Menu
Currency
Main
Store
Blog

Loading Report

Preparing your ancestry journey

Connecting to ancient matches...

Preparing your report

Skip to main content
Portrait reconstruction of A woman buried in Romania in the Bronze Age era
Ancient Individual

A woman buried in Romania in the Bronze Age era

A woman buried in Romania during the Glavanesti Culture of Romania

A fragment of the ancient world, preserved across millennia in strands of DNA.

I11912
3500 BCE - 1100 BCE
Female
Romania
Scroll to begin
Chapter I

Identity

The biological and cultural markers that define this ancient individual

Sample ID

I11912

Date Range

3500 BCE - 1100 BCE

Cultural Period

Glavanesti Culture of Romania

Biological Sex

Female

mtDNA Haplogroup

Not available

Y-DNA Haplogroup

N/A (Female)

Social Role

Farmer (AI estimate, era-typical)

Chapter II

Place

Where this individual was discovered

Country Romania
Locality Glăvăneşti
Coordinates 46.2442, 27.3975
Chapter III

Time

When this individual lived in the broader context of human history

I11912 3500 BCE - 1100 BCE
Chapter IV

Story

The narrative of this ancient life

Region & Environment

The Glavanesti cultural horizon is associated with parts of Romania within and near the Carpathian arc, where valleys and upland margins created varied zones for farming, herding, and access to raw materials. River systems and fertile tracts supported agriculture, while nearby woodland and pasture landscapes contributed to a mixed subsistence strategy.

Historical Context

Dating to roughly 2000–1800 BCE, Glavanesti sits in the Carpathian Bronze Age. This era is characterized across southeastern Europe by expanding interregional connections and the increasing importance of bronze production and distribution within complex networks.

Populations & Lifeways

Communities likely practiced mixed agriculture and herding, with household labor focused on crop cultivation, animal management, and craft production. Settlement patterns in Bronze Age Europe often included villages and smaller activity locales, though the archaeological record for any single culture may vary by site type and preservation.

Archaeology & Material Culture

Archaeological identification relies on the characteristics of ceramics and associated artifact categories attributed to the Glavanesti tradition. Pottery forms, decorative styles, and manufacturing techniques provide key evidence for cultural affiliation. Other material categories—such as metal objects, stone tools, and ornaments where preserved—can supplement ceramic evidence, though their presence and visibility may differ across sites.

Culture & Society

The use of shared ceramic styles and production methods suggests participation in learned traditions and social connections across the region. Bronze Age material culture also indicates that some communities had access to exchange routes, likely enabling the movement of metal, finished objects, or raw materials. Social differentiation may have existed, but it is typically inferred cautiously from burial or hoard contexts when available.

Legacy & Transition

The Glavanesti culture is part of a broader sequence of Carpathian Bronze Age developments, after which later Bronze Age communities adopted new styles and technologies. Transitions between cultural horizons are best approached as gradual shifts in material traditions and networks, rather than abrupt discontinuities across the entire region.

Context

Related Samples

This individual exists within a broader network of ancient samples. No ancient genome stands alone.

Sample ID Culture/Period Date Location Action
I11912 Glavanesti Culture of Romania 3500 BCE Glăvăneşti, Romania View
I11902 The Bodrogkeresztur Culture 4500 BCE Urziceni, Romania View
I11906 The Bodrogkeresztur Culture 4500 BCE Urziceni, Romania View
I11929 Middle Neolithic Alföld Linear Pottery Culture, Hungary 4300 BCE Polgár-Ferenci hát. M3-31, Hungary View
I11933 Middle Neolithic Alföld Linear Pottery Culture, Hungary 4300 BCE Polgár-Ferenci hát. M3-31, Hungary View
I20767 Iron Age Scythian Culture, Hungary 4000 BCE Kesznyéten-Szérűskert; Great Hungarian Plain. Borsodi-Mezőség, Hungary View
I20766 Iron Age Scythian Culture, Hungary 400 BCE Kesznyéten-Szérűskert, Hungary View
I20770 Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age Hungary 1700 BCE Mezőkeresztes-Cethalom. M3-10 lelőhely; Great Hungarian Plain. Borsodi-Mezőség, Hungary View
I20773 Late Bronze Age Hungary 1700 BCE Besenyszög Berek-ér partja, Hungary View
I11683 Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age Hungary 1700 BCE Mezőkeresztes-Cethalom. M3-10 lelőhely; Great Hungarian Plain. Borsodi-Mezőség, Hungary View
I20747 Iron Age Scythian Culture, Hungary 400 BCE Kesznyéten-Szérűskert, Hungary View
I20749 Late Bronze Age Halomsíros (Tumulus) Culture, Hungary 1700 BCE Hajdudorog-Szallasfold, Hungary View
I20750 Middle Bronze Age Füzesabony Culture, Hungary 2300 BCE Polgar Kenderfold, Hungary View
I20751 Late Bronze Age Hungary 1500 BCE Besenyszög Berek-ér partja. Köröm-Kápolnadomb, Hungary View
I20752 The La Tene Culture in Hungary 500 BCE Besenyszög Berek-ér partja. Köröm-Kápolnadomb, Hungary View
I20756 Old Bering Sea Culture Ekven, Russia 970 CE Chukotka. Bering Strait. Ekven, Russia View
I4112 5500 BCE Dereivka I, Ukraine View
Sample ID Culture/Period Date Location Action
I11912 Glavanesti Culture of Romania 3500 BCE Glăvăneşti, Romania View
Sources

References

Scientific publications and genetic data that inform this profile.

Scientific Publication

A minimally destructive protocol for DNA extraction from ancient teeth

Authors Harney É, Cheronet O, Fernandes DM, Sirak K, Mah M et al.
Abstract

Ancient DNA sampling methods-although optimized for efficient DNA extraction-are destructive, relying on drilling or cutting and powdering (parts of) bones and teeth. As the field of ancient DNA has grown, so have concerns about the impact of destructive sampling of the skeletal remains from which ancient DNA is obtained. Due to a particularly high concentration of endogenous DNA, the cementum of tooth roots is often targeted for ancient DNA sampling, but destructive sampling methods of the cementum often result in the loss of at least one entire root. Here, we present a minimally destructive method for extracting ancient DNA from dental cementum present on the surface of tooth roots. This method does not require destructive drilling or grinding, and, following extraction, the tooth remains safe to handle and suitable for most morphological studies, as well as other biochemical studies, such as radiocarbon dating. We extracted and sequenced ancient DNA from 30 teeth (and nine corresponding petrous bones) using this minimally destructive extraction method in addition to a typical tooth sampling method. We find that the minimally destructive method can provide ancient DNA that is of comparable quality to extracts produced from teeth that have undergone destructive sampling processes. Further, we find that a rigorous cleaning of the tooth surface combining diluted bleach and UV light irradiation seems sufficient to minimize external contaminants usually removed through the physical removal of a superficial layer when sampling through regular powdering methods.

Use code for 25% off Expires Jul 27