Slavic Chronology discussion

[Gordius]

If we believe the Soviet linguists (and after them, apparently, no one studied the hydronymy of Eastern Europe), then northeastern Ukraine (that is, the territory of the Kyiv culture and a large part of the territory of the Zarubinets culture) are Baltic hydronyms. Of course, linguists can be wrong.

According to these maps Baltic hydronyms only cover a small part of Ukraine north of Chernihiv (Cernigovas):

Yes, they cover small part of Ukraine, but they cover large part of Kyiv culture (taking into account the Belarusian territories - about 2/3 of its area) and about 1/2 of Zarubinets area. Is it possible to have both the Slavic and Baltic halves within the framework of one archaeological culture? The question is rhetorical, I personally believe that the Proto-Slavic and Proto-Baltic populations should be represented by different cultures. And, by the way, where are the oldest Slavic hydronyms located?

[Vinitharya]

1. Slavic remained mutually intelligible for a long period of time, which indicated that it spread quickly out of a small community that had a period of high population growth.
2. Certain subclades are found among all Slavs (Z280>Y2902, M458>YP263, M458>YP417, M458>YP1337, I-Y3120) which all have MRCA from 400 BC to 200 AD. This is the core of the proto-Slavic community that evolved out of a small, hitherto insignificant south Baltic tribe, mostly due to the cultural enrichment from the M458 guys and likely the Y3120, although the likelihood that Y3120 was a small line of a previously inconsequential Carpathian hill tribe cannot be ruled out. The remainder of L1029 is more western oriented and lived more to the west of the proper homeland, while the other Z280 guys were scattered to the north and east, all of them speaking now extinct Baltic dialects (except for those who gave birth to the current Latvian and Lithuanian languages, of course), although the possibility that western L1029 and Y3120 spoke Celtic or north Dacian dialects cannot be ruled out.
3. I support the Udolphian homeland (or the Przeworsk) for the reason that this is the only homeland where the haplogroup evidence and the linguistic evidence converge. A broad homeland would induce dialectal differences; the Thessaloniki dialect that Old Church Slavonic was based on was still intelligible to the other Slavs 500 years after the breakup began. Finally, from a migration standpoint, Udolph makes the most sense. Why would you go through the Carpathians coming out of Kiev when you can go around down the Dniester like the Seven Slavic Tribes, the linguistic founders of Bulgaria, did? The reason the Pannonian Slavs did that is because they lived in the foothills of those very mountains.

[Gordius]

1. Slavic remained mutually intelligible for a long period of time, which indicated that it spread quickly out of a small community that had a period of high population growth.

Prague culture is quite homogeneous. Obviously, it came from some rather limited region. A demographic explosion was to be observed in this limited region, since from the 6th century AD the carriers of the Prague culture spread over large territories. It is necessary to find a region in which there was a high density of archaeological sites until the 6th century.

[Tomenable]

It is necessary to find a region in which there was a high density of archaeological sites until the 6th century.

Maybe here?:

[Tomenable]

(...) A broad homeland would induce dialectal differences; the Thessaloniki dialect that Old Church Slavonic was based on was still intelligible to the other Slavs 500 years after the breakup began. (...)

The second statement contradicts the first statement.

[leonardo]

Of course it's speculation, but I always think of the Vistula Veneti of the late 4th century, just before the arrival of the Huns. We know the Gothic king, Ermanaric, defeated the Vistula Veneti, who were described as "numerous," as well as the Aesti - whom many associate with a Baltic tribe, thus the Veneti could not be Balts. Who were they? Perhaps a combination of M458 and Y3120? By the late 4th century the tribes of M458 and Y3120 would have been numerous. I also note on Davidski's blog where David and blogger Matt discuss - dated March 17 - the possibility that the modern Pole is substantially influenced by the Goths.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2024/02/b...mment-form
This could coincide with both Vinitharya's (further west, the Przeworsk influences) and Tomenable's (further east, the Chernyakhov culture's influence) theories. Situated across southern Poland and Ukraine, M458/Y3120 could have mixed substantially with Z280 from further north, forming that explosive tribe - that due to the Hunnic invasion - allowed this group to coalesce within a century to century and a half, thus forming the tribe history presents as the Slavs in the mid 6th to early 7th century.

[Orentil]

I also note on Davidski's blog where David and blogger Matt discuss - dated March 17 - the possibility that the modern Pole is substantially influenced by the Goths.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2024/02/b...mment-form

How should this work with haplogroup I1 decreasing from 41.3 % to 3.5 % and R1a jumping from 8.6 to 57.5 % (if we take the Stolarek numbers from Wielbark/Poland MA as a proxy)? Total replacement of the men? I don't get this Goths-Poles theory.

[pelop]

I also note on Davidski's blog where David and blogger Matt discuss - dated March 17 - the possibility that the modern Pole is substantially influenced by the Goths.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2024/02/b...mment-form

How should this work with haplogroup I1 decreasing from 41.3 % to 3.5 % and R1a jumping from 8.6 to 57.5 % (if we take the Stolarek numbers from Wielbark/Poland MA as a proxy)? Total replacement of the men? I don't get this Goths-Poles theory.

Depends on what people mean by Goths and whether they believe this influenced proto-Slavs or just Poles. If Goths in the Ukraine were of largely local ancestry (similar to the high EEF-low WHG "Thracian-like" profile we've seen in Scythian period Moldova and later in migration period Hungary), then it's possible. But a hypothetical mix between Balts and Weklice-like Goths doesn't result in a proto-Slavic profile.

[Tomenable]

But a hypothetical mix between Balts and Weklice-like Goths doesn't result in a proto-Slavic profile.

Do we know what was the Proto-Slavic profile like? So far we don't have samples from the Slavic ancestral homeland.

But I doubt that the Proto-Slavs had the same genetic profile as the Baltic_BA. In my opinion it had to be different.

[Bukva_]

Using ph2ter turn of the era calculator, looks like Carpathian origin made difference between Balts and Proto/Early Slavs.
Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↑
A: Serbia_Viminacium_Roman_elite_1.SG:R9673.SG__AD_150__Cov_64.87%
B: Latvia_BA:Kivutkalns215__BC_609__Cov_74.70%
C: ↴
-0.05515987 Ostrogoths
-0.05337959 Iazyges
-0.05289457 Bastarni
-0.05136773 Iapodes
-0.05038763 NorthPontic_Greeks

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓
A: Serbia_Viminacium_Roman_elite_1.SG:R9673.SG__AD_150__Cov_64.87%
B: Latvia_BA:Kivutkalns215__BC_609__Cov_74.70%
C: ↴
0.02257809 Balts


Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↑
A: Serbia_Viminacium_Roman_elite_1.SG:R9673.SG__AD_150__Cov_64.87%
B: Latvia_BA:Kivutkalns215__BC_609__Cov_74.70%
C: ↴
-0.05918891 Serbia_Viminacium_Roman_elite_1.SG:R3931.SG__AD_181__Cov_63.79%
-0.05901924 England_Roman:I20615__AD_164__Cov_42.67%
-0.05871248 Czech_EBA_Unetice:KO1010__BC_1956__Cov_39.82%
-0.05859515 Hungary_EarlyArpadian:MH-153.SG__AD_1050__Cov_89.20%
-0.05858879 ALB_Cinamak_Anc:I16256__BC_550__Cov_24.92%

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓
A: Serbia_Viminacium_Roman_elite_1.SG:R9673.SG__AD_150__Cov_64.87%
B: Latvia_BA:Kivutkalns215__BC_609__Cov_74.70%
C: ↴
0.05484196 Latvia_BA:Kivutkalns207__BC_650__Cov_80.50%
0.04412363 Estonia_BA.SG_s19_X17_2_noUDG.SG__BC_869__Cov_23.01%
0.04186848 Lithuania_Marvele_Roman.SG_R10836.SG__AD_475__Cov_46.97%
0.04183216 Russia_IA_Ingria.SG_s19_VIII5_2_noUDG.SG__AD_187__Cov_23.69%
0.04016489 SWE_Sigtuna_VA:kal009__AD_1050__Cov_9.77%

R3931: https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna...1357/story

[Tomenable]

What (if any) could be the role of Scythian Farmers/Ploughmen in Slavic ethnogenesis?:

Code:

Scythian_Farmers/Ploughmen:Scythian_UKR_MJ14,0.135449,0.120848,0.046386,0.065569,0.035699,0.01004,0.012221,0.024922,-0.005113,-0.024602,-0.004384,-0.005245,0.025124,0.007707,-0.017644,-0.002784,0.021513,0.004687,0.010559,0.015257,0.000998,0.00507,0.013434,0.001205,-0.008742
Scythian_Farmers/Ploughmen:Scythian_UKR_scy009,0.125205,0.144205,0.069013,0.057494,0.044931,0.020917,0.010105,0.006923,0.004295,-0.010752,-0.003248,-0.005395,0.00773,0.012799,0.001221,0.008618,0.004172,-0.005701,-0.002891,0.003377,0.006738,-0.000495,0.00419,-0.021208,0.003113
Scythian_Farmers/Ploughmen:Scythian_UKR_MJ13,0.1161,0.116786,0.064111,0.057494,0.015387,0.010319,-0.00329,0.001615,-0.011862,-0.027882,0.001624,0.001649,0.008474,0.004129,-0.002579,-0.002917,-0.019166,-0.007348,0.015712,-0.001501,0.006114,0.003586,0.006779,-0.000241,0.004311
Scythian_Farmers/Ploughmen:Scythian_UKR_scy010,0.114961,0.135065,0.051666,0.044574,0.035391,0.01757,-0.00658,0.000231,-0.004295,-0.005285,-0.000812,-0.007493,-0.011298,-0.000413,-0.006243,0.01432,0.02034,-0.007095,0.018101,0.006253,0.001872,0.003833,-0.008997,-0.002771,-0.001916

[Gordius]

It is necessary to find a region in which there was a high density of archaeological sites until the 6th century.

Maybe here?:

Center of Kyiv culture and area of Baltic hydronyms?

[Tomenable]

Center of Kyiv culture and area of Baltic hydronyms?

Maybe Baltic hydronyms appeared there after Slavs emigrated to areas vacated by Goths? It is possible that Balts moved into formerly Proto-Slavic territory.

=====

Edit:

Map of Kiev culture territory: https://i.imgur.com/UtImtwe.png

[Bukva_]

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↑
A: Russia_Viking_o.SG:VK160_noUDG.SG__AD_1100__Cov_74.94%
B: Latvia_BA:Kivutkalns215__BC_609__Cov_74.70%
C: ↴
-0.06043593 HUN_late_Avar:VPB31__AD_942__Cov_79.62%
-0.05992846 Moldova_Glinoe_Scythian.SG_scy311_noUDG.SG__BC_285__Cov_18.57%
-0.05914617 Hungary_Conqueror_Commoner_SH-251.SG__AD_975__Cov_70.95%
-0.05912806 Hungary_Conqueror_Commoner_VPB-561.SG__AD_950__Cov_86.95%
-0.05893481 GRC_S.Mainland_LBA:AID017__BC_1475__Cov_16.11%

Distance difference: ( AC - BC ) ↓
A: Russia_Viking_o.SG:VK160_noUDG.SG__AD_1100__Cov_74.94%
B: Latvia_BA:Kivutkalns215__BC_609__Cov_74.70%
C: ↴
0.04696680 Latvia_BA_Kivutkalns207__BC_650__Cov_80.50%
0.04432213 Lithuania_EMN_Narva_Donkalnis7__BC_5160__Cov_39.97%
0.04422917 Latvia_HG:I4628__BC_5083__Cov_61.06%
0.04401794 Latvia_HG.SG:Latvia_HG2_noUDG.SG__BC_5727__Cov_91.60%
0.04339510 Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic:I4881__BC_6919__Cov_71.57%

Looks like there are two main shifts in Early/Proto Slavs, one is more Celto - Germanic, other one Aegean. Both point to the area around Carpathian and Black Sea.

[Orentil]

Looks like there are two main shifts in Early/Proto Slavs, one is more Celto - Germanic, other one Aegean. Both point to the area around Carpathian and Black Sea.

Celto-Germanic could also be Przeworsk culture, I'm very sure that's what Przeworsk will turn out when we finally have some valid data.