PDA

View Full Version : Germanic settlement in the Balkans confirmed



Maciamo
29-02-12, 23:18
I have wondered before if the presence of haplogroup I1 in the Balkans might be due to Germanic migrations (notably the Goths, who are known to have settled in the Eastern Roman Empire) or simply to Paleolithic/Mesolithic remnants. A new study of Serbian Y-DNA by Regueiro et al. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22310393?dopt=Abstract) provides for the first time data for subclades deep enough to confirm this. The sample size is rather small (n=103), but they tested I1d1 (P109) as well as R1b-S28 (U152) and R1b-S21 (U106, M405). I1d corresponds to the northern cluster of I1, found mostly in Norway, Sweden and Finland. I1d1 is much rarer in Finland, but more common in Denmark. It is typically Scandinavian. There is no less than 5% of I1d in this Serbian sample + 3% of other I1.

This much could confirm the presence of a major Germanic, probably a Gothic settlement in the region. If that is so, we should expect a considerable presence of matching Germanic R1b. This is just what the study found, with 2% of R1b-S21. There is an additional 3% of R1b-L23 that is neither S21 nor S28. Unfortunately they don't separate the Greek L23* from the Celto-Germanic L11. But some of it could also be Germanic. There is also plenty of R1a (20%), and only 6% of was positive for the Balto-Slavic M458 mutation. There is also potentially a lot of Germanic or Mesolithic R1a. The most important was the identification of a substantial amount of unmistakably Germanic I1 and R1b. We can't assess exactly the percentage of Germanic paternal lineages in Serbia, but my guess is around 15%.

how yes no 2
29-02-12, 23:47
I have wondered before if the presence of haplogroup I1 in the Balkans might be due to Germanic migrations (notably the Goths, who are known to have settled in the Eastern Roman Empire) or simply to Paleolithic/Mesolithic remnants. A new study of Serbian Y-DNA by Regueiro et al. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22310393?dopt=Abstract) provides for the first time data for subclades deep enough to confirm this. The sample size is rather small (n=103), but they tested I1d1 (P109) as well as R1b-S28 (U152) and R1b-S21 (U106, M405). I1d corresponds to the northern cluster of I1, found mostly in Norway, Sweden and Finland. I1d1 is much rarer in Finland, but more common in Denmark. It is typically Scandinavian. There is no less than 5% of I1d in this Serbian sample + 3% of other I1. .yes, but I1d1 is not found in Gothic settlemetshttp://www.familytreedna.com/public/yDNA_I1/default.aspx?section=ymapno i1d1 in east and north east Europe and the sample in Spain is in area that was not settled by Goths but in area settled by Suebi...i1d1 seems to be rare except in Serbia...so, it is also possible that I1d1 travelled together with i2a2 which probably came to Serbia mostly with Serbs from north Europe..for me this could be indication that proto-Serbs came from northern Europe...as we do not find I2a2 in Scandinavia, than this merging of I1d1 with I2a2 migh have happened in Denmark or north Germany

zanipolo
01-03-12, 08:31
I have wondered before if the presence of haplogroup I1 in the Balkans might be due to Germanic migrations (notably the Goths, who are known to have settled in the Eastern Roman Empire) or simply to Paleolithic/Mesolithic remnants. A new study of Serbian Y-DNA by Regueiro et al. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22310393?dopt=Abstract) provides for the first time data for subclades deep enough to confirm this. The sample size is rather small (n=103), but they tested I1d1 (P109) as well as R1b-S28 (U152) and R1b-S21 (U106, M405). I1d corresponds to the northern cluster of I1, found mostly in Norway, Sweden and Finland. I1d1 is much rarer in Finland, but more common in Denmark. It is typically Scandinavian. There is no less than 5% of I1d in this Serbian sample + 3% of other I1.

This much could confirm the presence of a major Germanic, probably a Gothic settlement in the region. If that is so, we should expect a considerable presence of matching Germanic R1b. This is just what the study found, with 2% of R1b-S21. There is an additional 3% of R1b-L23 that is neither S21 nor S28. Unfortunately they don't separate the Greek L23* from the Celto-Germanic L11. But some of it could also be Germanic. There is also plenty of R1a (20%), and only 6% of was positive for the Balto-Slavic M458 mutation. There is also potentially a lot of Germanic or Mesolithic R1a. The most important was the identification of a substantial amount of unmistakably Germanic I1 and R1b. We can't assess exactly the percentage of Germanic paternal lineages in Serbia, but my guess is around 15%.

but isn't P-109 southern swede and west finnish ( lettish ) and also be Livs, Lats, aestii, rugii, sambians and venedi purely a "baltic" people/haplotype, while L-22 being saami, north sweden and norwegian completely different?

If what you say is true that this marker is gothic , then the latest theory that goths where east-germanic which went to sweden and then back to the contintent , is wrong.

granted a "cousin" of the goths, the gepids ( an east-germanic people near the vistula delta ) would need to also be considered I1d1 P-109

razor
01-03-12, 16:00
Not to forget that the first documented "Germanic" population to settle in the Balkans (as recounted by Cassius Dio) were the Bastarnians, in 29 BCE. They were migrating from Moldavian territory (in today's terms) to Dardania.

MOESAN
01-03-12, 22:35
but isn't P-109 southern swede and west finnish ( lettish ) and also be Livs, Lats, aestii, rugii, sambians and venedi purely a "baltic" people/haplotype, while L-22 being saami, north sweden and norwegian completely different?

If what you say is true that this marker is gothic , then the latest theory that goths where east-germanic which went to sweden and then back to the contintent , is wrong.

granted a "cousin" of the goths, the gepids ( an east-germanic people near the vistula delta ) would need to also be considered I1d1 P-109

I don't understand your post - please could you go further on in the details: what HGs are envolved and born by what tribe? comparing to the Serbs ones (if possible with the same denomination for SNPs

Maciamo
01-03-12, 22:48
Not to forget that the first documented "Germanic" population to settle in the Balkans (as recounted by Cassius Dio) were the Bastarnians, in 29 BCE. They were migrating from Moldavian territory (in today's terms) to Dardania.

Weren't they related to the Goths ?

razor
01-03-12, 23:55
They were. Culturally though, they are associated with the Yastorf culture, and the Goths with the Wielbark culture. The genetics would have been similar I suspect.

zanipolo
02-03-12, 00:38
Weren't they related to the Goths ?

Not until after 200AD when the goths "annexed" the bastanae

zanipolo
02-03-12, 00:44
I don't understand your post - please could you go further on in the details: what HGs are envolved and born by what tribe? comparing to the Serbs ones (if possible with the same denomination for SNPs

I1d1 is only with P-109 as far as I know and there is no P-109 with the saami and the others I mentioned, they are only L-22.

If you check finnish types, there is a division between the eastern and western part of Finland. Since Fnland where never classified as norse or vikings, then the association of HG must be only from sweden to western finland or reversed, ie, a lettish HG.
Since the lettish are also with the kurs, livs and lats , ( but not the ests) , then what does this tell us.

If maciano, syas I1d1 is gothic, then we need clarity with (1) did the goths bring it to sweden from east germany or did the goths originated in sweden

razor
02-03-12, 00:52
More precisely: those Bastarnae who lived in the area of the Chernyakhiv (Chernyakhov) culture. Quite a few of them, however, had migrated north and northeastward in the time of the "Late Zarubinian horizon" (ca 50-200 CE) where they participated in the Slavic ethnogenesis.

MOESAN
03-03-12, 00:12
I1d1 is only with P-109 as far as I know and there is no P-109 with the saami and the others I mentioned, they are only L-22.

If you check finnish types, there is a division between the eastern and western part of Finland. Since Fnland where never classified as norse or vikings, then the association of HG must be only from sweden to western finland or reversed, ie, a lettish HG.
Since the lettish are also with the kurs, livs and lats , ( but not the ests) , then what does this tell us.

If maciano, syas I1d1 is gothic, then we need clarity with (1) did the goths bring it to sweden from east germany or did the goths originated in sweden

thanks - now I'll go to dive for more details about these distributions of Y-I1

GloomyGonzales
04-03-12, 22:47
This much could confirm the presence of a major Germanic, probably a Gothic settlement in the region. If that is so, we should expect a considerable presence of matching Germanic R1b. This is just what the study found, with 2% of R1b-S21. There is an additional 3% of R1b-L23 that is neither S21 nor S28. Unfortunately they don't separate the Greek L23* from the Celto-Germanic L11. But some of it could also be Germanic.

When we talk about the East Germanic people we should keep in mind that they were mostly R1a-z280 with some I1-T1, I1-ASP, I1d1-P109. So there is no reason to expect to see any considerable amount of R1b-U106 in the settlements of the East Germanic people. In fact R1b-U106 even is not Germanic it's germanized so they did not take part in early migrations of Germanic people.



There is also plenty of R1a (20%), and only 6% of was positive for the Balto-Slavic M458 mutation. There is also potentially a lot of Germanic or Mesolithic R1a. The most important was the identification of a substantial amount of unmistakably Germanic I1 and R1b. We can't assess exactly the percentage of Germanic paternal lineages in Serbia, but my guess is around 15%.

The majority of Serbian R1a would be R1a-z280 this clade is typical for the East Germanic settlements.
I think it's not quite correct to call R1a-M458 clade Balto-Slavic this clade is typical for the Western Slavs but not for the East Slavs and Baltic people.
For example if we take Russians then M458/Z280 ratio for them would be something like 25%/75%.
for Latvians ~ 10%/90%
for Lithuanians ~30%/70%.

Taranis
04-03-12, 23:40
When we talk about the East Germanic people we should keep in mind that they were mostly R1a-z280 with some I1-T1, I1-ASP, I1d1-P109. So there is no reason to expect to see any considerable amount of R1b-U106 in the settlements of the East Germanic people. In fact R1b-U106 even is not Germanic it's germanized so they did not take part in early migrations of Germanic people.

This is very doubtful. As you may know, a sample of R1b-U106 (along with R1a and R1a has been found in the Lichtenstein cave in northern Germany, dated to circa 1000 BC. Regarding R1a, it is of course known to have been in Central Europe since the Corded Ware period, and it stands to reason that the people of the Battle Axe culture (an offshot of Corded Ware in Scandinavia) were carriers of R1a as well. The question is the ethnic identity of these peoples. While it's likely that they were Indo-European, it's doubtful that they could have been "Germanic" in any recognizable way. Regarding R1b, we know that it was in Central Europe by Urnfield times, even though we do not know when it arrived (the Beaker-Bell Culture is often suggested, and there have been a lot of arguments for and against the Beaker-Bell Culture). In any case, this very likely predates the Germanic ethnogenesis. From the linguistic perspective, it's clear that the Proto-Germanic language wasn't spoken until the iron age, and I personally find it very unlikely that the Proto-Germanic peoples of the (iron age) Jastorf Culture were not carriers of R1b.

mihaitzateo
05-03-12, 01:54
This is very doubtful. As you may know, a sample of R1b-U106 (along with R1a and R1a has been found in the Lichtenstein cave in northern Germany, dated to circa 1000 BC. Regarding R1a, it is of course known to have been in Central Europe since the Corded Ware period, and it stands to reason that the people of the Battle Axe culture (an offshot of Corded Ware in Scandinavia) were carriers of R1a as well. The question is the ethnic identity of these peoples. While it's likely that they were Indo-European, it's doubtful that they could have been "Germanic" in any recognizable way. Regarding R1b, we know that it was in Central Europe by Urnfield times, even though we do not know when it arrived (the Beaker-Bell Culture is often suggested, and there have been a lot of arguments for and against the Beaker-Bell Culture). In any case, this very likely predates the Germanic ethnogenesis. From the linguistic perspective, it's clear that the Proto-Germanic language wasn't spoken until the iron age, and I personally find it very unlikely that the Proto-Germanic peoples of the (iron age) Jastorf Culture were not carriers of R1b.
Well is told that R1A1 was found in Germany from 2600 BC:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a_%28Y-DNA%29#Europe
"The remains of a father and his two sons, from an archaeological site discovered in 2005 near Eulau (in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany) and dated to about 2600 BCE, tested positive for the Y-SNP marker SRY10831.2. The R1a1 clade was thus present in Europe at least 4600 years ago, in association with one site of the widespread Corded Ware culture."

Taranis
05-03-12, 01:56
Well is told that R1A1 was found in Germany from 2600 BC:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a_(Y-DNA)#Europe
"The remains of a father and his two sons, from an archaeological site discovered in 2005 near Eulau (in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany) and dated to about 2600 BCE, tested positive for the Y-SNP marker SRY10831.2. The R1a1 clade was thus present in Europe at least 4600 years ago, in association with one site of the widespread Corded Ware culture."

That's what I said, even though I didn't mention Eulau in this post:


This is very doubtful. As you may know, a sample of R1b-U106 (along with R1a and R1a has been found in the Lichtenstein cave in northern Germany, dated to circa 1000 BC. Regarding R1a, it is of course known to have been in Central Europe since the Corded Ware period, and it stands to reason that the people of the Battle Axe culture (an offshot of Corded Ware in Scandinavia) were carriers of R1a as well. The question is the ethnic identity of these peoples. While it's likely that they were Indo-European, it's doubtful that they could have been "Germanic" in any recognizable way. Regarding R1b, we know that it was in Central Europe by Urnfield times, even though we do not know when it arrived (the Beaker-Bell Culture is often suggested, and there have been a lot of arguments for and against the Beaker-Bell Culture). In any case, this very likely predates the Germanic ethnogenesis. From the linguistic perspective, it's clear that the Proto-Germanic language wasn't spoken until the iron age, and I personally find it very unlikely that the Proto-Germanic peoples of the (iron age) Jastorf Culture were not carriers of R1b.

mihaitzateo
05-03-12, 03:06
Well I think R1A1 from Europe include germanic people branches ,norse vikings and slavs branches,sure more branches for slavs.
If you take history,germanic tribes should settled in Serbia with goths,suebi etc which settlement should have taken place later than 200 AD.
So I think in those times germanic tribes already had some branch or even branches of R1A1.
Thing is you can not know how R1A1 that is in Serbia came there,it can be from germanic settlement there,can be from old inhaibtants and so on.