Thread by @VVeltkrieger

ORIGINS OF THE DACIANS AND THRACIANS 🧵

This thread will trace the origins of the Dacian and Thracian people, from the Iron Age through the entire Bronze Age, relying primarily on archaeology supplemented and backed with genetic evidence. I believe it is possible to definitively reconstruct the migration history of the Proto-Daco-Thracians.

This thread is the culmination of over five months of research. This has been a incredibly complex and heavily debated topic, the debate of which I now think can be concluded.

We will start with an overview of the archaeogenetics known insofar about these populations:

The Bulgarian or Classical Thracians tend to form a fairly homogenous group that has on average only about 20% Yamnaya admixture, with the rest being ANF, very poor in (if at al with any) European Hunter-Gatherer ancestry. Additional CHG/Iranian admixture is also likely, as was the case for Eastern and Southern Balkans at least since Chalcolithic. The Thracians do have so sightly more Yamnaya autosomal ancestry than the average Mycenaeans.

Nevertheless, this is a substantial decrease of the steppe component in comparison with the samples from Ezero culture of the EBA Bulgaria, more than 1000 years earlier. Furthermore, their by far most common Y-DNA haplogroup isn’t R-Z2103, I-L699 or I-P78, which were previously repeatedly found in local Yamnaya and Cernavoda descendants. It is rather a branch of E-L618, which was itself a very minor Y line among the Neolithic Farmers of Europe, namely E-V13.

Now, a couple of words about L618. This lineage was no stranger to the Balkan region at least since the Neolithic. L618 samples negative for/unconfirmed to be V13 have been found here in the Impresso-Cardial culture in Croatia, at Varna during Chalcolithic, in Cucuteni and Usatovo (in an individual remarkably rich in steppe ancestry, whose G25 coordinates are still unavailable).

Nevertheless, one thing can be said with certainty now about E-V13: in a manner that likely parallels the role of I1 among proto-Germanic people we aren’t talking about an Indo-European lineage or clan per se, rather about an “Indo-Europeanised” one, that is also associated with a distinctive Indo-European language and culture of its own.

Tracing E-V13 is complicated substantially by the fact that throughout most of the Southeast European Bronze age, between 2500-1000BC, almost every culture here cremated their dead or had no known burial rite at all, leaving us with extremely fragmentary genetic evidence.

-===========-
Therefore, in the next section of the thread, we will rely on archaeology to trace the origins of the Daco-Thracians.

For this, we will start at the beginning, in the Early Bronze Age. From hereon, we will follow the trail of archaeological succession between known cultural groups.

Our story begins in 2700BC, in the Mako-Kosihy-Caka Culture. This culture had formed out of the Indo-European Yamnaya, which invaded the area only 300 years prior, and the native Baden culture, with additional influences from Corded Ware.

In the Late Early Bronze Age, a new culture, the Somogyvar-Vinkovci complex emerged, replacing the Mako group in many areas and ending its evolution. Interestingly, the Mako culture persisted in its homeland in Northern Hungary, but also in Banat, Romania.

It is important to also mention what was happening in Southern Romania at the time. Here the Glina-Schneckenberg complex emerged, a culture that had, just like Mako, kickstarted the Bronze age in its respective region. The people of this group were very different from the cultures in Pannonia. I explained in another post why they were likely speakers of Para-Anatolian langauges, and have an entirely different heritage, coming from Cernavoda and Usatovo and not Yamnaya.

x.com/VVeltkrieger/s…

The Glina Culture, along with Mako, Somogyvar and elements of the Bell Beaker culture all converge in Banat in the Late EBA. The convergence of these elements leads to the start of a new group called in the archaeological literature "Periam-Mokrin-Pancevo" and "Sanpetru-German-Pancevo". These are both the same concept, and they represent a sort of Proto phase of the later Maros culture.

The Periam-Mokrin-Pancevo culture is part of a cultural horizon defined by Broomstroke striation and textile ornamentation. This peculiar ceramic style, originating in Banat in 2300BC, spreads out in all directions eastward.

They occupy Transylvania, replacing the previous Șoimuș culture, and they move through the Iron Gates into Wallachia as the Gornea-Orlești group. Here they replace the Glina culture. It is not sure if Glina fell due to invading Gornea-Orlești people or if these simply moved into the area, profiting from the collapse of Glina.
Around 2300BC E-V13 also sees an explosive emergence of new branches, matching the Broomstroke expansion perfectly.

From the invasion of Gornea-Orlești and on a Glina substrate emerge the Verbicioara (2100-1600BC) and Tei (2000-1600BC) cultures of Late Middle Bronze Age. In Banat, the related Vatin, Cornești-Crvenka, and Maros cultures form from the migration of Broomstroke groups. Vatin and Verbicioara are in fact hard to seperate in the Iron Gates region, and overlap heavily.

The Tei culture specifically is relevant here. It has a mild presence south of the Danube in phases I and II, but by phase III Tei sites start appearing throughout all of Bulgaria and even in North Macedonia.

It is important to mention that the Middle Bronze Age in Bulgaria is practically empty and undefined, making Tei the most dominant element during this time. The date for this migration is not exactly clear, but the strong founder effect of E-V13>Z5018 could point to around 1700BC.

After the migration of Tei groups, Muntenia (central and eastern Wallachia) was seemingly depopulated. The 4th and 5th phases of both Verbicioara and Tei after 1600BC are markedly different from the previous phases. They are grouped together into a poorly attested horizon called "Fundeni-Govora", which exists until 1300BC. This group is a dead-end leftover population.

The migration of Tei people to the south in around 1700BC created the basis for a new ceramic style and culture, characterised by Incised and "Furchenstich" decoration techniques. In the recent PhD thesis by Denitsa Nenova about the Bulgarian MBA multiple settlements and cultural groups were identified, whose distribution lines up perfectly with Incised and Furchenstich ceramic finds. Therefore, I propose an "Incised ware horizon", which exists 1600-1300BC.

The Incised wares Relations to Tei and the later Zimnicea-Cerkovna are striking and it is unlike the partly contemporary matt-painted ware of northern greece, the previous Ezero and Yunatsite groups, or the older Armenochori Culture.

While these Proto-Daco-Thracian groups evolve in Bulgaria and Northeastern Greece, a related group through common ancestry, the Belegis culture, starts a series of aggresive and explosive expansions in all directions around 1200BC. Hypothetically they could be associated with E-V13>CTS9320 (TMRCA of also 1200BC), a marker that shows a sightly different upstream dynamic from other E-V13 branches and whose substantial founder effect around 1200BC is the biggest of the period for V13.

What enabled or caused this exactly is unclear but climatic factors are likely, and is part of the wide Bronze Age Collapse phenomenon.

The Expansion of the Belegis II Culture after 1100BC heralds the Channelled ware horizon across all of Romania and Serbia. Belegis descended groups make it all the way to Greece, Possibly Albania and even Troy and up to the Dniester, where they completely expel and replace the previous steppe herders of the Noua Culture.

As this was happening, Daco-Thracians of the Incised Ware horizon evolved in the Zimnicea-Plovdiv-Cerkovna group. This culture is commonly assumed to be from the North due to uncertainty, but this is a false assumption.

Zimnicea ceramics are best decorated and elaborate in the south, while in the north they are much more "primitive" and poor. The ceramic finds also show a hotspot in the south, and the culture roughly occupies the same area as the previous Incised Ware horizon, with a furhter expansion north. Again, here is the relation between Incised ware and Zimnicea highlighted:

In 1100BC, the Alada Phase of Zimnicea gives way to a new culture, namely Psenicevo I. This transformation was brought on by the discovery and employment of a new and incredibly powerful technology brought from Anatolia:

Iron

With this newfound material, the Daco-Thracians expand rapidly and in every possible direction, defeating their bronze-using cousins from the Belegis Tradition in a span of less than 100 years, spreading a unique type of pottery called Stamped ware.

Iron appears everywhere following the Stamped ware horizon moves, most notably in Psenicevo and the Cozia-Saharna cultures.

Strangely, Channelled ware only appears in Muntenia, a region which seemed to be depopulated after 1200BC, AFTER the Stamped ware migration. It is likely that these were Belegis refugees. Groups of the Gava culture also migrated out of Transylvania into Mutenia in this time.

In around 850bc, we can see the Dacian culture starting to take shape in the Basarabi group. This culture forms on the basis of Stamped ware groups of Insula Banului and Novaci, as well as a Channelled ware substrate and influences from the Gornea-Kalakaca culture, the later being most likely connected to early Illyrians by virtue of its geometric incised decoration also present in Glasinac.

The Basarabi culture expands in every direction in association with iron. This is visible in the Hoard inventory, with the area of the Basarabi culture depositing iron, while the rest of Pannonia was still depositing bronze.

In Thrace, the Thracian culture takes form with various leitform artifacts, notably the Pit Burial, starkly contrasting with the cremation of Dacians further north. Various iron artefacts are also characteristic for Thracians of this period.

Basarabi fades in the 7th century, when the Cimmerians are forced to flee due to the invasion of Scythians and their frequent raids across the Danube. Dacians in Wallachia seek refuge in the hills at the southern edge of Carpathians as the Ferigile-Bârsești group, while Dacians in Transylvania end up under the rule of the Agathyrsoi (Ciumbrud group), a group of Cimmerians previously dominant in the steppe.

By this time, the Thracians and Dacians are well into the Historical Era. The Thracians have been first recorded in the time of the Iliad, most likely in 1200bc, which would chronologically and spatially fit with the Zimnicea-Plovdiv-Cerkovna culture. The Dacians, or "Geto-Dacians" will later start building fortifications against the Scythians and Celts en-masse after liberating their Homelands from their rule, starting the Geto-Dacian Epoch and laying the cultural, economic and political framework for the Dacian kingdom.

That concludes the thread. Alot of Research, not just by myself but a very helpful collague without whom this would not have been possible, was put into this, and many re-iterations regarding the Daco-Thracian origin were thrown around until we finally arrived at a conclusion. I hope you enjoyed reading it.

TLDR; Daco-Thracians are from Banat, Migrated into Wallachia in 2300bc, then Migrated south into Thrace from Oltenia in 1700bc and Migrated back north across the danube in 1000bc after adopting Iron.