Penske et al 2024_Kinship practices at the early bronze age site of Leubingen

[rmstevens2]

Have you all seen this new paper?

Kinship practices at the early bronze age site of Leubingen in Central Germany

[Manofthehour]

U152/L2, R1a, U106, and I2 all in the same neigborhood. Real Unetice hours I guess.

[ambron]

Unfortunately, all R1a are highly marked, only one to Z280.

[ambron]

However, if these men were related, then all of R1a could have been Z280.

[Pylsteen]

In the supplement table, some of the R1a is specified as Z283, Z280 and Z645, quite diverse.

[Orentil]

Supplementary Fig. S6 | Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and qpAdm ancestry
modeling.

[Riverman]

In the supplement table, some of the R1a is specified as Z283, Z280 and Z645, quite diverse.

It looks like a diverse Corded Ware origin indeed. I guess this diversity was later reduced due to the Celtic and Germanic expansions.

[alanarchae]

Confirms what we already thought - thatcher Unetice is not a single mega breeding lineage kind of society. It seems that a number of unrelated dynasties held some kind of power in the same locality. Seems to confirm a somewhat more civic kind of society where representitives of many lineage had a role in power. This is very different from the areas west of the Rhine, the isles, bavaria and Italy where single lineage P312 dominance seems to have continued far far longer - even into the iron age (and even post-roman times in the isles ‘Celtic fringe’). In a crude way the latter seems v Celtic while view Unetice reminds me of much much later Germanic society where clan lineage was not quite so fundamental.

One thing i’m absolutely sure of is core Unetice is not the genetic origin of the Celts. Everything about Celtic and indeed early Latin DNA points to an origin on the fringes of Unetice at best in groups who had stuck to the single lineage dominance beaker type model. So probably from beaker derived groups who might have had material culture influences from unetice but did not take up core unetice type of social system.

[Riverman]

Confirms what we already thought - thatcher Unetice  is not a single mega breeding lineage kind of society. It seems that a number of unrelated dynasties held some kind of power in the same locality. Seems to confirm a somewhat more civic kind of society where representitives of many lineage had a role in power. This is very different from the areas west of the Rhine, the isles, bavaria and Italy where single lineage P312 dominance seems to have continued far far longer - even into the iron age (and even post-roman times in the isles ‘Celtic fringe’). In a crude way the latter seems v Celtic while view Unetice reminds me of much much later Germanic society where clan lineage was not quite so fundamental.

One thing i’m absolutely sure of is core Unetice is not the genetic origin of the Celts. Everything about Celtic and indeed early Latin DNA points to an origin on the fringes of Unetice at best in groups who had stuck to the single lineage dominance beaker type model. So probably from beaker derived groups who might have had material culture influences from unetice but did not take up core unetice type of social system.

Absolutely. Celts evolved from a subbranch of the Tumulus culture (other branches likely led to Italics and unknown groups which went extinct before historical records could mention them), which was indeed coming from the fringe of Unetice, never under its core groups control. What we see with Unetice is however that it was a tribal-demic diffusion. The Southern German Beakers being pushed back and Epi-Corded lineages from the East came in, as we can clearly see in the samples taken.

[Mitchell-Atkins]

9 U152, 8 of which are U152>L2. 9th is not resolved below U152.

Oldest median age was Midpoint 2115 BC (2196 - 2035 BC). 15-17 years old.

LEU041.A0101.TF1.1. Germany_Unetice_ Leubingen Sömmerda, Thuringia

[Mitchell-Atkins]

So it’s appears at least some parts of Eastern Bell Beaker (L2 dominated based on ancient samples) transitioned to Unetice. 

That was a common thought but there hadn’t been much ancient dna support for it (IIRC there was at least a one before this).

EDIT:
Searched Rich Rocca's ancient U152 map


and I only found 1 U152 Unetice sample on Rocca's map

1856 BC Papac et al. (2021)
KO1008 L2 >> BY13157+ BY13161+ Unetice Culture (2017-1694 calBC) near Kolin, Czech Rep (in Bohemian Province, of Eastern Bell Beaker map below)

[Mitchell-Atkins]

Leubingen, Thuringia was in the former Middle Elbe-Saale "Province" of Eastern Bell Beaker



The red area in central Germany between the orange to the north and green to the south (map of number of Bell Beakers per county/province/region)

[alanarchae]

It’s always been suspected core unetice was some kind of early attempt at some more civic state-like social structure which ultimately collapsed. The fall of a sophisticated culture and it’s replacing by less sophisticated groups on the fringe should not evoke surprise.Its a repeated phenomenon in the prehistory and history of Europe and SW Asia. Settled sophisticated societies are always vulnerable that way.

Likely unetice’s main contribution to future prehistoric societies was from the groups on their fringes who likely selectively absorbed aerially some ideas from core unetice which survived among them when core Unetice died. So it’s possible even some borrowed unetice terms have survived among in languages that descend from groups who had lived in the outer fringes of the unetice influence zone. Groups like that who show selective unetice influences include the EBA groups in as far flung areas as south and west Germany, the Alps, Italy, Wessex, Armorica, nordic europe and other smaller cultures in between. The most likely living language branches to show unetice vocab borrowings are Celtic, Italic and Germanic imo. Then there is the fascinating Celto-Germanic isoglosses which seem partly to date back to v early times which I suspect to be EBA. Would be cool if they actually came from a third dead source -unetice - but then you’d have to explain why that vocab isn’t in Italic.

[alanarchae]

Confirms what we already thought - thatcher Unetice  is not a single mega breeding lineage kind of society. It seems that a number of unrelated dynasties held some kind of power in the same locality. Seems to confirm a somewhat more civic kind of society where representitives of many lineage had a role in power. This is very different from the areas west of the Rhine, the isles, bavaria and Italy where single lineage P312 dominance seems to have continued far far longer - even into the iron age (and even post-roman times in the isles ‘Celtic fringe’). In a crude way the latter seems v Celtic while view Unetice reminds me of much much later Germanic society where clan lineage was not quite so fundamental.

One thing i’m absolutely sure of is core Unetice is not the genetic origin of the Celts. Everything about Celtic and indeed early Latin DNA points to an origin on the fringes of Unetice at best in groups who had stuck to the single lineage dominance beaker type model. So probably from beaker derived groups who might have had material culture influences from unetice but did not take up core unetice type of social system.

Absolutely. Celts evolved from a subbranch of the Tumulus culture (other branches likely led to Italics and unknown groups which went extinct before historical records could mention them), which was indeed coming from the fringe of Unetice, never under its core groups control. What we see with Unetice is however that it was a tribal-demic diffusion. The Southern German Beakers being pushed back and Epi-Corded lineages from the East came in, as we can clearly see in the samples taken.

We likely dont agree on the detail but we are in the broad picture in agreement that it was groups on the periphery with only modest influence from core unetice and benefited from the collapse of the core. Which is rather like the history of Mesopotamia where a sequence of less sophisticated  more mobile bellicose groups on the fringe kept destroying the much more sophisticated core.

Makes me wonder - did the fringe of unetice groups benefit by filling a vacuum left by the Unetice core collapse or did those peripheral groups actually CAUSE  the collapse by constantly raiding them and wearing down the their economy and viability? If a sophisticated group suffers  constant raids by much more mobile and dispersed groups who would hit and run and just evade any superior forces trying to do punitive campaigns against them, it could gradually grind the core down. It’s extremely hard to defeat that

[Riverman]

Confirms what we already thought - thatcher Unetice  is not a single mega breeding lineage kind of society. It seems that a number of unrelated dynasties held some kind of power in the same locality. Seems to confirm a somewhat more civic kind of society where representitives of many lineage had a role in power. This is very different from the areas west of the Rhine, the isles, bavaria and Italy where single lineage P312 dominance seems to have continued far far longer - even into the iron age (and even post-roman times in the isles ‘Celtic fringe’). In a crude way the latter seems v Celtic while view Unetice reminds me of much much later Germanic society where clan lineage was not quite so fundamental.

One thing i’m absolutely sure of is core Unetice is not the genetic origin of the Celts. Everything about Celtic and indeed early Latin DNA points to an origin on the fringes of Unetice at best in groups who had stuck to the single lineage dominance beaker type model. So probably from beaker derived groups who might have had material culture influences from unetice but did not take up core unetice type of social system.

Absolutely. Celts evolved from a subbranch of the Tumulus culture (other branches likely led to Italics and unknown groups which went extinct before historical records could mention them), which was indeed coming from the fringe of Unetice, never under its core groups control. What we see with Unetice is however that it was a tribal-demic diffusion. The Southern German Beakers being pushed back and Epi-Corded lineages from the East came in, as we can clearly see in the samples taken.

We likely dont agree on the detail but we are in the broad picture in agreement that it was groups on the periphery with only modest influence from core unetice and benefited from the collapse of the core. Which is rather like the history of Mesopotamia where a sequence of less sophisticated  more mobile bellicose groups on the fringe kept destroying the much more sophisticated core.

Makes me wonder - did the fringe of unetice groups benefit by filling a vacuum left by the Unetice core collapse or did those peripheral groups actually CAUSE  the collapse by constantly raiding them and wearing down the their economy and viability? If a sophisticated group suffers  constant raids by much more mobile and dispersed groups who would hit and run and just evade any superior forces trying to do punitive campaigns against them, it could gradually grind the core down. It’s extremely hard to defeat that

The clear presence of the main Tumulus culture lineage, R-L2, begs the question as to whether we deal, similar to later Hallstatt, with a stratified society and Eastern conquering clans of Epi-Corded being on top of locals. If that would have been the case, the question is whether these locals made an uprising or helped the Western relatives to get rid of these upper class people.
One common issue with early "sophisticated" societies is that they were more stratified, hierarchic, even caste-like systems with a broad mass of farmers, herders and workers below them, some at a slave-like or actual slave status. Such societies were therefore the preferred mode for the upper classes of such a system, but not necessarily for the lower ones.
We know from Unetice that they had kind of garrisons in some areas, probably not just to defend the realm, but to keep the commoners or conquered people down as well, probably.

We know that in the later people the Epi-Corded lineages decreased in frequency, so the question is where they replaced as a whole, or did the commoners and lower castes ally up with the free clans to the West to attack the upper classes - something which with near certainty happened in Late Hallstatt as well.

The other issue is that the Unetice chiefdoms or kingdoms were not just under attack from the Western fringe, but they came under attack from the Eastern horseback and especially chariot raiders too. It is the exact same time we see incursions from the East in Western Ukraine and Romania, that Unetice crashed. Their position was strategically like the Polish or German one later, they were always in between two powerful neighbours and exactly when Unetice crashed, both neighbours started to become aggressive and attack.

I'm not sure how much they were attacked by the Eastern raiders directly, but they surely, similar to the Cimmerians, Scythians and Sarmatians later, did interrupt, if not cut, many of the connections and trade routes to the Carpathian mines and the Aegean, Eastern Mediterranean.

In fact, the whole Central block of Europe, not just Unetice, but also the Tell cultures of the Carpathian basin, collapsed, because of the combined attack from the West (Tumulus culture) and the East (early chariot complex, more lasting especially Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeni).

That's an area from Germany, Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Western Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria and down to Greece which was massively affected, with many state-like and chiefdom structrues collapsing, whole people, tribes and cultures crashing, disappearing. I think there is no reason to understate how big these movements and consequences were.

I often wrote about the Encrusted Pottery complex in Pannonia: They were on the run and moved along the Danube down, first reaching Croatia and Serbia, then moving on to Bulgaria! That group alone was not small or unimportant for its time by any means. And its glass clear they were running first and foremost from the Tumulus culture clans and secondarily from the Pre- and early Gáva-related Channelled Ware groups.

The Carpathian equivalent to Unetice, or at least a related culture in some ways, was Wietenberg. Wietenberg was barely touched by the Tumulus culture, but the Noua-Sabatinovka pastoralists reached them directly:

At the beginning of the 15th century BC, after the last phase of the Wietenberg Culture, a sudden change in the development of the settlement appeared. The architecture, the funerary rite, the pottery and material culture in general changed. These changes resulted from the arrival of a new population from the Eurasian steppes, the so-called Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeni culture,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotbav_Arc...gical_Site

Compare the dates:

The Wietenberg culture was a Middle Bronze Age archeological culture in central Romania (Transylvania) that roughly dates to 2200–1600/1500 BCE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wietenberg_culture

The Únětice culture, Aunjetitz culture or Unetician culture (Czech: Únětická kultura, German: Aunjetitzer Kultur, Polish: Kultura unietycka, Slovak: Únětická kultúra) is an archaeological culture at the start of the Central European Bronze Age, dated roughly to about 2300–1600 BC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9An%C4%9Btice_culture

They were basically synchronous, beginning to end. And both came under outside pressure, pretty clearly so. Encrusted Pottery survived a bit longer, but they lost most of their original Pannonian territory in the same period with the Koszider horizon period, when the Tumulus culture clans invaded the Carpathian basin.

Surely both Unetice and Wietenberg didn't just disappear, but in some areas rather transform, but a lot of their former territory was eaten up by the foreign invaders from the West (Tumulus culture) and East (Noua-Sabatinovka) respectively. And these invasions didn't happen some generations after the collapse, they caused the collapse. Not everywhere the same time, but they brought the networks down, by taking one area or chiefdom after another.