Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 293

Thread: New map of Slavic Y-DNA

  1. #226
    Elite member Tomenable's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poznan
    Posts
    4,660

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    The best fits I could obtain for Bosnians for example would always be around 60% West Ukrainian & 40% Albanian. In groups like Bosnian Croats the Y-DNA could be up to around 90% Slavic in orign. Russians & Belarusians as Slavic source give a very bad fit, while Poles also fit very well.
    AFAIk Ukrainians from the western part of the country aren't very light-pigmentend, so that could explain the ancient descriptions.
    Western Ukrainians are not a good proxy for Proto-Slavs at all. Kiev culture was Proto-Slavic, and it occupied Northern and Eastern Ukraine as well as West-Central Russia and Southern Belarus. On GEDmatch "Ukrainian_Belgorod" (from Sloboda Ukraine) is probably the best modern proxy for Proto-Slavs.

    But you also need to remember, that Slavs expanded into the Balkans from two directions - one group came from the east via Moldova, Romania and Bulgaria, another group came from the north, from what is now Slovakia and Moravia. That group which came from the north could be similar to modern West Slavs. That group included ancestors of Croats for sure (they came from the so called White Croatia), probably also a significant portion of ancestors of Slovenes, Bosniaks and Serbs.

  2. #227
    Elite member Tomenable's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poznan
    Posts
    4,660

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    Russians & Belarusians as Slavic source give a very bad fit.
    West-Central Russians and Southern Belarusians should be good fits. Try using Ukrainians_Belgorod as well - but they are probably a good proxy especially for Slavic ancestors of today's Bulgarians and Northern Macedonians.

    Anyway I suppose that soon we will have a couple of good Slavic ancient DNA samples from the Migration Period and/or Late Iron Age.

  3. #228
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    West-Central Russians and Southern Belarusians should be good fits. Try using Ukrainians_Belgorod as well - but they are probably a good proxy especially for Slavic ancestors of today's Bulgarians and Northern Macedonians.

    Anyway I suppose that soon we will have a couple of good Slavic ancient DNA samples from the Migration Period and/or Late Iron Age.
    Keep in mind that the Slavic linguistic split should be East Slavic separating from common Slavic first, with Late Common Slavic later splitting into South & West Slavic. There are Slovakian dialects that have both West Slavic and South Slavic features, thus providing a common link.

    I don't believe that the Serbo-Croats arrived separately on the Balkans. Bosnians/Croats/Serbs must have been one population when they came from the north. There was however an ancient West Slavic population already in Pannonia, whose language survives as substratum in the Kajkavian dialects of Croatia.

    I agree that the Proto-Slavs could have been genetically differentiated from the Slavs who ultimately arrived in the Balkans.

  4. #229
    Enfant Terrible Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    480


    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    I don't believe that the Serbo-Croats arrived separately on the Balkans. Bosnians/Croats/Serbs must have been one population when they came from the north. There was however an ancient West Slavic population already in Pannonia, whose language survives as substratum in the Kajkavian dialects of Croatia.
    Slovenian is south Slavic language too. The main division exists between Eastern and Western group. Eastern Serbian dialects are transitional. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_...avic_languages It should be noted that in the beginning of 19th century Croatian books had to be translated to Sebian and vice versa.
    Neopisivo

  5. #230
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    668


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    Keep in mind that the Slavic linguistic split should be East Slavic separating from common Slavic first, with Late Common Slavic later splitting into South & West Slavic. There are Slovakian dialects that have both West Slavic and South Slavic features, thus providing a common link.

    I don't believe that the Serbo-Croats arrived separately on the Balkans. Bosnians/Croats/Serbs must have been one population when they came from the north. There was however an ancient West Slavic population already in Pannonia, whose language survives as substratum in the Kajkavian dialects of Croatia.

    I agree that the Proto-Slavs could have been genetically differentiated from the Slavs who ultimately arrived in the Balkans.
    Written documents do not say that Serbs and Croats have come together to Roman Dalmata, for this reason the only population that comes it should be Croatian population. They come and from different places, so probably they originally talked different slavic languages.

  6. #231
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22 View Post
    Written documents do not say that Serbs and Croats have come together to Roman Dalmata, for this reason the only population that comes it should be Croatian population. They come and from different places, so probably they originally talked different slavic languages.
    That's possible, but it necessarily means that either Croats or Serbs are nowadays extinct at least in the linguistic sense.

  7. #232
    Regular Member Joey37's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-06-18
    Location
    Coventry, Rhode Island
    Posts
    460

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a-YP445
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c2b

    Ethnic group
    Celto-Germanic
    Country: USA - Rhode Island



    Yes, today Standard Croatian and Standard Serbian are very similar. They're really only separated by religion and alphabets, the Serbs and Croats today. There are divergent Croatian dialects but they weren't standardized. Probably those were the original Croatian dialects while the other was subjected to Serbian influence from their colonies on the Hapsburg Military Frontier.

  8. #233
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    I made this map by adding paternal lineages associated with the diffusion Slavic peoples from the Iron Age onwards. These include Y-DNA haplogroups I2a1b-CTS10228, R1a-CTS1211, R1a-Z92 and some branches R1a-M458.

    The Slavic Y-DNA in Italy, southern France and northern Spain came with the Goths, who had assimilated a lot of (Proto-)Slavic people in Poland and Ukraine before moving into the Roman Empire. Interestingly these Slavs appear to have been almost exclusively R1a-CTS1211 (Y2902 and Y3301 clades), in sharp contrast to the later South Slavs who settled in the Dinaric Alps and Balkans and possessed high percentages of I2a1b-CTS10228 (in addition to R1a-CTS1211).

    Some deep clades of E-V13, G2a, J2b2a and R1b-Z2103 may also be of Slavic origin, but as they have not yet been identified and no regional data is available, these were not been included. They might account for an extra 5 to 10% of Y-chomosomal lineages in Slavic countries. Within core Slavic countries like Western Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Poland, the remainder of the Y-DNA is mostly Uralic, Germanic, Iranian (Scythian) with also some Celtic in Poland, Czechia and Slovakia.



    This map hints that Slavic migrations could have reached deep into the Byzantine Empire, across Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia, and not just in Southeast Europe. However I think that it may be in part to later redistribution of population within the Byzantine and Ottoman Empires. People move, intermarry, and genes flow, especially within a same country. 1500 years is a long time and such drift may be responsible for Slavic Y-DNA in places like northern Mesopotamia. However it is undeniable that there is Slavic autosomal DNA in Turkey itself - more even than in Greece or Albania according to 23andMe's Ancestry Composition.

    Y-DNA frequencies do not always correspond to genome-wide ancestry. That is especially true for South Slavs, most of all in the Dinaric Alps, where according to 23andMe East European ancestry (more broadly Balto-Slavic) is generally only 10 to 20%, a far cry from the 72% of Slavic Y-DNA among Bosniaks.

    I think I2a1b-CTS10228 was brought by Germanic people, in Slavic lands, not Vikings, but Goths and other Eastern Germanic speakers.
    Just found out that Dacia/Romania was called Gothia for around 200 years, around the year 400.
    There are lots of historical writings attesting this fact.
    So it seems Dacians and Goths were actually closed people.
    As for the "migration" of Goths from South Scandinavia, that seems only a legend, is not possible to shift your language from Old Norse to a East Germanic language.
    Is not possible that the Goths just vanished, neither is possible that Dacians vanished and their place was taken somehow by Slavs.
    It is attested that where are living now South Slavs were living South Dacians and later, Goths have came and lived together with Dacians into Dacia/Romania and actual South Slavic lands.
    Only later, Slavs came and some people got Slavic language.
    The "mystery" of I2A1B-CTS10228 could be solved in a very easy mode, if the populations that have this HG at high percentages would also have made autosomal and mt-dna testing.

    A simple proof that I2A1B could not be only Slavic is the fact that in Bosnia as Maciamo also writes, the Eastern European admixture is less that 20% while I2A1A-CTS10228 is over 50%.
    How would be that possible?

    Telling that Austrians are actually more Slavic that Germans does not make too much sense, history does not tell anything about a Slavic migration into Austria.
    As for Hungary, history tells some Gothic tribes were settled into Panonia .
    I suppose that East Germanics, Slavs and Baltic people lived one near another so paternal lines overlapped and autosomal genetics was closed.
    I think it would be very useful to have more in depth analysis to I2A1A-CTS10228 bearers, to see if this is the exact same paternal line, or are more subclades.

  9. #234
    Enfant Terrible Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    480


    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Joey37 View Post
    Yes, today Standard Croatian and Standard Serbian are very similar. They're really only separated by religion and alphabets, the Serbs and Croats today. There are divergent Croatian dialects but they weren't standardized. Probably those were the original Croatian dialects while the other was subjected to Serbian influence from their colonies on the Hapsburg Military Frontier.
    Croats have used all three dialects as a mother tongue since medieval times. Practically all written literary tradition in all three dialects before 19th century was Croatian. So I don't see the reason why we should believe that any of them is not "original".

  10. #235
    Ned Stark the Boromir Fatherland's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-03-17
    Posts
    389

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2b2-L283
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Ethnic group
    Gheg Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    I think I2a1b-CTS10228 was brought by Germanic people, in Slavic lands, not Vikings, but Goths and other Eastern Germanic speakers.
    Just found out that Dacia/Romania was called Gothia for around 200 years, around the year 400.
    There are lots of historical writings attesting this fact.
    So it seems Dacians and Goths were actually closed people.
    As for the "migration" of Goths from South Scandinavia, that seems only a legend, is not possible to shift your language from Old Norse to a East Germanic language.
    Is not possible that the Goths just vanished, neither is possible that Dacians vanished and their place was taken somehow by Slavs.
    It is attested that where are living now South Slavs were living South Dacians and later, Goths have came and lived together with Dacians into Dacia/Romania and actual South Slavic lands.
    Only later, Slavs came and some people got Slavic language.
    The "mystery" of I2A1B-CTS10228 could be solved in a very easy mode, if the populations that have this HG at high percentages would also have made autosomal and mt-dna testing.

    A simple proof that I2A1B could not be only Slavic is the fact that in Bosnia as Maciamo also writes, the Eastern European admixture is less that 20% while I2A1A-CTS10228 is over 50%.
    How would be that possible?

    Telling that Austrians are actually more Slavic that Germans does not make too much sense, history does not tell anything about a Slavic migration into Austria.
    As for Hungary, history tells some Gothic tribes were settled into Panonia .
    I suppose that East Germanics, Slavs and Baltic people lived one near another so paternal lines overlapped and autosomal genetics was closed.
    I think it would be very useful to have more in depth analysis to I2A1A-CTS10228 bearers, to see if this is the exact same paternal line, or are more subclades.
    23andme's admixture features, such as East European admixture is terrible. Admixtures on 23andme only go back for 300 years max, so every Balkanite, even if high Slavic or high Med, gets high Balkan just due to living in the Balkans and mixing with adjacent people.

    So don't base it off any 23andme admixture maps.

    Admixturewise, most South Slavs are perfectly modeled between Polish and Albanian as we see in many Gedmatch results.

  11. #236
    50cal
    Guest


    1 members found this post helpful.
    It seems like the map has been purposefully tailored to look like a Slavic DNA map. In fact, it tells nothing about Slavic genetics or any shared genetic component between them.

    Slavs are mostly a linguistic entity and there's no need to try to make it more than it is.

  12. #237
    Regular Member Dibran's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-09-16
    Posts
    934

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L1029>Y133361
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H11a2b*

    Ethnic group
    Albanian/Gheg/Dibran/Okshtun
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    I think I2a1b-CTS10228 was brought by Germanic people, in Slavic lands, not Vikings, but Goths and other Eastern Germanic speakers.
    Just found out that Dacia/Romania was called Gothia for around 200 years, around the year 400.
    There are lots of historical writings attesting this fact.
    So it seems Dacians and Goths were actually closed people.
    As for the "migration" of Goths from South Scandinavia, that seems only a legend, is not possible to shift your language from Old Norse to a East Germanic language.
    Is not possible that the Goths just vanished, neither is possible that Dacians vanished and their place was taken somehow by Slavs.
    It is attested that where are living now South Slavs were living South Dacians and later, Goths have came and lived together with Dacians into Dacia/Romania and actual South Slavic lands.
    Only later, Slavs came and some people got Slavic language.
    The "mystery" of I2A1B-CTS10228 could be solved in a very easy mode, if the populations that have this HG at high percentages would also have made autosomal and mt-dna testing.

    A simple proof that I2A1B could not be only Slavic is the fact that in Bosnia as Maciamo also writes, the Eastern European admixture is less that 20% while I2A1A-CTS10228 is over 50%.
    How would be that possible?

    Telling that Austrians are actually more Slavic that Germans does not make too much sense, history does not tell anything about a Slavic migration into Austria.
    As for Hungary, history tells some Gothic tribes were settled into Panonia .
    I suppose that East Germanics, Slavs and Baltic people lived one near another so paternal lines overlapped and autosomal genetics was closed.
    I think it would be very useful to have more in depth analysis to I2A1A-CTS10228 bearers, to see if this is the exact same paternal line, or are more subclades.
    Sorry to burst your bubble but CTS10228 is Slavic. The disparity from autosomal to ydna could be explained by the fact that there is VERY LITTLE diversity in CTS10228 found in South Slavs. Suggesting they descend from a few common ancestors. Explaining why they have higher native admixture, but higher slavic YDNA due to the fact that they were successful in producing progeny.

  13. #238
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    668


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    That's possible, but it necessarily means that either Croats or Serbs are nowadays extinct at least in the linguistic sense.
    In Baška tablet one of the first Croatian written documents exist words that are similar to Polish, we talked about it a few years ago on this forum.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ba%C5%A1ka_tablet

  14. #239
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    668


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Joey37 View Post
    Yes, today Standard Croatian and Standard Serbian are very similar. They're really only separated by religion and alphabets, the Serbs and Croats today. There are divergent Croatian dialects but they weren't standardized. Probably those were the original Croatian dialects while the other was subjected to Serbian influence from their colonies on the Hapsburg Military Frontier.
    Interesting information gives
    Evliya Çelebi (Ottoman Turkish: اوليا چلبى‎), was an Ottoman explorer
    who says that Serbs in Belgrade speak differently from Croats and Bosniaks, it is in the 17th century.

  15. #240
    Enfant Terrible Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    480


    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22 View Post
    Interesting information gives who says that Serbs in Belgrade speak differently from Croats and Bosniaks, it is in the 17th century.
    It was most likely a some kind of Torlakian, which is transitional to Bulgarian. Present Serbian standard language, based on the language of Croats and Bosnians, was accepted in Serbia as late as in the middle of 19th century. However, the ekavian accent, which is a feature of Torlakian, was preserved, as well as some features of Balkansprachbund. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkan_Sprachbund

  16. #241
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dibran View Post
    Sorry to burst your bubble but CTS10228 is Slavic. The disparity from autosomal to ydna could be explained by the fact that there is VERY LITTLE diversity in CTS10228 found in South Slavs. Suggesting they descend from a few common ancestors. Explaining why they have higher native admixture, but higher slavic YDNA due to the fact that they were successful in producing progeny.
    You are not bursting my bubble :) .
    I know that highest diversity of I2-CTS10228 is Carpathians from Moldavia.On the actual land of Romania.
    Romanians and South Slavs are actually a lot more Western shifted that Poles.
    And is known that Poles are having plenty of West German admixture and Baltic people admixture.
    But, these Autosomal tests are reducing ethnicities to some not so refined calculus.
    For example, Goths brought in Spain R1A clades.
    If a Slav or a Baltic person was joining the Goths and live with them, for 100 years and his children were speaking Gothic as native language, were they anymore Slavs?
    I think they were also East Germanics as ethnicity.
    I highly doubt ethnicity is given only by maternal language, but by a lot more things.
    A simple question, regarding the Croatians and Bosnians is why they always kept themselves away from Russians if they are so Slavs?
    They speak a language with most of the words of Slavic origin, but is that enough to make them Slavs?

    Ex-Yugos are preferring for migration in our days Germany or Italy, not Poland.
    Why?
    Ex-Yugos also mass-migrated to Austria.
    I think the fact that South Slavs prefer to migrate in Germany and Austria shows quite clear they are actually still East Germanics, as ethnicity even if they speak a South Slavic language.
    They have not been Slavizied enough.

    In the history is told that Italy has a lot of influence from East Germans, while Spain was formed as a state by the Visigoths and Goths.
    There is a clear thing,that Slavs had carried R1A clades and some North Germanics had also R1A - Norse, is also known Baltic speakers had R1A clades.
    As for R1A in the Germanic people, except R1A-Norse seems to have come from assimilated Slavs and Baltic people, assimilated Scythian people etc.

    I do not want to offend anyone, but today Poland is a very rich and peaceful state, which offers a lot more opportunities than Austria or Italy, for example.
    However, you will see no ex-Yugos migrating to Poland instead you will see lots of ex-Yugos migrating to Germany, or going to work there and also, to Austria and Italy.
    Why?
    What is the logic behind the way in which South Slavs are making such a choice?
    Another question, regarding the Romanians, this time, Romanians prefer to migrate most to Italy, 2nd-3rd to Germany and Spain.
    Austria is also very liked by Romanians and UK, US are also on the list.
    As for Russia , not even 1% of Romanians would like to go naturalize there. Poland, quite same.
    Trust me, is not about money, because are Romanians that go to work on low salaries in Germany and take welfare instead of staying in Romania where they would have better conditions.
    Same about Romanians going to Italy.
    People are calling these things with the generic term "cultural differences".
    Now, is not the "cultural differences" part of your ethnicity?
    And if actually "cultural differences" are the more important factor for which someone can live and assimilate in a country, are not cultural differences more important than paternal lines?
    How could I believe that some people living in swamps (the Slavs) came and started to live in the mountains, where are no plains, no swamps, as it is the case with Serbians, Croatians, Bosnians and Montenegrins and Macedonians?
    I noticed a thing, that ex-Yugos have all their big cities near mountains.
    Russians,Ukrainians, Poles do not have big cities near the mountains.
    They actually have a fear of mountains.

  17. #242
    Regular Member Dibran's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-09-16
    Posts
    934

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L1029>Y133361
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H11a2b*

    Ethnic group
    Albanian/Gheg/Dibran/Okshtun
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    You are not bursting my bubble :) .
    I know that highest diversity of I2-CTS10228 is Carpathians from Moldavia.On the actual land of Romania.
    Romanians and South Slavs are actually a lot more Western shifted that Poles.
    And is known that Poles are having plenty of West German admixture and Baltic people admixture.
    But, these Autosomal tests are reducing ethnicities to some not so refined calculus.
    For example, Goths brought in Spain R1A clades.
    If a Slav or a Baltic person was joining the Goths and live with them, for 100 years and his children were speaking Gothic as native language, were they anymore Slavs?
    I think they were also East Germanics as ethnicity.
    I highly doubt ethnicity is given only by maternal language, but by a lot more things.
    A simple question, regarding the Croatians and Bosnians is why they always kept themselves away from Russians if they are so Slavs?
    They speak a language with most of the words of Slavic origin, but is that enough to make them Slavs?

    Ex-Yugos are preferring for migration in our days Germany or Italy, not Poland.
    Why?
    Ex-Yugos also mass-migrated to Austria.
    I think the fact that South Slavs prefer to migrate in Germany and Austria shows quite clear they are actually still East Germanics, as ethnicity even if they speak a South Slavic language.
    They have not been Slavizied enough.

    In the history is told that Italy has a lot of influence from East Germans, while Spain was formed as a state by the Visigoths and Goths.
    There is a clear thing,that Slavs had carried R1A clades and some North Germanics had also R1A - Norse, is also known Baltic speakers had R1A clades.
    As for R1A in the Germanic people, except R1A-Norse seems to have come from assimilated Slavs and Baltic people, assimilated Scythian people etc.

    I do not want to offend anyone, but today Poland is a very rich and peaceful state, which offers a lot more opportunities than Austria or Italy, for example.
    However, you will see no ex-Yugos migrating to Poland instead you will see lots of ex-Yugos migrating to Germany, or going to work there and also, to Austria and Italy.
    Why?
    What is the logic behind the way in which South Slavs are making such a choice?
    Another question, regarding the Romanians, this time, Romanians prefer to migrate most to Italy, 2nd-3rd to Germany and Spain.
    Austria is also very liked by Romanians and UK, US are also on the list.
    As for Russia , not even 1% of Romanians would like to go naturalize there. Poland, quite same.
    Trust me, is not about money, because are Romanians that go to work on low salaries in Germany and take welfare instead of staying in Romania where they would have better conditions.
    Same about Romanians going to Italy.
    People are calling these things with the generic term "cultural differences".
    Now, is not the "cultural differences" part of your ethnicity?
    And if actually "cultural differences" are the more important factor for which someone can live and assimilate in a country, are not cultural differences more important than paternal lines?
    How could I believe that some people living in swamps (the Slavs) came and started to live in the mountains, where are no plains, no swamps, as it is the case with Serbians, Croatians, Bosnians and Montenegrins and Macedonians?
    I noticed a thing, that ex-Yugos have all their big cities near mountains.
    Russians,Ukrainians, Poles do not have big cities near the mountains.
    They actually have a fear of mountains.
    You just tried to associate socio-economic and political entities with Ancestry. That kind of dismantles your entire argument by suggesting South Slavs migrate more to Germany or Italy so they must be Germanic! They keep themselves from Russia they are Germanic!

    What does that even mean? Croatians are more western influenced via culture and way of life over generations. It has nothing to do with Ancestry. No haplgroup is particularly anything really. It is responsible for coding proteins, and makes up a total of 1 percent of your entire genome. It is not relevant for determining ancestry which is constantly fluctuating generation to generation.

    For example. If you're genetically Chinese and are R1a-M458(like a sample of a Han Chinese on Yfull) it doesn't make him a Slav. All it means is that probably(given no ADNA to be sure) that his earliest paternal ancestor 1500 years ago was either a Germanized Slav, or Slav taken as slaves by the Mongols.

    Y-DNA is accurate for predicting migratory patterns. If some clades of say R1a-Z280/M458 are more common and specific to the Balkans, then that clade would be Balkan given the passage of time. However its parent clade would indicate where it migrated from. Context is everything. I2a1b-CTS10228 may not be Slavic. However Slavs are not basal CTS10228. South Slavs are further down stream, younger clades which concord with the Slavic ethnogenesis and migration. For instance the most common clade of CTS10228 in Serbians and Bosnians is only 950 years old. Which means the founder of that line was only living 1000 years ago. You trace migrations the further back you go.

    Most all clades of CTS10228 in the Balkans is not that diverse and far younger. Don't get me wrong. I am of the mind(theoretically speaking) that Z280/M458/CTS10228 was possibly found in Getae/Bastarnae/Proto-Slavs. I believe Proto-Slavs either trace a large part of their ancestry or if not have some relation to Getae and Bastarnae. However, the downstream clades to which most belong are a result of younger founders. The ethnogenesis of the Slavs likely occurred as some combination of the aforementioned elements among other admixtures. Which may be responsible for new founding clades and clusters.

    Technically the earliest ancestor of R1a was in Siberia. but No one calls themselves Siberian. You need to refer to the clade in question to ascertain who the earliest founder was or may have been. Regardless of this, your genetic composition is what determines your ancestry. You wouldn't call a Native American or African American a Viking or Anglo if he had that YDNA would you? Because these are merely social constructs.

    If you speak Slavic and practice Slavic culture and way of life, you are Slavic. Your YDNA is only defined by your earliest ancestor. My line most likely came with any assortment of Sklavenoi, Avars, Bulgars, or Goths. But im neither of those things. That defines the ancestor, not you. Theres also founder effects to take into consideration.

  18. #243
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    Ancestry?
    What is that?
    Is not related to your ancestors?
    Now, we are debating how I2-CTS10228,also known was brought to Romania and actual South Slavic lands.
    There was a Slavic migration around 600AD but not a big migration.
    What I currently think is that actually the Slavs that migrated 600 AD gave the ruling class and kings,because they had this kind of skills and people from South of Danube changed their language after their language of the rulers, but the mass of the people from South of Danube have not changed.
    There was genetic testing made and Bulgarians score to be very close to what genetic material was found in Thracian archeological sites.
    If I remember correctly Bulgarians were closest to the Thracian archeological sites.
    Dacians were not Thracians, were close to Thracians.
    And as said before, saying that Slavs living in the swamps, mass migrated and settled in the mountains from ex-Yugoslavia makes no sense.
    In those times was hard to live in the mountains, you would be needed some very serious skills to live in the mountains.
    In the mountains is not like in the plains, you can make almost no agriculture, you need to raise some animals (sheep are most fit to be raised in the mountains), to make serious provisions for the long winter etc.
    There is no record in history or in archeological sites related to Slavic speakers that they were raising sheep.

    Another animal that you could raise in the mountains, but is harder, are cows.
    For the simple reason that a cow needs a lot to eat and needs more warm during winter, so you be needed to know to make a good stable to not have your cows frozen in the winter.
    Also you would need to gather a large amount of hay during the spring, summer and autumn to have what to give during the winter to the cows to eat.

    In the mountains for example is hard to raise pigs, which could be a survival food for the long and harsh winters of ex-Yugo.
    People living in the swamps, 1300-1400 years ago did not knew how to live and survive in the winter in the mountains of ex-Yugo.
    So, as said before, I do not believe at all that I2-CTS10228 was brought at some Slavs migration from 600 AD.

    Another thing, there is known that Slavs were herding pigs as a survival food for the winter.
    Now, in around 1000-1500 AD in Wallachia and Moldavia most people did not raised pigs.
    They did not like to raise pigs, no idea why.
    They raised sheep. Also, till some hundreds of years ago most Romanians lived in the mountains or near the mountains, not in the plains.
    For the reason they did not liked to live in the plains.

    So if Slavs migrated in mass when they came to Romania and ex-Yugo they somehow radically change their way of life and eating habits and started to like to live in the mountains and not in the swamps. They also stopped to eat a lot of pig meat and switched to eating sheep cheese and sheep meat.
    I prefer to not believe this.

  19. #244
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    19-06-17
    Posts
    2


    Country: Serbia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    There is no record in history or in archeological sites related to Slavic speakers that they were raising sheep.
    So, do you want to say that Slavs first time saw sheep in Bysantine empire? Or that Slavs did not have sheep at all?
    Sheep were domesticated 10 000 years ago, and farmers brought it to Europe 6000, 7000, 8000 years ago. Probability that no Slav had a sheep is less than 0,001%.

    Even if you are right, argumentation that South Slavs are not actually Slavs because sheep farming is too complicated is hilarious.

    Homo sapiens is able to live in deserts, in Himalaya, in Arctic and Yakutia, and it is impossible for a Slav to adjust to mountains?! Most of our mountain regions are rich with valleys, plateaus, arable land, and living there is sustainable. Populations were much smaller 1500 years ago.
    Slavs lived in swamps because good lands and steps were too dangerous, not because they enjoyed it.
    This could be the universal argumentation for everything. Example: NASA fabricated Moon landing. NASA is American, Americans are cowboys, and how could a cowboy possibly learn to build a spacecraft and fly it?
    Not to mention Gagarin and USSR. As a Slav, he couldn't be able to take care of two sheep.
    We live in a rapidly changing world of broadband internet, we are learning new skills every day, how can one seriously say something like that?!

  20. #245
    Regular Member Dibran's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-09-16
    Posts
    934

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L1029>Y133361
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H11a2b*

    Ethnic group
    Albanian/Gheg/Dibran/Okshtun
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    Ancestry?
    What is that?
    Is not related to your ancestors?
    Now, we are debating how I2-CTS10228,also known was brought to Romania and actual South Slavic lands.
    There was a Slavic migration around 600AD but not a big migration.
    What I currently think is that actually the Slavs that migrated 600 AD gave the ruling class and kings,because they had this kind of skills and people from South of Danube changed their language after their language of the rulers, but the mass of the people from South of Danube have not changed.
    There was genetic testing made and Bulgarians score to be very close to what genetic material was found in Thracian archeological sites.
    If I remember correctly Bulgarians were closest to the Thracian archeological sites.
    Dacians were not Thracians, were close to Thracians.
    And as said before, saying that Slavs living in the swamps, mass migrated and settled in the mountains from ex-Yugoslavia makes no sense.
    In those times was hard to live in the mountains, you would be needed some very serious skills to live in the mountains.
    In the mountains is not like in the plains, you can make almost no agriculture, you need to raise some animals (sheep are most fit to be raised in the mountains), to make serious provisions for the long winter etc.
    There is no record in history or in archeological sites related to Slavic speakers that they were raising sheep.

    Another animal that you could raise in the mountains, but is harder, are cows.
    For the simple reason that a cow needs a lot to eat and needs more warm during winter, so you be needed to know to make a good stable to not have your cows frozen in the winter.
    Also you would need to gather a large amount of hay during the spring, summer and autumn to have what to give during the winter to the cows to eat.

    In the mountains for example is hard to raise pigs, which could be a survival food for the long and harsh winters of ex-Yugo.
    People living in the swamps, 1300-1400 years ago did not knew how to live and survive in the winter in the mountains of ex-Yugo.
    So, as said before, I do not believe at all that I2-CTS10228 was brought at some Slavs migration from 600 AD.

    Another thing, there is known that Slavs were herding pigs as a survival food for the winter.
    Now, in around 1000-1500 AD in Wallachia and Moldavia most people did not raised pigs.
    They did not like to raise pigs, no idea why.
    They raised sheep. Also, till some hundreds of years ago most Romanians lived in the mountains or near the mountains, not in the plains.
    For the reason they did not liked to live in the plains.

    So if Slavs migrated in mass when they came to Romania and ex-Yugo they somehow radically change their way of life and eating habits and started to like to live in the mountains and not in the swamps. They also stopped to eat a lot of pig meat and switched to eating sheep cheese and sheep meat.
    I prefer to not believe this.
    I will formulate a more in depth response when I have the time. However, In short, all I will say is, believe it or not, it does not change the truth. Your passionate position on the matter doesn't change the facts. Even if CTS10228 is not Slavic, the clades South Slavs belong IS. There are no basal CTS10228 Slavs in the Balkans. They all belong to young clades DOWNSTREAM CTS10228 that concord with the Slavic Migration. Theres no diversity in South Slavic CTS10228 either. If South Slavs were basal CTS10228 then you could make a point. They are not though: Only a modern Frenchman is basal CTS10228 so far, and only a Greek/European Jew specific cluster is the oldest branch under CTS10228. The rest are young clades. Majority of Serbs and Bosnians are downstream PH908 which is quite young(between 500-1500 years). Even if for arguments sake that CTS10228 descends from Dacians, the clades most belong are not from dacians but their descendant. So it would only be a loose descent rather than direct. Most I2a1b-Din diversity is in Poland, meaning it expanded from there. Hence why I said Getae/Bastarnae are possible hacing occupied those areas . https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/

  21. #246
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    Quote Originally Posted by Dibran View Post
    I will formulate a more in depth response when I have the time. However, In short, all I will say is, believe it or not, it does not change the truth. Your passionate position on the matter doesn't change the facts. Even if CTS10228 is not Slavic, the clades South Slavs belong IS. There are no basal CTS10228 Slavs in the Balkans. They all belong to young clades DOWNSTREAM CTS10228 that concord with the Slavic Migration. Theres no diversity in South Slavic CTS10228 either. If South Slavs were basal CTS10228 then you could make a point. They are not though: Only a modern Frenchman is basal CTS10228 so far, and only a Greek/European Jew specific cluster is the oldest branch under CTS10228. The rest are young clades. Majority of Serbs and Bosnians are downstream PH908 which is quite young(between 500-1500 years). Even if for arguments sake that CTS10228 descends from Dacians, the clades most belong are not from dacians but their descendant. So it would only be a loose descent rather than direct. Most I2a1b-Din diversity is in Poland, meaning it expanded from there. Hence why I said Getae/Bastarnae are possible hacing occupied those areas . https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/
    I do not see anyone from Romania having this I-CTS10228.
    And I know Romania has also up to 40% I2-din in some areas.
    I suppose Romania does not have I-CTS10228 but some other types of I2-din.

  22. #247
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    04-05-18
    Posts
    59


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Dibran View Post
    If you speak Slavic and practice Slavic culture and way of life, you are Slavic. Your YDNA is only defined by your earliest ancestor. My line most likely came with any assortment of Sklavenoi, Avars, Bulgars, or Goths. But im neither of those things. That defines the ancestor, not you. Theres also founder effects to take into consideration.
    Of course. Slavic is not ethnicity, it's linguistical group. At the end, no one can't impose you nationality. It is with what you are born, which language and tradition.

  23. #248
    Regular Member Dibran's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-09-16
    Posts
    934

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L1029>Y133361
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H11a2b*

    Ethnic group
    Albanian/Gheg/Dibran/Okshtun
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    I do not see anyone from Romania having this I-CTS10228.
    And I know Romania has also up to 40% I2-din in some areas.
    I suppose Romania does not have I-CTS10228 but some other types of I2-din.
    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    I do not see anyone from Romania having this I-CTS10228.
    And I know Romania has also up to 40% I2-din in some areas.
    I suppose Romania does not have I-CTS10228 but some other types of I2-din.

    Are you I2a1b-Din? Most of the clades are definitely associated with the Slavic expansion. Some perhaps can be associated in part with Getae or Bastarnae. If you go to Vayda's blog. He has the most up to date information/data as of 02/2018 for I2a1b-Din. Go to this site:http://blog.vayda.pl/en/i2a-dinaric-subclade-y3120-2/

    As far as Romania is concerned, the most common I2 clusters are DinB and DinC. Din C makes up the overwhelming majority of Romanian I2a1b-Din and the branch is only 1650ypb to the most common ancestor. That is for the entirety of the branch. Meaning 45 percent of Romanian I2a1b-Din dates back to 350AD(common ancestor). This most likely can be the result of Vlach expansion. Considering this is the most common I2-Din cluster in the south Balkans. So far all Albanian data on I2a1b-Din seems to fall in Y12341 a sublade of DinC(Z17855) TMRCA 550AD. In the case of this cluster it most likely was assimilated Proto-Slavic tribe that moved with Vlach expansion. Considering its most prominant in Romania.

    The second most common I2a1b type for Romanians which seems to be 15 percent of I2-Din is DinB cluster(Y4460) TMRCA 2200ypb. Common ancestor living 200BC. The most common clade under this cluster for Romanians seems to be Y3118 which also has a TMRCA of 2200ypb. This particular cluster in Romanians may be tied to Dacians, Getae, and Bastarnae(most likely) given the recent ancestor lived 200BC. We can theoretically state that this 15 percent of Romanian I2a1b-Din is possibly Dacian/Bastarn/Getae left overs. This cluster is not very common outside of Central/East European Slavs. Suggesting it didn't spread with Balkan slavs much.

    So 60 percent give or take of Romanian I2a1b-Din is not as common in Balkan Slavs. This represents DinC/B. The rest falls into DinA, 30 percent give or take. Din A is the most common I2a1b-Din in the rest of the Balkans. DinA1 and DinA2 are the majority of Romanian DinA cluster. DinA1 and DinA2 are most prevalent in North/West/East Slavs. DinA3(PH908 and downstream clades) are the most common in the Balkans. Serbs/Bosnians/Croats especially.

    So without DOUBT I2a1b-DinA is expanding with the Slavs. this makes up close 40 percent of Romanian I2a1b. DinB cluster makes up 15-20 percent of Romanian I2a1b-Din. This cluster is not so common. We can theoretically say it could have expanded with Dacians/Getae/Bastarnae. DinC is most common in Romania. However the age of the entire parent clade is only about 1600ypb. This is young. It most likely expanded with Proto-Slavs. Given how uncommon it is outside of Romanians, Bulgarians, Moldovans, Ukrainians Albanians. I assume it was an assimilated Proto-Slav that expanded with Vlachs(given its most common in these countries).

    Obviously context is everything, but only about 15-20 percent of Romanian I2 may not be specifically Slavic. Maybe Proto-Slavic/Balto-Slavic etc.

  24. #249
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    @Dibran
    If it is 350AD is possible to also be Goths.
    200BC is possible to be Dacians expansion.
    Did not knew that most I2-din from Romania is not same with I2-din from South Slavs, I have heard in the past, but forgot it.
    I do not know what paternal HG I got, I will ask my uncle (father of my brother) to take a Y DNA and autosomal test.
    I am living in Romania and getting testing would be quite complicated.
    Thank you very much for providing so detailed info, is quite awesome.
    Now I am wondering if it is possible to have I2-dinA brought between Slavs by Goths expansion.
    Maybe Goths expanded North but not exactly from Romania lands, maybe they have lived somewhere else.
    Later, these Gothic people remained between Slavs and got assimilated. Later Slavs migrated South and brought these assimilated Goths.
    Is so few info about these freaking Goths....

    Romania have not even a small interest to make archeological diggings and try find out which archeological sites from Romania belong to Dacians, which belong to Goths&other East Germanics, which sites belong to Slavs and so on.
    I am sure in the existing archeological sites from Romania you could find bones and you could determine paternal lines of those bones, when is male bones.
    Is not possible that Goths did not left archeological sites in Romania.
    There is no Y DNA testing made between Romanians either.....meh....so weird.

  25. #250
    Regular Member Dibran's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-09-16
    Posts
    934

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L1029>Y133361
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H11a2b*

    Ethnic group
    Albanian/Gheg/Dibran/Okshtun
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    @Dibran
    If it is 350AD is possible to also be Goths.
    200BC is possible to be Dacians expansion.
    Did not knew that most I2-din from Romania is not same with I2-din from South Slavs, I have heard in the past, but forgot it.
    I do not know what paternal HG I got, I will ask my uncle (father of my brother) to take a Y DNA and autosomal test.
    I am living in Romania and getting testing would be quite complicated.
    Thank you very much for providing so detailed info, is quite awesome.
    Now I am wondering if it is possible to have I2-dinA brought between Slavs by Goths expansion.
    Maybe Goths expanded North but not exactly from Romania lands, maybe they have lived somewhere else.
    Later, these Gothic people remained between Slavs and got assimilated. Later Slavs migrated South and brought these assimilated Goths.
    Is so few info about these freaking Goths....

    Romania have not even a small interest to make archeological diggings and try find out which archeological sites from Romania belong to Dacians, which belong to Goths&other East Germanics, which sites belong to Slavs and so on.
    I am sure in the existing archeological sites from Romania you could find bones and you could determine paternal lines of those bones, when is male bones.
    Is not possible that Goths did not left archeological sites in Romania.
    There is no Y DNA testing made between Romanians either.....meh....so weird.
    Goths definitely left a mark. But, I think it would be a hiccup in comparison to other moving groups lol. I could be wrong but I don't think they had long lasting settlements, so realistically there impact should be minimal. Though I imagine it would be more pronounced around Ukraine/Romania.

    Regarding clusters, the most common Balkan cluster of I2a1b-Din is DinA3(PH908). This is only 5 percent in Romanian I2a1b-Din. It reaches its highest percentage in Bosnia(over 40 percent), Croatia(over 30 percent), Serbia(about 30 percent), Montenegro(27 oercent roughly), Macedonia(15 percent), Bulgaria(roughly 10 percent), and Romania(just shy of 5 percent). http://blog.vayda.pl/en/i2a-dinaric-...ubclade-ph908/

    Take a look at this graph illustrating. Most common Slavic I2a1b-Din type is DinA. especially A3(PH908). Which is low in Romania compared to B/C clusters. I was shocked to see most Albanian I2a1b-Din so far was shared with the most common Romanian C cluster. So even if it was assimilated Proto-Slav, it looks like it could have moved with Vlachs through Albania.


Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •