PDA

View Full Version : E-a24066



Aspurg
05-01-20, 01:57
I'd rather open my own topic rather than post in another one!



accuser: Aspurg, maternally paternal descendant of commanders of the fortress Hodidid, claimant of direct paternal descent from Greater Cumania, autonomous entity of the Kingdom of Hungary, modern day Hungary.

Oh it seems I am not descended of Hodidjed fort commander. There is a family from Sarajevo with same surname as my maternal family who are but it seems there were 4 separate families with the same surname from Sarajevo 200 years ago who cannot be linked, and surname is based on Ottoman state monopoly of coffee productions which was given to some people for a year or much more. These 4 families are from 4 separate mahallas (quarters) and it is very unlikely a single family can hold onto such lucrative monopoly.

Anyway even if I am not related to that branch still my grandfathers branch were designated in 1781. as kişizade, which means "noble". Only 5 families of Bosnia had this designation. One tested is Spanish I-M26, descended of Spanish muslims. Another from Mostar, historians use this surname to suggest Turkish origin. Another kişizade from Sarajevo are most likely descended from Hungary. Not 100 % but ancestor might be related to a Janissary unit which was stationed at the same place in 1680 from where the other family comes from probably (North of Budapest). I talked to a cousin, to get him tested.

My grandfathers mother is descended from another Sarajevo family which descends of muslims from Sanjak of Pakrac (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanjak_of_Pakrac). Again like many they arrived in late 17th century.

Grandmothers family Zavidovici, mid 19th century, some Turkish origin claims, but that village seems to have been composed of locals 400 years ago. But this claim relates to 200 years ago, probably local but have to test.

Grandmothers mother family, moved to Sarajevo from Donji Vakuf century ago. Ancestor 200 years ago mentioned with a surname indicating certain origin from muslims of Timișoara/Temesvar. Certainly arrived from Timișoara after 1716. when the Ottomans lost it. My mtdna I1a1a is from here.

I have lots of foreign ancestry, even unusual for Bosniaks.

So I have more motivation now to ensure my paternal ancestry is also foreign!
Finally my clade is isolated https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-A24066/

Unexpectedly I got a Bosniak from Central Bosnia there. Among over 1000 tested Serbs from Bosnia I don't have a single member of my clade, and very unlikely I will. There is another Bosniak from NE Bosnia of my clade but he is descended of my family so surely about 500 years at best from me. And he came from Peshter area.

We'll see how many novels he has, my 14 novels make up 2200 ybp, on YFull they only count novels of best quality. Still we share 12 of best quality.
Bosniaks from Central Bosnia have more native ancestry than Serbs or even Croats, very low Vlach, and Albanian sporadic. It could be some old Illyrian connection but:

Bosniaks from Central Bosnia also have had strong Hungarian influence since Medieval Bosnia, and some migration of muslims from Hungarian areas post Battle of Wiena in 1683. I have such ancestry myself.

Who seems closest to YF67778? There is one study sample:
Bosniak____14 24 14 10 16-18 11 12 13 13 11 29 17 14 20 12 17 11 22
RU281 Cluj_14 24 13 10 16-18 11 12 13 13 11 29 18 14 20 12 18 11 22

So GD=3/19 but they share dys393=14 which is very rare for V13. Karcag family has ordered BigY700, I used to think he may be related to RU281 GD=4/19 dys456=18, but Bosniak has a better case, he also has elevated dys458. If that's true then RU281 and Györfi from Karcag despite being in that region are pretty distant.

In a village where Bosniak is from in 1604. there were people named Gaspar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%A1sp%C3%A1r), Galin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%A1l), land called Shargan (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/s%C3%A1rk%C3%A1ny).

Also in Central Bosnia there are finds of proto-Magyar N-M2019, and also some Bosniak R-Z326 (which exists in Hungary I can say based on STR's), G-PH1780 (from Hungary where it is found or Anatolia).

So there are already some certain and potential links.

Karcag cousin told me they are of certain Cuman origin. In fact there is another family with same/similar surname, I was told this family is not Cuman.

I've found one of my subcluster dys385b=17 in Vojvodina study. Vojvodina Serbs are descended of Krajina Serbs or Raska Serbs mostly, in first my cousins don't exist, among second there is my cluster but this guy must be 1000 years away, he is not of my family. He looks similar to some Serbian/Bulgarian border region people. As that study had many non-Serbs, Hungarians, Romanians, Roma, this guy might easily be a Hungarian or Banat Romanian (very undertested area).

All that I want is to find a single member of my cluster dys385b=17 in Kunsag. And that would be it. Usually when you probe a population, more common haplotypes pop out, so if the first and only tested from Karcag was my cousin there should be more.. Especially as in the Balkans this cluster is found in some places suggesting Cumano-Pecheneg links..

Trojet
05-01-20, 02:45
We'll see how many novels he has, my 14 novels make up 2200 ybp, on YFull they only count novels of best quality. Still we share 12 of best quality.

No, in addition to Best Quality, they include Acceptable Quality Novels as well. The main criteria is the coordinates of SNPs must fall within the "combBED regions". Not every SNP falls within these regions, however, it doesn't mean they're bad SNPs, they just don't qualify for the Age Estimation formula. You can actually see on YFull if a particular SNP falls within these regions if you search for it and click for more info. See here for a detailed explanation: https://www.yfull.com/faq/what-yfulls-age-estimation-methodology/

I've noticed that your line is overestimating the TMRCA as compared to other samples. For example the average E-Z17107 TMRCA is ~2700 ybp, while your line has it at ~4200 ybp. So I would think the TMRCA of E-A24066 is currently being overestimated as well. It will probably be lowered once the new sample's (YF67778) age estimation is calculated into the TMRCA.

Aspurg
05-01-20, 04:42
My family are from Bijelo Polje, modern Rakonje (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rakonje). Attested ancestor died in 1645. from about there. This village is attested in at least two Ottoman defters as "Rakun/Rakon" in 1485. and 1530. But nobody lived there back then. The original name of this village was Spocha or something similar, then in 1485. it received a second new name, these seconds names are always associated with some clan that is taking over.


So where were they? Some made up tradition of Kuchi area descent exists in my family, but it was never to be taken seriously, because it makes no sense for a wealthy family to be some poor people running away for their lives from Kuchi, besides my family is attested pre-battle of Wiena (again you see this event having influence), as only after then these Brda Montenegrin clans started arriving.


Genetics gives clues. There are two families E-A24066+ from central Serbia, but who surely migrated to there from Peshter highlands. One is Dragovic came from Boroštica (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boro%C5%A1tica)village 200 years ago, other came from Raždaginja (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C5%BEdaginja)village on Peshter at the same time, third just "Peshter". Unique surnames of the 2nd and 3rd clearly suggest links with the hill Trojan next to Krnja Jela (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krnja_Jela), and deserted village Čarovina (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%8Carovina), next to and belonging to village Baljen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baljen)in 16th century.


So my E-A24066+ is related to multiple places on Peshter, all of these villages are today and have been since 200 or more years Bosniak, more precisely mostly they have been Kelmendi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelmendi_(tribe)), who arrived there in early 18th century as Catholics, later converted to Islam.


But what was there before?
In Ottoman Sipahi defter of 1526. for the battle of Mohacs, among sipahis who were supposed to stay in Sancak of Bosnia (this area belong to Bosnian sandzak), there was a group of Christian sipahis. There were no less than ten timar holders from the nahiya of Barče to the North.
knez Ognan, his timar village Brvenica, second name Zaječić (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaje%C4%8Di%C4%87e).
knez Radoslav, timar village Korutan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan%C4%8Da)
knez Dimitri, timar village Balenova , original name of modern village Baljen in 16th c.


and above them
Hasan Çelebi son of Ahmed-bey silahdar, timar village Krće (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kr%C4%87e)


This small piece of information above explains my ancestry.


1) Knez Ognan was a commander of voynuks from Sjenica area in 1530. His community later settled village Lopiže. In this village there is one distant branch of my own family. The original village belonging to Ognan - Zaječić was taken over by Hasan Çelebi, and when you consider that his village Krće is right next to Zaječić it is obvious these people are connected.
2) Korutan was a village with vojnuk community and village along with Janča whose part it is today this was the base of the father of Hasan Çelebi, Ahmed-bey
3) Baljen the village of 3rd person from the list had an old land called Ahmed in 1571., almost certainly referring to this Ahmed-bey, his son was superior to a Christian sipahi..


Ahmed-bey and Hasan had connections to only this group of Peshter voynuks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voynuks)not any other! As is the case with other communities in Ottoman census the mere fact that these come in succession means they are likely tribally connected. Another village where Hasan celebi got some lands is Raždaginja, from where one family related to me came from. His son Mehmed was sipahi who held Krnja Jela village too!! So they could have moved from Krnja Jela/Baljen area to Raždaginja at that time. And this was the general trend to leave Eastern Peshter for Western Peshter because voynuk organisation was flourishing on the Western Peshter highlands (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pe%C5%A1ter), and it died out on the Eastern Peshter already in mid-16th century.


The knez Ognan community from Zaječiće is the only community where a similar last name to mine is attested, "Rajkun/Rajkon" in late 16th c. Also in 1485. Zaječiće did not exist which means these people came to there from somewhere, clearly either from Korutan or Baljen direction, their co-tribalists. Korutan voynuks seem not to have left some descendants, and I couldn't find any old families there either.
A24066 is connected to Baljen.
A24066 is also connected to Krnja Jela which was a voynuk village before already in 1485.


So logically we should expect A24066 in knez Ognan's community because of one branch of my family there and because of "Rajkun" there only in this community, and because this community has tribal ties with community with certain A24066 connection as explained above.


Village Rakonje was not settled in 1530. but was settled in late 16th or early 17th century by my ancestors. So these 3 communities were working for Hasan Çelebi son of Ahmed-Bey.


Who is Ahmed-Bey? Ahmed-Bey is the person whos property is Rakonje in 1485.


Ahmed-Bey was şahinci (https://tr.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C5%9Fahinci)(the one who trains the falcons) on the Court of Sultan Mehmed Fatih (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehmed_the_Conqueror), sometimes prior to 1463. when he is first attested. He then became the silahdar of Isa-bey Ishaković or Sultan Mehmed. In 1467-68 he became the kapıcıbaşı (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kap%C4%B1c%C4%B1ba%C5%9F%C4%B1)of the Sultan Mehmed.
In 1468/69 he came to Bosnian sanjak and was given a large timar with total worth of 48.527 akçe, in two areas near Novi Pazar with his base being in Korutan/Janča, and Peshter, and in the southern area where he held the nahiye Nikšići (https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=49749), and nearby my village. A very powerful Ottoman figure, maybe only second to Isa-Bey Ishaković in Bosnian sanjak because Sultan's kapıcıbaşı is a very powerful position, often meaning some people are getting executed if he is coming, and he came to the area in 1468 with this title.


This was Ottoman area and an idea that some Christian raya people or even any Muslims could settle on the property of a Commander of the palace guards of Mehmed the Conqeueror is ludicrous, at that time this position was only one at the time in the Ottoman empire. It could only have been somebody who has connections to him and his family. And the only group they really had some ties with are these voynuks where there are already clear E-A24066 associations.


But as explained above Peshter group descends from the Krnja Jela, Baljen region of Peshter. There
1) Krnja Jela , 1571. baština/land called Kuman , the only such baština name I found in at least hundred mile radius.
2) Baljen or earlier Balenova looks quite possibly related to Cuman personal name Balin or Cuman city Balin
3) between these there is village Točilovo, in 1571. a Christian had a name "Togan" or "Tugan" (in Ottoman script o/u cannot be distinguished), in Turkish Dogan is more common form of "hawk", "t" is more Kipchak.


So when he came to Peshter Ahmed-bey kapicibasha hired some voynuks from this area. Possibly then came influence of my clan with this second name Rakon in 1485. So it seems because of this name my clan had some connection to this village even before we settled there later.
However this area was divided between multiple Ottoman Sanjaks.
Pešter was divided between Bosnian Sanjak in the West, and Prizren Sanjak in the East. Originally there were many voynuks in the Eastern Peshter, and few in Western. The situation was reversed few decades after. It seems voynuk organization could not survive in Prizren Sanjak, but it could in Bosnian sandjak where it flourished. So that is why this migration of community of knez Ognan occured, originally from Baljen/Krnja Jela area (Prizren sanjak) they moved to Zaječiće and then later to Lopiže under direction of Ahmed-bey's son. There they would keep this status at least until 1604. and certainly until Cretan War in 1645. and even until Battle of Wiena in 1683 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna).


Then in the chaos these Christian sipahi and voynuk communities who had some autonomy and served the Ottomans dissapeared. And some of my family got this made up Kuchi tradition, because Kuchi tribe people started coming in in large numbers. Both Christian and Muslim, and there are so many families of Kuchi cluster in the area. Also many PH908 families had even more elaborate Kuchi traditions, Kuchi and other Brda clans offered protection in 18th, 19th centuries, they would take revenge for their tribesmen etc.

None of the families related to me from Peshter had any Kuchi tradition, and neither did some of my family branches. If this tradition had any reliability it would have recorded genetic links with these people, and it would have recorded a member of our family who was wealthy in the first half of 17th century but it didn't.

This is only from some published documents, there are more unpublished, and as I can read them, I will find eventually my ancestor and his ancestors. Another thing: our ancestor had a name Paun, this name is usually associated with Romanian language, it did exist sporadically in these areas, but at one point in time namely late 16th century when this person was likely born for some reason this personal name became very common on Peshter!! And sporadic elsewhere, little more common in some Vlach areas (Barče), rare generally. So his personal name itself actually indicates that he was born on Peshter!!


Lejlek mosque in Novi Pazar (https://www.beautifulmosque.com/Lejlek-Mosque-in-Novi-Pazar-Serbia) is the oldest mosque there and it was built by Ahmed-Bey silahdar. He is basically one of founders of Novi Pazar.
Most likely this Turkish family left no living descendants, but I've identified 20 individuals related to him in 16th/17th century.


Some people with whom he had close contacts were Sanjakbey's of Zvornik Sandjak. Because E-A24066 can be connected to him, quite possibly presence of (again should be Bosniak) E-A24066 that is close to my family in Tuzla Canton can be explained through his family's contact with some Zvornik Sanjakbey's. At that time Zvornik Sandjak was a separate Sanjak and it occupied precisely the Tuzla/Zvornik area.

Aspurg
05-01-20, 05:38
No, in addition to Best Quality, they include Acceptable Quality Novels as well. The main criteria is the coordinates of SNPs must fall within the "combBED regions". Not every SNP falls within these regions, however, it doesn't mean they're bad SNPs, they just don't qualify for the Age Estimation formula. You can actually see on YFull if a particular SNP falls within these regions if you search for it and click for more info. See here for a detailed explanation: https://www.yfull.com/faq/what-yfulls-age-estimation-methodology/

I've noticed that your line is overestimating the TMRCA as compared to other samples. For example the average E-Z17107 TMRCA is ~2700 ybp, while your line has it at ~4200 ybp. So I would think the TMRCA of E-A24066 is currently being overestimated as well. It will probably be lowered once the new sample's (YF67778) age estimation is calculated into the TMRCA.

Ah I see,thanks! I know I have about 14 or 15 of best quality and 4 of acceptable quality, and looking at other clades I came to impression that they don't count in TMRCA calculation SNP's of acceptable quality but that didn't add up fully. So that is the key.

Well I saw immediately that I share with YF67778 14 SNP's and I have 18 of my private ones. So I figured TMRCA of 1700 ybp is more realistic. We are 21/111 so not close and it seems our clade mutates more, as indeed I contribute 4200 years to the age of Z17107, far more than the others. I was looking at some of his and mine unique STR's past those that we share and it seems per 111 STR's that I have more of these unique STR's, so I guess he should have less novels, but ofc there are these days far more STR's.

But the YFull formula is such that it only counts novels, so if one happens to have many novels these novels are going to make up TMRCA regardless of how many are shared! That is why it is important that a clade is differentiated, that it has several levels. So when I saw my 18 SNP's I still figured if I counted all of them our TMRCA (my contribution) would reach 2700 ybp which is silly. You can't have 18 SNP's at 150 years/SNP and then 21 year/SNP within the same clade.

So getting more samples and levels matters, you see above under E-Y81971, E-A19238 share 5 SNP's at their level, their 1 novel makes up their TMRCA, but YF16494 only has 2 novels parallel to A19238, this time their 4 and 5 SNP's are counted for Y81971's TMRCA, YF16494 lowered the TMRCA. This system has flaws and more sub-branches help.


Me and YF67778 share DYS510=18 + DYS446=11
Me and E5882 share DYS587=19
YF67778 and E5882 share DYS525=11

It seems E5882 will be above me and YF67778 as we share two of these slow STR's. Also I've noticed we have off-modals at DYS650 but we don't share it. Modal is 21, E5882 has 20, YF67778 has 19, I have "18.a". Probably this STR represents another of our shared SNP's.

Also what should be noted is that per current evidence:
E-Z17107>Y81971 GATAH4=11
E-Z17107>Y30991 GATAH4=12 (I have 11 but this one is recent)
E-Z17107>Y30991>Z38456>BY4435 GATAH4=12
E-Z17107>Y30991>Z38456>BY4461 GATAH4=12

It seems GATAH4=12 defines Y30991. Russian E-Z17107>BY4467 has H4=11, no reading on Y30991. Ukrainian 116695 and their cluster all have H4=12 so it seems chances are Ukrainian is Y30991+, Z38456- going by current data. This SNP cannot be tested at FTDNA, FTDNA's SNP offer is horrible.

There is a new Ossetian E-S26015* clade, negative to main 5 except E-BY20093 and he is very distant to them, probably negative as well ( I suggested they test it). He doesn't seem close to anyone, closest is one Russian, ofc I thought he might be Z17107 due to his H4=12. That's what I wanted to see, some new CTS9320's far to the East. Tested some Caucasians for Z17107, but SNP pack costs only as much as 3 SNP's. Single SNP is abit expensive at FTDNA.. I thought one Georgian at 111 STR's was a match for American Z17107, Z38456 clade, and he looked good but he must be some other CTS9320.

Aspurg
27-01-20, 22:21
Well there is a mountain called Žilindar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%BDilindar), situated at the Serbian-Montenegrin border. Around this mountain there is a concentration of Bulgarian toponyms: immediately South there was a village called Dragulin, to the NW Boljare, Peshter, and Boroshtitsa itself from where a cousin little more distant to me is from. Also mentioned Raždaginja, these sport typical Bulgarian zhd, sht instead of Serbian đ (dj) and ć (ch) forms. You'd think looking at these villages that you are in Bulgaria.
My close genetic relatives have direct genetic ties with some of these villages, and in the case of two families from Raždaginja, as I've said their unique surnames clearly point in direction of Cuman traces.

Highest peak (1616 m) is also called Žilindar, a neighboring peak is called Zmijina Glava - Snake's head. How come nobody has ever noticed that jılandar/жыландар (pronounced. zhılandar) is also a snake - in Kazakh and Kyrghyz!!
It is basically phonetically identical. Consonants are identical, vowels are very similar (жыландар - Жилиндар). Turkic languages follow wovel harmony and no "i" can be paired with "a" in a word, rather in this instance only "ı" can. This vowel would be converted into "i".

There is literally no other explanation, and y -> zh phonetic change is typical for Kipchak languages, this cannot derive from Turkish, especially with the "dar" added, Turkish is yılan.

There was a Cuman population from Bulgaria around there, and obviously the only possible such parallel is the 1253./1254. Bulgarian-Cuman raid of the area when they pillaged the St. Peter's monastery. It seems they escaped to Peshter, or as Serbs were generally losers in that war, and where Hungarian king was the arbiter maybe they were forced to accept some foreign population there.
Of course other than E-A24066, nothing else exists there that also exists in Bulgaria and Cumania.

Look forward to some Second Bulgarian Empire results, I think there is at least 40 % chance Asen, Shishmans or Terters were E-A24066.

I need to find these cousins from Bulgaria which do exist (Karachanak et al etc), and I have a pretty good idea where to search..

I was looking to utilize my cousin from Boroštica village on Southern Peshter, and Boroštica is pretty close to Žilindar. So that's where we started expanding from. :cool-v:

Johane Derite
28-01-20, 02:07
Your own family has a tradition of Kuqi which occams razor points to as being true. Peshter is known as a having a large Albanian minority.

These other folk etymologies are much more convoluted and don't have much probability of being true.

Aspurg
28-01-20, 02:58
Your own family has a tradition of Kuqi which occams razor points to as being true. Peshter is known as a having a large Albanian minority.

Do not play troll games with me here Johane, this is my thread and any off-topic will be acted upon. I have explained already that my clan are:
1. Not genetically related to Kuqi
2. Our presence in Lim area predates any Kuqi migration (after Wiena War)
3. Our family was wealthy (laughable to have wealthy family as some runaway people from other places)
4. Something like 10 different haplogroups in the area have this "Kuqi tradition", it was made up in 18th or 19th century as Kuqi were powerful tribe at the time, and they offered some protection.

5. Trojančević (now its public result so I may comment) E-A24066 Raždaginja, hill Trojan next to Krnja Jela with a land Cuman, no Kuqi tradition
6. Čarović (related to the guz above) E-A24066 Raždaginja, Čarovina next to Cuman Baljen, no Kuqi tradition
7. Dragovic E-A24066 Boroshtica, near Žilindar, no Kuqi tradition , closest to him seems a North Macedonian, likely from Kumanovo area (because he is close to some others in the area) Literally every time this cluster is found on Peshter with these Bulgarian traces.

Lutovac for example just counted as as old population. So Kuqi tradition was clearly without any doubt unfortunately made up. Unfortunately I say, because from my POV my ancestry is 10 times better than that of Kuqi or any other katunar. I admit some of us (not all, some branches did not have Kuqi tradition) completely lost our way, making up this tradition while not remembering our notable ancestor from 400 years ago..

Plus we have some other cousin not in our cluster bit to the North. But around there we see some traces like Shishman too..




These other folk etymologies are much more convoluted and don't have much probability of being true.


This forum is full of your topics where you babble about etymologies of Illyroillyroillyriiiaaan, posing as some linguistically "smart" dude while not having a clue about linguistics.

If you have a problem with one of my etymologies then rationally counter it.

Btw. I can easily demolish some of your linguistic points about Illyrian - Albanian "parallels". So don't troll.


You like many Albanians have a problem. The problem I see in so many peoples. The victim cult. We wuz there beforee, the Slavs came and did bad things to us. Serbs also. We wuz here before Alboz, Alboz are Bessi who came to our land and opressed us, but Slavs were there before.

That is your cult of the Prey.

But I follow the cult of the Hunter.

Cumans were hunters, hunting for the prey, and I have the honor of being descended of these Hunters. Not of Kuqi or other katunars or Slavic turfs. They are below my league.


E-A24066 is found in
Žilindar - Kipchak Snake
Pečenjevce
Karcag


As I've said in another thread 10 years of being Cuman or Pecheneg is above 100 years of being an average Serb, Croat, Bosniak etc. (I rate some Albanian clans higher though). And by the evidence my ancestors were Cumans in 13th, 12th century, and Pechenegs in at least 11th, possibly 10th.

P.S. Yes there are Albanian traces on Peshter. But if not for the chaos in the Ottoman empire after 1683. when my clan lost power, my clan would not have allowed any Kuqi, Vasojevici, etc. nor any Albanian Kelmendi to settle there.

Peshter is Bulgarian for a cave, not Pećina like in Serbo-Croatian, and that land belonged to nobility of Cuman-Bulgarian roots since late Medieval.

So Peshter was Bulgaro-Cuman long before becoming Albanian.:grin:

Aspurg
28-01-20, 03:09
These other folk etymologies are much more convoluted and don't have much probability of being true.

Btw. umm, they are all either likely or certainly true. Unlike bunch of your ridiculous "Illyrian-Albanian parallels" that have been debunked long time ago.:laughing::laughing:

Btw. you might be in numbers around here and well Eupedia is mostly Italian (its ok Italians and Albanians are good friends) so you have some protection here even when you blatantly troll I guess. But lets meet on a place such as Anthrogenica or Apricity.. Please.. I don't have a lot of weight here (nor I have some desire to have it) but I might have much more weight elsewhere..:smile:

I understand your frustration. Vast majority of E-V13 got owned by the Pripyat folks. My folk were hunting these people. If I were almost any other clade of V13 I'd be pissed off too (there are notable exceptions ofc)..

I know you like to troll Serbs about having these or those roots but there is very little of a Serb in me.. I simply like savage nomads more than I like any other people so now wonder I am in this game, If I were PH908 I wouldn't like it. I wouldn't be pissed off if I were some R-Z2705 etc. And this is just the beginning, proving the Cuman-Pecheneg origin, the harder part is making sure that they exist again, otherwise nothing of this makes any sense really..

There is nothing to be said here it is mathematically nearly impossible for a cluster to be found at Kuman-Žilindar - Pečenjevce - Karcag, (with last claiming to be of certain Cuman origin) and NOT be Cumano-Pecheneg.

What needs to be done is test more people from certain areas, just one member of my cluster (385b=17) found in Karcag would prove this connection 100 %.

Aspurg
06-03-20, 01:00
As expected Bosniak had less novels so now the TRMCA is more realistic 1800 ybp.

A new Hungarian Y30991+, Z38456- from Temes area (Timisoara) with BigY! And he doesn't seem A24066 thus far. Maybe he ends up sharing an SNP with us but he is very distant. He shares with A24066 dys510=18, though a Hungarian A24066 whose result should be up there soon has 16 (modal is 17). He too has H4=12 so if this Russian Z17107 is negative for Y30991 then the Ukrainian is Y30991+ and H4=12 defines Y30991. Hopefully I can get these new Hungarian Y30991 BigY's on YFull as well.

So not only Z17107 but also Y30911 has more diversity North of Danube. A24066 is the one that occurs in both areas but it has a historical TMRCA so somebody migrated here, and with this result it seems very clear Balkan A24066 migrated.

There is no V13 clade found that seems more Dacian in dispersal than Z17107 as of now.

Aspurg
25-03-20, 03:19
@Johane Derite

Trolling to no avail :cool-v:, I knew right from the beginning when I saw I have relative in Cuman areas and having nomadic traces elsewhere where this cluster appears that my genetic cluster is not from the Balkan proper. And this new Hungarian does share 2 SNP's with my cluster: Y167028 and A24070! And of course BigY of Cumanian Hungarian who might share anywhere between 13-15+ SNP's should be done soon (and I'm sure more to be found).

There is a second Bosniak family of our cluster it seems they might be related to a medieval Bosnian family. On Y37 what defines Bosniak cluster is the same thing that is seen in Cluj sample from Basarab study (and especially 393 is very reliable STR), so like some other genetics from Hungary this one too came to Central Bosnia in Medieval times. This is what makes Bosniaks different from Croats and Serbs. Interestingly if indeed he is related to this family, this family had contact with Medieval Bosnian family whose names seem kinda Pecheneg or smt. like that. And other Hungarian genetics in central Bosnia is not ordinary but proto-Magyar and Iassic (Jaszsag), this one seems to have Cuman-Pecheneg link. It seems our cluster moved around in Medieval times, was some factor back then.

I bet actually those Ukrainian Z17107, Z38456 dys438=9 are Y30911+ and I wouldn't be surprised at all if they went back from our 11 to 9 (like one of our cluster did on other STR, it's very unusual to see within the same clade mutation on such a slow STR so sharing instability there might be a hint of a link) that is that they share something with us, but I need more STR's/BigY.

I think we likely are Costoboci, and I found one Costoboci archaeological location where there was mingling with the Huns in late 4th century so that might be something I was looking for. Many of those seem to have joined Slavs (like some clades found in Ruthenians, Ukrainian highlanders). I bet those areas (like Cluj) might be our point from where we started spreading (as we are not native anywhere else we are found), and immediately to the North there was Carpathain Kurgan culture (Costoboci, and some other tribes like Ansamenses - Ansamii at the Someș river) and some other basal Z17107's are found there and to the North, Lviv Lipitsa culture (again Costoboci).

Dema
25-03-20, 16:26
Clearly Albanian origin... : D

Progon
04-04-20, 05:06
Most of the subclades of: https://yfull.com/tree/E-Z17107/

are found in Hungary, Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro, Albania.

Yet, somehow magically this subclade becomes the best candidate for Dacians.

Aspurg
04-04-20, 20:23
Most of the subclades of: https://yfull.com/tree/E-Z17107/

are found in Hungary, Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro, Albania.

YFull tree is not the whole picture, it is missing the Russian Z17107>BY4467, Z38456- result, it is missing Western Ukrainian Z17107+, Z38456- result (likely no relation to Russian). I am trying to secure BigY of that Ukrainain group who is per current evidence likely Y30991+. It is missing the Swedish Z38456>BY4446 results.

Unfortunately for me other Hungarian turned out Z25461>BY4507 in cluster with an Irish. it seems some of his STR's converge with important STR's of my own clade but closer analysis of the new Hungarian A24070 shows the BY4507 Hungarian does not matches us there. No way I could have known this without new Hungarian result. And Z25461 is almost impossible to predict. He has only one distinct STR shared with the Irish and they are 30/111, but this is 6th Hungarian CTS9320 BigY/NGS. So no Cuman connection for me, there still might be a Pecheneg connection though. Because Pečenjevce (where I have relatives) was founded by them and they were mass settled precisely where my cousins seem to pop-up. Well to check that out is very simple. there are other Pecheneg villages in the area, and there are some Hungarians of that origin.. So we'll see. Cluj sample still will certainly cluster with the Bosnians. And in Vojvodina my cluster appear (likely 1000 years away from me). I'll try to get some info on that one. At least the ethnicity because they tested all ethnicities there, even Roma..
The way I distinguish my people from this convergent haplotype is through the subclusters I've identified, I represent one, Bosniak results (hopefully the other Bosniak will do BigY, I know this family will have 2nd but we need BigY from the more distant family) the another.. So he might converge with us on some of these but he cannot converge on additional STR's which define our subclusters. And likely some of his convergent STR's are not that old.

My clade might be some NW Illyrian or might be Triballian. It seems my cluster pops up alot more in Serbian-Bulgarian border area, and that is Triballian and Hungarian is a Daco-Mysian link in such case. Triballi and Dacians were related. Vlachs originate from the Shop, where a non-Slavic zone separated the speakers of Serbo-Croatian from the speakers of Bulgarian languages. That is why Slovenian language is closer to Serbian than Bulgarian.


Yet, somehow magically this subclade becomes the best candidate for Dacians.

All Z17107 Hungarians are East of Danube river. Dacians lived East of Danube. Pannonians lived West of Danube. No exceptions.. So Z17107 has to pop up in Pannonian areas of Hungary for a Pannonian connection. Ukrainian is from Lviv region where Costoboci lived (before some moved little bit to the South). And we know he has some relative in a scientific study of that place as well.

What I see is (like other Albanian E-V13's) is an Albanian E-V13 who wants to be Illyrian at all costs. Well I don't care about Illyrians or Thracians primarily, what I care is to ensure my haplogroup (CTS9320) is in good position against the other competitor haplogroups (including Slavic and Paleobalkan ones). Unlike other E-V13's who were a bit sedentary in Late BA/EIA CTS9320 were some more mobile people. I found already an Ossetian CTS9320* and some more Easterners who seem certain CTS9320 should be probed.

Btw there is a Szekely who is some E-Y161799 (needy BigY) and there is a Serb (of Romanian origin by surname it seems) who is distant from the other Z38456. If those end up being some basal Z38456 well you might be looking at the Carpi (or other Thracian) who brought the Albanian/Dacian language to Albania. Though we'll see where those people end up eventually.

Last book on Dacian reconstruction I have been reading explicitly claims that the Albanian is descended of Dacian. Not convinced they are correct myself but some links can be established, they choose to go for the Dacian link there.. We already know Albanian language can't possibly fit into a whole lot of Illyrian groups, certainly the Pannonian group. Few years ago some Austrian linguists went to Albania and they found out some "Baltoid" connections of Albanian. They got chased off for insulting Enver Hoxha's Illyrian theory and ofc "Baltoid" means Thraco-Dacian. Not saying Albanians have some "Dacoid" connections for that. Z38456 actually is one of the very few possible ones. Certainly the only one with some strong presence in Albanians. So I'd say any Dacian-Albanian connection will either flourish or die through the Z38456.

CTS9320 seems connected to the expansion of Gava culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%A1va-Holigrady_culture) , and also some clades seem to be Eastern Hallstant adjacent to the West. Gava people were proto-Daco-Mysian. Gava people pushed into assimilated Noua culture people (Srubnaya so R1a Z93) , Noua is proto-Thracian. Proof? E-CTS9320* in Ossetians. We already have some Bulgarian Z93 clades that seem Srubnaya and not Bulgar/Turkic.

Parts of CTS9320 who were in Eastern Hallstat formed some Illyrian Pannonian tribes. Albanians are a people who have monopoly on R-Z2705 and most of J-L283, they most definitely don't on E-V13 and some of their V13 shows signs of being incomers.

I don't deny various V13 are Illyrian. For example most of Z16988 seem Illyrian/Illyro-Pannonian group. But the Ossetian E-CTS9320* clearly tells you this is no Western haplogroup.. These people bordered the Steppe..

Aspar
05-04-20, 14:32
@Aspurg

I remember you advocated Cuman and other Turkic heritage of your line.
Someone who is apparently very knowledgeable and enthusiastic like you should have picked up by now that your subclade has nothing to do with any Turkic people apart from the reason that with the Hallstatt expansion of CTS9320, the center of gravity for this particular SNP moved to the most eastern expansion of the Hallstatt culture, and for that reason there are some CTS9320* among the Ossetians or other subclades such as Z17107 in various Russians and Ukrainians whom most probably were dispersed with the highly mobile Scythians.
Furthermore, your remarks about various groups of ancient people as important or unimportant are very childish.
Nothing personal but most of us interested in this field should be very realistic with our expectations and draw the line between expectations and reality.
I for example would like to find more about my deeper ancestry no matter what it is originally after all. That wan't make me a better or a weaker person. Bumping self confidence out of some genetic results was never my intention and those who are afraid to not descend from a group whom they deem weak, unlikable etc. should not take a genetic test because it might effect their self confidence.

Furthermore you are: https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-Y30991/ correct?

Both on the Block Tree and YFULL Tree it's very clear that this subclade have nothing to do with any Turks or other Steppe people but with the most eastern expansion of the Hallstatt culture thus it's no wonder that there is much diversity of CTS9320 in Hungary and it's neighborhood. Again, the Scythians, Cimmerians and other Steppe people who expanded west most probably dispersed many CTS9320 further east.

Also, we can't really say what the carriers of these subclades would have been, whether Dacians or Pannonians.
Y30991 looks pretty old in the West Balkans assuming the predictions of YFULL are correct. It's distribution is a Hallstatt influence on the region and dates to the EIA. Therefor, it's distribution looks Pannonian-Western Balkans.

Aspurg
05-04-20, 17:05
@Aspurg

I remember you advocated Cuman and other Turkic heritage of your line.

And I still will explore the Pecheneg option. I do have relatives in a (one of few) village founded and settled by them. And the "clan" in question is the most numerous family there and in literature they are of "unknown origin". We'll see if that pattern continues or not..

I can still claim A24070 is more diverse North of Danube and be fully correct :grin:
a) A24070* Hungarian
b) RU281 Cluj (Basarab study) dys393=14 + dys458=17/18 he clusters with Bosniak because I know due to result of second Bosniak family that their subcluster is defined by these same, and its impossible RU281 is BY4507 because he won't be converging on these additonal STR's..
c) no. 9 Vojvodina (Veselinovic et al.) , my subcluster dys385b=17, yet negative to H4=11 and dys385a=17 mutations within my subcluster. That means up to 1000 years away from me. I don't know what ethnicity he is, but I hope to find out at least that, they did test all people from Vojvodina there as can be see by haplotypes, Serbs, Hungarians, Romanians, Roma, Rusyns... I do know that such haplotypes occur only in Shop (but impossible to know distance to them it could also be 1000 ybp) and Serbs from Vojvodina are by and large of Rascian and Bosnian origin, hardly any have Shop connection..




Someone who is apparently very knowledgeable and enthusiastic like you should have picked up by now that your subclade has nothing to do with any Turkic people

Turkic expansion is recent and great many different clades became part of it at one point or the other. In fact there are originally proto-Turkic clades which were Iranic 2000 years ago etc. So no, insofar V13 is concerned there are no older Turkic clades and there cannot be as Turkic boom was far more recent. One can be of almost any distant origin and still be part of Turkic expansion at one point in time. Some younger V13 clades might be Turkic.



apart from the reason that with the Hallstatt expansion of CTS9320, the center of gravity for this particular SNP moved to the most eastern expansion of the Hallstatt culture, and for that reason there are some CTS9320* among the Ossetians or other subclades such as Z17107 in various Russians and Ukrainians whom most probably were dispersed with the highly mobile Scythians.

You can't look at Z16988 and it's "Western" spread and conclude it is so Western "Hallstat" when there are so many Roman legionaries there. fact E-V13 has never been found in an Indoeuropean Western-central European spectrum and it has likely little or nothing to do with it. Proto-Celtic/Italic included. There is also a basal Z16988 in Moldavia, NW Bulgaria. There are only 3 ethnic Romanian/Moldavian BigY/NGS tests, 10 times less than in Albanians/Serbs etc.. That does create a hole where it shouldn't be.




Furthermore, your remarks about various groups of ancient people as important or unimportant are very childish.

There is nothing childish about the facts. Ottoman Turks conquered the Balkans because they were a mixture of warrior Steppe culture and "warrior" Islamic religion. Similarly Arabians with their warrior Bedouin Islam defeated the Byzantines and Sassanids (who fought each other but still).. Many would say Roman Empire died partly due to Christianity, compared to the old Roman "spirit", ofc Christianity had subsequently "Beserk" times..:laughing:




Nothing personal but most of us interested in this field should be very realistic with our expectations and draw the line between expectations and reality.
I for example would like to find more about my deeper ancestry no matter what it is originally after all. That wan't make me a better or a weaker person.

I wouldn't necessarily, I just pick what I like and disregard the rest. That may be 20 %, 50 % or 90 %. I am a picky person.
Well I speak Turkish (for years before I was even tested).. And my Bosnian cousin is an Islamic scholar who translated Ottoman documents. I assure you for them too Hungaro-Turkic options are attractive as are for most Bosniaks. I am half Bosniak and I spent most of my time with them, not Serbs, so no wonder I go for such connections. Turks are not such "bad guys" for me. In fact I do have likely Turkish origin from few of my maternal lines. I know my great-grandmothers family certainly descends of Muslims from Temes who came to Bosnia after the Ottomans lost Temes in 1716. Maybe my mtdna comes from there.

I can tell you though most Serbs wish to be of Slavic origin. I most definitely don't and never have really. I do like "unusual origins" in general.



Bumping self confidence out of some genetic results was never my intention and those who are afraid to not descend from a group whom they deem weak, unlikable etc. should not take a genetic test because it might effect their self confidence.

I have and always have had a list of "preferred" peoples. It does not matter whether I descend from one or not. I like some of those peoples based on principles they were governed by not necessarily genetic links. If there is some "good" to be found then I view it as something that should be harvested for the future. If not then it should be overlooked.

If I or anyone else happen to find some ancestor they might deem of "unpreferable" stock, consider him non-existent and search for the others.


Btw I am proud of being of distant North African descent and I have no problems whatsover identifying with North Africans (in a way) unlike 99 % of E-V13. In fact I take great pride in being a descendant of Ibero-Maurusians, and I certainly hope Capsians. In comparison to the EEF short, small gracile Meds (And Paleobalkanites were pred. EEF).




Both on the Block Tree and YFULL Tree it's very clear that this subclade have nothing to do with any Turks or other Steppe people but with the most eastern expansion of the Hallstatt culture thus it's no wonder that there is much diversity of CTS9320 in Hungary and it's neighborhood. Again, the Scythians, Cimmerians and other Steppe people who expanded west most probably dispersed many CTS9320 further east.

What about other Carpathian CTS9320's such as BY4507 and it's relatives. Actually as far as I am concerned this Hungarian BY4507 still has a good claim for Cuman relation and I hope we get some results in that direction. I see one Russian who should be certain CTS9320+ by Y111 as maybe related to him.




Also, we can't really say what the carriers of these subclades would have been, whether Dacians or Pannonians.
Y30991 looks pretty old in the West Balkans assuming the predictions of YFULL are correct. It's distribution is a Hallstatt influence on the region and dates to the EIA. Therefor, it's distribution looks Pannonian-Western Balkans.

Nope, there is no strong evidence to associate Hallstat Central Europeans to CTS9320 or any E-V13 clade. These were mostly R1b U152. CTS9320 is Eastern "Hallstat" Gava culture, originally Thracian but some have spilled into the Western areal.

Most of early E-V13 expansions seem proto-Philistine/EBA. Hallstat (mostly R-U152) caused the migration of Sea Peoples packed with E-V13, J-L283, R-PF7562 etc. CTS9320 might have been of of few V13's in those days to cause these migrations alongside R-U152, but even so their role in this is not clear.


Anyway in the case Thracian languages were LBA arrivals which is likely, then CTS9320 is likely proto-Thracian alongside R-Z93 clades and few others. We do have CTS9320* clades in Bulgaria (they occur in Romanians as well but those might be migrants), we do have much greater diversity of various CTS9320 clades in Triballian areas. Don't forget Thracian Greek who is CTS9320* (was active here).


And for Z17107 basal diversity is not in any "Illyrian" areas. As I have said, my A24066 cluster is rare but in the study done by Zgonjanin it was 10 times more common than usual, because they tested Southeast Serbian border region which is heavily under-tested in Serbian Project (because some Serbs are upset they will have cousins in Bulgaria, and they do have them often naturally). STR's are quite clear that my own family migrated from the Shop be it this or that. So current situation for my subclade is far from realistic. And also Bosnian clusters with a NW Romanian, too bad Romanian project has only 100-120 (ethnic Romanian) people tested. Won't find him waiting for Romanians to test.

In Illyrian context obviously it can be in some more NW areas of Illyria.

So we'll see how the tree develops, but our nearest distant relative is Hungarian too. Btw. I think Ukrainians have a good shot at coming between me and Hungarian, too bad they don't have Y111 as our most important STR's are in 68-111, but BigY will tell.

Aspurg
05-04-20, 18:34
And the "clan" in question is the most numerous family there and in literature they are of "unknown origin". We'll see if that pattern continues or not..
.

Something interesting. The tested cousin of mine claims they are taller than the surrounding population of the region, which is shorter than in many other Serb areas. And tested Bosniak related to me said they are tall, all from 5'11" to 6'9", round faced, generally lighter.

Unlike for ex. E-CTS9320>BY105970 of Kelmendi clan who were known to be short on Peshter. And you have this internet Bjelopavlic dude E-Z16988>Z13591 claiming how his shortness is due "to V13". :D That's not some Vlach/Albanian/Paleobalkan thing. Indeed in Eastern Montenegro where there is more E-V13/Paleobalkan admix people are shorter for MNE standards. As Dema puts it, "Albanians are Mediterraneans" , Mediterraneans are supposed to be short people (taller types such as "Atlanto-med" came to be due to IE admixture). Nomads very often had tall stature based sexual selection. Some might say Cumans were short, Cuman burials were most definitely far from short. Not to mention Bulgars.

To add on Peshter highlands this personal name "Togan/Tugan" that appears few times, I said "t" is Kipchak, true but this sort of name was never attested in Cumans, related form "Towan" is considered Pecheneg. This and Dorman which also occurs 2 times near Bijelo Polje, some say Cuman (Drman Bulgarian Bolyar) but originally likely Pecheneg, again other than Drman never attested in Cumans, I believe few links with Pechenegs exist (those in Hungary). The mountain name of Žilindar does seem definitely something Kipchak, the thing is there is some other genetics in the area. In Bosniaks from actually near Kumanica monastery there is C-M48, though they match Turks in Turkey, and also in Bosniak from Sjenica D-Y14813 found in a Tatar from Romania, origin from Crimea. Don't know how close he is to this one (could be recent Tatar ancestry if he is only 300 years away). So there are some exotic haplogroups in the area. And still 1253 Bulgarian raid did happen, and these villages such as Raždaginja, Boroštica from where I have cousins do have clear Bulgarian lingustical base. Add to that Boljare.

exercitus
06-04-20, 23:49
Hi Aspurg,
I see that you are very knowledgeable concerning Genetic Genealogy (in my own case it's the opposite actually !!).So, could you please analyze this two Yfull results and give me your opinion, and possibly a plausible explanation why we observe such matches between Romanians and Albanians (considering the cosiderable geographical distance i.e. from Vlore to Botoșani!)!?

-https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y191359/

-https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y150765/

Progon
07-04-20, 13:10
If we go by Y-DNA E-M78* in it's pure ANA form E-M78 descended people would be taller than Steppe Nomads and Mesolithic Euro types. But their autosomal was diluted due to Med admixture.

But, that's not in discussion anyway.

Regarding, Albanian and Dacian theory it's a hype propagated by Serbs after they lost the Caucasian theory card. I mean, i am the type of guy i wouldn't mind if we are descended from Dacians. Nothing wrong with it, but things start to get really fishy when people with extreme hatred toward my people trying to push a hypothesis not holding ground, and being considered as C option after Illyrian and Thracian theories.

If people would be objective, then they'll say that Illyrian is the best candidate, Thracian then Dacian. And the most realistic view would be a Illyrian-Thracian with Epirotic influences and slightly Slavic.

But up to this degree any theories of Albanians descending further North than South Serbia is propaganda. Linguistic evidence, genetic evidence doesn't seem to be in accordance.

Aspurg
08-04-20, 01:58
Something is wrong with this forum, can't log in for dozens of times..


Hi Aspurg,
I see that you are very knowledgeable concerning Genetic Genealogy (in my own case it's the opposite actually !!).So, could you please analyze this two Yfull results and give me your opinion, and possibly a plausible explanation why we observe such matches between Romanians and Albanians (considering the cosiderable geographical distance i.e. from Vlore to Botoșani!)!?


-https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y191359/


-https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y150765/


These matches are completely in line with the dominant scientific consensus (excluding Romanian scientists, often made in Ceausescu era) based on linguistic, archeological, and now genetic evidence that the proto-Romanians formed South of Danube river, and that in successive migrations they colonized modern day Romania. Prior to that Romania was populated by Slavic speaking populations with some Turkics here and there, (excluding ofc Transylvania).


The amount of non-Slavic, non-germanic Y-DNA matches dating to Medieval times between Romanians on one side and Albanians/Serbs/Bulgarians/Greeks on another is enormous. I am familiar with all Romanian haplotypes from studies and FTDNA, and I can say at least 10 % of Romanian Y-DNA has Medieval connections with the Balkans. 10 % of those that can be classified that is, so certainly more.

In fact almost all J-L283 falls in there:
J-L283>Z1043>BY101837 Numerous Basarabs from Bibiu and Gorj as well as ht96 from Niamt, 169 from Ploiesti cluster with Albanians (Thaci-Korbi), Croats, Bosniaks, Greeks, likely Montneegrins/Serbs. This is most the probable Basarab Y-DNA (only Basarab occuring in 2 districts).
J-L283>BY81991 Romanian has TMRCA with Italian at 1850 ybp, but closer are Bulgarians from Tarnovo (still not profiled but they fall certainly there).
J-L283>Y20899 Oradea (study), with Albanians
J-L283>Y85328 with Bulgarian
J-L283>Y40288 I think one guy from here is at this level. Again Serbs, Bulgarians.


Also we see plenty of matches in E-V13, especially with Bulgarians. I'd say over 50 % of (identifiable) Romanian E-V13 has recent Balkan ties. Of there are those who seem Dacian-Getic, often having relatives in Hungarians, Ruthenians, W. Ukrainians.

J-Y150765 seems something else, it might have older presence there. Generally thus far only one Romanian J2a cluster seems to have recent Balkan ties.

Proto-Romanians likely descend from inhabitants of Roman cities in Balkan provinces who migrated to the mountains to escape the chaos and devastation caused by the Hunnic incursions and inability of Romans to ensure security at the time. There they met proto-Albanians from whom they learned the trade of Transhumance, and they excelled at Transhumance probably even more than the Albanians.


So we have an Albanian Z17107* result it seems, Dante takes lot of time to do the STR's, but I reallz want to know his GATAH4. There are some American Z17107 results with H4=11 and I suspected beacuse of these H4=12 is Y30991.




Regarding, Albanian and Dacian theory it's a hype propagated by Serbs after they lost the Caucasian theory card.

Would you point to some serious Serbian source which claims Albanians came from the Caucasus. I am not aware of any. Deretic is a lunatic and nobody sane takes him seriously. When reading some Serbian linguists such as A. Loma he always postulated Albanians descend of a Paleo-Balkan population, though generally he favored Thracian one.




I mean, i am the type of guy i wouldn't mind if we are descended from Dacians. Nothing wrong with it, but things start to get really fishy when people with extreme hatred toward my people trying to push a hypothesis not holding ground, and being considered as C option after Illyrian and Thracian theories.


If people would be objective, then they'll say that Illyrian is the best candidate, Thracian then Dacian. And the most realistic view would be a Illyrian-Thracian with Epirotic influences and slightly Slavic.


But up to this degree any theories of Albanians descending further North than South Serbia is propaganda. Linguistic evidence, genetic evidence doesn't seem to be in accordance.

With the new Albanian Z17107* result it seems lot more likely Albanian Z38456 is there for a long time, so not Dacian. Other than that there are no numerous clusters that could possibly be of Dacian origin. Besides the Dacian option was never likely because Albanian has huge Latin influence, had Albanian descended of Carpi or Costoboci no way Albanian would have had such strong Latin influence. Because these groups were never under Roman control, and they only had some trade contacts with the Romans.

Bulgarian linguist Vladimir Georgiev was the one who pushed for the Dacian origin of Albanian, but he considered the shared non-Latin substrate that Romanian shared with the Albanian to be of Dacian origin, assuming Dacian ancestry of Romanians. We know now that Romanians and Albanians share some genetics but these seem pretty un-Dacian. So likely proto-Romanians and Albanians were somewhere in Central Balkans living next to each other for some period of time.


Some Romanian linguists also pushed for this so they could prove that they are descended of romanized Dacians (Romanian substrate words shared with Albanian => Albanian = Dacian => Romanians descend of Dacians.)


I am being very objective when I say that CTS9320 corresponds very well with with the Gava culture and that this culture was also proto-Dacian/proto-Thracian. I did not mention most of E-V13, you seem to generalize overly. Maybe some clades such as clades of FGC11450 might have some case there, but most others simply do not have a case. Gava culture elements who among others caused the Late Bronze Age collapse from the Hungarian/Slovakians areas reached Albania, Asia Minor/Troy, Northern Greece... And TMRCA of CTS9320 corresponds very well to it. I used to think Basarabi was more likely but TMRCA doesn't correspond so well nor do the migratory paths (possibly some Gava elements later were part of some Basarab movements).
Most of V13 can't have anything to do with Gava culture in a formative sense.


Ah I see finally the Albanian cousin of Bjelopavlici appeared. So both Kuqi and Palbardhi have some close matches in Albanians as onomastics clearly indicate. Kuqi had 50 % + of Albanian names in 1485 whereas although Bjelopavlici had few, the name of their ancestor was very unusual for Slavic standards: "white Paul", the names involving white were alot more common in Albanians as is this construction of surname with two persons (usually son and father).

blevins13
08-04-20, 02:10
These matches are completely in line with the dominant scientific consensus (excluding Romanian scientists, often made in Ceausescu era) based on linguistic, archeological, and now genetic evidence that the proto-Romanians formed South of Danube river, and that in successive migrations they colonized modern day Romania. Prior to that Romania was populated by Slavic speaking populations with some Turkics here and there, (excluding ofc Transylvania).


The amount of non-Slavic, non-germanic Y-DNA matches dating to Medieval timnes between Romanians on one side and Albanians/Serbs/Bulgarians/Greeks on another is enormous. I am familiar with all Romanian haplotypes from studies and FTDNA, and I can say at least 10 % of Romanian Y-DNA has Medieval connections with the Balkans. 10 % of those that can be classified that is, so certainly more.


In fact almost all J-L283 falls in there:
J-J-L283>Z1043>BY101837 Numerous Basarabs from Bibiu and Gorj as well as ht96 from Niamt, 169 from Ploiesti cluster with Albanians (Thaci-Korbi), Croats, Bosniaks, Greeks, likely Montneegrins/Serbs. This is most the probable Basarab Y-DNA (only Basarab occuring in 2 districts).
J-L283>BY81991 Romanian has TMRCA with Italian at 1850 ybp, but much closer are Bulgarians from Tarnovo.
J-L283>Y20899 Oradea (study) with Albanians
J-L283>Y37121 with Bulgarians
J-L283>Y40288 I think one guy from here is at this level.


Also we see plenty of matches in E-V13, especially with Bulgarians. I'd say over 50 % of (identifiable) Romanian E-V13 has recent Balkan ties.

J-Y150765 seems something else, it might have older presence there. Generally thus far only one Romanian J2a cluster seems to have recent Balkan ties.

Proto-Romanians likely descend from inhabitants of Roman cities in Balkan provinces who migrated to the mountains to escape the chaos and devastation caused by the Hunnic incursions and inability of Romans to ensure security at the time. There they met proto-Albanians from whom they learned the trade of Transhumance.


So we have an Albanian Z17107* result it seems, Dante takes lot of time to do the STR's, but I reallz want to know his GATAH4. There are some American Z17107 results with H4=11 and I suspected beacuse of these H4=12 is Y30991.




Would you point to some serious Serbian source which claims Albanians came from the Caucasus. I am not aware of any. Deretic is a lunatic and nobody sane takes him seriously. When reading some Serbian linguists such as A. Loma he always postulated Albanians descend of a Paleo-Balkan population, though generally he favored Thracian one.




With the new Albanian Z17107* result it seems lot more likely Albanian Z38456 is there for a long time, so not Dacian. Other than that there are no numerous clusters that could possibly be of Dacian origin. Besides the Dacian option was never likely because Albanian has huge Latin influence, had Albanian descended of Carpi or Costoboci no way Albanian would have had such strong Latin influence. Because these groups were never under Roman control, and they only had some trade contacts with the Romans.


Bulgarian linguist Vladimir Georgiev was the one who pushed for the Dacian origin of Albanian, but he considered the shared non-Latin substrate that Romanian shared with the Albanian to be of Dacian origin, assuming Dacian ancestry of Romanians. We know now that Romanians and Albanians share some genetics but these seem pretty un-Dacian. So likely proto-Romanians and Albanians were somewhere in Central Balkans living next to each other for some period of time.


Some Romanian linguists also pushed for this so they could prove that they are descended of romanized Dacians (Romanian substrate words shared with Albanian => Albanian = Dacian => Romanians descend of Dacians.)


I am being very objective when I say that CTS9320 corresponds very well with with the Gava culture and that this culture was also proto-Dacian/proto-Thracian. I did not mention most of E-V13, you seem to generalize overly. Maybe some clades such as clades of FGC11450 might have some case there, but most others simply do not have a case. Gava culture elements who among others caused the Late Bronze Age collapse from the Hungarian/Slovakians areas reached Albania, Asia Minor/Troy, Northern Greece... And TMRCA of CTS9320 corresponds very well to it. I used to think Basarabi was more likely but TMRCA doesn't correspond so well nor do the migratory paths (possibly some Gava elements later were part of some Basarab movements).
Most of V13 can't have anything to do with Gava culture in a formative sense.


Ah I see finally the Albanian cousin of Bjelopavlici appeared. So both Kuqi and Palbardhi have some close matches in Albanians as onomastics clearly indicate. Kuqi had 50 % + of Albanian names in 1485 whereas although Bjelopavlici had few, the name of their ancestor was very unusual for Slavic standards: "white Paul", the names involving white were alot more common in Albanians as is this construction of surname with two persons (usually son and father).

Roman Dacian relation was constructed during the period of extreme nationalism.....to support that, they proposed that Albanian came from Carpi ....but this theory holds no water....Modern Romanians came from South Danube (from the Roman Empire logically)

11939



Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

exercitus
08-04-20, 18:12
Thanks Aspurg very clarifying.
I noticed also some new Albanian samples at the last update at Yfull tree which have impressively TMRCA's > 3000 ybp, so i guess that this evidences further corroborate the Old presence of this Hg in the Balkanic area;

- https://yfull.com/tree/J-Y21878*/

- https://yfull.com/tree/J-Y21045/

also regarding the - indo european hg - R1b;

- https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L52*/

exercitus
08-04-20, 18:40
About the Bjelopavlici\Palbardhi there was also a portion, among those inhabitants in the Defter of 1485, with typical (or likely) Albanian Anthroponyms, but still the majority had Slavic onomastics , so we might conclude that it was a mixed Slavic-Albanian community !!

11940

11941


Concerning Kuci and Piperi the Albanian presence in list of names it's noticable, in the case of Vasojevici, the area around Andrejevica and Plav, the Slavic presence is overwhelming !! So my perplexity consist in the fact that how can we explain that the today Serbians\Bosnians\Montenegrins which have ancestry from the Montenegrin Brda's, have principally Old Balkan Haplogroups ?!

11942

Aspurg
08-04-20, 19:47
Thanks Aspurg very clarifying.
I noticed also some new Albanian samples at the last update at Yfull tree which have impressively TMRCA's > 3000 ybp, so i guess that this evidences further corroborate the Old presence of this Hg in the Balkanic area;


- https://yfull.com/tree/J-Y21878*/


- https://yfull.com/tree/J-Y21045/


also regarding the - indo european hg - R1b;


- https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L52*/


Most definitely J-L283 are pretty old in the Western Balkans area. That R-L52* should be some older migration (like Bell Beaker).





About the Bjelopavlici\Palbardhi there was also a portion, among those inhabitants in the Defter of 1485, with typical (or likely) Albanian Anthroponyms, but still the majority had Slavic onomastics , so we might conclude that it was a mixed Slavic-Albanian community !!




Concerning Kuci and Piperi the Albanian presence in list of names it's noticable, in the case of Vasojevici, the area around Andrejevica and Plav, the Slavic presence is overwhelming !! So my perplexity consist in the fact that how can we explain that the today Serbians\Bosnians\Montenegrins which have ancestry from the Montenegrin Brda's, have principally Old Balkan Haplogroups ?!



It seems your attachment didn't work well, but I've seen that already. The territory of Bjelopavlic tribe was not entirely in the 1485 defter, portion was recorded in 1477 Herzegovina defter. There are Albanian names here and there but they were already slavicised at the time. Also, first time the tribe is mentioned in 1411, and few tribal individuals were mentioned in about 1445 with Slavic names.


In Kuči Albanian influence was large in 1485. With Vasojevici much less, I think Vasojevici are not local there, they likely came from Herzegovina. They have various cousins there, but all of those need to do NGS tests to establish the facts. Even recently a Pole showed up who seem little distant to them, but not as distant to suggest some Slavic connection.


I don't think these were necessarily mixed, maybe some locals here and there under Bjelopavlici. In Kuci area there were 2 villages with entirely Slavic names, those were most likely some I2a Din and R1a people.

It is easy to explain, the area of Dioclea was some sort of "Refugium" for some Palaeobalkanic poeples. There are various other Balkanic hg's in the broader region.

Anyway you might start a theme on it. Not sure if there was one before. What I do know is that there was no problem for Montenegrins or Albanians if one had this or that origin as they often fought together against the Ottomans.


Wow my mtdna, it seems Alanic-Sarmatian.:cool-v: I didn't know the TMRCA was so low, but Russia, N. Europe, also Italy, W. Europe, and importantly North Africa combined with I1a1 Srubnaya find and some I1a* in Iran make it pretty certain this was Alan lineage. I1a1 was found in a proto-Illyrian grave but that must be some lost line due to low TMRCA of I1a1 and spread, some Estonian IA, but this TMRCA of 1650 ybp and spread looks Alan, some clades going to the North. I knew there was some force pushing to look for Nomad links for my Y-DNA lol.

Aspurg
21-04-20, 17:01
This Albanian from Tirana shares a single SNP with Hungarians A19247. But somehow his SNP count is low. Theirs is not too much higher.. I thought maybe Dante low depth reduces the SNP count, but probably not. It does reduce the number of reads. And coverage is great. In some other cases Dante results have more SNP's..

I think I'm back to the old ways... hahahaha I think genetic facts are more likely to become aligned with this than not..

I should have paid more attention to Pechenegs. It turns out there was a Hungarian Pecheneg community in the early 14th century in which (within one of their tribes, community) a name very similar to my surname base occurs. Also in this same community occurs the name Towan related to "Togan" (actuall its gh, and this gh > w) found right where my cluster is found.. That's not going be an accident especially not with this cluster being found in a village founded and settled by the Pechenegs..

Also in Bulgaria in the same village where my surname base occurs there is another Pecheneg name in the same village: Tomir. (Not found anwhere else in Bulgaria). All of these are attested in Pechenegs, not in Cumans (Cumans have compound with Tomir but not alone).. Especially this Orkon, Wrkun, Wrkund etc. forms, already in the Pechenegs from the 10th century.

Bosnia, this Bosnian cluster. It turns out that the first ruler of Bosnia Ban Kulin had a Pecheneg name. Kulin son of Kegen was a Pecheneg from 11th century. It means "foal". Even before looking at few noble Medieval Bosnian families such as Sabančić there was this influence. Btw Sabančić had some sort of blood connection with Vilić and Vilić is A24066. Vilić was a Medieval noble house in Bosnia, and very powerful Ottoman Bey family. This one is from Herzegovina but there were migrations of them from Bosnia to Herzegovina and this cluster is not found in any Serbs from Herzegovina (almost 500 tested). Even Bosnia itself might be derived of it but less likely (Bosnia - Besseni). One mufti actually claimed this, based on writings of one Tatar. But there was Pecheneg influence in Bosnia it seems. Well Bosnians must be rather closely related to Cluj sample (just these 2 STR's are 2 SNP's and there are more) where we have plenty of their traces. Already Bosniaks have some Central Bosnian Nomad clusters, proto-Magyar, Jasz, and obviously somebody has to be Pecheneg too with these Pecheneg influences.

So it could be that some nomads slapped around the locals and created the Bosnia, possibly with Hungarian involvement. None of these is found in Serbs or Croats from Bosnia.. And Bosniaks from central Bosnia descend of original Bosnians in highest percentage. Many Croats from C.Bosnia descend recently from Herzegovina, but many locals as well there.

Well there was Ban Borić just before Kulin, but then again he came from Hungary, and also his name is being possibly connected to Bulgarian..

Plenty of Bessenyei's from Hungary to test, it's a very widespread surname but I have to look more closely at the County where these names occur in 14th century. And, Berende villages also. Two tested don't have any matches, one is E-V13, looks some CTS9320 likely. (this one was tested at Serbian project, not sure he is interested in deeper tests).

Plus there is some Hungarian Z17107 candidate, he happens to be from a Pecheneg settlement. If he is Z17107 then he is related to one Ukrainian clade who's BigY I have been chasing. You see they have H4=12, and generally Z17107 have lower SNP count suggesting some TMRCA of 2700 years as Trojet suggested. Except my clade, namely A24066 where we have more, and we look mutated. Ukrainian clade also looks very mutated and they also mutated on dys438 (just in opposite direction), so I think chances are they do share something at A24066 level.

And ofc this clade is weird in having a possible member from Uzbekistan from one study. My surname base (excluding the suffix designating location) can indeed be derived of this Pecheneg name, just with a loss of semi-wovel at the front. This Pecheneg name in turn might be Avar and relate to the person of "Gostun" and we have such village right next door in Bijelo Polje, and we have Pecheneg name in that village in late 15th century. I'd like to see some people who are old there tested.

Also Hungarian A24070 looks to have some Magyar link, possible relation to Apor.

Aspurg
23-04-20, 19:34
Wow this Cuman convergent haplotype has really hindered me from realizing the things, because I was too focused on them. In one Peshter village near Bolyare, we find individuals with some unique names: Kopun/Kopon and Okor!! As it turns out Kopon/Chopon was one of Pecheneg tribes!!! They ruled modern Wallachia. So my ancestors even knew of what tribe they were... Kopun as a surname existed in areas of Croatia where it betrayed an Italian influence, mostly people who dealt with poultry. Literally no such people in these areas ever had it as a personal name, and I haven't seen it elsewhere used as such. Kopun is stingy rooster, laughable for a personal name lol. Not in one Medieval Serbian document either (with tens of thousands of names) an these Latin influences in Croatia were far from this area. In this instance an individual had this name.

And this Okor person, just as with my own surname base which is similar (my surname can only be viewed in S.Slavic context as some sort of unlikely even pejorative form rather unfitting an old family that mine is, sometimes denotes physical trait in this case it cannot denote that, in any case unusual) betrays Oghur influence. Also linguistically these differences (my surname -Pecheneg names) can be explained in Slavic, loss of frontal vowel so common plus insertion of a vowel to break up the unpronounceable cluster at the front, "rk" cluster can't be pronounced at the start without the addition of a vowel. Consonants are identical as is final vowel. Per Gyula Nemeth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyula_N%C3%A9meth_(linguist)) and Baskakov this tribe's name originates from the title of Kopon/Kopan which is Oghur/Bulgar in origin. And guess what the only two people with such personal names are found in this village and look at this:

Kopan Okorsis , leader under Omurtag who drowned in the Dniepr river.

Also in a village with A24066 we get some really odd for the region Russian names/forms, normal as Pecheneg remnants the Black Hats served Kyev and Ruthenian princes against the Cumans..

So only when I deleted the Cumans, I was able to see a clear and exact sense in these.. It turns out all these traces have nothing to do with Cumans and everything to do with the Pechenegs.. And ofc I got cousins in village founded by them. Btw we find one "Korsin" near that village too in the late 15th century. Never found this name anywhere else.

In 1253. Bulgarians invaded Bijelo Polje, ransacked the area because Ragusians called upon them in the course of their war with Serbia. Serbs were the losing side and Serbian ruler had to sue for peace, with the help of Hungarian king he made peace with Bulgarians. But he had to recognize the Hungarian king as sovereign. Duo to huge amount of Bulgarian traces in Southern Peshter and few near Bijelo Polje area it seems he had to accept the presence of some Bulgarian Bolyar group there. Unlike most people I know all ancestry for the past 400 years and also can guarantee presence and also prominence all the way to the late 15th century.

I see plenty of Romanians have the surname Berendei, so I'm gonna be adding them to Pecheneg Hungarians and some Bulgarians to my list of priorities.. There are only 20 Romanian NGS's ridiculous for a nation of that size, so the only way to get a better picture of them is through studies until more people get tested. We do have Romanian from Cluj county who is certainly related to Bosniaks by STR's, and over there plenty of Pecheneg influence in archaeology.. Two clusters: one Bosniak - NW Romania, the other Upper Lim, Peshter - Shop - Vojvodina. Their TMRCA should be around 1000 years. Btw in one Serbian study where I have these relatives they have some STR's not present in FTDNA Y111. And one of these is a triple backmutation on a slow STR. So they are 100 % related and 100 % there is a cluster defined by a 385b here.. I am more certain in this link than I ever was in Cuman, just crazy how this evidence fits in..

Also it seems dys438 mutates faster in Nomads. R and Q share elevated dys438=11, R1b M269 mutateed to 12, Asian R-M73 mutated back to 10.. I see a large sample of hg's and R1b's and R1a's mutate more there. Ossetian Alan cluster of GG330 mutated back to 9. This convergent Cumanian sample to 11, same as me, other unprofiled Z17107 mutated back.. I already read of the possibility that environments affect mutation rates.

LeoJ
25-04-20, 17:06
These matches are completely in line with the dominant scientific consensus (excluding Romanian scientists, often made in Ceausescu era) based on linguistic, archeological, and now genetic evidence that the proto-Romanians formed South of Danube river, and that in successive migrations they colonized modern day Romania. Prior to that Romania was populated by Slavic speaking populations with some Turkics here and there, (excluding ofc Transylvania). Proto-Romanians likely descend from inhabitants of Roman cities in Balkan provinces who migrated to the mountains to escape the chaos and devastation caused by the Hunnic incursions and inability of Romans to ensure security at the time. There they met proto-Albanians from whom they learned the trade of Transhumance, and they excelled at Transhumance probably even more than the Albanians. With the new Albanian Z17107* result it seems lot more likely Albanian Z38456 is there for a long time, so not Dacian. Other than that there are no numerous clusters that could possibly be of Dacian origin. Besides the Dacian option was never likely because Albanian has huge Latin influence, had Albanian descended of Carpi or Costoboci no way Albanian would have had such strong Latin influence. Because these groups were never under Roman control, and they only had some trade contacts with the Romans. Fair enough. Personally I think you're right. But the proto-romanians were in fact the old north Danube (original Dacia area before conquest) latinized dacians who retreated alongside the romans south Danube (Dacia Aureliana, Moesia Superior, Serdica, Bulgaria), which in medieval times formed the so-called vlachs. So, even south of Danube they have north Danube ancestry. Dacia Aurelie was afterward divided into two: Dacia Mediterranea and Dacia Ripensis. Off course, many wanted and still want for the sake of ideological fixations to force the truth in either ways. In this aspect, the baseline of the romanian historians was and is to confirm (without much consistency imho) the continuity of the romanians inside the former Dacian area. And off course, the basic theorem of the latinization of the dacians, and thus the birth of the romanian peoples.

LeoJ
25-04-20, 17:17
These matches are completely in line with the dominant scientific consensus (excluding Romanian scientists, often made in Ceausescu era) based on linguistic, archeological, and now genetic evidence that the proto-Romanians formed South of Danube river, and that in successive migrations they colonized modern day Romania. Prior to that Romania was populated by Slavic speaking populations with some Turkics here and there, (excluding ofc Transylvania). And what's your opinion on the romanian Transylvania ancestors related to dacians (that area was also inhabited by dacian tribes) ?

Aspurg
29-04-20, 05:34
6. Čarović (related to the guz above) E-A24066 Raždaginja, Čarovina

How the hell did I not notice this before!!! Because of Cumans.. LOOOL So there is this old family from Peshter Čarović. "Char/Čar" basis does not exist anywhere in Medieval Serbian documents. It is encountered few times in Bulgaria in 16th century, and today in few surnames there. Origin?? Turkic. Çağrı -"hawk", but this "ğ" is a Voiced velar fricative so for example in Modern Turkish it is not pronounced (Çarı), And so A24066 is Çarović, aaand A24066 is the main family of Pečenjevce, next to it there is Čekmin/Çekmin, Čekmin is certainly connected to Pečenjevce even in terms of sharing genetics because together with 2 small neighboring villages they are mentioned in 1498.

So in 1167. we have 3 Berendei brothers one of them was Çekman Ça(ğ)rovich.
These names were sooo rare, and their combination especially. This surname in Serbs does not exist other than in my cousins (their close cousins were tested actually, but they must be the same thing). Having these Russian names on Peshter.. these Chagrovichi worked for some Kievan princes I believe.. A24066 is connected to these, a genetic fact. Honestly Serbs and Albanians are far better tested than Russians, Ukrainians when the population size is taken into account.. Even this basal Russian Z17107>BY4467, clearly Z17107 does have some older Eastern connections too already...This Vojvodina dude, I don't think he's Serb (they did test all ethnicities in the study but they didn't specify who's what), and even he were I cannot find any sense for some Shop area family to be in Vojvodina inhabitant. No such migrations. Plus ofc this clade of Z17107*, I can say of all Z17107 only A24066 and these seem so "mutated", even the Hungarian A24070 is not. And indeed they all get around 2700 years, we get more and so will these, and we mutated on dys438, only in opposite directions, if one of us didn't go from 10 then we are certainly related. So I'll be wanting BigY of these. Also there is some other interesting guy, but needs a Pack..

There is only one "kopan" in history and that is the Okorsis.. Apparently Pechenegs were a very mixed people. Actually per some authorities Xopon/Kopon tribe is derived of the title "kopan".

So it seems I am actually the son of Çağr who died in mid 12th century. In any case these names are firmly associated with the Berindei. These places in the region, they could have arrived in early 13th century, for example Berendei are not mentioned as a separate group prior to early 12th century. First Pecheneg main settlement of the Shop was in 1091 after they were defeated. Their remnants then united with these other peoples in a group called the Black Hats.

I see so many Berindeis in Romania even in Cluj where we have some A24066 (he's just more distant to me, close to Bosnian). Romanians are so poorly tested atm, that even testing various Berindeis would make up a good portion of their project.

Some legends say we always had lots of horses.. That the Ottomans chased us to take our horses away.. Wasn't like that mostly, we worked with the Ottomans. But because of these I thought my ancestors were possibly some nomadic people years ago..

LeoJ
29-04-20, 17:10
I see so many Berindeis in Romania even in Cluj where we have some A24066 (he's just more distant to me, close to Bosnian). Romanians are so poorly tested atm, that even testing various Berindeis would make up a good portion of their project. Berindei is quite a common name here in Transilvanya. I had once a work mate with this name. Did you read my above posts ?

Aspurg
29-04-20, 18:53
Berindei is quite a common name here in Transilvanya. I had once a work mate with this name. Did you read my above posts ?

I responded to you in another thread dealing with Dacia.
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/37672-Main-Y-haplogroups-on-the-territory-of-Dacia-2000-3000-years-ago/page4?p=602205&viewfull=1#post602205

Yes very interesting to see it is common, even some boyars were Berindei. They appear as a group in 1097, they were united with the remnants of Pechenegs, Uz (Torki) and they often served the Russians against the Cumans.

I was talking about Çağrı loosing ğ but actually there is a hint Çağr proper root retaining the "g" does occur in the Shop area! Village Čagrovac only 10 miles NE from Pečenjevce! Also mentioned in 1498. so no doubt that actually some Berindei Chagrovichi were there in Medieval times! They might have been some local magnates. Pečenjevce, Čekmin, Čagrovac, Berende 1, Berende 2 across the border in Bulgaria.. Chekman Chagrovich a Berendei who were part of federation with the Pechenegs..

Pečenjevce/Čekmin are A24066 my subcluster, and the only similar surname to Cagrovich with a very minor difference (ğ not pronounced in A.Turkish and S.Slavic languages do not like those "h-like" sounds generally so Croats say for themselves often Rvat instead of Hrvat, "I want" - "Ya hoću -> oću" etc.) in existence are also A24066 my subcluster. Those are facts..

Looking at some of these groups, the Uzi were just like their Oghuz cousins so carrying some N-VL73 common in modern Oghuz Anatolian Turks. Pechenegs were it seems different, 3 of their tribes came from Asia, the Kangar ones, but the rest non-Kangar it seems were locals, and looking from anthropological data they had far less mongoloid influence than the Uzi. I didn't expect to see that but apparently Pechenegs resembled Sarmatians with some mongoloid influence. For Cumans, despite the "Polovtsy"/"blonde" claims usually bit more Asian influence is associated. No wonder as the proto-Cuman was a R-M478 clade. Still it seems one R-Z93 clade literally associated with it, "Shari", might have been spreading the "blonde" genes among them.

LeoJ
30-04-20, 21:09
I responded to you in another thread dealing with Dacia. I've read it but still can't point you're opinion about, most are replies to other subjects.

Aspurg
25-07-20, 17:30
At last I know who the oldest member of my family is. Reliable documents trump anything. My family was (until few days ago, now its older) 400 years old and was of high status, of course I was able to find out more. It was just waiting to be discovered.

The family I descend of is clear. Prominent member of that family as recently as 500 years ago on Peshter spoke Torlak/Bulgarian or was still heavily influenced by it. He called the "hare" "zajec" or "zajek", not "zec" like Serbo-Croats do. Most importantly the oldest member of the my family born likely around 1420 had a name 100 % foreign to Serbo-Croats. First time mentioned on the Balkans was in a Bulgarian bolyar from early 13th century. Was very rare in Bulgarians in 15th/16th century, but present in crucial core Bulgarian areas around Tarnovo and Razgrad, few more often near fortresses. Only a descendant of Bulgarian bolyar elite could have carried such a name. Its ultimate origin is Khazar and (Black) Bulgar and ultimately it's Sogdian/Saka derived.

Some of these comments here were bit trollish, but I felt it is "dishonorable" to complain to the mods. You would have done it, in your crying style ofc. So it is obvious we are of different stock as I always thought, and indeed we are.


@ Aspar you came here to have the back of these trolls. I know where you are from, and I know whom you match. Your Bulgarian cousin who shares one SNP with you is still Bronze Age distance to you. I know since I first got tested that I have a close relative in a Bulgarian from Karachanak study, likely another one from another study. Also I have a N.Macedonian (that is Bulgarian) relative. These people are far closer to me than your Bulgarian cousin.. My clade's current tree doesn't reflect reality. Reality is, from a genetic POV, from the order of mutations, my own family is not native in our native area, and not long ago! Long enough for high Medieval though. The fact is the Western Balkan people have done a far better job of testing people than the Easterners and Greeks..
And I'll tell you something, my close genetic relatives will pop up in medieval Bulgarian forts far earlier than the relatives of 90 % of ethnic Bulgarians.

These Bosnians for example have a relative in NW Romania likely 1000 years away (and we have historians claiming founder of the Bosnian state was a Pecheneg like I did), Romanians are practically a non-tested population, but still I found one there and thanks to these Bosnian results I know what defines their clade. And Bosnians from central Bosnia don't have Vlach ancestry, some do have Magyar-like ancestry though. And even I have some basal relative in Vojvodina, whose ethnicity I don't know (in that study over 30 % of tested were not Serbs). But I know he is certainly about or close to 1000 years away from me and all of my relatives bar one, and very unlikely related to him as well. Also there is a Ukrainian (W. Ukraine, one likely SE Poland) cluster of Z17107*, almost certainly Y30991+, finally I got attention there so hopefully I can have their position on the tree. I predict they belong to my clade based on some clear patterns. And if they do so will an Uzbek too. Also our TMRCA is little bit lower due to A24066 higher mutation rate than in other Z17107 clades (one reason why these Ukrainians might split the A24066).

Where my genetics comes from locally there was a Bulgarian enclave in Medieval times in the core of Serbian medieval state. The huge diversity of Bulgarian toponyms is clear. And my ancestors ruled there as local feudals in Medieval times within the Serbian state ofc, but they obviously had significant cultural autonomy. I think Bulgarians must be better tested, especially those from sub-ethnic groups such as Kapantsi etc. I think currently it is largely people testing their own relatives (mothers father, grandparents, greatgrandparents) from their region, which is good but not anywhere near good enough.

Aspurg
25-07-20, 18:20
Y167028 Hungarian's surname seems derived of a Hungarian chief (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apor_(chieftain)). My ancestors (in any case 100 % of my genetic cluster) name from 15h century certainly related and first attested in another Hungarian Conqueror (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huba_(chef_magyar)), leader of a Kabar (Khazar) tribe. Some of these Bulgar traces I found in the region actually point to that tribe. It seems from some data about them that part of Pechenegs were of Bulgar origin.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7_K28GZHdo

https://samoistina.at.ua/2/sudikovo/Shudikovo1-2s.JPG

Shudikova stone from Šudikova monastery, Berane N.Montenegro, found 20 km SW from the area from where my ancestors initially settled, based on onomastic and genetic evidence. Aleksandar Loma (and most) called them clearly Bulgar, per him possibly related to Pagan uprising of 893. That is a group of pagan Bulgars who migrated to there and were received by the semi-pagan Serbs. We don't know exactly their datation, will look into details.

Aspar
26-07-20, 21:35
@ Aspar you came here to have the back of these trolls. I know where you are from, and I know whom you match. Your Bulgarian cousin who shares one SNP with you is still Bronze Age distance to you. I know since I first got tested that I have a close relative in a Bulgarian from Karachanak study, likely another one from another study. Also I have a N.Macedonian (that is Bulgarian) relative. These people are far closer to me than your Bulgarian cousin.. My clade's current tree doesn't reflect reality. Reality is, from a genetic POV, from the order of mutations, my own family is not native in our native area, and not long ago! Long enough for high Medieval though. The fact is the Western Balkan people have done a far better job of testing people than the Easterners and Greeks..
And I'll tell you something, my close genetic relatives will pop up in medieval Bulgarian forts far earlier than the relatives of 90 % of ethnic Bulgarians.

Any reason why I was called upon in this post of yours?

Of course I match Macedonians, both Slavic speaking Macedonians but also speakers of Eastern Romance as evidenced by the cousins in Shtip. Whether we call ourselves Македонци or Machedoni doesn't matter, we are basically the same people, a salad of Romance and Slavic influences. You might want to check Kanchov about this (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_for_the_Macedonians#cite_note-11).

Anyway, I am not sure you can drew conclusions based solely on STR's when it comes to haplogroup such as E-V13. From those SNP tested I can see great diversity of Z17107 in the Carpathian basin and in the Western Balkans. You might have genetic cousins in Bulgaria and Macedonia but nevertheless the center of gravity of Z17107 and the whole CTS9320 I would say is the Carpathian basin so these cousins you have most probably came from that direction. In other words your line is very old in the Central and Western Balkans and you should search your ancient ancestor in the Carpathian basin not in the Steppe I believe. Although assimilation in various incoming peoples from the Steppe is possible nevertheless.

I had a post in another forum which might be of interest for you and which is ultimately connected with the cremation as a funeral rite and the expansion of E-Z1057 from the Carpathian basin:

The following EBA cultures such as Usatovo or Vucedol all practiced inhumations. In Pannonia however it seems that the cremation funeral rites survived and even influenced the Bell Beakers who in turn were known to practice both inhumations and cremation. I would even dare to say that the Chalcolithic and EBA people who lived in Pannonia at the time influenced the Beakers genetically, hence the visible dinaricization of the Beaker's skulls. These practices survived in Pannonia even as late as the Kishaposhtag culture which was a Bell Beaker culture and whose primary funeral rite was the cremation.
What is interesting about the Kishaposhtag culture is that in many ways was a continuation of the culture of Vučedol, especially south of the lake Balaton. Although in Vucedol the inhumations were the norm, an interesting phenomenon was observed in it's latest stage where cremation burials under barrows were observed alongside inhumation. The Serbian archaeologist Nikola Tasic wrote in his "Eneolithic Cultures of Central and West Balkans" that this phenomenon can be interpreted as the beginning of the crisis provoked by the arrival of a new population in the Carpathian basin and the Balkans, a crisis that would eventually bring about the disintegration of the Vucedol culture.
Nevertheless much of the legacy of the Vucedol culture would continue living in the MBA Transdanubian Encrusted Pottery culture or the Inlaid Ceramics Culture that would form on the basis of the Kishaposhtag culture with the participation of populations from the Drava and Sava rivers , representing the traditions of the Vučedol-Zok culture.
The Encrusted Pottery culture influenced to a great extent the cultures of Gyrla Mare, Verbichoara and Tei and there was a migration event from this culture towards the Central Balkans. There is a BA site in North-West Bulgaria dated around 1600-1100 BC with pottery and urns (https://www.archaeology.wiki/blog/2015/11/05/encrusted-pottery-found-bulgaria-necropolis-excavations/#:~:text=Over%2040%20ceramic%20artefacts%20have%20 been%20unearthed&text=The%20settlement%20which%20is%20near,was%20ex cavated%20for%2018%20years.) belonging to the Encrusted Pottery culture.
This Vucedol influence on the Encrusted Pottery culture can be observed in urns in the form of birds that are very similar to the simbol of Vucedol, the Vucedol Dove:

https://i.postimg.cc/qv8Lq328/Vucedol-Culture-ceramic-dove.jpg (https://postimages.org/)


Urns in the form of birds found in Orsoya, North-West Bulgaria:

https://i.postimg.cc/CKv62wRP/201108135022430.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://i.postimg.cc/VshckT8P/201108133622116.jpg (https://postimages.org/)


It's worth mentioning also that in Greek Macedonia along the Vardar/Axios river are found artefacts belonging to Gyrla Mare Culture towards the end of phase D of the Bronze Age (about 1200 BC). The population of the Gyrla-Mare culture migrated (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=tK6OAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=danubian+encrusted+pottery&source=bl&ots=YscZx-9PVR&sig=ACfU3U0HZ0qSO5GNFQGhDaELitg8wp0-VA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjEvqTPwqXqAhWEgVwKHcQ1CRAQ6AEwD3oECAgQA Q#v=onepage&q=greek%20vardar%20valley&f=false) south, towards Mycenaean Greece , where the Bronze Age civilization was replaced by the period of the Dark Ages ( Heraclides , Dorian invasion ).

The cremation as was shown already seems that it spread from the Pannonian basin first towards south in the late Vucedol phase(2400-2200 BC) and in the phases BR A1, A2 and B1(1950-1600 BC) according to Reinacke it was already present in Cetina, Vatina and was slowly spreading east towards Transylvania and Dobrugia/Moldova by replacing the previous custom of inhumation practiced by the Ottomány and Wietenberg cultures and possibly a significant shift in population as well causing the disappearance of these cultures and south-east towards Oltenia with Gyrla-Mare or Dubovac-Zuto Brdo group as shown in my previous post.
At last this custom reached Dobrugia and Eastern Wallachia in the Late Bronze Age with the disappearance of the steppe culture of Coslogeni caused by the appearance of a new style ornaments, those of the Channel pottery style with possible further links to Gava-Holihrady culture which in turn was also in great part derived of elements from the Carpathian basin and whose primary funeral rite was the cremation.

This a very good map of the hotspots and places where the cremation ritual was practiced between the 14th and 9th century BC:


https://i.postimg.cc/q7VR3NkS/csm-CBAB-Karte-f057298fa3.jpg (https://postimg.cc/w12gKTRQ)




As you can see, by the Middle-Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age this custom was widespread in the Balkans, the Carpathian Basin and Northern Italy in particular and the source of spreading was the Carpathian Basin and Pannonia and what was common about all these places and groups is the similarity not only in the funeral rites but also ornaments with the Middle-Danube cultures.
In particular, for Northern Italy, we can observe a similarity with the Terramare Culture:

Comb-shaped pendants (Kammanhänger): (https://www.academia.edu/40913016/MIDDLE_BRONZE_AGE_ENCRUSTED_POTTERY_IN_WESTERN_HUN GARY)
These characteristic ornaments of the Encrusted Pottery culture have a cast, comb-like “body” with
a loop-shaped hanger as “head” and applied with a curving, arm-like middle part.
Comb-shaped pendants have been interpreted as stylized male representations.
All the known pieces of the comb-shaped pendants were recovered to the south of Lake Balaton:
a stray piece found at Bonyhád–Szöcske szántók (Pl. 63. 14), and the articles in the Zalaszabar hoard
(Pl. 62. 1–2). One comb-shaped pendant was found outside of Transdanubia alone: Ladislav Hájek
published a piece from Úherce, Czech Republic, representing a mix of variants a and c. Based on
this artefact, Hájek originates the comb-shaped pendants from the Aunjetitz culture, dating this
particular specimen (and its comparative example from Pusztasárkánytó) to the Aunjetitz period,
while he listed the one of Nagyhangos to the Koszider period.430 Amália Mozsolics – depending
on the shape of the hanger – distinguished two types of the comb-shaped pendants; relating these
artefacts closely to the Nagyhangos assemblage assigned to the BIIIb period. Bernhard Hänsel also
discussed the two types occuring in hoards and placed them to the end of the Danubian Early Bronze
Age (FD III); he pointed out that the references from Switzerland, quoted by Hájek previously,
belong to a much later period (Urnfield culture).431 The distribution of the comb-shaped pendants
and more importantly, the mould found at Lengyel – on the settlement associated with the Encrusted
Pottery culture – proves that these objects were produced locally; and thus the piece of Úherce must
be a local replica of the Transdanubian originals.
Another possible origin for the comb-shaped pendants was the Terramare culture – with
assumed Italian antecedents of the comb-shaped pendant type. However, a recent detailed study
of the Terramare settlements called attention to that this assumption is not certain either, as bone
pendants similar to variants found in the Carpathian Basin appear later, in the 2nd phase of the
Italian Middle Bronze Age (Bronzo Medio). This correlates approximately with the Koszider period
in the Carpathian Basin, whereas the bronze versions in this area only become typical from the 3rd
phase.
Concerning the original use of the comb-shaped pendants, Tibor Kovács collected their
representations on vessels and figurines among the material of the (Szeremle–) Dubovác and
the Cârna culture at the Lower Danube area.

What's interesting here is that the bearers of the Terramare culture in it's initial phases were practicing the inhumation burial and in it's later phase exactly when this comb-shaped pendants appear the cremation starts to be the norm. More recently, Italian archeologist Andrea Cardarelli has proposed (https://www.academia.edu/5808394/The_Collapse_of_the_Terramare_Culture_and_growth_o f_new_economic_and_social_System_during_the_late_B ronze_Age_in_Italy) re-evaluations of contemporaneous Greek accounts, such as that of Dionysius of Halicarnassus, and to link the Terramare culture to the Pelasgians – whom the Greeks generally equated with the Tyrrhenians and specifically, therefore, the Etruscans. This proposal in not without a base and as I've shown earlier, it can be correlated with the archaeological finds along the Vardar/Axios river in Greek Macedonia and who belong to the Trans-Danubian cultures and more specifically, Gyrla-Mare or Dubovac group from the Late Bronze Age. These finds in particular can't be associated with the Doric Greeks who only invaded the area in the 8th century BC, and by historical accounts from the Greeks themselves we know that in Greek Macedonia before the Doric Greeks, the Brygians and the Paeonians lived, especially in the area along the Vardar river.

Therefore I assume that E-Y30977 played a part mostly in the Cetina culture while E-BY3880 in the cultures of the Carpathian basin who later spread towards the Balkans.

Anyway, it's interesting about this Bulgarian like toponyms present in Montenegro. There is certainly a migration in question but when and how? I believe it's somewhere between the First and the Second Bulgarian-Vlach Empire. There are some subclades like this one, E-BY5430 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-BY5430) that might point to such a migration from the direction of Macedonia and possibly related with the failed uprisings of the Bulgarians.

Aspurg
26-07-20, 23:47
Any reason why I was called upon in this post of yours?

Of course I match Macedonians, both Slavic speaking Macedonians but also speakers of Eastern Romance as evidenced by the cousins in Shtip. Whether we call ourselves Македонци or Machedoni doesn't matter, we are basically the same people, a salad of Romance and Slavic influences. You might want to check Kanchov about this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_for_the_Macedonians#cite_note-11).

No particular reason, well I was just so glad I found this info, and there is more of it, I need some unpublished Ottoman defters from 1485, 1489, 1516. I was looking to find some earlier ancestors that could have lived in 15th century but I didn't see this coming..

I see now there is plenty of argument about this name in Bulgarian and other sources, some say Mongolian origin, then also a loan into Mongolian from Turkic, but it also looks similar to E.Iranic (likely ultimately). It surely came from some nomadic group into Bulgarian language.

About Kanchov I think Macedonians do have a specific identity which includes Vlach groups, in particular Moglen Vlachs seem interesting. Linguistically and genetically they are clearly related to Bulgarians. Far more than to the Serbs. Serbian influence came later with Nemanjici.



Anyway, I am not sure you can drew conclusions based solely on STR's when it comes to haplogroup such as E-V13.

I fully agree, for 95 % of clades or more you can't, however for A24066 clade which doesn't even look like a V13 (before SNP tests many were predicting V12) I can. Because what defines our clade are so many weird STR values, including very slow STR's, and basically no other clade has them. Even this Hungarian which turned out to be another CTS9320, while sharing some of our STR's, even from him we can be clearly differentiated, my cluster and the Bosnian. For some of those scientific paper samples from the Shop region I also have an additional very slow STR, triple back mutation we have (outside of Y111) and that just makes it certain.

And even within our cluster, that is A24066>A24049, we have a string of four specific mutations, and we can see, that the older haplotypes are from Vojvodina and Shop area, and my own branch is youngest.
So my clade is among the lucky ones, the two subclusters we have. But if your take E-A19247, even with Y111 it is not easy to guess..

The Balkan E-Z38456>BY4459 is also to a lesser degree such a clade, they have extremely high dys458=19/20.

The only reason though I have to utilize these more is because some populations aren't well tested yet. I have also a Montenegrin scientific sample of 404 people, but expectedly it showed just 2 people of my own family.



From those SNP tested I can see great diversity of Z17107 in the Carpathian basin and in the Western Balkans. You might have genetic cousins in Bulgaria and Macedonia but nevertheless the center of gravity of Z17107 and the whole CTS9320 I would say is the Carpathian basin so these cousins you have most probably came from that direction. In other words your line is very old in the Central and Western Balkans and you should search your ancient ancestor in the Carpathian basin not in the Steppe I believe. Although assimilation in various incoming peoples from the Steppe is possible nevertheless.

Albanians, Serbs and now Bosniaks are atm best tested, Bulgarians are good too, but it seems Bulgarians are genetically more heterogeneous, so it requires a larger sample to find all of these various clades than it does for Serbs or Albanians where you have huge former tribes, comprising huge chunk of the population. TMRCA of 700-1000 years being 3-5 % of the population.. Multiple such cases.

Regarding the CTS9320, don't forget there is a Western Bulgarian who is CTS9320* (with a bigY), hasn't uploaded to YFull (well he wouldn't gain anything atm). There is another Bulgarian with another haplotype who is CTS9320*, with an SNP Pack. Both of them have matches in Romanians from papers especially the latter (in Szekely too). It's just that as Romanians are so poorly tested we don't see that.

Ofc even Z17107 are old both in the Western Balkans and Carpathian basin.. Though yes it is possible someone was assimilated long time ago. There is one Z17107* Russian from Rostov, so he's pretty far. And ofc the Ossetian CTS9320* I found (I tested him because he was a candidate for Z17107). That Ossetian result was a surprise, maybe he holds more surprises in store (such as not being positive to all CTS9320 level SNP's)..

On the topic of Ancient cultures and CTS9320, especially Z16988 seems Illyrian definitely, though again not seen on the tree there is a Moldovan distant from all, and one Bulgarian too.. It should be Eastern Urnfield/Hallstat, the only other alternative is that it's some Western Vatina people assimilated by the Glasinac J-L283 dominated culture. And as these migrated (J-Z631), they did it too, but thats not likely, and CTS9320 is little bit older than the Glasinac boom. Glasinac though was totally inhumation, and no cremation people, just like their archaeological cousins where J-L283 was found.

On the topic of Dacian vs Pannonian, Danube was the demarcation line. The Tisza-Danube valley which was settled by the Iazyges, but we know from the sources that they pushed out the local Dacians from those areas.. Also when they describe the Dacian funerary ritual I have seen so many authors mentioning "typical Dacian La-Tene funeral".. Dacians are Hallstat descended. So regarding modern Hungary, Western half was Pannonia, Eastern half Dacia. And Danube was a significant demarcation line back in those days.




I had a post in another forum which might be of interest for you and which is ultimately connected with the cremation as a funeral rite and the expansion of E-Z1057 from the Carpathian basin:


I already read that actually, though I'm not on that forum. I do agree that E-V13 has an association with cremation practicing cultures. I still strongly believe E-V13 began in Dalmatia in proto-Cetina phase, and even these people practiced 50 % of cremation. And still although we have so many samples from BA Central Europe, no E-V13. I still maintain that E-V13 began with Dalmatian Neolithic, and proto-Cetina people, then CTS1273 literally migrated to the modern day Romania and very soon after, it spread from there. There is clear evidence Yamnaya variant called Glina III Schneckenberg was very involved with the creation of the proto-Cetina culture. And yes I think CTS1273 could have gone so far from Eastern Herzegovina, because Yamnaya people that visited Eastern Herzegovina were 100 % Nomadic. It seems they were hunting proto-Luwians (R-PF7562) around the Balkans.

Only this is consistent with the spread of V13. BY3880- clades do not seem Balkan in origin, yet great many BY3880's are. And this is especially true for your own clade, where you and this Bulgarian seem to have EBA presence in your regions. Even with TMRCA it coincides with the Glina III EBA assaults.

Some Yugoslav archaeologists made huge errors decades ago when they said there was Ezero culture in Eastern Herzegovina, there were some Ezero elements because Yamnaya nomads must have destroyed the Ezero culture and took something with them. But in recent times, proto-Cetina links with Glina III were more explored.

Of Girla-Mare, Verbiciara and some other related Vatin, Mediana (proto-Dardanian) etc. I agree, I think they were E-V13 heavy and especially various Z5018 clades, which is unlike CTS9320, a MBA clade so it must have been much more important in MBA.

So in general I would say E-V13 is EBA (the initial spread), some clades being MBA, LBA, EIA.

This forum though seems pretty dead anyway.. Might visit some other places..

Aspar
27-07-20, 15:27
@Aspurg

I am not sure about which name you are talking about?

About the Meglen Vlachs, these are descendants of the Vlach-Bulgarians that lived in the region of Meglen during the Second Vlach-Bulgarian Empire. Of these people is also Dobromir Chrys (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobromir_Chrysos). The Eastern Romance speakers were much present in the area not only in Meglen, but also Grevena, Doiran, Korca but it seems they were bulgarised or hellenised en mass. What's left of them is a few mountainous villages. These are my own people as I descend from them and whether Eastern Romance or Bulgarian speaking today, the people of south-eastern North Macedonia and those from the triangle of Kukus, Vodena and Enidze Vardar are the same people. They were like border people between Bulgaria and the Byzantine Empire. In the past they lived all the way down to Grevena but the border changed overtime. We know this because the Greek clerics, John Apokaukos and George Bardanes, writing around 1220, considered Grevena in western Macedonia a barbaric Bulgarian speaking place. Also there is an account (http://ald-bg.narod.ru/biblioteka/Homatian_zaRusaliite.htm) by Demetrios Chomatenos in connection with dances performed by people that lived near the medieval region of Molisc, Μολισκό, near Grevena in Greek Macedonia, exactly where the village of Kontsikon is but also another village with a similar name, that of Koniskos, an account that dates between 1215-1235 AD.The original account is in Greek while the link I posted is a Bulgarian translation of the original account.
In the account Demetrios Chomatenos gives details to an occurrence in which a murder was committed. Namely, during a festival called Rusalia(Ρουσάλια), in which the dancers performed a warrior dance, one of the actors somehow managed to hit a shepherd with a wooden stick. The shepherd without any remorse pulled a knife and gave a blow to the dancer called Chrisil(Χρύσηλος) straight to the hearth killing him on the spot. Then Chomatenos gives details how the Archbishop of Bulgaria(Archbishopric of Ohrid) condemns these games among whom Bota and Brumalia(Βότα και Βρουμάλια) as well as the aforementioned Rusalia(Ρουσάλια) and calls them pagan debauchery. This unfortunate Chrysil had a name with a Greek origin(Chrys) golden, and a typical Bulgarian suffix(il) which can be witnessed in names such as Boril, Strahil and so on.


This account is very important for my people because Rusalia is a national festival that was performed by the Slavic and Eastern Romance speakers in the region of Greek Macedonia plus the south-eastern area of today North Macedonia and south-west Bulgaria.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfHeIxk5G20


Similar dances exist among the Albanians and the Romanians as well but not exactly the same and are not know under the name Rusalia.


And this is important because Rusalia is a legacy directly from the ancient Roman festival called Rosalia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalia_(festival)). In Imperial-era Macedonia, several inscriptions(both in Latin and Greek) mention the Rosalia as a commemorative festival funded by bequests to groups such as a vicianus, a village or neighborhood association , a legally constituted association, often having a religious character , or symposium, in this sense a drinking and social club. The best account probably comes from an inscription in connection with the Attis myth given by the Christian apologist Arnobius and the happening was in Phrygia:
The next day the dendrophores laid the tree to rest with noisy music that represented the Corybantes, youths who performed armed dances and in mythology served as guardians for infant gods.
These warrior dances are in direct connection with what the Greek general Xenophon witnessed during his stay among the Thracians:

The Greek general and military historian Xenophon during his march within Persia and Thrace in 401-399 BC has added in Anabasis (VI, 1, 4-6): ‘After sacrificing some of the oxen which they have captured and other animals too, they provided a feast which was quite a good one, though they ate reclining on low couches and drunk out of horn cups which they had come across the country. When they had poured the libations and sung the Paean, first of all two Thracians stood up and performed a dance to the flute, wearing full armour. They leapt high into the air with great agility and brandished their swords. In the end one of them, as everybody thought, struck the other one, who fell to the ground, acting all the time. ... Then some more Thracians carried the stripped man out, , as though he was dead, though actually he had not been hurt in the slightest. ...(VII, 4, 4) It was then (in winter) easy to see why the Thracians wear fox skins round their heads and ears, and why they have tunics that cover their legs and not only the upper part of the body, and why, when they are on horseback, they wear long cloaks reaching down to their feet instead of our short coats.’


What's also important from the Chomatenos account is that we find out that some other festivals performed during Roman times was also performed by my ancestors during the time Chomatenos wrote although forgotten today, most probably under pressure from the Church as witnessed in the account. And that is the festival of Brumalia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brumalia) but also the offering of Vota (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Votum). The Balkan Sprachbund is also evidence that there was a great mixing and we can speak of Vlach-Bulgarian people. The lexicon is clearly Slavic derived but the grammar which is the backbone of a language it's nothing Slavic. In fact it's direct inheritance from the Romance languages of the Balkans.

This is a direct evidence of a pre-Slavic connection with the Roman Balkans of my own people and direct legacy in it's folklore. Therefore I as a descendant of these people am certain that my ancient ancestor was a Roman citizen that lived somewhere in the borders of the Roman Empire in the Balkans. Before that we can't speak for certain unless we get more evidences which we don't have atm.

Anyway, the biggest problem we have thus far is the lack of aDNA from the Balkans. The oldest BY3880 we have thus far is the clearly Scythianised Getae sample scy197 hence we can conclude that BY3880-FGC44169 was indeed present in the IA Lower Danube people. These people were probably absorbed en mass by the Slavs of Candesti-Ipotesti culture hence no surprise of the big diversity of E-FGC44169 clades in Bulgarians. Probably my BA Bulgarian cousin's lineage was part of these same Getae people. In that context my own lineage probably should be traced among related people to Getae who penetrated the Central Balkans instead of the Eastern ones.

Of course this is speculation until we get aDNA from EBA, MBA cultures of the Balkans which unfortunately we don't have however my own assumption is that most of the E-V13 clades entered the Balkans at the end of EBA and the beginning of MBA from direction of the Carpathian basin and in that context they should be in close relationship with the Bell Beaker people, not the Yamnaya guys. At the end of the day it seems the Bell Beakers were the big winners, not the Yamnaya people who didn't leave much of a legacy outside of the Balkans evidenced by the Z2103 Yamnaya rich y-dna lineage.

Aspurg
27-07-20, 17:42
@ Aspar

It's Huban, present in Bulgarian as adjective "hubav", in Macedonian without "h". It is old-Bulgarian, being in a bolyar Huban from 1207-1218, though I see Bulgarian linguists connect this with Mongol Ghobay with the same meaning, ultimately likely Eastern Iranian. My ancestors left the Shop more than 750 years ago so them having this name in 15th century means they had it in 13th century too. Considering the Mongols only started assaulting the Europe after the time of Boril, no way it is from them. But among the so called "Black Hats", where remnants of Pechenegs, Uzi (Torkils), Berendei gathered, there were also some tribes hypothesised to have been of Mongol origin, might be another connection to Berendei (archaeologically they mostly descended of Pechenegs) of my own. These people settled in Bulgaria, not only settled but they must have had some higher status, as evidenced by the fact that Ivan Asen II was ktetor of the church in one Berende village. I definitely want people tested from those villages (there are two). In any case it cannot be Ottoman (from Persian xub), as it is attested from before, was not common in Turkish, plus as one Bulgarian linguist said no Anatolian Turk knows what hub is while every Bulgarian does. And it doesn't seem Bulgar from their names. Magyar Conqueror had a name Huba, so potentially it might be related to Bulgarian form, Hungarian sources say it is of unknown or Turkic origin.
This personal name was rare in Bulgarians but present especially around Tarnovo, even next to the Beadnos Fortress (http://visit.guide-bulgaria.com/a/719/beadnos_fortress.htm), so it looks probably through the bolyars it entered the Bulgarian language.
One Martenitsa legend (https://bunt.bg/2020/03/01/za-proizhoda-na-martenitsata-legendata-za-han-kubrat/) mentions Huba as daughter of Kubrat, but I read this was made up 100 years ago. And that the celebration of Martenitsa is paleo-Balkan related.


Thanks for that info about Mogleno-Vlachs. I read about Grevena some time ago, there was one haplotype I was looking into, likely E-CTS9320>BY4404 clade, Greek surname. I saw that mention of Bulgarian speakers there in early 13th century.

Very interesting about Rosalia, it does seem Thraco-Phrygian related. Apparently linguistically Mogleno-Vlachs are closer to Romanians than to Aromanians. Your result thus far seems like the only Moglen proper result, where you have some Aromanians as matches, so looking at that they have some connection. Of course, your people what used to be a very widespread Eastern Romance group, and especially in the area between Serbia and Bulgaria they were very prominent. Linguists attribute their presence to significant differences between Serbo-Croatian and Bulgaro-Macedonian. They were likely massively assimilated only in Medieval, around 1100-1200. And ofc Vlachs played significant influence in creation of II Bulgarian Empire.
You also see Slavic influence in early Vlachs with names such as Dobromir, but also I believe in earliest Thessalian Vlachs we have Slavic names. Major Aromanian Y-DNA lineage is R-YP4278 (10 out of 65 tested from Stip), also found in Herzegovina Serbs who descend from 14th century Vlach Kresojevići tribe.

Of Western Romance speakers, what is left of them is mostly in Dalmatian coastal area (in modern Croats), where they were even a separate group until the Medieval, masters of the sea like the Illyrians/Liburnii. Much of the hinterground was deserted, hence such strong dominance of Slavic DNA today.

About ancient V13, ofc we lack the aDNA required. It is true that the Yamnaya left little legacy but the fact is people like Greeks were Yamnaya derived, and we also have some E-CTS5856* (probably another BY3880*) in Cyprus. And Bell Beaker influence wasn't as large in the Eastern portion. Also it was these Yamnaya related groups that made various incursions in EBA around the Eastern Balkans, Central Balkans, even modern day Albania. That does correspond to various basal BY3880* clades we see today. Cetina culture was actually directly BB influenced but the funerary ritual (which is very important) was of Glina III, and they were politically aligned with the Yamnaya people. With some BB groups next to them they had no interaction. I think Cetina was just the E-Y37092 clade. So as Raf suggested long ago I agree with Cetina, it's just some of these Eastern Cetina relatives such as Belotic-Bela Crkva etc to which he connected the spread of V13 clades actually were not derived from Cetina but from Schneckenberg culture. Similarity with Cetina was due to GS element in Cetina..

The only culture having something BB and being active in the area was Cetina (but it wasn't BB proper in any way). And the second seems J-L283 dominated culture with whom Cetina had almost no contacts. I just don't see BB's carrying basal BY3880 lineages around Central/Eastern Balkans. I have somewhere a map of Glina III incursions (can't find it atm), and does mimic the basal BY3880 (not these younger clades such as Z5018 or CTS9320) spread.

Hopefully there will be aDNA results from there too, but again Romanians lag not only in testing people but in aDNA too, though there are many hundreds or thousands of samples from that timeframe.

Progon
27-07-20, 22:32
How do u explain Sicilians belonging quite a lot under this subclade: https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-CTS1273/ => some rare branches under this (https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-BY3880/) which is neither Z5017/Z5018.

Aspar
28-07-20, 16:05
@ Aspar
It's Huban, present in Bulgarian as adjective "hubav", in Macedonian without "h". It is old-Bulgarian, being in a bolyar Huban from 1207-1218, though I see Bulgarian linguists connect this with Mongol Ghobay with the same meaning, ultimately likely Eastern Iranian. My ancestors left the Shop more than 750 years ago so them having this name in 15th century means they had it in 13th century too. Considering the Mongols only started assaulting the Europe after the time of Boril, no way it is from them. But among the so called "Black Hats", where remnants of Pechenegs, Uzi (Torkils), Berendei gathered, there were also some tribes hypothesised to have been of Mongol origin, might be another connection to Berendei (archaeologically they mostly descended of Pechenegs) of my own. These people settled in Bulgaria, not only settled but they must have had some higher status, as evidenced by the fact that Ivan Asen II was ktetor of the church in one Berende village. I definitely want people tested from those villages (there are two). In any case it cannot be Ottoman (from Persian xub), as it is attested from before, was not common in Turkish, plus as one Bulgarian linguist said no Anatolian Turk knows what hub is while every Bulgarian does. And it doesn't seem Bulgar from their names. Magyar Conqueror had a name Huba, so potentially it might be related to Bulgarian form, Hungarian sources say it is of unknown or Turkic origin.
This personal name was rare in Bulgarians but present especially around Tarnovo, even next to the Beadnos Fortress (http://visit.guide-bulgaria.com/a/719/beadnos_fortress.htm), so it looks probably through the bolyars it entered the Bulgarian language.
One Martenitsa legend (https://bunt.bg/2020/03/01/za-proizhoda-na-martenitsata-legendata-za-han-kubrat/) mentions Huba as daughter of Kubrat, but I read this was made up 100 years ago. And that the celebration of Martenitsa is paleo-Balkan related.
Thanks for that info about Mogleno-Vlachs. I read about Grevena some time ago, there was one haplotype I was looking into, likely E-CTS9320>BY4404 clade, Greek surname. I saw that mention of Bulgarian speakers there in early 13th century.
Very interesting about Rosalia, it does seem Thraco-Phrygian related. Apparently linguistically Mogleno-Vlachs are closer to Romanians than to Aromanians. Your result thus far seems like the only Moglen proper result, where you have some Aromanians as matches, so looking at that they have some connection. Of course, your people what used to be a very widespread Eastern Romance group, and especially in the area between Serbia and Bulgaria they were very prominent. Linguists attribute their presence to significant differences between Serbo-Croatian and Bulgaro-Macedonian. They were likely massively assimilated only in Medieval, around 1100-1200. And ofc Vlachs played significant influence in creation of II Bulgarian Empire.
You also see Slavic influence in early Vlachs with names such as Dobromir, but also I believe in earliest Thessalian Vlachs we have Slavic names. Major Aromanian Y-DNA lineage is R-YP4278 (10 out of 65 tested from Stip), also found in Herzegovina Serbs who descend from 14th century Vlach Kresojevići tribe.
Of Western Romance speakers, what is left of them is mostly in Dalmatian coastal area (in modern Croats), where they were even a separate group until the Medieval, masters of the sea like the Illyrians/Liburnii. Much of the hinterground was deserted, hence such strong dominance of Slavic DNA today.
About ancient V13, ofc we lack the aDNA required. It is true that the Yamnaya left little legacy but the fact is people like Greeks were Yamnaya derived, and we also have some E-CTS5856* (probably another BY3880*) in Cyprus. And Bell Beaker influence wasn't as large in the Eastern portion. Also it was these Yamnaya related groups that made various incursions in EBA around the Eastern Balkans, Central Balkans, even modern day Albania. That does correspond to various basal BY3880* clades we see today. Cetina culture was actually directly BB influenced but the funerary ritual (which is very important) was of Glina III, and they were politically aligned with the Yamnaya people. With some BB groups next to them they had no interaction. I think Cetina was just the E-Y37092 clade. So as Raf suggested long ago I agree with Cetina, it's just some of these Eastern Cetina relatives such as Belotic-Bela Crkva etc to which he connected the spread of V13 clades actually were not derived from Cetina but from Schneckenberg culture. Similarity with Cetina was due to GS element in Cetina..
The only culture having something BB and being active in the area was Cetina (but it wasn't BB proper in any way). And the second seems J-L283 dominated culture with whom Cetina had almost no contacts. I just don't see BB's carrying basal BY3880 lineages around Central/Eastern Balkans. I have somewhere a map of Glina III incursions (can't find it atm), and does mimic the basal BY3880 (not these younger clades such as Z5018 or CTS9320) spread.
Hopefully there will be aDNA results from there too, but again Romanians lag not only in testing people but in aDNA too, though there are many hundreds or thousands of samples from that timeframe.

@ Aspar
It's Huban, present in Bulgarian as adjective "hubav", in Macedonian without "h". It is old-Bulgarian, being in a bolyar Huban from 1207-1218, though I see Bulgarian linguists connect this with Mongol Ghobay with the same meaning, ultimately likely Eastern Iranian. My ancestors left the Shop more than 750 years ago so them having this name in 15th century means they had it in 13th century too. Considering the Mongols only started assaulting the Europe after the time of Boril, no way it is from them. But among the so called "Black Hats", where remnants of Pechenegs, Uzi (Torkils), Berendei gathered, there were also some tribes hypothesised to have been of Mongol origin, might be another connection to Berendei (archaeologically they mostly descended of Pechenegs) of my own. These people settled in Bulgaria, not only settled but they must have had some higher status, as evidenced by the fact that Ivan Asen II was ktetor of the church in one Berende village. I definitely want people tested from those villages (there are two). In any case it cannot be Ottoman (from Persian xub), as it is attested from before, was not common in Turkish, plus as one Bulgarian linguist said no Anatolian Turk knows what hub is while every Bulgarian does. And it doesn't seem Bulgar from their names. Magyar Conqueror had a name Huba, so potentially it might be related to Bulgarian form, Hungarian sources say it is of unknown or Turkic origin.
This personal name was rare in Bulgarians but present especially around Tarnovo, even next to the Beadnos Fortress (http://visit.guide-bulgaria.com/a/719/beadnos_fortress.htm), so it looks probably through the bolyars it entered the Bulgarian language.
One Martenitsa legend (https://bunt.bg/2020/03/01/za-proizhoda-na-martenitsata-legendata-za-han-kubrat/) mentions Huba as daughter of Kubrat, but I read this was made up 100 years ago. And that the celebration of Martenitsa is paleo-Balkan related.
Thanks for that info about Mogleno-Vlachs. I read about Grevena some time ago, there was one haplotype I was looking into, likely E-CTS9320>BY4404 clade, Greek surname. I saw that mention of Bulgarian speakers there in early 13th century.
Very interesting about Rosalia, it does seem Thraco-Phrygian related. Apparently linguistically Mogleno-Vlachs are closer to Romanians t
han to Aromanians. Your result thus far seems like the only Moglen proper result, where you have some Aromanians as matches, so looking at that they have some connection. Of course, your people what used to be a very widespread Eastern Romance group, and especially in the area between Serbia and Bulgaria they were very prominent. Linguists attribute their presence to significant differences between Serbo-Croatian and Bulgaro-Macedonian. They were likely massively assimilated only in Medieval, around 1100-1200. And ofc Vlachs played significant influence in creation of II Bulgarian Empire.
You also see Slavic influence in early Vlachs with names such as Dobromir, but also I believe in earliest Thessalian Vlachs we have Slavic names. Major Aromanian Y-DNA lineage is R-YP4278 (10 out of 65 tested from Stip), also found in Herzegovina Serbs who descend from 14th century Vlach Kresojevići tribe.
Of Western Romance speakers, what is left of them is mostly in Dalmatian coastal area (in modern Croats), where they were even a separate group until the Medieval, masters of the sea like the Illyrians/Liburnii. Much of the hinterground was deserted, hence such strong dominance of Slavic DNA today.
About ancient V13, ofc we lack the aDNA required. It is true that the Yamnaya left little legacy but the fact is people like Greeks were Yamnaya derived, and we also have some E-CTS5856* (probably another BY3880*) in Cyprus. And Bell Beaker influence wasn't as large in the Eastern portion. Also it was these Yamnaya related groups that made various incursions in EBA around the Eastern Balkans, Central Balkans, even modern day Albania. That does correspond to various basal BY3880* clades we see today. Cetina culture was actually directly BB influenced but the funerary ritual (which is very important) was of Glina III, and they were politically aligned with the Yamnaya people. With some BB groups next to them they had no interaction. I think Cetina was just the E-Y37092 clade. So as Raf suggested long ago I agree with Cetina, it's just some of these Eastern Cetina relatives such as Belotic-Bela Crkva etc to which he connected the spread of V13 clades actually were not derived from Cetina but from Schneckenberg culture. Similarity with Cetina was due to GS element in Cetina..
The only culture having something BB and being active in the area was Cetina (but it wasn't BB proper in any way). And the second seems J-L283 dominated culture with whom Cetina had almost no contacts. I just don't see BB's carrying basal BY3880 lineages around Central/Eastern Balkans. I have somewhere a map of Glina III incursions (can't find it atm), and does mimic the basal BY3880 (not these younger clades such as Z5018 or CTS9320) spread.
Hopefully there will be aDNA results from there too, but again Romanians lag not only in testing people but in aDNA too, though there are many hundreds or thousands of samples from that timeframe.
Yes 'хубав/убав' is a word in Bulgarian/Macedonian that entered during the last thousand years most probably.
In the Bulgarian Wiktionary I see that it's assumed that the word entered in the middle ages from the Cuman 'ghub' with the same meaning. In that regard it's for sure not from the Mongols who didn't even had an influence and contacts with the Bulgarians but from the Cumans who indeed played major part in the Second Vlach-Bulgarian Empire. Most probably this Huban was himself mostly of Cuman extraction. So my opinion is that this is not a Bulgar word because it's a late loan but rather Cuman one.
Up to the end of the 12th century and the beginning of the 13th the Cumans lived in what is now Wallachia and the land was known as Cumania. That pretty much is clear from historical sources. It seems that the onslaught by the Mongols deserted much of the land and the Cumans migrated mostly in Bulgaria and Hungary. It seems also that the Cumans heavily settled in the Shop region where we find concentration of Cuman derived toponyms such as Kumanovo. This might have led proto-Romanians that lived in the Shop region up to that point and who acted as a border between the Serbs and the Bulgarians to start migrating into Wallachia and other parts of today Romania and Moldova. Probably these proto-Romanians were part of a larger chain that stretched from Danube on the border between Bulgaria, Serbia and Romania all the way down to Macedonia and Thessaly therefore that might explain why the Romanian is closer to the Meglenitic Vlach and not the Aromanian who was not part of this chain but likely was isolated in the mountains of South Albania and Epirus or what was known as Upper Vlachia in the historical sources.
About Martinka it is an ancient tradition that dates to pre-Slavic Balkan as per the most investigators and ethnographers. The relation to the Bulgars is just a modern ethno-romantism who tends to prescribe everything to only one element just because they carry the name of that particular element.
By the way Meglenitic Vlach is not closer to Romanian. It is actually closer both in grammar and lexicon to Aromanian than Romanian. But the Romanian it's closer to Meglenitic than it is to Aromanian. This was spot on by Weigand but also Theodor Capidan who wrote a lot about Meglenitic and Aromanian. The big difference is that Aromanian was more isolated from Slavic speakers and had more influence from Greek and Albanian while Romanian and Meglenitic had more Slavic influence. In that regard it looks like the proto-Romanians who lived in Shop were actually the border between the Bulgarians and the Serbs. Most of the Meglenitic speakers were probably living in Macedonia even before the Slavic migrations. All three groups proto-Romanians, Meglenites and Aromanians probably lived close to the main Roman roads such as the western halfs of Via Militaris and Via Egnatia plus the connection between these two roads along the Morava-Vardar rivers and acted as border men and guards. That the military and the guards were mostly Latin speakers and under Latin administration is a well known fact so my opinion is that this have something to do with Justinian's efforts with strengthening of the defensive lines and the rise of the Coman culture which many historians think it was a culture of Latin speakers. That probably goes hand in hand with great many Latin derived toponyms in Albania and North Macedonia. Plus we have the famous 'Torna torna Fratre' deep in the Balkans that only confirmes that Latin speakers did live south of the Jirecek line.
Therefore the Slavic influence is not a surprise among the Meglen Vlachs and the proto-Romanians because the most affected territories by the Bulgarian expansion were the territories exactly where they lived. On the other hand the Aromanians who lived more isolated in Epirus were less affected and some of their recorded names were typically Latin derived such as the name of a Vlach by the name Constantine Aurelian who was accused of raping a Greek girl and attacking her father in the region of Naupaktos, an account dated to 1221 by John Apokaukos, metropolitan of Naupaktos.
As for basal E-BY3880 clades you might be right and the only way to know this is aDNA from Glina III Schneckenberg. However about Cetina I am sure that I read somewhere that they practiced Cremation as well especially a Cremation cist burial under Tumulus. From the same source I've read that the Dorians who practiced the same Cremation cist burial was inherited directly from Cetina. Plus there are some others elements that point to that direction such as the use of Illyrian spears etc. There is still no official confirmation but I think that Eurogenes/Davidski mentioned on Anthrogenica that in a paper yet to come about the ancient Greeks, there is one Z2103 Mycenaean and other L51 which is the major Bell Beaker line. If these rumors are true than there is also major influence in ancient Greeks that is Bell Beaker in origin and that probably arrived from Cetina culture direction. That was visible even with the existing Mycenaean samples as the youngest of them I9033 dated to 1416-1280 BCE and unlike the other samples unearthed in western Pelloponnese plots northern than the other Mycenaeans in the direction of MBA Croatia. So let's see what the future papers bring.
Although I agree that E-V13 might have steamed from Neolithic Croatia. In my first post you can see that there was a major Vucedol influence south of the Balaton lake under which influence the later Encrusted Pottery Culture evolved and which also developed on the base of Kisapostag culture which was a BB culture. So even though it steamed from the Vucedol culture it's later subclades were probably dispersed from the direction of the Carpathian Basin with some even migrating to the Steppe.
Anyways to not kidnap your thread it was enough speculation from me.

Aspar
28-07-20, 16:48
Also it's interesting what you describe as Bulgarian-like toponymy in the region around Montenegro. Unlike the Greeks the literacy of the medieval Slavic people was on much lower level so we don't have accounts about many such migrations that might given birth to such toponymy.
As a lineage that might have migrated from Bulgarian speaking area to Montenegro i have one in mind: E-BY5430 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-BY5430). Probably there are more such examples.

It's also interesting that the Serbs have such a low diversity in many lineages. I've read somewhere that during the attacks of the Bulgarians from the First Bulgarian Empire great many Serbs were taken captives and transferred in Bulgaria thus the land of Serbia was greatly deserted. After the collapse of the First Bulgarian Empire and the failed uprisings such as the one of Petar Delyan, probably many Bulgarians and Vlachs did migrated to Serbia and Montenegro under pressure from the Byzantnes thus mixing with the original Serbs there. I always believed that the original Serbs were much like the Croats and Bosnians of today however the mixing with the Bulgarians and Vlachs who migrated there plus mixing with the Torlakian people after the expansion of the Serbian state east of the Morava river made them more Bulgarian-like.

Aspurg
28-07-20, 21:02
@ Aspar

Thanks for that input, I didn't notice this Cuman claim. And it seems quite legit as it refers to Codex Cumanicus. And it seems closer to Bulgarian than Mongol form. Slavicist Wilhelm Tomaschek (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Tomaschek) first made this Mongol connection long time ago. I guess CCum wasn't translated back then. There were many bolyars of Cuman extraction, and alongside this Huban was for ex. certain Chernoglav, this is not the Slavic name that was common, but for example in 1282. the Serbs captured Tatar leader Crna Glava or "black head" so likely direct translation from Karabash. In any case it doesn't look Bulgar as it wasn't attested in Bulgars.

Pechenegs were too more Kipchak than Oghuz from what I've read, especially the Berendei, who were often confused with the Cumans by many authors (though they were different).
EDIT: I found this Cuman "ghob/ghub" in Codex Cumanicus, so indeed it must be from such direction. And also the Mongol ghobay is related to it as they all have the same meaning.

Regarding E-BY5430, ofc for some time it is clear to me their ancestry is from Macedonia. Though they do not quite match this Bulgarian toponym concentration, they are from Pljevlja, according to some claims their ancestor was Sipahi Vojin/his kin, who was ktetor of Holy Trinity monastery in Pljevlja (http://Monastery of the Holy Trinity of Pljevlja) in 1590s. So they seem also like some older family like mine.

On the other hand this particular Bulgarian concentration is on the Southern Peshter area, indeed the very name Pešter is Bulgarian (Serbs use Pećina for cave), some people of my cluster tested are directly from some of these, for example one from Boroštica (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boro%C5%A1tica). Also for example Raždaginja (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C5%BEdaginja), you see instantly linguistic difference of Bulgaro-Macedonian sht/zhd vs Serb Ć/Đ (ch/dj), there is indeed in Bulgaria river and village (https://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%83%D1%89%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0) with such name.
Also to add Bolyare which doesn't need much explanation, these are mostly concentrated around the mountain I mentioned: Žilindar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%BDilindar) which seems surely Kipchak Turkic (https://kk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%96%D1%8B%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80), meaning "snake", one peak of Zhilindar is called "snakes head"/zmijska glava. In 1254. Bulgarian ruler wanted to take the Dalmatia, he had a pact with Dubrovnik and Hum ruler Radoslav (also Nemanjić), and Bulgarian army came to Bijelo Polje, but eventually after short conflict things were back to normal, and Ragusans got what they wanted. Radoslav dissapeared as did the independence of Zachumlia. Serb ruler apparently swore oath of allegiance to Hungarian ruler back then.

I found indication my family were musellems in the early 16th/late 15th century. That was an old Ottoman cavalry order (from the days of Osman), some Christians were recruited, in this instance it should be an indication they were very good with horses (as two traditions of my family claim).

And it seems my own family weren't even vlach by status. Now when you mention greater Balkan influence in Serbs than in Bosnians/Croats, this is indeed due to many factors. One, Vlach migration from the Central Balkans, then some Slavic Y-DNA locals already in 14th century adopted the Vlach status. most descendants of Herzegovina Medieval Vlach katuns have Slavic Y-DNA, however some do have clearly non-Slavic ancestry. Then the Ottomans came, and basically in late 15th century most of Serbs were Vlachs or they were in such status.
Actually most of Serbs from Bosnia and Croatia migrated as Vlach groups with the Ottomans (Serbs from Herzegovina are very old there though). These people had privileges, their leaders were officially sipahis etc. So no wonder especially Bosnian Bosniaks always referred to Serbs as "Vlachs". For Serbs under the Ottomans being of vlach status was advantageous in many ways. Also Nemanjic expansion Eastwards caused mingling with various Shop/Central Balkan groups, largely Serb I-Z17855 became part of Serbian ethnos.
So due to numerous factors Serbs, indeed originally likely similar to Croats became more SE shifted.

Ofc there were those early Bulgarian incursions, per some Serbia was even totally deserted, but also much of this genetic homogeneity in Serbs is for the same reason as in Albanians, tribal culture and domination of stronger tribes over the weaker tribes. Such culture used to be very common in Montenegro, and in Herzegovina little bit earlier. Still much of Serbs trace their ancestry to Herzegovina and Montenegro. Actually Western half of modern Montenegro is Herzegovina. Montenegro was a small core area of Montenegro 300 years ago..


Regarding the Meglen, very interesting, I find them puzzling. So they are closer to Aromanians. I know in the past some have hypothesized they have some Steppe input, as in Moglen both Pechenegs and Cumans settled. There are some Greeks under I-Y125026>Y128714 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y125026/) , they are from Theodorakion (https://mk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%86%D0%B8)village not far from you but I guess they aren't of Moglen ancestry. I-Y125026 occurs in some Serbs, Bulgarians too, so should be Slavic, but there is one Bessenyei from Hungary and also one from anonymous Cumanian sample from Hungary so not sure what's their ancestry, especially as in Todorci though most had Slavic names there were few which looked Turkic. This is a clade likely descended of Daco-Celtic Kotini/Anarti and they expanded largely with Slavs, some likely moved with Cumano-Pechenegs.

Thus far Aromanians seem genetically isolated, even their most common J-L283 clade is still very distant from Albanians.

Yes Shop might have been the starting point for Proto-Romanians, I don't deny some potential earlier presence of some Latin groups in Romanian areas (like Transylvania), but it seems Balkan incomers had great influence.

Regarding Cetina, the did practice cremation combined with inhumation. On the other hand their neighbor culture where J-L283 was found practiced exclusively inhumation, as did their direct descendants such as Glasinac culture. Archaeologists say these two were clearly different populations. Thanks to these inhumation burials of Cetina I believe there is enough material to test these eventually. Now regarding their Tumulus burial, both Cetina and Posušje cultures had it. But it's origin is Glina III, almost identical burials. This sort of burial was totally unknown to the BB's. J-L283 were likely originally Bell Beakeroid derived, and you can see in autosomal profile of EBA/LBA Dalmatians that these people are BB derived not Yamnaya. But cyst Tumulus was imposed by the Yamnaya it seems.

Regarding L51 in Greeks, Dorians could have had the L51 easily, because it was the L51 heavy central European groups who were among the instigators of the LBA collapse. That's no surprise but based on linguistics Greek should be distantly related to Armenian and like Armenians originally Z2103.

Yes I read about those unofficial finds, it will be interesting to see what was the exact context etc. Again Greeks are not so well tested so thus far few of these clades have been identified.