Possible genetics of neolithic people of Tartaria-Turdas settlements


Here, “Tartaria people” is a didactic denomination of contemporary people to Tartaria’s tablets scribe, in  Tartaria-Turdas settlements                                                      (In the best case of an oldest age limit for the tablets, presumed by me / Cotofeni Culture 2500-2000 B.C.)

Din Enigma Tablitelor de La Tartaria – Iuliu Adrian Paul – [PDF Document] https://vdocuments.mx › Category Documents

“Astfel, E. Neustupny (E. Neustupny, 1968, p. 32-35), referindu-se la
tăbliţele de la Tărtăria, subliniază că, după părerea sa, nu există decât două
posibilităţi: ori datele C14 sunt fundamental greşite, ori tăbliţele nu aparţin
contextului arheologic de care au fost legate de descoperitor, adică stratului
Vinča-Turdaş de la Tărtăria. În argumentaţia sa, el înclină spre cea de-a doua
posibilitate, bazată, printre altele, pe faptul că la Simpozionul Internaţional
privind cultura Lengyel, ţinut la Nitra (Slovacia) în 1967, s-a precizat că, la
nivelul tăbliţelor, s-a descoperit şi o ancoră de lut de tip caracteristic culturii
Coţofeni şi bronzului egeean timpuriu.“…………….                                                                  “Consecinţa logică rezultată din coroborarea datelor amintite este că
tăbliţele ar putea fi atribuite unui orizont cultural mai nou şi anume orizontului
Coţofeni, deci eneoliticului târziu sau începutului epocii bronzului din
Transilvania şi nu orizontului neolitic corespunzător fazei Vinča-Turdaş, datată pe baza C14 în mileniul V, pe la 4500 î. Hr. (Makkay, 1990, Pl.2)”. ====================================================

This not means:                                                                                                                                      – that the scribe had relatives or is native of this comunity,                                                         – not the “writing” originated here,                                                                                                   – nor proof to be so old.

MY OWN SUPPOSITION IS FOR AN SOUTHWARD ORIGIN for both: for “writing” and the scribe (Near East,Anatolia or rather Aegean). This is in my opinion the place where this “writing” was originated: From  The Risch-Chadwick Theory: An Obstacle to Progress by J. Faucounau Member of the Linguistic Society of Paris, France

1)- A theory which disregards the ancient tradition

The first weakness of the RC Theory is its total disregard of the most ancient tradition. For all the ancient authors, the Ionians were “the first Greeks“. There are no conflicting views about this among Herodotus, Strabon or Pausanias, although there is one concerning the origin of the Ionians. We will notice, in particular, that Herodotus – who call them “Pelasgoi” – established a link between the Ionians and the oldest inhabitants of the Cycladic Islands. He wrote : “The inhabitants of the islands … were also a Pelasgic people. They were later called Ionians for the same reason as the Ionians who came from Athens..” (Herodotus VII,95).

The word “Pelasgoi” is important. Influenced by the RC Theory, and because the Pelasgoi were said to have been the first inhabitants of Greece, most modern scholars have considered the name as designing a “Pre-Greek” (and therefore “non-Greek”) population. But the obvious link with “Pelagos” : “the open sea” leads us to think that the primitive meaning of the word must have been “seafarers”, a good description indeed of the Cycladic people during the Early Bronze Age. The most natural guess coming from the Herodotus account is therefore that a)- the Ionians were “the first Greeks” b)- they were seafarers and came by sea c)- they were once settled in the Cycladic Islands, probably during the Early Bronze Age.     

2)- A theory which disregards the geographical data

…..The classification of the Greek dialects into four groups (Ionic-Attic, Arkado-Cypriot, Aiolic and West Greek) has been universally accepted, as has also been agreed by all scholars that “Greek” (or at least its Indo European component) has been brought by “immigrants from the north”. From where, is still a matter of discussion. But the most probable place seems to be in the Balkans, south of the Low Danubian Valley.

3)- A theory based upon a single linguistic fact    ……………”                      ===========================================================================From:                                                                                                                                             Balkan ‘Aryan’ waves: 2800-2500bc R1b Troy, 2000-1500bc R1a Macedonians/Ionians/Micenians, 1200BC – R1b Dorians                                                                                                                                          https://aleximreh.wordpress.com/2014/07/30/balkan-aryan-waves/

Some time before:

eupedia.com/R1b The first forays of steppe people into the Balkans happened between 4200 BCE and 3900 BCE, when cattle herders equipped with horse-drawn wagons crossed the Dniester and Danube and apparently destroyed the towns of the Gumelnita, Varna and Karanovo VI cultures in Eastern Romania and Bulgaria. A climatic change resulting in colder winters during this exact period probably pushed steppe herders to seek milder pastures for their stock, while failed crops would have led to famine and internal disturbance within the Danubian and Balkanic communities. The ensuing Cernavoda culture (Copper Age, 4000-3200 BCE), Coțofeni culture (Copper to Bronze Age, 3500-2500 BCE) and Ezero culture(Bronze Age, 3300-2700 BCE), in modern Romania, seems to have had a mixed population of steppe immigrants and people from the old tell settlements. These steppe immigrants were likely a mixture of both R1a and R1b lineages, with a probably higher percentage of R1a than later Yamna-era invasions.

Tartaria people begining

<< 2800-2500BCE. Around the Black Sea, in the North of Turkey, in the East of the Balkans – the R1b highway. Old Europe is still resisting, R1b jumps over Cucuteni/Vinca culture to ‘Transylvania’, the starting platform from where Western Europe will be conquered. >>

Tartaria-Turdas people contemporary with supposed tablets’ scribe:

<< 2500-2000 BCE. Most of Cucuteni Culture replaced by Cotsofeni R1b. Cernavoda and Ezero also mixed cultures – Old Europe mixed with R1b, same with Otomani and Glina, R1b military elite controls the area but they will be in the end melted into the Old I2(+J2+E1b1) mixture. R1b controls western part of Balkans, Bubanj-Hum Maliq Culture. Much of Old Europe is still resisting. Troy also R1b. >>

Tartaria’s people (Cotofeni Culture) contemporary with the scribe:

early-bronze-age

R1b migration – bronze age = R1b migrants melted into I2+E/J/G Enelolithic/Old Europe populations produce new cultures: Cernavoda in Dobrogea >> Gumelnita from Dobrogea to Olt river >> Salcuta between Olt river and Serbia >> Krivodol/Bubanj in Serbia >> Maliq in Albania; plus Ezero in Bulgaria and Cotofeni in Transilvania. These Bronze Age mixes are proto-Thracians, and proto-Illyrians from which the Iron Age populations resulted – Thracians, Dacians, Getae and Illyrians.eliznik.org.uk/EastEurope/History

<< R1b coming from the Caucasus, N&S of Black Sea is ‘jumping’ over Old Europe to conquer Western Europe. R1a coming from the N is ‘jumping’ over Old Europe to conquer the the Balkans & ‘Greece’. Why the Hittites, such a strong empire, why they were not able to conquer the south shores of the Black Sea? Because that was R1b corridor, from Caucasus to Europe. Same Romania had a 7000 years continuity, Dacians had a ‘Latin language’ before the birth of Roman Empire and we preserved this ‘Latinity’ to present day!, BECAUSE we had the highest European population density in Neolithic. All migrations melted into this lower Danube area, the biggest European human reservoir, all migrating populations were absorbed by the I2 old Europeans, due to the best living conditions found in this area. First from the Lower Danube area,  Europe was colonized with I2 populations, than through the Balkans arrived in Europe the J2/G farming populations  and finally from the Lower Danube area, R1b made the celtic conquest of Western Europe,and from the north shores of the Black Sea R1a made the conquest of all East Europe.  As Herodotus used to say, thracians were the biggest, most powerful population of the known world, compared only to the population of India. All over the world the biggest rivers produced the biggest populations and consequently the biggest cultures. Nile > Egypt, Indus/Ganges > India, Tigris/Euphrates > Mesopotamia, Lower Danube + Black Sea shores > ‘Arian’ Old Europe.

In the above maps we can see, according to Eupedia, between 2800-2500BCE, a first R1b migration to the East Balkans and East of Greece, along the shores of the Black Sea, of R1b, coming from Caucasus/Kura Axes Culture and from the South Yamma Open Steppe Culture, Late Yamma Culture = ‘Proto Greek’?. Then between 2000-1500BCE, a second R1a migration of ‘Greco Macedonians and Thracians’ to ‘Bulgaria’ and down to the South of ‘Greece’. >>

===============================================================

From https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34414-Genetic-Origins-of-Minoans-and-Mycenaeans?p=516963&mode=threaded                                                                                      As far as I have read and learnt, I also tend to believe that the Proto-Greeks were associated with the Babyno culture or perhaps even the Cotofeni (close enough to where Babyno culture would arise) or Vucedol, considering the increasing likeliness that the Proto-Greeks were from their beginning a largely EHG-admixed EEF-majority people who shifted to IE language and culture. That’d explain nicely the cultural links of Mycenaeans to northern cultures and also the relatively little impact of steppe-like component in Mycenaean Greece.                                                                                                See :

Danube-Trypillia source of Minoan scripts | iurii mosenkis – Academia …

Danube-Trypillia source of Minoan scripts?

 

Iurii Mosenkis   

 

‘Proto-Linear A’ of Troy II–V (2600–1900 BCE) is preceded by ‘pre-Linear A’ of Cucuteni A-B (4100–3800 BCE) and late Trypillia (Troianiv and Gorods’k, early 3rd m. BCE) which may be read in Greek or Greek-Armenian

 

Cucuteni-Trypillia source of Minoan culture is a very old idea which traced to early XX c. Old comparison of Butmir (a branch of Impresso) and Minoan art (without clear link), Impresso and Cycladic figurines (with a link in Cycladic Neolithic art) may be also mentioned.

As E. R. von Stern in early XX c. and V. V. Struwe in mid-XX c. compared Crete with Usatove, Yu. V. Andreev in late XX c. underlined that Minoan ornamental motifs have ‘especially close analogies’ in Cucuteni-Trypillia and Gumelnita ones.

Spindle-whorls were typical oblect of Trojan inscriptions similar to Linear A (above). Trypillian spindle-whorls (late 4th – early 3rd m. BCE, contemporaneous with Troy I) might be also readed in comparison with Linear A.

Presented Trypillian spindle-whorl might bear an inscription:

pa-we-a = Lin. B pa-we-a = Greek φάρεα, pl. of φᾶρος, ‘a large piece of cloth’.

The sign te, frequent on Trypillian  spindle-whorls, might be compared with Lin. A, B te, shortened designation of material possibly related to Lin. A ta-pa, Lin. B te-pa, τάπης, ‘carpet’.

Not only ‘linear’ but also ‘hieroglyphic’ Minoan signs have Trypillian parallels.

Seven Ж-symbols on the vessel which was found at the place of grain cult (dated to Trypillia BI) resemble Cretan Linear A, B syllabic sign si; Anatolian syllabic sign ha is also similar, in comparison to Hittite halki, ‘grain’. Σιτώ, ‘she of the Grain’, was cult title of Demeter. Si-to-po-ti-ni-ja, ‘Lady of the Grain’ is mentioned in the Linear B inscription from Mycenae. Ж-symbol is also depicted on the Late Trypyllia vessel. D. I. Pereverzev (pers. comm.) the same origin of Slavonic Ж letter while Slavic name of rue might be an adaptation of Greek sitos or even Sumerian zid, ‘flour’ (Sumerian Uruk influence on Trypillia?).

Rhombuses on Trypillian goddess figurines are similar with rhombus on Eleusinian Demeter figurine. Similar rhombuses are known in Vinča, Neolithic Greece (Tsani-Magoula), and Usatove. Among other meanings of Ancient Greek ῥόμβος was ‘membrum virile’.

Snake cult (esp. Trypillian cult of the snake skeleton) is related to previous: number of snake ribs is equated to number of days in month

Lunar cult was central in Trypillian and Minoan religions.

Lunar Dog, typical to Trypillian religious art, might be also reconstructed from Greek mythology. The word ἀργός means ‘shining’ and ‘swift’, and both meaning also are in Sanskrit (Skt. jrá, shining, swift), Vedic proper name Rji-śvan-, = possessing κύνες ἀργοί (Homeric). Ἄργος was Odysseus’ dog while Ἄργος Πανόπτης, a many-eyed guardian of Io, was killed by Hermes: the Moon (star-eyed Argos) disappears when morning Mercury (Hermes) appears. The same root is presented in the Greek name of silver, a ‘lunar’ metal.

  1. Burkert (following N. Platon) described Minoan ‘fire feast’ on a mountain in the night (lamps were used, clay figurines and animals were sacrificed)and compared them with similar festivals in classical Greece. Cucuteni-Trypillian rite of village-burning (ultimately related to proto-Halaf via Vinča) is well-known.

‘An amazingly and controversialinscribed Cucuteni A-B fragment from Lozna (Romania)’ contains two signs (the first word under the picture of killed bird) which, in comparison with Linear AB, may be read ra-ro, cf. Ancient Greek λάρος, ‘sea-mew, gull’, Pamphylian σισίλαρος: πέρδιξ, Περγαῖοι (Hesych.), Armenian lor, ‘quail’. The next word is ro-tu-ke : ὄρτυξ < ϝόρτυξ, ‘quail’, Vedic vártikā, ‘quail’. Cucuteni A-B is dated to 4100–3800 calBC

Late Trypillia (where inscribed spindle-whorls are known) chronologically preceded Troy II (where spindle-whorls and, particularly, inscribed spindle-whorl were increased). Some parts of Baden cultural circle, especially Ezero, might be a link between Trypilla and Troy. It was possible part of the transmission of linear script.

Aegean-related Trialeti culture might also include Greek element; some scholars linked names of Trialeti and Troy (Etruscan truj-al ‘Trojan’ and Tri-al-eti ‘Trojan place’?). There were similarities between Mycenaean and Trialeti elites, between Troy II, Alaca royal tombs, and Trialeti. Multi-Rolled > Abashevo > Timber Grave signs

Kura-Araxes culture influenced Alaca Hoyuk elite of early Hittites whereas Kura-Araxes signs (including ‘great king’!) influenced Anatolian hieroglyphs. Cretan hieroglyphs preceded Anatolian ones, and the latter couldn’t be a source. Instead, Khirbet-Kerak filiation of Kura-Araxes culture (existed until about the 2200 BCE chaos) and Trialeti as the Aegean-related descendant of Kura-Araxes might be links between Caucasus and Crete. Trypillia might contact with Kura-Araxes via Maikop (Maikop signs are similar to Anatolian hieroglyphs) while pre-Maikop was influenced by Trypillia. Cucuteni-Trypillia signs might be of Danube Vinča origin. ============================================

Note                                                                                                                                                          In my opinion, the folowings are related to Vinca culture, not as sugested below also to tablets wich I am sustaining that are later-time products !

From DRAVIDIAN TOKENS, UBAID, AND ITS TRACES IN BALKANS by Iurii Mosenkis https://www.academia.edu/10909671/Dravidian_tokens_Ubaid_and_its_traces_in_Balkans

Ubaid Dravidian cult language of the Vinča
The Vinča, possibly Hurrian and similar to Indo-European Linear Pottery, might
be dravidianized by the Anatolian Ubaid. The phonetic structure of the Dravidian
languages is similar to the ‘banana’ substrate in Sumerian and Hurrian. Sumerian
writing system is good for the Dravidian word structure but not so good for
Sumerian one. The strong Dravidian element in Sumerian basic and cultural lexicon
might be interpreted as a ‘banana’ = Ubaid component.                                                         The Dravidian Ubaid roots might be suggested for                                                                     1) the Sumerian script of suggested pre-Sumerian origin,                                                        2) the Vinča script, including the Tărtăria tablets, related to the Sumerian script but not immediately,                                                                                                                                         3) the Cretan Linear A, B script derived from the Vinča script via the Dispilio tablet and the Trojan scriptinvestigated by N. N. Kazanskii,                                                                              4) the Kura-Araxes script similar to Vinča.                                                                               The beginning of the Ubaid culture in Southern Mesopotamia is currently dated from 6500 BCE, i. e. earlier than the Vinča and the Vinča script. The first tokens asthe prototypes of the Sumerian hieroglyphs are dated from the 9th millennium BCE.                 The Anatolian Ubaid influence on the Balkans is confirmed by the Dravidian etymologies of the Cretan Linear A, B signs and several Paleo-Balkan words.The line of descendance Vinča (with the Dispilio Tablet closest to Linear A) >Tisza>Tiszapolgár > Bodrogkeresztúr (with Aegean relations) contacted with Baden might reflect the connection between the Vinča script and the Trojan script (Troy IIV) which N. N. Kazanskii interpreted as an intermediate element between the Vinča and Linear A.                                                                                                    As L. S. Klejn suggested, the Vinkovci / Somogyvar of the Baden origin was related to the culture of the Cretan Linear script A. So Dravidian might be a cult language of the Anatolian Neolithic and Vinča because of the Dravidian relations of the Linear A, B signs, substrate words in Greek and Dacian, and the Tărtăria tablets. The Karanovo IV bearded figurines very similato the Harappan ones and contemporary of Vinča may be interpreted as anadditional argument.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


%d bloggers like this: