Upcoming Reich Lab paper on Viminacium etc

I just think it is more
Logical that those anatolians ( near east cluster)
Came to the balkan as traders, translators, or
Soldiers rather than slave ...
But i could be wrong...who knows ..:unsure:

P.s
Would be intresting to see some expert anlaysis
Of the bam files when the will be out
There is also another individual I15502 who was burried in brick contruction rather than wooden coffin like the E-L791... :unsure:
He was e-z830 > e-m123
So he could belong to anyone of those branches :
e-y31991
e-m34> m84>pf6751
m34> e-L791:)
It nice for me personally to see some other branches of e1b1b1
After the big etruscan dissapointment
 
Last edited:
I just think it is more
Logical that those anatolians ( near east cluster)
Came to the balkan as traders, translators, or
Soldiers rather than slave ...
But i could be wrong...who knows ..

I think we simply have a little misunderstanding here. I was rather referring to the city-state Rome and its surroundings and not to the Balkans. And I don't think that the Eastern Med-like Imperial Romans were mostly of slave origin. That said, it seems that many slaves came from the Eastern provinces when going by Roman sources. However, as I said plenty of affluent and skilled folks came from the East. Furthermore, in ancient Rome Greek slaves were often used in fields that we today associate with high education and skills, such as docs, and teachers, etc.

Oh by the way, it appears that R1b wasn't that uncommon in the Levant.
 
As I posted previously, the "Near Eastern cluster" here seems Cypriot and eastern Aegean Sea.

Interesting how so many people discount the hundreds of thousands of Gallic, Germanic, and Britannic slaves in the Empire. I would remind people of all those Gladiators in England, all of whom would have been slaves. Only one was from the east.

Perhaps they're not recognized because they aren't that different from the locals in certain areas. Or, perhaps, being unskilled and unprized, they were assigned to galleys and latifundia and factories, and when they died the remains of these poor people were tossed on a rubbish heap somewhere.
 
I suppose the I1 carriers and other Nothern Euro type - halpogroups carriers were counted in the "Iron Age" cluster.
Most Goths came in Bakans in 4th century so IDK how accurate is this.


Also Russians? Not a good idea. Why not Western Ukranians or South-Eastern Poles?
 
Those 2 slavic outliers from kuline necropolis
Are interesting :unsure:

I15538 Timacum Minus, Kuline Necropolis M H1e1a6 R1b,R-M269,R-L23,R-L52,R-L151,R-P312,R-D99 Serbia_Slavic_o 892-989 cal CE (1115±15 BP, PSUAMS-8592)

I15539 Timacum Minus, Kuline Necropolis M H1e1a6 R1b,R-M269,R-L23,R-L52,R-L151,R-P312,R-D99 Serbia_Slavic_o

They had completely diffrent autosomal
Profile from others buried in the necropolis
They cluster with southwest europeans iberians:cool-v:
They look like brothers carry same mtdna
Now i see they are twins there y haplogroup is r1b-D99
 
Last edited:
great post by 23abc user from anthrogenica (so i want to share it) (y)
However, the southernmost populations such as Greek_Cyclades and Greek_Dodecanese fail this model and are better modelled with the high coverage Roman_Greek sample I7833 from an upcoming Lazaridis et al. paper, who lived just before the Slavic migrations into the Balkans (252-412 CE).

image.png



"We observe Northeastern Europe-related ancestry in the Cyclades and Crete which are more closely located to the Greek mainland. This ancestry signal (absent in Iron Age and Roman Balkan populations) decreases from North to South in the Balkans, but it is still substantial in populations from these Aegean islands. However, this North-Eastern signal is not significant in the farther islands: the Dodecanese and Cyprus, who even rejects the model by having negative values in the former.



p.s
thats my 2cent from the paper
:cool-v:

https://i.imgur.com/LbdUYuV.png

the black
= north east european related ancestery :)
the kuline necropolis are in red
:unsure:
you can see there are remmants of this ancestery in cyclades islands
and in crete

and it disappear completely from cyprus and dodecanese:unsure:
 
Last edited:
you can see there are remmants of this ancestery in cyclades islands
and in crete

and it disappear completely from cyprus and dodecanese:unsure:

This Slavic-related ancestry in the islands was obviously mediated by mainland Greeks over the last 10+ centuries.
 
I have very little trust in the legitimatcy of this paper.

Vuko what ticks you off, in this study Balkans and the Greek islands are flooded with Slavic genes 🧬.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
This Slavic-related ancestry in the islands was obviously mediated by mainland Greeks over the last 10+ centuries.

could be:unsure:
was there known migration of mainland greeks to those islands ( crete , cyclades) ?
 
could be:unsure:
was there known migration of mainland greeks to those islands ( crete , cyclades) ?
If even Arvanites/Albanians made it to the islands to the point of becoming a majority in several islands, imagine Early Medieval Greeks possibly escaping the barbarian raids. It?s only natural.
 
If even Arvanites/Albanians made it to the islands to the point of becoming a majority in several islands, imagine Early Medieval Greeks possibly escaping the barbarian raids. It�s only natural.

Where do you people get this stuff?

Please provide a link to a genetic study proving this?

You do know that two groups plotting near one another doesn't necessarily mean one descends from the other, right???
 
Vuko what ticks you off, in this study Balkans and the Greek islands are flooded with Slavic genes ������.


Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum

Since when is 1-20 in the Greek Islands, with most around 14% equal being "FLOODED" with Slavic genes???
 
7-20% with average 13-14% in crete and cyclades is not a flood as you said
but it is still a genetic signiture that is present and shouldn't been ignored
i wonder who broght it to those islands
if it was mainland greeks from where ?
 
7-20% with average 13-14% in crete and cyclades is not a flood as you said
but it is still a genetic signiture that is present and shouldn't been ignored
i wonder who broght it to those islands
if it was mainland greeks from where ?

% are those we all know, discussing what flood means it is to lower the level of our discussion. I guess we all agree that Slavic migration was overwhelming, it took several centuries for Eastern Roman Empire to establish the situation.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
Where do you people get this stuff?

Please provide a link to a genetic study proving this?

You do know that two groups plotting near one another doesn't necessarily mean one descends from the other, right???
Excuse me, what do you mean ?you people?? I see you often using this phrase towards Albanians. Are you being racist/xenophobic? AFAIK ?you people? are not from a different race from ?us people?.

Anyway, a quick Google research would show you that Arvanites are present in many Greek islands, it?s not a conspiracy theory. They?re still there, with many still carrying Albanian/Arvanite lastnames.

I clearly wasn?t talking about genetics, autosomal plotting, or studies. I simply tried to be helpful to a fellow forum member that ?if even Arvanites made it to the island from mainland Greece, why not Greeks themselves?? I know that even Vlachs made it to Euboia for example (if that kinda counts as an island) and perhaps even further into the Cyclades.

No idea how such an innocent post gets treated as provocative. Am I getting banned now by the way? Jesus!

To answer the question to whoever is interested, yes, it is very likely that mainland Greeks (together with other ethnic groups) brought the North East European admixture to the islands.
 
Where do you people get this stuff?

Please provide a link to a genetic study proving this?

You do know that two groups plotting near one another doesn't necessarily mean one descends from the other, right???

The islands of the Saronic Gulf, the South of Euboea, The northern half of Andros and in parts of Kerkyra and of one or a couple more of the rest of the Ionian islands. That's all of the migrations/resettlements I think, not including various smaller movements of single or more families/people that found their way to other islands but that was not something exclusive to them. Mainlanders and or other ethnicities moved too.
 
This thread is becoming a sink of unsupported allegations, beyond sloppy language, and the resurrection of ridiculous ideas that should have been tossed into the shredder years ago.

No matter what data is produced, it seems that there will always be some Albanians here who just a) refuse to understand what the data shows and b) either completely lack the ability to express themselves in anything resembling a precise way, or are just deliberately using sloppy language to provoke members of other ethnic groups in the Balkans, as always.

If I see one more post implying that Greece has no Greeks, just freaking Arvanites... Also, btw, Albanians have their share of Slavic too; you're not an unchanged, un-admixed, pure people either; no one is. So just freaking STOP IT. That goes for Blevins and Dushman in particular.

@King John,
Really??? You didn't recognize that for what it was??? I somehow doubt it. He's always playing the same old games, thinking it's all so subtle no one will be able to tell.

Oh, and no, NOT Cypriots. We have no idea really as to the composition of the Cypriots during the time of the Empire. You're falling into the same bad reasoning of which Sikelliot is usually guilty. IF the Roman-Greek sample under discussion is as the rumor would have it, and IF it is representative, then the Classical Greeks were like the people of the Dodecanese NOW, and close to the people of Cyprus TODAY, not then.

This is all really disheartening, but there you have it. Clean up your act, guys.
 

This thread has been viewed 34853 times.

Back
Top