New map of Slavic Y-DNA

Read about the descriptions of the Slavs that came into contact with the Romans/Byzantines. It's not the typical modern Eastern Slav at all but rather similar to the Yugoslavs.

Agreed, the contrast of R1a and I2a shows that South Slavs were probably somewhat different from the Northern ones.

I have read descriptions of the Slavs and I agree that they didn't look like most Eastern Slavs today. I just don't think it's because they mixed with Illyrians. Maybe Dacians, but if they had been so close to them the Romans should have noticed them a bit earlier. If you look at the I2a thread here: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34389-I-CTS10228-Dinaric-subclades-and-distribution, in the last page, you can see that even I2a likley originated somewhere between Ukraine and Belarus. That darker look might have been just how the people of that area were before the Vikings and Baltics expanded there. Or it could have emerged from admixture with different waves of Central Asian invaders.
 
When the invaders brought 70% Y-DNA (in Bosnia) they did also contribute 50% of their autosomal DNA, that's 35% overall autosomal contribution, from men alone, if one assumes that these men were genetically pure or at least close to that. And of course they did brought women with them too.

I agree that South Slavs are very mixed, especially the southern ones, but I believe their Slavic admixture is underestimated. I may be wrong about that though.

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.
 
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.
So Bosnians are 60% Slavic according to you? I am in agreement with that. I am very sure that Croats and Slovenes are chiefly Slavic with a significant native admixture.
 
So Bosnians are 60% Slavic according to you? I am in agreement with that. I am very sure that Croats and Slovenes are chiefly Slavic with a significant native admixture.

Yes, I'd say it's roughly correct. I'm not on my PC right now and don't have access to regional samples, so I used Poles instead of West Ukrainians in these nMonte models. West Ukrainians fit better and add an additonal 2-3% Slavic ancestry, but the difference is small:

Slovenian: 72.5% Polish + 27.5% Albanian Fit: 0.702
Croatian: 70.83% Polish + 29.17% Albanian Fit: 0.52
Bosnian: 59.17% Polish + 40.83% Albanian Fit: 0.7791
Serbian: 40% Polish + 60% Albanian Fit: 0.8004

Not a very sophisticated model, but the fits are pretty good.
 
I didn't mention Montenegrins. I am not sure how reliable 23andMe's Ancestry Composition is, but Croats, Bosniaks and Serbs have between 60 and 80% of Balkans admixture + a few percents of 'French & German' (mostly Celtic), 'Northwest European' (mostly Germanic) and 'Broadly South European'. I am not exactly sure what that 'Balkans' corresponds to, but probably the blend of Neolithic, Bronze and Iron Age populations that defined the ancient Illyrians, Greeks and Thracians. The South Slavic migration was apparently strongly male-biased and got progressively diluted autosomally along the way so that their genetic impact was much stronger on the Y-DNA side than autosomally.

I doubt that the tall body height of Dinaric people come from the Slavs. It was probably inherited from the ancient population. It could also have arisen from the blend of various complementary alleles for height from both Illyrian and Slavic populations.
You need to explain why Dalmatian Croat males, where I2a1b-CTS10228 peaks at, were 165cm tall in the 1880s, shorter than many other populations(including Albanian Ghegs who stood 171cm in the late 1800s) of that time:

qsTRlRo.png
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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_Slavic_languages#Transitional_South_Slavic_languages It should be noted that in the beginning of 19th century Croatian books had to be translated to Sebian and vice versa.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.

Slavic_Europe.png


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.

23andMe_East_European.png

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.
 
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".
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
 

This thread has been viewed 147473 times.

Back
Top