HistoGenes is one of the largest ongoing EU research projects seeking to unpack the complex problem of European genetic history. It addresses a major historical problem, the population history of Eastern Central Europe and, more specifically, of the Carpathian Basin (the former Roman province of Pannonia) between c. 400 and c. 900 CE. The population history of the region clearly has present-day implications as it is related with the topical issues of ethnicity, migration and the overarching problem of what actually constitutes European identity. The 10-million Euro project which is running from 2020 to 2026 is coordinated by the Austrian Academy of Sciences under the lead of Prof. Walter Pohl and includes research organizations from most of the successor states to the former Austro-Hungarian Empire plus research organizations from Germany and the US.
The ambitious interdisciplinary project is scientifically credible and clearly contributes to the state-of-the-art in historical studies of the Early Middle Ages in Europe. What makes HistoGenes innovative is that it employs methods from three scientific disciplines – history, archaeology and genetics in a cross-checking paleogenetic project driven by historical questions. More specifically, the employment of methods from genetic studies such as genomic analysis and isotope analysis in historical studies is very original and promising. Integrating population genetic analysis with the historical disciplines is an expression of the “bio-archaeological turn” which can provide tools for more precise research on the biological origin of Europeans. In methodological terms, it is positive that the use of linguistic models is minimized which is fully justified given that linguistic analysis in historical studies is most easily subject to speculation and falsification. This holds true especially for the history of the steppe empires and peoples in Eurasia in the Early Middle Ages which are very often interpreted from a linguistic perspective in Pan-Turkic terms, having a Pan-Turkic geopolitical agenda at the background.
A major weakness of the project is that Bulgars – who have played a prominent role in Central Eastern Europe in the period between 400 and 900 CE and, specifically in the Avar Khaganate – are to great extent excluded from the project. Bulgars are just briefly mentioned in passing in sections 2.5 and 3.3 of the project proposal. Respectively, the project consortium does not involve any Bulgarian research institution. At least part of the 6000 human samples to be collected under the HistoGenes project are human remains of Bulgars. In some cases, Bulgar genetic clusters in ancient graves in the Carpathian Basin could be expected. The implicit bias to the Bulgar genetic legacy and early medieval identity in Central Eastern Europe in the period between 400 and 900 CE is a major ethical issue of the HistoGenes project. The exclusion of Bulgars and the implicit bias against them in the project certainly affects the interpretation of research results and, consequently the historical conclusions to be drawn. And this concerns not only Bulgars but, more generally, the project’s overall approach to early medieval ethnicities in Central Eastern Europe. On the one hand, it is understandable that the project has a critical approach to the ethnic interpretation of archaeological evidence which helps avoid misleading simplifications. On the other hand, however, and judging from the project results published so far there is a risk that HistoGenes will not be able to deliver concrete results on the role of ethnicity and on the ethnic distinctions among ‘barbarians’ which are some of the project’s major research questions as stated in the proposal.
The project proposal is very cautious about a potential political utilization of the project’s research outcome. The temptation to make use of research results in current political debates on migration, identity and ethnicity, however, seems to be strong as evidenced by the media content of some project team members. Some project results have already been used in political discourses in support of the multiculturalist ideology and gender propaganda. For example, the claim that under Avar rule the Vienna Basin had experienced an unprecedented level of peace (based on the excavations of two sites only) seems an overstatement given the written sources about the Avars’ repressive treatment of subjugated ethnical groups, especially of the Slavs.
Despite these shortcomings the project’s main contribution is that it highlights the ‘European’ nomadic tradition, the impact of the steppe culture and the steppe warriors who have played a major role in the making of early medieval Europe. In this respect the project’s assumption (coming from migration theory) is that in human history, migration was the norm and not the exception. Of course, it would be unscientific to refer to the existence of a ‘nomadic gene’ – a term which has been used in some journalist works recently. It would be more precise to speak of a nomadic tradition in Europe and, especially in Eastern and Central Europe where the Great Steppe of Eurasia ends. As noted in the project proposal in the Central Eurasian Steppe, ‘mobility’ (‘nomadism’) was a way of life. A clear expression of this nomadic tradition is that for much of the period steppe empires following a Central Eurasian model dominated the Carpathian Basin. Indeed, it is a Eurasian tradition and not a European one in the strict sense. Nevertheless, in ethnical terms the roots of the European steppe nomadic tradition could be traced back to the Scythians and not only to groups like the Avars whose core group had predominantly Eastern and Central Asian ancestries. The Scythian ethnical basis of the European nomadic tradition has not been sufficiently examined to date and has not been adequately addressed in the HistoGenes project either. The project proposal just briefly mentions Sarmatians, one of the major Scythian tribes. The Scythians, a super-ethnos of Caucasian origin have played a dominant role in the Eurasian Steppe until the end of the 4-th century AD when the Sarmatian Kingdom collapsed as a result of the Hun conquests. The Scythians’ role in the Hunnic steppe empire and their political and, possibly ethnical transformation in the Hunnic period has not been clarified yet. The Eastern European profile of many genetic clusters identified under the HistoGenes project might be an important clue in this respect. One of the major conclusions from the HistoGene project is that the European Huns were genetically highly heterogeneous. There is no evidence of a large eastern /steppe descent community among the Hun- and post-Hun period Carpathian Basin population. Most of the Carpathian-Basin individuals from the late 4-th to the 6-th century do not show any signs of East/Central Asian genetic admixture, carrying only European ancestries. In this context, it is very important follow-up paleogenetic research projects to examine the role of the Scythians and Sarmatians in the formation of the barbaric ethnicities and states in Central and Eastern Europe, including the emerging Bulgar ethnicity and states in the period 5-9 century AD.