Slavic admixture in South Lithuania

Tomenable

Elite member
Messages
5,419
Reaction score
1,336
Points
113
Location
Poland
Ethnic group
Polish
Y-DNA haplogroup
R1b-L617
mtDNA haplogroup
W6a
I uploaded to GEDmatch some samples from "Patterns of genetic structure... in the Lithuanian population" (Urnikyte 2019):

Ca. 39 Southern Lithuania samples in this study have Slavic admixture (another 28 samples from this region appear Balts).

I uploaded only the samples with clear Slavic influences:

Kit number --- sample

JK6955726 --- LTG125
HX2459622 --- LTG1352
ZH9904087 --- LTG1374
XP9888088 --- LTG1375
KK5560960 --- LTG1378
LB5015953 --- LTG1408
WF4261598 --- LTG1409
MW4980740 --- LTG1411
EG1106901 --- LTG1412
DZ8732901 --- LTG1414
NN2806762 --- LTG1415
UB5946103 --- LTG1421
SZ6478040 --- LTG1436
PL3162085 --- LTG1439
EB2863958 --- LTG1440
NV9872178 --- LTG1448
MQ7477090 --- LTG167
UW7999068 --- LTG173
WZ8797131 --- LTG181
ET7174964 --- LTG395
RX1894353 --- LTG601
HZ3307903 --- LTG778
XP4757172 --- LTG782
SU9121750 --- LTG788
GB1647017 --- LTG796
YA4202218 --- LTG797
RY3865139 --- LTG800
EN2001593 --- LTG801
WU8448499 --- LTG804
XG3359321 --- LTG805
AL7580160 --- LTG807
CP6221777 --- LTG808
HP8465670 --- LTG810
AR5736561 --- LTG811
AJ9582849 --- LTG816
UP7677276 --- LTG817
XL4168069 --- LTG828
EH4176992 --- LTG829
YX4347568 --- LTG824

^^^
They are from the region labelled as Pietu Auk?taitija (South Auk?taitija) much of which was part of Poland before WW2:

wqWRsuG.png
 
Last edited:
Some of them score "Estonian Polish" as their closest population in Eurogenes K13/K15 in Single Distances.

=====

Interestingly according to this study from 2004, South Auk?taitija has over 60% of Y-DNA haplogroup R1a:

"Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA variation in Lithuanians", Kasperavičiūtė 2004:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6556/5477a499dddc3728cfc34172d434d4dfe8fa.pdf

https://www.semanticscholar.org/pap...skas/65565477a499dddc3728cfc34172d434d4dfe8fa

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1529-8817.2003.00119.x
 
There are some Slavic-admixed samples also in Rytų Auk?taitija (East Auk?taitija), likely from southern parts of this region:

Kit number --- sample

SW3724449 --- LTG134
UK1317165 --- LTG248
XK5510303 --- LTG104
WR4322340 --- LTG135
RE4826929 --- LTG197
YS7125471 --- LTG342

=====

Eurogenes EUtest V2 K15 Oracle results:

Kit SW3724449

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baltic 29.2
2 North_Sea 22.45
3 Eastern_Euro 21.16
4 Atlantic 19.41
5 West_Med 2.92
6 South_Asian 2.76
7 Northeast_African 1.09
8 West_Asian 0.87
9 Amerindian 0.09
10 Oceanian 0.04
11 East_Med 0.01

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Polish 4.38
2 Belorussian 5.09
3 Estonian_Polish 5.26
4 Estonian 5.61
5 Russian_Smolensk 5.89
6 Southwest_Russian 6.89
7 South_Polish 7.01
8 Lithuanian 7.69
9 Ukrainian_Belgorod 7.9
10 Ukrainian 8.01

Eurogenes EUtest V2 K15 Oracle results:

Kit UK1317165

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baltic 32.45
2 Eastern_Euro 22.57
3 North_Sea 22.3
4 Atlantic 17.13
5 West_Med 2.12
6 South_Asian 1.78
7 West_Asian 1.3
8 Red_Sea 0.36

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Belorussian 3.79
2 Estonian_Polish 4.44
3 Lithuanian 4.45
4 Estonian 5.25
5 Southwest_Russian 6.07
6 Polish 6.09
7 Russian_Smolensk 6.14
8 Ukrainian_Belgorod 7.12
9 South_Polish 8.44
10 Ukrainian 8.75
 
Slavic-admixed samples from Kaunas region / Lauda region (West Auk?taitija and WA/SZ borderland):

Kit number --- sample

MR6470190 --- LTG301
FQ9044985 --- LTG362
LX9634983 --- LTG451
AY8683414 --- LTG454
UZ3939692 --- LTG465
EX8431380 --- LTG604
JU5422669 --- LTG613
JB2005225 --- LTG626
YG6963436 --- LTG760
EQ1906587 --- LTG1261
KS9841297 --- LTG1220
PP6393204 --- LTG1158

^^^
Some of them are probably Lithuanized descendants of Lauda region Poles (Kaunas Uyezd), see here:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pl&tl=en&u=https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauda_(region)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kovensky_Uyezd

Quote from Wikipedia: "At the time of the Census of 1897, Kovensky Uyezd had a population of 227431. Of these, 41.4% spoke Lithuanian, 23.2% Polish, 19.8% Yiddish, 11.6% Russian, 2.3% German, 0.5% Tatar, 0.4% Belarusian (...) as their native language.[1]"
 
Hmm, at that time choosing one's nationality was often influenced by two things - religion and social status. First thing, people would mostly often identify themselves by religion. So to say speaking Polish/being Polish meant that they were Catholics and speaking Russian(earlier Ruthenian) being Russian orthodox.

In this respect, the majority of Lithuanians were catholic and thus it was sort of natural to identify with being Polish if they wanted to switch to a better status ethnicity.
Secondly, identifying with Lithuanian origins and speaking language meant that one was of the lowest social rank (uneducated peasant), and thus people, if they managed to achieve anything more in their life / received some education, took any position were ashamed of being Lithuanian. It should be remembered that in 1897 there was a full ban of the Lithuanian language usage in the public sphere/ Lithuanian books, so if children wanted to learn to read and write they had to do it in Polish/Russian.

Thus, it is not really surprising that better off Kaunas people wanted to identified themselves as Poles rather than Lithuanians ...

Regarding genetic distinction between the Slavic and Baltic people - I am just wondering how to interpret that, for instance, it is very much likely that Jotvingian genetic influence should be rather distinct within current Belarus people. Jotvingiai spread much into current Slavic territories before those territories became Slavic, but we don't know their genetic make up and how much similar they were compared to other Eastern and West Baltic tribes or Eastern/Western Slavic tribes.

Similarly, it would be very interesting to get genetic samples of the first archeologically Slavic people and to use it as a reference, otherwise, readings of who is Slavic and who is Baltic can be rather confusing, at least that how I perceived the current level of understanding of these issues. For instance, now you write about Slavic influence in the Souther Baltic, but could that also be because of the Baltic influence in the Norther Slavic?

What do you think? What is your reference for Slavic versus Baltic people? How to deal with currently dead West Baltic populations whose genetic influence, nevertheless, should be remaining within those territories where they lived.

Moreover, according to archeological/linguistic research, there are lots of indications pointing out that it were Baltic people who were more widespread and lived within current slavic territories, rather than Slavic came to the current Lithuanian territory. Of course, I think mixing of the Baltic people with Slavic and even more with Ugro-Finnic people did take place - this is what the latest research states, too, but equally it would be interesting to check the mixing of Slavic populations with Baltic, especially where Slavic people (parts of Belarus, Poland and Russia) live within the former Baltic territories.

These are two map from wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balts (sorry they are in Russian, but this is what I found on ENG wiki page)
1) before Great Migration (III-IV AD)
2) after Slavic Migration (VII-VIII AD)


"Map of the ancient Baltic homelands at the time of the Hunnish invasions (3rd-4th c. AD). Archaeology identifies Baltic cultural areas (in purple). The Baltic sphere originally covered Eastern Europe from the Baltic Sea to modern Moscow"
Green - Finno-Ugric
Purple - Baltic
Red - Slavic
1280px-East_europe_3-4cc.png
800px-Slav-7-8-obrez.png

Green - Slavic
Purple - Baltic
Yellow - Finno-Ugric
 
Last edited:
Would it be possible to compare admixture of Lithuanians with Slavic people, but Slavic should be from those regions which were never populated by the Baltic tribes historically? For instance, if comparing with Polish people, those should be originating from places more Western that Vistula Wisła river in the North (i.e., from Greater Poland?)
 
Also I think when comparing populations it is really useful to do Principal Component Analyses (PCA) like Polako does. For instance just one such picture way better clarifies overall situation with Etruscans, Romans, Latins and the others...
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/

Update 13/11/2019: Here's another, similar PCA. This one, however, is based on genotype data, and it also highlights many more of the samples from the Antonio et al. paper. Considering these results, I'm tempted to say that the present-day Italian gene pool largely formed in the Iron Age, and that it was only augmented by population movements during later periods. The relevant datasheet is available here.



 

This thread has been viewed 5133 times.

Back
Top