Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum

View Poll Results: Main Y-haplogroups on the territory of Dacia 2000-3000 years ago?

Voters
29. You may not vote on this poll
  • C

    0 0%
  • E

    11 37.93%
  • G2

    10 34.48%
  • H2

    1 3.45%
  • I1

    1 3.45%
  • I2

    10 34.48%
  • J2

    10 34.48%
  • Q

    1 3.45%
  • R1a

    9 31.03%
  • R1b

    15 51.72%
  • T

    1 3.45%
  • Other. Specify what you think.

    0 0%
  • Similar to the current proportion in the area.

    0 0%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 49

Thread: Main Y-haplogroups on the territory of Dacia 2000-3000 years ago.

  1. #1
    Spammer Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class

    Join Date
    22-07-18
    Posts
    377
    Points
    2,436
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,436, Level: 13
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 14
    Overall activity: 12.0%


    Country: Romania



    Question Main Y-haplogroups on the territory of Dacia 2000-3000 years ago.

    What could have been the main Y-haplogroups on the territory of Dacia, 2000-3000 years ago?
    (you can choose more than one)


    Dacia included areas between the Tisa and the Middle Danube. The Carpathian Mountains are located in the middle of Dacia. It thus corresponds to the present-day countries of Romania and Moldova, as well as smaller parts of Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and Ukraine.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by gidai; 05-01-19 at 16:51.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    04-03-18
    Posts
    246
    Points
    2,215
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,215, Level: 13
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 235
    Overall activity: 9.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-Z17107>A24048
    MtDNA haplogroup
    I1a1a

    Ethnic group
    Qun, Ermi
    Country: Bosnia & Herzegovina



    1 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    First, Germanic and Slavic haplogroups/clades must be eliminated from the equation. I-Y3120 is Slavic and is not Dacian, it arrived with Bastarnae from Western Europe and all bar A2512 who likely descend from Bastarnae expedition in 2nd century BC, seem Slavic.

    I-Y3120 is the single most common hg among Romanians, and I see they have been vocal about ludicrous notion of this hg being Dacian. However heavy Slavic influence is in agreement with onomastical and other evidence which indicates that there is no such thing as Vulgar-Latin/Romanian speaking population north of Danube prior to Vlach migrations of 12th-13th centuries, I do leave option for some groups being present prior to that but Daco-Romanian continuity is impossible to defend, it is ludicrous to think latinophone Romanian nation formed during the short Roman occupation of (part of) Dacia. Already it is clear nearly half of Basarabi surname carriers are recent Medieval migrants from the South. And such tendencies are easily observed in some other haplotypes as well.

    I guess that is the real reason why Romanians don't get tested, at ftdna i know little over 100 Romanians, and most of the info has to be taken from studies, whose sample is for ethnic Romanians over 500 with different regions.

    So Slavs, Germanics, recent Vlach migrants from the South and others have to go out of equation.
    However there are those haplogroups or more precisely subclades that seem clearly present in Dacia in antiquity.

    I see you aren't tested like most of these partisan internet warriors gidai. :) Get tested before fantasizing about Dacians or anybody else. However Vlachs who arrived from the South seem pred. of Thracian ancestry so they have some distant relation to Dacians themselves.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    04-03-18
    Posts
    246
    Points
    2,215
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,215, Level: 13
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 235
    Overall activity: 9.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-Z17107>A24048
    MtDNA haplogroup
    I1a1a

    Ethnic group
    Qun, Ermi
    Country: Bosnia & Herzegovina



    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    So for example in Brasov you've got 4 tested J2a-L84 who match with a Macedonian/Bulgarian from Struga, so likely Medieval arrivals with Vlachs. In Cluj and Bihar there are 2 J2a haplotypes RU272 and H46, they don't seem to have any close matches, but they are very likely J-L264, so I guess they should be of Dacian ancestry considering their location, and probably they are some local element since the Neolithic times considering the age and spread of L264.

  4. #4
    Spammer Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class

    Join Date
    22-07-18
    Posts
    377
    Points
    2,436
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,436, Level: 13
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 14
    Overall activity: 12.0%


    Country: Romania



    ....................

  5. #5
    Spammer Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class

    Join Date
    22-07-18
    Posts
    377
    Points
    2,436
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,436, Level: 13
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 14
    Overall activity: 12.0%


    Country: Romania



    Quote Originally Posted by Aspurg View Post
    First, Germanic and Slavic haplogroups/clades must be eliminated from the equation. I-Y3120 is Slavic and is not Dacian, it arrived with Bastarnae from Western Europe and all bar A2512 who likely descend from Bastarnae expedition in 2nd century BC, seem Slavic.

    I-Y3120 is the single most common hg among Romanians, and I see they have been vocal about ludicrous notion of this hg being Dacian. However heavy Slavic influence is in agreement with onomastical and other evidence which indicates that there is no such thing as Vulgar-Latin/Romanian speaking population north of Danube prior to Vlach migrations of 12th-13th centuries, I do leave option for some groups being present prior to that but Daco-Romanian continuity is impossible to defend, it is ludicrous to think latinophone Romanian nation formed during the short Roman occupation of (part of) Dacia. Already it is clear nearly half of Basarabi surname carriers are recent Medieval migrants from the South. And such tendencies are easily observed in some other haplotypes as well.

    I guess that is the real reason why Romanians don't get tested, at ftdna i know little over 100 Romanians, and most of the info has to be taken from studies, whose sample is for ethnic Romanians over 500 with different regions.

    So Slavs, Germanics, recent Vlach migrants from the South and others have to go out of equation.
    However there are those haplogroups or more precisely subclades that seem clearly present in Dacia in antiquity.

    I see you aren't tested like most of these partisan internet warriors gidai. :) Get tested before fantasizing about Dacians or anybody else. However Vlachs who arrived from the South seem pred. of Thracian ancestry so they have some distant relation to Dacians themselves.
    Aspurg,
    Are you upset? I think not... It's a poll as you see. About what you speak? If you think it could be another haplogrup, say about which. Thank you!

  6. #6
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    04-03-18
    Posts
    246
    Points
    2,215
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,215, Level: 13
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 235
    Overall activity: 9.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-Z17107>A24048
    MtDNA haplogroup
    I1a1a

    Ethnic group
    Qun, Ermi
    Country: Bosnia & Herzegovina



    0 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by gidai View Post
    Aspurg,
    Are you upset? I think not... It's a poll as you see. About what you speak? If you think it could be another haplogrup, say about which. Thank you!
    Well I remember your "dreptul" vlach insulted me once for no reason, so you never know when I might be in mood to return a favor with some brutal facts.

    So, I see you've got H2 in the poll, not sure if there is any H2 in Romania but I've seen a dozen of H1 in scientific studies in ethnic Romanians.

  7. #7
    Spammer Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class

    Join Date
    22-07-18
    Posts
    377
    Points
    2,436
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,436, Level: 13
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 14
    Overall activity: 12.0%


    Country: Romania



    Aspug.... Again!? ................

  8. #8
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    04-03-18
    Posts
    246
    Points
    2,215
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,215, Level: 13
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 235
    Overall activity: 9.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-Z17107>A24048
    MtDNA haplogroup
    I1a1a

    Ethnic group
    Qun, Ermi
    Country: Bosnia & Herzegovina



    Quote Originally Posted by gidai View Post
    Aspug.... Again!? ................
    Again what? These studies are available. You can check them out. About your theme, that is very hard to say, as most of the info are low-res studies but you can go from a clade to a clade, if some of these have non-modal values they can be estimated more easily. As I said these J-L84 weren't likely there and J-L264 were. These 9 tested Basarab J-L283>Z631 were most definitely not there 2000 years ago because they match with Albanians, Greeks (of certain Vlach origin) but 5 tested Z631 looking haplotypes from Brasov and Dolj might have been there, hard to say without hi-res tests done.

  9. #9
    Spammer Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class

    Join Date
    22-07-18
    Posts
    377
    Points
    2,436
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,436, Level: 13
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 14
    Overall activity: 12.0%


    Country: Romania



    I ask a moderator if can delete all these disturbing discussions so far. I do not see their point, other than to distract attention from the poll in other direction. .

  10. #10
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-04-18
    Posts
    572


    Country: Romania



    I see you didn't get my message, to be treated like a man,you have to grow up.


    We all know that there are certain risks for greediness,and you have to deal with it;as for brutal,it must be a lot of fun,since you don't know what you're doing.
    Last edited by Dreptul Valah; 06-01-19 at 11:51.

  11. #11
    Spammer Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class

    Join Date
    22-07-18
    Posts
    377
    Points
    2,436
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,436, Level: 13
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 14
    Overall activity: 12.0%


    Country: Romania



    Friends, are you here to vote in ?!
    If you want t-rolling somewhere, please make your thread and download it there.

  12. #12
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-04-18
    Posts
    572


    Country: Romania



    The Getae-Dacians were made from the Basarabi culture.



    "Thus,the 6 tumuli discovered are dated on the Iron Age period.
    Tumulus V had contained a single grave,of a decapitated woman, the others,successive ones...
    All had a rich funeral inventory,iron weapons,iron and bronze adornments(including Glasinac fibulas),indicating the presence of an Illyrian enclave in this area,at the second half of the 7th. BC.



    The ceramics from the graves is typical to this culture, representing the contacts between the Illyrian population with autochtonous Thracian tribes." (Romanian History Encyclopedia).



    The pottery is clearly Thracian-based,Insula Banului and Psenicevo-Babadag types.
    .
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...bi_culture.png

  13. #13
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-04-18
    Posts
    572


    Country: Romania



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Another interesting opinion, the migration didn't take place at that time, and the author probably suggests a common Glasinac -Basarabi source:



    https://books.google.ro/books?id=KRx...asinac&f=false



    In this case,both the Getae-Dacians and Illyrians wound be nothing more than Thracian tribes,at the boarder with the Hallstatt culture.


    It explains the hardest linguistic-cultural link of all the Paleo-Balkanics-the Satem character of the Illyrian language.

  14. #14
    Spammer Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class

    Join Date
    22-07-18
    Posts
    377
    Points
    2,436
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,436, Level: 13
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 14
    Overall activity: 12.0%


    Country: Romania



    I have not found data from the Iron Age. That's why, I have introduced in the poll some haplogroups without subclades that I read were found around the area some 10,000-3,000 years ago. That is all.

    A calm and to the object discussion, without unrelated assumptions, is good.

  15. #15
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-04-18
    Posts
    572


    Country: Romania



    Another thing here,the Babadag-Psenicevo tribes have reached Troy,VIIb2 level...



    https://cdn.cartu.ro/img/prod/240/97...592871-240.jpg



    https://books.google.ro/books?id=vXl...20troy&f=false
    Last edited by Dreptul Valah; 06-01-19 at 20:09.

  16. #16
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-04-18
    Posts
    572


    Country: Romania



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    It seems that woman decapitation also took place in Britain(Somerset), the same period.



    https://www.ancient-origins.net/news...etlands-009487



    Somerset, "Our Darker Angels":



    http://bellbeakerblogger.blogspot.co...ngels.html?m=1





    Thracian noblewomen, buried dismembered:



    http://archaeologyinbulgaria.com/201...ope-mountains/

  17. #17
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-04-18
    Posts
    572


    Country: Romania



    The Maenads have practiced dismemberment, it proves that Dyonisos was Thracian.



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maenad



    Falx and romphaia were probably also used for decapitation:





    https://books.google.ro/books?id=SqB...member&f=false


    We all know what this means:attitude.

  18. #18
    Spammer Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class

    Join Date
    22-07-18
    Posts
    377
    Points
    2,436
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,436, Level: 13
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 14
    Overall activity: 12.0%


    Country: Romania



    Basarabi culture is the local denomination of the Hallstadt culture of the early Dacians? Are there any human remains of the iron age, genetically analyzed from the Basarabi culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basarabi_culture ?
    p.s.
    There are still geographical names that remind us of ancient peoples, such as Hallstatt-Dachstein (Austria) or Galati (Romania). Is like... these are related to the Dacians or Celts - Gauls?

  19. #19
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassVeteran
    JajarBingan's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-05-16
    Posts
    154
    Points
    2,599
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,599, Level: 14
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 151
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-PH908*, DYS561=15
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2a1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Most likely R1b-Z2103 among the royals and warriors initially, but dominated by E-V13, J2a, J2b and traces of G2a among the pre-Dacian locals. Eventually, as time went by the locals became Dacians, so all of these haplogroups began to be typical for Dacia. Then when the formation of the Romanians and our modern language happened through the mixing of Daco-Romans and Slavs, R1a-M458, Z280 and I2-CTS10228 were also introduced. These latter influences expanded from the East, first in Moldova and then to the rest of the territory.

    For those who know Romanian, refer to this starting from page 72.

    Also these passages from the most up-to-date interpretation of the history of Romanians according to the Romanian school: They support the same thing (i.e. Romanians and the Romanian language formed due to a symbiosis of Daco-Romans and Slavs). Now, looking at the non-Balkan Slavs, it becomes quite clear which haplogroups were native to our lands and which ones were introduced.








  20. #20
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassVeteran
    JajarBingan's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-05-16
    Posts
    154
    Points
    2,599
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,599, Level: 14
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 151
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-PH908*, DYS561=15
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2a1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aspurg View Post
    First, Germanic and Slavic haplogroups/clades must be eliminated from the equation. I-Y3120 is Slavic and is not Dacian, it arrived with Bastarnae from Western Europe and all bar A2512 who likely descend from Bastarnae expedition in 2nd century BC, seem Slavic.

    I-Y3120 is the single most common hg among Romanians, and I see they have been vocal about ludicrous notion of this hg being Dacian. However heavy Slavic influence is in agreement with onomastical and other evidence which indicates that there is no such thing as Vulgar-Latin/Romanian speaking population north of Danube prior to Vlach migrations of 12th-13th centuries, I do leave option for some groups being present prior to that but Daco-Romanian continuity is impossible to defend, it is ludicrous to think latinophone Romanian nation formed during the short Roman occupation of (part of) Dacia. Already it is clear nearly half of Basarabi surname carriers are recent Medieval migrants from the South. And such tendencies are easily observed in some other haplotypes as well.

    I guess that is the real reason why Romanians don't get tested, at ftdna i know little over 100 Romanians, and most of the info has to be taken from studies, whose sample is for ethnic Romanians over 500 with different regions.

    So Slavs, Germanics, recent Vlach migrants from the South and others have to go out of equation.
    However there are those haplogroups or more precisely subclades that seem clearly present in Dacia in antiquity.

    I see you aren't tested like most of these partisan internet warriors gidai. :) Get tested before fantasizing about Dacians or anybody else. However Vlachs who arrived from the South seem pred. of Thracian ancestry so they have some distant relation to Dacians themselves.
    Just in case you are trying to bait, I will refrain from being triggered and leaving a wall of text and will instead just say the following. Study the archaeological heritage, because the influences from the Daco-Roman period carried well into the early medieval period through the Santana de Mures-Chernyakhov culture (still Daco-Roman), followed by Ipotesti-Candesti (proto-Romanian, i.e. the coexistence of Vlach and Slavic elements) and finally Dridu (pre-statehood via Wallachia).
    Modern research[edit]

    Today, scholars recognize the Chernyakov zone as representing a cultural interaction of a diversity of peoples, but predominantly those who already existed in the region,[12] whether it be the Sarmatians,[13] or the Getae-Dacians (some authors believe that the Getae-Dacians played the leading role in the creation of the culture).[14] Late Antiquity authors often confused the Getae with the Goths, most notably Jordanes, in his Getica.
    The Ipotesti–Candesti culture (Russian: Ипотешти-кындештская культура) was an archaeological culture in Eastern Europe. It developed in the mid-6th century by the merger of elements of the Prague-Penkovka and Prague-Korchak cultures and local cultures (including Germanic) in the area between Prut and Lower Danube.[1] It stretched in the Lower Danube over territory in Romania and Moldavia.[2] The population of the area was made up of Romanized descendants of Daco-Getic, Germanic and Slavic tribes.[3] There are views that it derived from the Chernyakhov culture and represented a group of the Antes.[2] The houses were identical to the Slavic huts of the Prague-Korchak and Penkovka areas.[4] The sites in Romania are known as Ipotești-Candești-Ciurel[5] (Russian: Ипотешти-Кындешти-Чурел)[6] or Ipotești-Ciurel-Cândești.[7]
    The Balkan–Danubian culture[1][2] was an early medieval archaeological culture which emerged in the region of the Lower Danube in the 8th century and flourished until the 11th century. In Romania it is called Dridu culture,[1][2] while in Bulgaria it is usually referred to as Pliska-Preslav culture.[3] It is better represented on the territory of modern-day Northern Bulgaria although its spread north of the Danube is also well attested due to the continuous extension of the First Bulgarian Empire over the territory of present-day Romania.[4] The Balkan–Danubian culture is described as an early Slavic-Bulgarian culture,[5] but besides Slavic and Bulgar elements it possesses also some Romance components, all of them under a Byzantine influence.[6]
    If you don't care about archaeology, which is a bad start if you are interested in such topics, then, we won't find a lot of data. The first mentions of actual variations of the ethnonym Vlach start only with the 9th century.
    The "silence" about the Vlachs/Romanians prior to that period is due to the fact that Byzantine sources recorded the flow of events, the action so to speak, rather than the static aspect. Do you hear about the Vlachs in the Balkans when they were sedentary? Certainly not, just as with those in the North-Danubian space, chronicles report on them when they start to move, stir trouble and so on.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassVeteran
    JajarBingan's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-05-16
    Posts
    154
    Points
    2,599
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,599, Level: 14
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 151
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-PH908*, DYS561=15
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2a1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aspurg View Post
    Again what? These studies are available. You can check them out. About your theme, that is very hard to say, as most of the info are low-res studies but you can go from a clade to a clade, if some of these have non-modal values they can be estimated more easily. As I said these J-L84 weren't likely there and J-L264 were. These 9 tested Basarab J-L283>Z631 were most definitely not there 2000 years ago because they match with Albanians, Greeks (of certain Vlach origin) but 5 tested Z631 looking haplotypes from Brasov and Dolj might have been there, hard to say without hi-res tests done.
    In my opinion, you fail to consider that the Latinised population of the Balkans was spread all over the territory from North of Greece to the Carpathians. Certainly, that region wasn't densely populated, but they were around there. Then they got assimilated by the Slavs gradually in the South and likewise managed to assimilate the Slavs North of the Danube.
    Naturally, you would expect some of those from the South to be attracted by the notion of a Vlach state and migrate into the territory. Heck, it even happens to this day. Ever heard of Gheorghe Hagi and Simona Halep? Those guys descend from recent Aromanian migrants in Romania.

    And obviously, just to top it all off, I think I'm the only one who actually presented real archaeological data. I'm still waiting to be illuminated on the so-called colossal migration of Vlachs in the medieval period who somehow managed to take over all of these aforementioned cultures on the territories of Wallachia and Moldavia and subjugate them without much effort (certainly such a sudden movement of people would have made for some interesting writings in the chronicles of our neighbours, wouldn't they?). If you are eager on autosomal data from Romania, as I am too, consider that we don't have anything later than the Chalcolithic. And those Scythians from Moldova certainly look like they took a fair share of local Farmer components, as opposed to those further East. What did you expect to demonstrate with this lack of data then? I wouldn't jump the gun so early.

    https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/vi...9382506982&z=6

    So, let's all be civilised. The archaeological data is in favour of the continuation, while the autosomal aspect from ancients was simply not studied past the Chalcolithic yet. Modern Romanians are an almost 50/50 split between Balkan and Eastern European paternal markers and around 60/40 autosomally, when modelled as a combination of Balkans Iron Age and Baltic Iron Age.

    Just to liven up the mood a bit here. Here's the fit of the only medieval Hungarian sample from current Eastern Hungary that we have (1224-1264AD):



    Definitely a poor Vlach from the bottom of Thessaloniki who somehow managed to infiltrate the pure Carpathian space. Honestly you guys should rely less on theories from a period where everyone was pushing for claims on his neighbours' lands and focus on what we have now. And keep an open mind to everything, unless there is data to prove your point. I just don't understand how people can make claims of what is typical and atypical of the Carpathian space when we literally don't have a thing from here past the Chalcolithic (Y-DNA nor aDNA). And the Chalcolithic thing is almost purely farmer, as opposed to heavily filled with EHG as in Ukraine for example. So naturally, you would expect the descendant population to be heavier farmers than steppe pastoralists, unless some kind of Armageddon happened.

    And just for the heck of it, while I have the calculator up and running, here is a fit with the data that we have from Romania (Balkans_CHL:I4089 and Romania HG) plus a sample from the same time period in Southern Balkans (Klei10) and the later Yamnaya from Ukraine, who obviously touched all of the Balkans.



    What a beautifully tight distance, considering the age of the samples. Stop for a second and think. Are Hungarians somehow composed of anything else apart from WHG, Farmer and Steppe components (EHG+CHG) like the majority of Europeans? Certainly not; then why the larger distance? Because they received some of these components via different populations, not fully present on the ancient territory of Romania.
    But hey, this must be a coincidence and certainly a product of Romanian revisionism. "God, I hate Romanians even more now", said everyone who supports the migration theory.
    Last edited by JajarBingan; 07-01-19 at 19:36.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    04-03-18
    Posts
    246
    Points
    2,215
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,215, Level: 13
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 235
    Overall activity: 9.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-Z17107>A24048
    MtDNA haplogroup
    I1a1a

    Ethnic group
    Qun, Ermi
    Country: Bosnia & Herzegovina



    Quote Originally Posted by gidai View Post
    Basarabi culture is the local denomination of the Hallstadt culture of the early Dacians? Are there any human remains of the iron age, genetically analyzed from the Basarabi culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basarabi_culture ?
    p.s.
    There are still geographical names that remind us of ancient peoples, such as Hallstatt-Dachstein (Austria) or Galati (Romania). Is like... these are related to the Dacians or Celts - Gauls?
    No there are no Basarabi proper aDNA results. But Basarabi seems certain to have been heavy with E-V13>CTS9320, which is a very widespread V13 clade whose TMRCA corresponds with Basarabi culture.
    Already one CTS9320* clade occurs in Montana Bulgaria and in Calarasi Romania, not sure where is their "homeland" whatever they correspond well with it.
    Another CTS9320* clade in North Bulgaria, Dolj and Piatra Neamt, looks Basarabi regardless of its base.
    Also a distant haplotype of Z16988 in Moldavia, in addition to Z16988>A11837 having a more Triballian-like basis. Some other Z16988 look to have been shifted more to the West and part of some Hallstat population.
    BY4526 is not well read it seems by FTDNA or YFull, but this SNP actually shows another Basarabi-like link between BY4526>BY4524 in Northwestern Bulgaria and BY4526>S10743 common among Ruthenians (YF15857) who seem certainly descended of some Northern-Dacian tribe, this Montana-Carpathian link seems to date to 800 BC or so.
    Basal Z17107 clades all occur way north of Danube, however I'm not convinced they were Dacian. Because my clade certainly came from the North of Danube with Cumans or even some other similar people (there is some evidence for Berendei too), the other clade has also Cuman surname, and two other clades are found in Russians and Ukrainians have likely links with Central Asia and Caucasus. In fact what my ancestors claimed descend from does lead straight to Gelonians, and that is not likely to be accidental in itself. Basarabi culture had also Cimmerian influence and this clade seems to have been one strongly Cimmerianized because these Geloni per archaeological evidence from Belsk were Cimmerian-like population with various Thracian or Thraco-Illyrian influences not "formerly Greeks" per one Heredootus account. In any case the only things I personally can possibly descend from are some Dacians assimilated by Bolgars or Bolgars of distant Gelonian descent.

    And this possible Illyrian link might be in form of Z631 which has further home in the Western Balkans but it seems it is the most common Romanian J-L283 clade regardless of Basarabi Z631 cluster arriving from the South in 11-13th centuries, some other Z631 might be this Glasinac people who came there. Because Glasinac people 100 % had J-L283 in their ranks.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    04-03-18
    Posts
    246
    Points
    2,215
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,215, Level: 13
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 235
    Overall activity: 9.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-Z17107>A24048
    MtDNA haplogroup
    I1a1a

    Ethnic group
    Qun, Ermi
    Country: Bosnia & Herzegovina



    Quote Originally Posted by JajarBingan View Post
    Most likely R1b-Z2103 among the royals and warriors initially, but dominated by E-V13, J2a, J2b and traces of G2a among the pre-Dacian locals. Eventually, as time went by the locals became Dacians, so all of these haplogroups began to be typical for Dacia.

    Well there are some Dacian looking Z2103 clades. R-Y14300 considering its distant cousin R-Y5586 seems proto-Thracian, but it has some presence to suggest possible link with Sarmatians as well. Also some interesting R-PF7580 Puţureni Romanian and his cousins in Cluj, Dolj from studies. On the other hand R1b BY611>Z2705 from Dolj and Wallachia seem certanly migrants from the south.


    E-V13 and J-L283 are not really pre-Dacian locals. These hg's spread with IE poulations. Now that there are basal E-V13>CTS1273* clades unique to Ossetians and Kurds, that is they show no connection to others..


    I'm used to from Serbian forums etc. to see various "I2 Din guys" dissing E-V13 and J-L283's as ME's (also inspired by frequencies of these among Albanians) and see themselves as real Paleo-Euro "pure whites" etc..


    Not sure who were "elites", but both of these hg's were burying themselves in Tumuli since 2000+ BC, and V13's were also practicing lot of cremation.


    In fact when one looks at expansive power of various clades of Z2103 or V13 at the time of early Iron Age cultures like Basarabi one sees some V13 clades like CTS9320 and L241 clades that are present in Dacia who both have TMRCA of 2900 years. I wouldn't associate J2b-L283 too much with Dacians, except in the form of these Glasinac people who also were subsequently Dacians, and some of these Z631 might be a trace of that. V13 clades on the other hand seem to have been very instrumental in ethnogenesis of Thracians and Daco-Moesians.


    G2a is showing some interesting diversity in Romania and Moldavia, which is logical considering Cucuteni culture.

    Also maybe some R1a Z280 clade is Dacian, but one has to be careful there very much, because most are Slavic ofc.


    Quote Originally Posted by JajarBingan View Post
    In my opinion, you fail to consider that the Latinised population of the Balkans was spread all over the territory from North of Greece to the Carpathians. Certainly, that region wasn't densely populated, but they were around there. Then they got assimilated by the Slavs gradually in the South and likewise managed to assimilate the Slavs North of the Danube.
    Naturally, you would expect some of those from the South to be attracted by the notion of a Vlach state and migrate into the territory. Heck, it even happens to this day. Ever heard of Gheorghe Hagi and Simona Halep? Those guys descend from recent Aromanian migrants in Romania.


    And obviously, just to top it all off, I think I'm the only one who actually presented real archaeological data. I'm still waiting to be illuminated on the so-called colossal migration of Vlachs in the medieval period who somehow managed to take over all of these aforementioned cultures on the territories of Wallachia and Moldavia and subjugate them without much effort (certainly such a sudden movement of people would have made for some interesting writings in the chronicles of our neighbours, wouldn't they?). If you are eager on autosomal data from Romania, as I am too, consider that we don't have anything later than the Chalcolithic. And those Scythians from Moldova certainly look like they took a fair share of local Farmer components, as opposed to those further East. What did you expect to demonstrate with this lack of data then? I wouldn't jump the gun so early.


    https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/vi...9382506982&z=6


    So, let's all be civilised. The archaeological data is in favour of the continuation, while the autosomal aspect from ancients was simply not studied past the Chalcolithic yet. Modern Romanians are an almost 50/50 split between Balkan and Eastern European paternal markers and around 60/40 autosomally, when modelled as a combination of Balkans Iron Age and Baltic Iron Age.

    Well Romanian historians defend Daco-Romanian continuity, Hungarian historians the opposite naturally. However does it sound feasible that all of these Dacians embraced Latin and during the short time of Roman occupation? Romans occupied part of Dacia for 168 years.. Of course there are descendants of Dacians among Romanians but did Romanian language originate in Dacia? More likely is Moesia. This would also explain some similarities with Albanian. Though I know some Romanians explained those via Albanians being Dacian (Carpi etc.).


    Well about this migration, we have now genetics so we can see which hg's might have migrated North or not. At 800-900 you're looking at close matches for such links so even low-res studies might be of help. Initially it didn't look to me that this was very widespread but I see various haplotypes here and there. Are they enough to make up a "critical mass" of "latinisers of Dacia"? Possibly.

    There was a study about Aromanians, generally they don't seem to share lot of genetic links with Romanians looking at haplotypes, there are some links, but more of the links are with Bulgaria. However it seems Romanians have more genetic ties with Bulgaria so I guess modern-day Bulgaria might be instrumental. Because all those Bulgarians who are not of Slavic, Bulgar etc. origins would have also been pred. Vlachs.
    The Second Bulgarian Empire was also called Empire of Vlachs and Bulgars because Vlachs were important in its formation.

    Well I agree those Scythians of Glinoe, Moldova might be indicative of Geto-Dacian autosomal genetics, also among them were found R-Z2103, R-Z2106 and E-V13>CTS1273.

  24. #24
    Spammer Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience PointsTagger Second Class

    Join Date
    22-07-18
    Posts
    377
    Points
    2,436
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,436, Level: 13
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 14
    Overall activity: 12.0%


    Country: Romania



    As much as I understand, I think that haplogroups, do not do a good idea of the real proportion of the genetic ancestors of a population, comparing with autosomal ADN. Anyway, it's an exciting exercise.
    Human language, as well as written history, has sometimes the role of fooling each other.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassVeteran
    JajarBingan's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-05-16
    Posts
    154
    Points
    2,599
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,599, Level: 14
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 151
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-PH908*, DYS561=15
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2a1b1a

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    Quote Originally Posted by Aspurg View Post
    However does it sound feasible that all of these Dacians embraced Latin and during the short time of Roman occupation? Romans occupied part of Dacia for 168 years.. Of course there are descendants of Dacians among Romanians but did Romanian language originate in Dacia? More likely is Moesia. This would also explain some similarities with Albanian. Though I know some Romanians explained those via Albanians being Dacian (Carpi etc.).
    Well, screw me, I wasted 1 hour on a detailed answer, which didn't go through and restored only partially.
    Thus, I'll provide a TL;DR and if interested just google it.

    Up to 25% of the Dacian population was taken South prior to the Dacian wars, 1st by Aelius Catus (50k) and then by Aelianus (100k).
    Dacia was extensively colonised by people from the Balkans and Pannonia, following the Dacian wars. The retreat in 271AD, according to modern non-Romanian and Hungarian researchers (A. Watson, L. Okamura), happened among the upper classes (administration, tradesmen, land owners). The rest stayed behind, but due to lack of elites downgraded to a rural life, as proved by the continuity of life in the former Roman settlements and further out in the region. They were uninterrupted for 100 years, prior to the first wave of barbarian migrations.
    By the 4th century, the archaeological data points to the formation of the Santana de Mures-Chernyakov, which is accepted as the continuation of the Geto-Dacians. From there, look into the Ipotesti-Candesti and Dridu cultures.

    Also, to get back to your question. The Romanian language didn't originate at the time that you are discussing (Roman retreat), but later only after the appearance and mixing with the Slavs. That's our Dridu culture, which was a shared region on both banks of the Danube.

    Anyway, time will tell and there's no need to exhaust ourselves over this. Autosomally at least, the pendulum swings in Romania's favour. Y-DNA wise, there literally isn't anything to work with past the Chalcolithic.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •