Stolarek et al: Genetic history of East-Central Europe...

[ph2ter]

Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture:
> Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture: > ERS16293360 [S9] R-M417* 2560-2290 calBCE

The sample was also checked by Pribislav and he confirmed it's a basal R-M417* (and not R-CTS1211).

S9 on PCA:



MBA similarity map:



modern similarity map:

[alexfritz]

[...] and while CTS1211 was found already earlier (eg Somogyvár–Vinkovci culture) 

Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture:
> Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture: > ERS16293360 [S9] R-M417* 2560-2290 calBCE
Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture:

> ERS16293360 [S9] R-M417 2560-2290 calBCE

took the info from the paper (Table1) S9 R1a-V2670
though in supp S1 the sample is indeed not listed as CTS1211>V2670 but as M512>>M417>>Z280>>? or ISOGG 14.255 as R1a1a1b1a2~ (S466/Z280)

so he does get downstream of M417 to Z280

[ambron]

S9 has no significance in the context of the Slavic CTS1211 lines anyway.

What is important, however, is that probably no significant, typically Polish line of CTS1211 can be derived from the Kiev culture.

[Pribislav]

[...] and while CTS1211 was found already earlier (eg Somogyvár–Vinkovci culture) 

Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture:
> Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture: > ERS16293360 [S9] R-M417* 2560-2290 calBCE
Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture:

> ERS16293360 [S9] R-M417 2560-2290 calBCE

took the info from the paper (Table1) S9 R1a-V2670
though in supp S1 the sample is indeed not listed as CTS1211>V2670 but as M512>>M417>>Z280>>? or ISOGG 14.255 as R1a1a1b1a2~ (S466/Z280)

so he does get downstream of M417 to Z280

The only imortant thing is what calls he gets from BAM file, and since he is clearly Z645- he can be neither Z280 nor CTS1211.

[okshtunas]

[...] and while CTS1211 was found already earlier (eg Somogyvár–Vinkovci culture) 

Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture:
> Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture: > ERS16293360 [S9] R-M417* 2560-2290 calBCE
Somogyvár-Vinkovci culture:

> ERS16293360 [S9] R-M417 2560-2290 calBCE

took the info from the paper (Table1) S9 R1a-V2670
though in supp S1 the sample is indeed not listed as CTS1211>V2670 but as M512>>M417>>Z280>>? or ISOGG 14.255 as R1a1a1b1a2~ (S466/Z280)

so he does get downstream of M417 to Z280

The only imortant thing is what calls he gets from BAM file, and since he is clearly Z645- he can be neither Z280 nor CTS1211.

Is this now the oldest M417? Or is it the one from Ukraine (Oleksandria)?

[Pribislav]

took the info from the paper (Table1) S9 R1a-V2670
though in supp S1 the sample is indeed not listed as CTS1211>V2670 but as M512>>M417>>Z280>>? or ISOGG 14.255 as R1a1a1b1a2~ (S466/Z280)

so he does get downstream of M417 to Z280

The only imortant thing is what calls he gets from BAM file, and since he is clearly Z645- he can be neither Z280 nor CTS1211.

Is this now the oldest M417? Or is it the one from Ukraine (Oleksandria)?

The oldest M417 should be the new Durankulak sample I1456 (3500-3000 BC) from Nikitin et al. preprint, but he's not directly dated. S9 is dated 2560-2290 BC. Sample I6561 from Alexandria has been directly dated to 2134-1950 BC, so he's definitely not the oldest one.

[okshtunas]

The only imortant thing is what calls he gets from BAM file, and since he is clearly Z645- he can be neither Z280 nor CTS1211.

Is this now the oldest M417? Or is it the one from Ukraine (Oleksandria)?

The oldest M417 should be the new Durankulak sample I1456 (3500-3000 BC) from Nikitin et al. preprint, but he's not directly dated. S9 is dated 2560-2290 BC. Sample I6561 from Alexandria has been directly dated to 2134-1950 BC, so he's definitely not the oldest one.

While the Durankulak sample is likely the oldest as you say, technically S9 is currently the oldest if we only take into account carbon dated samples, right? 

Very interesting sample nonetheless.

[Radko]

I'm not sure if this study was posted before...

Synthesis of palaeoecological data from the Polish Lowlands suggests heterogeneous patterns of old-growth forest loss after the Migration Period

Abstract
Human impact on Central European forests dates back thousands of years. In this study we reanalyzed 36 published pollen data sets with robust chronologies from Polish Lowlands to determine the patterns of large-scale forest decline after the Migration Period (fourth to sixth century CE). The study revealed substantial heterogeneity in the old-growth forest decline patterns. Using new high-resolution studies, we could better understand the timing of this transition related to increasing economic development. After the Migration Period, forest expansion continued until the seventh to ninth centuries cal. CE, when the dawn of Slavic culture resulted in large-scale forest decline, especially in north-western and north-central Poland. Later, forest decline was recorded mainly in north-eastern Poland and was related to Prussian settlements, including activities associated with the Teutonic Order, as well as with new settlements from the fourteenth century. The composite picture shows a varied spatio-temporal forest loss and transition towards the present-day, human activity dominated landscapes. However, some sites, such as in north-eastern Poland, are characterized by a less abrupt critical transition. The pristine nature of the oak-hornbeam forest had already been destroyed in Early Medieval times (eighth to ninth centuries cal. CE) and the potential for recovery was largely lost. Our study has confirmed previous assumptions that the decline of hornbeam across the Polish Lowlands may be an early indicator of local settlement processes, preceding severe forest loss, and establishment of permanent agriculture.

(...)

In general, the greater the human pressure in the temperate forest zone, the smaller the forest area5,9,10. However, in some instances, sudden events associated with climate and socioeconomic transitions, often caused by warfare and/or epidemics, have resulted in restricted impact of human activity on vegetation11,12,13,14. The Migration Period (MP) was, without a doubt, the last such large-scale event in Central Europe11. In addition to political and ethnic transformations in Europe11,15,16, it was a period of brief respite for the vegetation, especially in Central Europe17,18,19,20. Within Poland, this period is assumed to have lasted from the second half of the fourth century until the beginning of the sixth century CE (from this moment, CE should be assumed where the era is not indicated). Still, its range and chronology are inferred from limited archaeological finds21. Palynological data revealed that the forest started to grow on fallow and abandoned pastures across the Polish Lowlands during the MP cf.22,23,24. This forest regeneration was characterized by a spread of European hornbeam (Carpinus betulus) and common beech (Fagus sylvatica, mainly in NW Poland). The regenerated forest was then probably gradually exploited by new Slavic societies from the east, western Ukraine and southern Belarus. They started to colonize the ‘empty’ landscape and thus renewed forest clearances25,26.

However, until ca. fifteenth century, the north-eastern part of the Polish Lowlands was occupied by diverse Baltic tribes (mostly Old Prussians, Galindians, and Yotvingians), who slowly moved eastwards mainly under the pressure of the Teutonic State and were finally conquered27,28,29,30.

Geographical distribution of sites from the date at which Carpinus betulus (green) and Fagus sylvatica (red) peaked before decline commenced during the last 1500 years.


https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-12241-1

[Andar]

Is this now the oldest M417? Or is it the one from Ukraine (Oleksandria)?

The oldest M417 should be the new Durankulak sample I1456 (3500-3000 BC) from Nikitin et al. preprint, but he's not directly dated. S9 is dated 2560-2290 BC. Sample I6561 from Alexandria has been directly dated to 2134-1950 BC, so he's definitely not the oldest one.

While the Durankulak sample is likely the oldest as you say, technically S9 is currently the oldest if we only take into account carbon dated samples, right? 

Very interesting sample nonetheless.

Much of Corded Ware R1a samples are older than S9. Also the  Durankulak sample is likely misdated. Afaik he was Polish like (Arza posted his G2b distances on eurogenes comment section) and something like 50% GAC which doesnt really fit that period and context.

[ambron]

Radko

In a word, this study perfectly proves, using the example of north-eastern Poland, that the increase in forest cover has no connection with depopulation.

[Radko]

Forest expansion after Migration Period, change of genetic affinities and appearance of Prague culture (linked to earlier cultures from Belarus and Ukraine) are surely a result of massive population changes and migrations.

"Palynological data revealed that the forest started to grow on fallow and abandoned pastures across the Polish Lowlands during the Migration Period. This forest regeneration was characterized by a spread of European hornbeam (Carpinus betulus) and common beech (Fagus sylvatica, mainly in NW Poland). The regenerated forest was then probably gradually exploited by new Slavic societies from the east, western Ukraine and southern Belarus. They started to colonize the ‘empty’ landscape and thus renewed forest clearances."

[Orentil]

If there was no depopulation during the migration period, why are most cemeteries abandoned (also the cremation ones) and why do we find much less artefacts? Below some data from the lower Oder river region.

[ambron]

Radko

Somehow, north-eastern Poland was densely forested in the Middle Ages, and the Baltic tribes did quite well there.

Orentil

There was certainly some population decline in Poland at that time, but there was no depopulation. Later the population size could increase on a local deomographic background, as in north-eastern Poland, without the migration of foreign population from Belarus.

[Radko]

Somehow, north-eastern Poland was densely forested in the Middle Ages, and the Baltic tribes did quite well there.

I'm not sure if you understand the map. It shows the forest expansion peak, so we see that Old Prussian western area was largely depopulated in the 13-14th c. due to the military campaign/crusade of the Teutonic Knights. Then, we see depopulation related to further growth of the Teutonic Order state in the east (forest expansion near today's border with Lithuania in the 15-16th c.).

Baltic tribes (mostly Old Prussians, Galindians, and Yotvingians), who slowly moved eastwards mainly under the pressure of the Teutonic State were finally conquered.

The subsequent, large-scale forest clearings in the Great Masurian Lake District, which were attributed to the economic activity and intensive colonization of the Prussian territory by the Teutonic Order, is recorded as late as the 17th century in Lake Łazduny and slightly later (since 1610) in Lake Żabińskie.

[ph2ter]

Radko

Somehow, north-eastern Poland was densely forested in the Middle Ages, and the Baltic tribes did quite well there.

Orentil

There was certainly some population decline in Poland at that time, but there was no depopulation. Later the population size could increase on a local deomographic background, as in north-eastern Poland, without the migration of foreign population from Belarus.

You are dishonest here.

"After the Migration Period, forest expansion continued until the seventh to ninth centuries cal. CE, when the dawn of Slavic culture resulted in large-scale forest decline, especially in north-western and north-central Poland. Later, forest decline was recorded mainly in north-eastern Poland and was related to Prussian settlements, including activities associated with the Teutonic Order, as well as with new settlements from the fourteenth century. "

Northeastern part was scarcely populated until the 14th century when under the pressure of the Teutonic order was gradually populated from the west, resulting in the forest decline there.