origin of the Gediminaite, princely families of Great Lithuania
M.Sjostrom
monarch Gediminas, ruler of Lithuanians and Belarusians, was first of his family in historical sense: his parentage is not clearly attested in any near-contemporary sources.
according to Stryjkovski chronicle, early rulers of Lithuanians spoke the Lithuanian language. Which is known to be an Indoeuropean language, with much surfatial similarities to Latin ?and also with sanskrit?...
Anyway, their language was that Baltic Indoeuropean language.
There has been a somewhat later invention, documented then in heraldic books about some Gediminaite princely lineages, that Gediminas descended from princes of Polatsk, the proto-Belarusian state already extant around the year 1000.
The princes of Polatsk, in turn, have been grafted into Rurikid family tree as descending from the eldest son of Vladimir, the ruler of Kiev who converted to christianity - but there have long existed those genealogists and historians who have suspected that the said son was actually son of Rogneda of Polatsk, Vladimir's early wife, by an earlier spouse of hers who had been a Viking chieftain. And that Vladimir's paternity was actually a step-fatherhood combined with him treating the boy as one of his own.
This descent of Gediminas from the Polatsk and Rurikids has been dismissed by research already some time, as historically unattested, as typical wishful thinking, as a typical grafting of an elevated ancestry to be the root of a later mighty dynasty...
Now, the intriguing project
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~mozhayski/teksty/ydna.html
has manageed to secure a few possible or believed Gediminaite male-line samples.
The results vary. In a most mind-boggling way. Two alternatives, which cannot be both true as to y-DNA of Gediminas.
The samples are (yet) few, thus even one sample more may alter conclusions drastically.
One sample, of a male of a well-attested Gediminaite lineage (Trubetzkoy) belongs to the haplotype R1a1. Which is, in light of demographic studies, one of usual haplotypes present in Indo-european Baltic peoples.
This one sample would thus mean that Gediminas -if he were its patrilineal ancestor- was a typical Balt as to his y DNA.
But, one sample is a precarious proof. Had anything fatal happened during those more than six centuries to break that lineage, the one sample would then prove nothing as to Gediminas.
It would not be any wonder, if a break had happened, that had infused a typical Baltic y-DNA. There were genetic Balts all around the family throughout these centuries, so that sort of DNA was well available.
Thus, a final conclusion must be refrained from.
Two other samples, of two males both possibly of Gediminaite lineage but with an almost non-existent or a fatally faulty evidence to support the existence of a direct male line from Gediminas, both show to be of the same male lineage, branched at least half a millennium ago and highly probably no more than a millennium ago. The time window when Gediminas and his sons lived.
Their essentially shared y-DNA belongs to the haplogroup I1a. Which is, in light of demographic studies, one of usual haplotypes present in Viking (= Varangian) populations.
These two samples would thus mean that Gediminas -if he were their patrilineal ancestor- was a genetical Viking.
At least these two samples mean that they both descend in patriline from a Viking, a Varyag, Varangian. Which is highly plausible: those coastal areas and river routes, from where the patriline of both said samples could well come, were travelling routes, occasional colonization spots, and robbing targets, of Varangians a millennium ago.
One such Viking, a Varyag, however was the guy who was first spouse of Rogneda of Polatsk, and the possible father of the prince who founded the Polatsk line of (quasi-)Rurikid stem. [It cannot be ruled out that the said Varangian guy were an ancestor of these two samples. However, to positively conclude that he were their ancestor, would require a plausible chain of historical evidence to support the pedigree, not solely DNA findings. There's almost no such evidence known now.]
All in all, this alternative suffers from the lack of historical attestation of the male-line pedigree of these samples from Gediminas. Without such attestations, these two samples cannot be concluded to inform anything on Gediminas' y DNA.
The question of Gediminid origin, on basis of y DNA, needs certain lot of further research.
M.Sjöström
Finland
M.Sjostrom
The description I gave to this one of 'Kurgan' haplotypes, was (as everyone can read):
"...the haplotype R1a1.... is, in light of demographic studies, one of usual haplotypes present in Indo-european Baltic peoples....
sample would thus mean that Gediminas -if he were its patrilineal ancestor- was a typical Balt as to his y DNA."
I would paraphrase Dr. Bajor's words to express the following:
"... well known fact that populations of Latvia and Lithuania almost equally come from (genetic) FINNO-UGRIANS (N3a1) and (genetic) INDO-EUROPEANS (R1a1)
(others, like I1a and R1b are insignificant).
...A vast discussion on this subject is being carried out on the Russian-speaking genetic genealogy forum (dnatree.ru). In my opinion this is a top secret where, when and how, a POPULATION speaking non-Indoeuropean dialect (N3a1 - Altai-Ural dialect), begun to use Indoeuropean (Prussian, Yatviagian, (proto)-Lithuanian, and some others).
--
About the question, how a really large bunch of Finno-Ugric populations came to speak Indo-European languages, there are the intriguing hypotheses of a phoneticist and linguist, Prof. Kalevi Wiik [which are in minority in any research community, in some disciplines non-existent or fringe...]
that postulate Germanic, Slavic and Baltic languages having been BORN by Finnic-Ugrics changing their language [A LANGUAGE SHIFT] from some Finno-Ugrian to Indoeuropean, when wanting to elevate their status or standard of living. Wiik has found a Finnic SUBSTRATUM in Slavic, Baltic and Germanic languages. The Wiik hypothesis is based on a belief that Finno-Ugrics learned their new (Indoeuropean) language a bit badly, like everyone who learns a new language, and that such learning mistakes (as well as Substratum) got established as characteristic to new Indoeuropean dialects, later languages, which were born out of those language shifts. According to the phoneticist Wiik, in Germanic, Baltic and Slavic languages, there are such mistakes (compared to sanskrit, latin, greek and so forth) which are very typical with Finnics learning an Indoeuropean language. New, from-other-language shifters, modified the Indoeuropean language to follow a bit more the
pronunciation and the structure of their own (earlier) language.
Also some words were remnants from the earlier language, such words which things were unknown to the (Indo-european) language they shifted to.
According to premises of the Wiik hypothesis, Finnic-Ugrics in Northern Europe were hunter-gatherers, originally hunters of large animals; while Indo-Europeans of South-East Europe were already farmers (of mixed farming and animal husbandry) and economically more successful. The Indo-European language of southeasterners served as a lingua franca of the inhabitants of many regions - displacing or gradually converting linguistically the less successful hunters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalevi_Wiik
--- On Mon, 7/7/08, David Zincavage <j...@usa.net> wrote:
> From: David Zincavage <j...@usa.net>
> Subject: Re: origin of the Gediminaite, princely families of Great Lithuania
> To: "bajor" <ba...@itme.edu.pl>
> Cc: qs...@yahoo.com, gen-me...@rootsweb.com, lpowic...@eurogastek.com
> Date: Monday, July 7, 2008, 7:44 AM
> The designation of members of the R1a Ydna haplogroup as
> "Slavs" is
> both bizarre and counterfactual. A Slav is someone who
> speaks a Slavic
> language. The R1a haplogroup is found present in
> significant percentages
> in any number of non-Slavic speaking populations, from
> Northern India to
> the British Isles, and no theory of linguistic history can
> possibly
> attribute descent from Slavic-language speakers to
> populations speaking
> different languages who have resided in the same region
> they are found
> in today from periods prior to the origin of the Slavic
> languages.
>
> Are 26.5% of Norwegians Slavs? Are 45% of upper caste
> Indians Slavs?
>
> Wells et al. </wiki/Spencer_Wells> (2001), "The
> Eurasian Heartland: A
> continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity
> <http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/98/18/10244>",
> /Proc. Natl. Acad.
> Sci. U. S. A./ *98* (18): 10244--9, PMID 11526236
> <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11526236>
>
>
> The identification of R1a with Kurgan culture is not my
> invention or
> unique to me.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a_%28Y-DNA%29#CITEREFWells_et_al.2001
>
> Semino et al. (2000), "The Genetic Legacy of
> Paleolithic /Homo sapiens
> sapiens/ in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective
> <http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/Science_2000_v290_p1155.pdf>",
>
> /Science/ *290*: 1155--59, PMID 11073453
> <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11073453>
>
> The key problem with calling persons belonging to the R1a
> haplogroup
> "Slavic" is that R1a originated around 13,000
> BCE, while Proto-Slavic
> developed around 3000 BCE. The best available scholarship
> identifies
> R1a with Indo-European, the ancestor of Proto-Slavic.
>
> David Zincavage
>
>
>
>
>
> bajor wrote:
> > Thank you very much for your very interesting email. I
> was trying to
> > persuade to two princes Galitzine that they should
> have made their Y-DNA
> > tests just for scientific purposes. There is an urgent
> need to confirm
> > whether the prince Tonu Trubetsky (Trubetzkoi) is, in
> fact, a direct
> > descendant of Gedimin. In spite of this that the
> princes Galitzine were
> > offered their tests for free (i.e. someone else would
> have been paying for
> > their tests), neither of them replied to my email.
> >
> > Therefore, I've got in touch with Mr. Sherbatov
> who is secretary of the
> > Russian Association of Nobility. He said that he will
> be needing some time
> > to find a Galitzine, or a Kurakine, or a Khovansky,
> who will eventually
> > agree to make his Y-DNA test.
> >
> > Best wishes.
> >
> > Andrzej Bajor
> >
> > PS. Currently, this has been a well known fact that
> populations of Latvia
> > and Lithuania almost equally come from (genetic) Finns
> (N3a) and (genetic)
> > Slavs (R1a1), whom Mr. Zincavage calls
> "descendants of the Kurgan culture"
> > (others, like I1a and R1b are insignificant). This is
> still not clear
> > whether the Finno-Ugrians came to the Baltic countries
> from Karelia, or from
> > Povolzhe. A vast discussion on this subject is being
> carried out on the
> > Russian-speaking genetic genealogy forum (dnatree.ru).
> In my opinion this is
> > a top secret where, when and how, a nation speaking
> non-Indoeuropean dialect
> > (N3a1 - Altai-Ural dialect), begun to use Indoeuropean
> (Prussian,
> > Yatviagian, (proto)-Lithuanian, and some others).
> > .
> >
> >
David Zincavage
the linguistic association. R1a is also very largely represented
percentage-wise in the population of the subcontinent of India. Would
you speak of (genetic Slavic) Hindus or Pathans? "Slavic" is an
anachronistic reference.
Cheers,
David
bajor wrote:
> David,
>
> Once again I am reminding you that I didn't say "Finns" and "Slavs",
> but, however, "(genetic) Finns" and "(genetic) Slavs", respectively.
> Certainly, and you are absolutely right here, we can't talk about the
> Finns who settled themselves in the Baltic countries. Most probably
> they had already spoken another dialects and lost traditions of their
> Finnish ancestors. However, undoubtedly, those people are genetically
> identical (certainly, there have been some minor differences) with the
> Finns who live in native Finland.
>
> The same applies to descendants of the Kurgan culture. When they
> settled themselves in the Baltic countries in short time (or maybe
> earlier) they adopted local dialects. Be so kind as to see on my
> website this what I have written, namely that the prince Tonu
> Trubetsky, although R1a1, is descended from the native Lithuanian
> population.
>
> We can't say that Indoeuropeans=R1a1. Because in my opinion R1b also
> belongs to the Indoeuropean tree of nations. However, their history is
> quite different to the R1a. R1b travelled along the Mediterranean
> coastal line; turned to the north in Spain, and from France they
> entered Germany (one of the branches, R1b1c (the Celts) also entered
> the British Isles). They met their distant cousins (R1a) on the Elba
> river.
>
> I have already informed you on the Herbarz forum, that some Finnish
> geneticists declare that one of the R1a tribes was travelling with a
> N3a tribe to Karelia, and, finally, they settled themselves in
> southern Norway. This is one of the sources for the important
> occurrance of R1a in the British Isles and in Iceland. However, I
> think that Slavic-speaking R1a also took part in Viking expeditions
> against the British Isles.
>
> Best wishes.
>
> Andrzej Bajor
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* David Zincavage <mailto:j...@usa.net>
> *To:* bajor <mailto:ba...@itme.edu.pl>
> *Cc:* qs...@yahoo.com <mailto:qs...@yahoo.com> ;
> gen-me...@rootsweb.com <mailto:gen-me...@rootsweb.com> ;
> lpowic...@eurogastek.com <mailto:lpowic...@eurogastek.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, July 07, 2008 12:44 PM
> *Subject:* Re: origin of the Gediminaite, princely families of
> Great Lithuania
>
bajor
Sincerely,
Andrzej
Cheers,
David
bajor wrote:
David,
Best wishes.
Wells et al. (2001), "The Eurasian Heartland: A continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity", Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 98 (18): 10244-9, PMID 11526236
The identification of R1a with Kurgan culture is not my invention or unique to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a_%28Y-DNA%29#CITEREFWells_et_al.2001
Semino et al. (2000), "The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective", Science 290: 1155-59, PMID 11073453
bajor
bajor
David Zincavage
both bizarre and counterfactual. A Slav is someone who speaks a Slavic
language. The R1a haplogroup is found present in significant percentages
in any number of non-Slavic speaking populations, from Northern India to
the British Isles, and no theory of linguistic history can possibly
attribute descent from Slavic-language speakers to populations speaking
different languages who have resided in the same region they are found
in today from periods prior to the origin of the Slavic languages.
Are 26.5% of Norwegians Slavs? Are 45% of upper caste Indians Slavs?
Wells et al. </wiki/Spencer_Wells> (2001), "The Eurasian Heartland: A
continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity
<http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/98/18/10244>", /Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. U. S. A./ *98* (18): 10244--9, PMID 11526236
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11526236>
The identification of R1a with Kurgan culture is not my invention or
unique to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a_%28Y-DNA%29#CITEREFWells_et_al.2001
Semino et al. (2000), "The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic /Homo sapiens
sapiens/ in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective
<http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/Science_2000_v290_p1155.pdf>",
/Science/ *290*: 1155--59, PMID 11073453
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11073453>
The key problem with calling persons belonging to the R1a haplogroup
"Slavic" is that R1a originated around 13,000 BCE, while Proto-Slavic
developed around 3000 BCE. The best available scholarship identifies
R1a with Indo-European, the ancestor of Proto-Slavic.
David Zincavage
> .
>
>
us...@domain.invalid
>
>
> I have already informed you on the Herbarz forum, that some Finnish geneticists declare that one
> of the R1a tribes was travelling with a N3a tribe to Karelia, and, finally, they settled
> themselves in southern Norway. This is one of the sources for the important occurrance of R1a in
> the British Isles and in Iceland.
Is this the YCAIIb = 21 group? Presumably it is.
Doug McDonald