Macedonian Slavs: which people are they genetically closest to?

Macedonians Slavs are genetically closer to:

  • Albanians

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Serbs

    Votes: 4 18.2%
  • Bulgarians

    Votes: 13 59.1%
  • Greeks

    Votes: 1 4.5%
  • Turks

    Votes: 1 4.5%
  • They are not particularly close to a single ethnic group.

    Votes: 3 13.6%
  • Other; namely

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    22

Dianatomia

Regular Member
Messages
400
Reaction score
130
Points
43
Ethnic group
Greek
Who are the Macedonian Slavs and which modern ethnic group are they most related to?
 
There is not Macedonian ethnicity. Macedonia is a geographic term. The slavs in Macedonia are Bulgarians. Greeks have nothing in common with slavs. Geneticaly macedonian slavs are largely slavic I2a+Bulgarian j2a
 
There is not Macedonian ethnicity. Macedonia is a geographic term. The slavs in Macedonia are Bulgarians. Greeks have nothing in common with slavs. Geneticaly macedonian slavs are largely slavic I2a+Bulgarian j2a

wasn't there an ancient macedonian empire that destroyed the persians?
 
Greeks have NOTHING in common with Slavs.......? Are you forgetting the 10-20% I2a and R1a ( each).
 
Greeks have NOTHING in common with Slavs.......? Are you forgetting the 10-20% I2a and R1a ( each).

I2a in Greece is around 9%. R1a is at around 10% in Crete and the islands. It is highly likely that R1a was present in Greece since ancient times.

BTW is the 23% of I2a in the FYR of Macedonia the average of both Macedonian Slavs and Albanians? If so, the precentage of I2a in Macedonian Slavs would be over 30%. Very close to the numbers of Serbia and higher than the numbers of Bulgaria. Although in Bulgaria there are large Roma and Turkish minorities which would mean that the number of I2a in Bulgarians is also around 30%.
 
Is this a licitation? Byzantin writers documented well which tribes settled their empire:

20061009_081553_03_-_Slavs_on_t.jpg


South_Slavic_tribes.png



For Dragovitai (Dregovich), and Milingoi (Milinzi) we have lot of data. Dregoviti, which (amongst other Slavic tribes) settled on the territory of ancient Macedonia even managed to keep their ethnic distinction up to 13th century. You can probably find data for all other tribes.
 
The thread is about macedonian slavs. Slavs have nothing in common with ancient macedonians. History says that at 4th centuary a.d macedonian ethnicity ceased existing. They abandoned their language and become greeks. There was not macedonia until Tito invented it in 1945. So they are Bulgarians.
 
The thread is about macedonian slavs. Slavs have nothing in common with ancient macedonians. History says that at 4th centuary a.d macedonian ethnicity ceased existing. They abandoned their language and become greeks. There was not macedonia until Tito invented it in 1945. So they are Bulgarians.

In the 4th century B.C. not only did the ancient Macedonians adopt Koine Greek, but all other Greek tribes as well. That says nothing about the original tongue of the Macedonians which might very well be a form of Greek. At least, there is no linguistic literary evidence which points to the opposite. But as you made your point, even it was something different than Greek, it is rather irrelevant.

There was a Macedonia prior to 1945, but only in a geographical context. I.e. the Ottoman region of Macedonia (which is not the same as the original kingdom of Ancient Macedonia). There were even some elites who identified themselves as Macedonians in the late 19th century, but only in the Bulgarian Macedonian context and definitely not in an Ancient context. That was adopted much later.
 
For Dragovitai (Dregovich), and Milingoi (Milinzi) we have lot of data. Dregoviti, which (amongst other Slavic tribes) settled on the territory of ancient Macedonia even managed to keep their ethnic distinction up to 13th century. You can probably find data for all other tribes.

Maps are always misleading.
The extent of the spread of the Slavic tribes says little about the genetic impact on the modern counterparts of that region.
In the places they settled they could have been vastly outnumbered, retreated, or deported in some period of time. By the same analogy you could create a map of the spread of Turkish settlers in the Balkans and claim that the people in the Balkans are Turks, while in reality there were some scattered Turkish settlers in the Balkans which at some time may have been absorbed and deported.
 
The thread is about macedonian slavs.
Exactly.....

Slavs have nothing in common with ancient macedonians.
so why would you mention different Macedonians now?

History says that at 4th centuary a.d macedonian ethnicity ceased existing. They abandoned their language and become greeks.
The was no Greece in 4th century. Abandoning one's language doesn't change ethnicity. Either they're extinct or assimilated into another people.

There was not macedonia until Tito invented it in 1945.
If we're talking about FYR, yes, there was. Rulers were from the House of Mrnjavcevic, noblemen from the court of Helen of Anjou.

So they are Bulgarians.
They never considered themselves as Bulgarians, neither Bulgarians thought they were. There are even parts of Bulgaria, that don't consider themselves as bulgarians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarisation
 
Maps are always misleading.
The extent of the spread of the Slavic tribes says little about the genetic impact on the modern counterparts of that region.
In the places they settled they could have been vastly outnumbered, retreated, or deported in some period of time. By the same analogy you could create a map of the spread of Turkish settlers in the Balkans and claim that the people in the Balkans are Turks, while in reality there were some scattered Turkish settlers in the Balkans which at some time may have been absorbed and deported.

Those are percentages and rate of survival you're talking about. That's level 2. We're still on level 1. trying to identify the Slavic tribes that arrived in Macedonia.
 
ancient macedonians are macedonians, they disappeared from the planet once the Romans took control. Their are some still there but most where dispersed. The Romans targeted them from 202BC to 168BC ( when they where destroyed)
They suffered the same fate as the Carthaginians because they where always allied to Hannibal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Pydna
 
ancient macedonians are macedonians, they disappeared from the planet once the Romans took control. Their are some still there but most where dispersed. The Romans targeted them from 202BC to 168BC ( when they where destroyed)
They suffered the same fate as the Carthaginians because they where always allied to Hannibal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Pydna

When talking about Macedonian Slavs, it would be historically more accurate to debate what happened to the Paionians, Illyrians and Thracians in the region of FYR of Macedonia.

As you point out, after the Hellenistic period little had remained from the Ancient Macedonians as a unique distinct (sub-)group. And this does not only hold true for the Macedonians. Let's not forget that the architects of Hellenization and the standardization of Greek language and culture were the Macedonians themselves.
 
They never considered themselves as Bulgarians, neither Bulgarians thought they were. There are even parts of Bulgaria, that don't consider themselves as bulgarians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarisation

The ethnic identity of Slavs in Macedonia in the early 19th century was very vague. Certainly the church and language played an important role in peoples identity. It is only through many coincidental political events that Macedonian Slavs were to see themselves as a distinct people in the 20th century. The Ottomans and Greeks did not distinguish them from Bulgarians. In that respect they could easily have evolved as a regional distinct subgroup of Bulgaria. The arguments that they could be considered Bulgarians would at least as convincing than they are not.

That said, if now they want to self-determine themselves as distinct from Bulgarians, I have no objections to it.
 
Exactly.....


so why would you mention different Macedonians now?


The was no Greece in 4th century. Abandoning one's language doesn't change ethnicity. Either they're extinct or assimilated into another people.


If we're talking about FYR, yes, there was. Rulers were from the House of Mrnjavcevic, noblemen from the court of Helen of Anjou.


They never considered themselves as Bulgarians, neither Bulgarians thought they were. There are even parts of Bulgaria, that don't consider themselves as bulgarians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarisation

I should have siad Ancient Macdonians became Hellens. You are right, there is difference between modern greek and hellen. Modern Greeks comprise of Hellens, Slavs,Albanians, Turks, Vlahs, Gypsies, Thracians and who knows what.
They adopted hellenistic education and culture and over time became culturally the same with Hellens. Records show that after 4 centuary a,d they no longer spoke Macedonian language. Greek historian noted that Macedonian and hellenistic languages were not of the same family. Todays Macedonian language is a dialect of bullgarian and there is the opposition party that promote bulgarian ethnicity in Macedonia. Macedonians score 85% of the time genetic similiarity with Bulgarian. So they really are Bulgarians who live in the geographic territory of Macedonia. There is also a greek Macedonia.
 
After the Balkan war Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia divided territory of Macedonia among themselves. Boundaries were drawn logically. Every member got it's own, pretty much right. Todays Macedonia or FYR Macedonia is just Serbian part of that territory. The Slavic tribes inhabiting that territory are not related to Bulgarians in any way. They are also not related to ancient Macedonians, and there is no distinctive Macedonian ethnicity.


Genetic similarity with Bulgarians is made through the part of the population that was neither Bulgarian nor Slavic. Drawing conclusions from there is not wise.




PartitionofMacedonia1913.jpg
 
So, it seems to me that Albanians (correct me if I am wrong), Greeks and Bulgarians see Macedonian Slavs as former Bulgarians, but Serbs do not. While none of them consider them to be related to Ancient Macedonians.

Coincidentally, it was the Serbs in the previous century who claimed Macedonian Slavs where not Bulgarians.
 
There may have been some other R1a/I2a (or Slavic) tribes inhabiting Macedonia before these Slavic Macedonians arrived in 6th century...
 
I should have siad Ancient Macdonians became Hellens. You are right, there is difference between modern greek and hellen. Modern Greeks comprise of Hellens, Slavs,Albanians, Turks, Vlahs, Gypsies, Thracians and who knows what.
They adopted hellenistic education and culture and over time became culturally the same with Hellens. Records show that after 4 centuary a,d they no longer spoke Macedonian language. Greek historian noted that Macedonian and hellenistic languages were not of the same family. Todays Macedonian language is a dialect of bullgarian and there is the opposition party that promote bulgarian ethnicity in Macedonia. Macedonians score 85% of the time genetic similiarity with Bulgarian. So they really are Bulgarians who live in the geographic territory of Macedonia. There is also a greek Macedonia.

do they what to remain independent or become part of bulgaria?
 

This thread has been viewed 21649 times.

Back
Top