Genetic study Ancient DNA of Roman Danubian Frontier and Slavic Migrations (Olalde 2021)

Been out of this for awhile. Doesn't this pretty much jive with the 20~ some percent of Greece with R1a1 and I2a1b ydna? Only big news is that Albanians took South slav wives in disproportionate numbers for their harems.
 
Theotokopoulos said:
Been out of this for awhile. Doesn't this pretty much jive with the 20~ some percent of Greece with R1a1 and I2a1b ydna? Only big news is that Albanians took South slav wives in disproportionate numbers for their harems.
Click to expand...

Christians Albanian are just as much northern shifted as Muslims one.
For Albanians I have said it before that original Albanians ancestors were probably more northern shifted compared to Roman Thraco-Macedonians in particular.

As for Slavic admixture there is a new study coming up that promises a great deal of Slavic admixture in Macedonia. Don't be surprised if the bulk of Imperial Era Greco-Thracians of Northern Greece (more than 50%) were replaced due to Late Antiquity Barbarian input (mostly Slavic) and some Anatolians that settled in there.
 
ihype02 said:
Christians Albanian are just as much northern shifted as Muslims one.
For Albanians I have said it before that original Albanians ancestors were probably more northern shifted compared to Roman Thraco-Macedonians in particular.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I just mean the relative paucity in Albanian proto-slavic ydna markers vs. apparent autosomal evidence. If this is correct, then it looks way female unbalanced. Even the evidence of Greek/Slavic intermingling looks Slavic-Northern female heavy. Why do you think Proto-Albanians were more northern shifted? It looks like even Thracians are Tuscan-like at best, no? I am still waiting on the possibility of *some* steppe-like Greek showing up, but other than the possible tainted sample in that original Mycenean-Minoan study, it's looking less and less likely.

As for Slavic admixture there is a new study coming up that promises a great deal of Slavic admixture in Macedonia. Don't be surprised if the bulk of Imperial Era Greco-Thracians of Northern Greece (more than 50%) were replaced due to Late Antiquity Barbarian input (mostly Slavic) and some Anatolians that settled in there.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised, as we have seen half of Greek Macedonia replaced by Antolians/Southerners within living memory even.
 
ihype02 said:
As for Slavic admixture there is a new study coming up that promises a great deal of Slavic admixture in Macedonia. Don't be surprised if the bulk of Imperial Era Greco-Thracians of Northern Greece (more than 50%) were replaced due to Late Antiquity Barbarian input (mostly Slavic) and some Anatolians that settled in there.
Click to expand...
I think 50% replacement is to much.If Northern Greeks have been 50% replaced by slavs then there is 70% population replacement in Bulgarians and about 50% in Albanians
 
Bill7 said:
I think 50% replacement is to much.If Northern Greeks have been 50% replaced by slavs then there is 70% population replacement in Bulgarians and about 50% in Albanians
Click to expand...

The question is also whether they were "pure Slavs" or already heavily Balkan IA/Roman Balkan shifted. It could mean they were ethnolinguistically Slavs, but genetically already closer to Albanians and Greeks than Proto-Slavs. Actually, that's quite likely, because how likely it is that totally unmixed Slavs popped up in Greece, after they have settled for generations in the Pannonian, Carpathian and Balkan regions before?
 
Riverman said:
The question is also whether they were "pure Slavs" or already heavily Balkan IA/Roman Balkan shifted. It could mean they were ethnolinguistically Slavs, but genetically already closer to Albanians and Greeks than Proto-Slavs. Actually, that's quite likely, because how likely it is that totally unmixed Slavs popped up in Greece, after they have settled for generations in the Pannonian, Carpathian and Balkan regions before?
Click to expand...

Isn't the dominance of I2a and R1a in Serbs and Croats a sign that they were not that mixed? (ie. Serb-like?)
From the leaked samples in the Anthrogenica I saw the bulk of Slavs were as Slovaks/Poles/Ukrainians, with some outliers resembling Lithuanians and Balkans Slavs. Makes sense the territory of Poland and Ukrainians was more populated than that of Lithuanians. The Y-DNA proves that the Slavs expanded from South Poland, Belarus and Western Ukraine just the Medieval historians documented it.

So I believe the Slavs that reached Greece were somewhat heterogenous (even with Bulgarian-like outliers - given how fast they spread they did not have much time to fully mix with each other and form a genetically uniform population), with the majority being close to Slovenes and Hungarians.

The only problem is how to distinguish the actual Greeks that were resettled from the Anatolians and Armenians that pulled the Greek Macedonians and Bulgarians from Serbian-like (probably the medieval samples that Davidski saw are from the Christian period) to modern Mainland Greece and Bulgaria.
 
some dna from iron age france , netherlands and yes slovenia iron age
if the slovenian genomes are the one that helped in part to creat the balkan cluster
in the danubian limes paper .... :unsure:


Originally Posted by Pribislav
We already have info for some samples, from the CarrionOlalde2021 supplementary tables (I am posting male results only, with haplogroups assigned by teepean47):


I5689; 750-400 BC; Grofove njive; Slovenia_IA; I2a1b1a1b1a1a-Y3721>Y3670>L1229>Z2069>Z2059>Z2068>Y3672 (xY11521,Y10648,Y7243,FGC15111,Y13325,Y31802)

I5690; 750-400 BC; Grofove njive; Slovenia_IA; R1b1a1b1a1a2b1-U152>L2 (xS255,L196,Z49,FGC22500)

I5691; 787-544 BC; Kapiteljska njive, Novo mesto; Slovenia_IA; J2b2a1a1a-L283>Z622>Z600>Z2509>Z585>Z615>Z597 (xZ2507,FGC64029)

I5696; 401-208 BC; Obrežje; Slovenia_IA; R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1a1a1a1a1a1a1a-L21>DF13>DF49>DF23>M222>DF85>S668>DF97 (xFGC19851,A1332)

I12907; 356-57 BC; Uitgeest-Dorregeest, Noord-Holland; Netherlands_IA; R1b1a1b1a1a1c1a-U106>S263>S264>S497

I19358; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2-P312

I19359; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; R1b1a1b-M269

I19356; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>Z16775 (xZ16770,Z41654,Z41659,Z45000,FT6200,Z41151)

I20817; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2b2b1-U152>Z36>CTS5531>CTS9981>Z37

I19916; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c1a1-U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z51>L562 (xCTS6554,S1491,F1947.2)

I13623; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4d1-L21>DF13>Z253>Z19670

I13620; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2b1-U152>L2 (xS255,Z49,FGC22513)

I13621; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1-P297 (xA9455,Z216,L356,M222,S691,Z16336,Z17830,Z16541,Z Z38,GG746)
 
ihype02 said:
Isn't the dominance of I2a and R1a in Serbs and Croats a sign that they were not that mixed? (ie. Serb-like?)
From the leaked samples in the Anthrogenica I saw the bulk of Slavs were as Slovaks/Poles/Ukrainians, with some outliers resembling Lithuanians and Balkans Slavs. Makes sense the territory of Poland and Ukrainians was more populated than that of Lithuanians. The Y-DNA proves that the Slavs expanded from South Poland, Belarus and Western Ukraine just the Medieval historians documented it.

So I believe the Slavs that reached Greece were somewhat heterogenous (even with Bulgarian-like outliers - given how fast they spread they did not have much time to fully mix with each other and form a genetically uniform population), with the majority being close to Slovenes and Hungarians.

The only problem is how to distinguish the actual Greeks that were resettled from the Anatolians and Armenians that pulled the Greek Macedonians and Bulgarians from Serbian-like (probably the medieval samples that Davidski saw are from the Christian period) to modern Mainland Greece and Bulgaria.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Plus, the fit provided in the paper for a 50% admixture of an extremely Northern Slavic population in some modern Balkanites is very good, so I don't see how they could have been very admixed. They just moved quickly into a very decimated area. Poor people; God knows how many died from illness and starvation.

If the group was very admixed you'd see even higher replacement rates.
 
Angela said:
Exactly. Plus, the fit provided in the paper for a 50% admixture of an extremely Northern Slavic population in some modern Balkanites is very good, so I don't see how they could have been very admixed. They just moved quickly into a very decimated area. Poor people; God knows how many died from illness and starvation.

If the group was very admixed you'd see even higher replacement rates.
Click to expand...

Yeah Poles might be more northern shifted than the Slavs of Macedonia and Bulgaria, but surely they are a way better proxy than modern Serbians.
 
ihype02 said:
Isn't the dominance of I2a and R1a in Serbs and Croats a sign that they were not that mixed? (ie. Serb-like?)
Click to expand...

On the paternal side, they are less mixed, but its also about more recent founder effects. Another issue is we still don't know for sure where exactly I2a-Din was picked up. Its still not known. We have I2a, we have E-V13, both being present in many early Slavic samples, but we don't know for sure when and where they were picked up. I2a probably almost fully, some lineages of E-V13 too, were brought to the Balkans by Slavs, but these were probably different from the Proto-Slavs at an earlier stage.

From the leaked samples in the Anthrogenica I saw the bulk of Slavs were as Slovaks/Poles/Ukrainians, with some outliers resembling Lithuanians and Balkans Slavs. Makes sense the territory of Poland and Ukrainians was more populated than that of Lithuanians. The Y-DNA proves that the Slavs expanded from South Poland, Belarus and Western Ukraine just the Medieval historians documented it.
Click to expand...

Sure, but they moved through Pannonia and the Carpathians, and there was backflow, as well as local populations in most of these areas which probably weren't Slavic, but rather Celtic, Daco-Thracian and Germanic derived, among other people. Especially if you say Slovakians, you already know its not about "pure Balto-Slavics" like this Baltic-like cluster is. Not at all.

So I believe the Slavs that reached Greece were somewhat heterogenous (even with Bulgarian-like outliers - given how fast they spread they did not have much time to fully mix with each other and form a genetically uniform population), with the majority being close to Slovenes and Hungarians.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's reasonable. My current assumptions is they were different in haplogroups and autosomally by tribe, and picked up additional diversity on the way. Just like Goths and Langobards did, too.

The only problem is how to distinguish the actual Greeks that were resettled from the Anatolians and Armenians that pulled the Greek Macedonians and Bulgarians from Serbian-like (probably the medieval samples that Davidski saw are from the Christian period) to modern Mainland Greece and Bulgaria.
Click to expand...

The crucial point is we need a multi-way model which takes into account all the different sources. Its hard, especially if lacking the right references. Like the Pannonian and Bulgarian papers are still not out, for having more of the Carpathian-Pannonian and Balkan diversity.

With general fits its also such an issue, because many programs prefer pure, typical sources before the real, mixed ones. Many of us know this from their personal experience with various programs too.
 
kingjohn said:
some dna from iron age france , netherlands and yes slovenia iron age
if the slovenian genomes are the one that helped in part to creat the balkan cluster
in the danubian limes paper .... :unsure:


Originally Posted by Pribislav
We already have info for some samples, from the CarrionOlalde2021 supplementary tables (I am posting male results only, with haplogroups assigned by teepean47):


I5689; 750-400 BC; Grofove njive; Slovenia_IA; I2a1b1a1b1a1a-Y3721>Y3670>L1229>Z2069>Z2059>Z2068>Y3672 (xY11521,Y10648,Y7243,FGC15111,Y13325,Y31802)

I5690; 750-400 BC; Grofove njive; Slovenia_IA; R1b1a1b1a1a2b1-U152>L2 (xS255,L196,Z49,FGC22500)

I5691; 787-544 BC; Kapiteljska njive, Novo mesto; Slovenia_IA; J2b2a1a1a-L283>Z622>Z600>Z2509>Z585>Z615>Z597 (xZ2507,FGC64029)

I5696; 401-208 BC; Obrežje; Slovenia_IA; R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1a1a1a1a1a1a1a-L21>DF13>DF49>DF23>M222>DF85>S668>DF97 (xFGC19851,A1332)

I12907; 356-57 BC; Uitgeest-Dorregeest, Noord-Holland; Netherlands_IA; R1b1a1b1a1a1c1a-U106>S263>S264>S497

I19358; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2-P312

I19359; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; R1b1a1b-M269

I19356; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>Z16775 (xZ16770,Z41654,Z41659,Z45000,FT6200,Z41151)

I20817; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2b2b1-U152>Z36>CTS5531>CTS9981>Z37

I19916; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c1a1-U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z51>L562 (xCTS6554,S1491,F1947.2)

I13623; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4d1-L21>DF13>Z253>Z19670

I13620; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2b1-U152>L2 (xS255,Z49,FGC22513)

I13621; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1-P297 (xA9455,Z216,L356,M222,S691,Z16336,Z17830,Z16541,Z Z38,GG746)
Click to expand...

Another L283. Thanks for sharing!
 
Archetype0ne said:
Another L283. Thanks for sharing!
Click to expand...

You welcome ;)
You have -11 j2b in future bronze/ iron age
Southern britain
Dna paper
I count on altverd from anthrogenica
That he read those calls correctly

Teenpan using a method called snipsa
And it is problematic here is an example why :

Richard rocca wrote:
The Slovenian sample I5696 (it is above)
is clearly NOT L21. The sample has 26 positive calls at R-L2.
I think a lot of the snipsa calls are very problematic and need manual checking.:unsure:
 
kingjohn said:
You welcome ;)
You have -11 j2b in future bronze/ iron age
Southern britain
Dna paper
I count on altverd from anthrogenica
That he read those calls correctly
Teenpan using a method called snipsa
And it is problematic here is an example why :
Richard rocca wrote:
The Slovenian sample I5696 (it is above)
is clearly NOT L21. The sample has 26 positive calls at R-L2.
I think a lot of the snipsa calls are very problematic and need manual checking.:unsure:
Click to expand...

11 Samples in BA/IA Britain? or one sample named sample 11?
 
kingjohn said:
some dna from iron age france , netherlands and yes slovenia iron age
if the slovenian genomes are the one that helped in part to creat the balkan cluster
in the danubian limes paper .... :unsure:


Originally Posted by Pribislav
We already have info for some samples, from the CarrionOlalde2021 supplementary tables (I am posting male results only, with haplogroups assigned by teepean47):


I5689; 750-400 BC; Grofove njive; Slovenia_IA; I2a1b1a1b1a1a-Y3721>Y3670>L1229>Z2069>Z2059>Z2068>Y3672 (xY11521,Y10648,Y7243,FGC15111,Y13325,Y31802)

I5690; 750-400 BC; Grofove njive; Slovenia_IA; R1b1a1b1a1a2b1-U152>L2 (xS255,L196,Z49,FGC22500)

I5691; 787-544 BC; Kapiteljska njive, Novo mesto; Slovenia_IA; J2b2a1a1a-L283>Z622>Z600>Z2509>Z585>Z615>Z597 (xZ2507,FGC64029)

I5696; 401-208 BC; Obrežje; Slovenia_IA; R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1a1a1a1a1a1a1a-L21>DF13>DF49>DF23>M222>DF85>S668>DF97 (xFGC19851,A1332)

I12907; 356-57 BC; Uitgeest-Dorregeest, Noord-Holland; Netherlands_IA; R1b1a1b1a1a1c1a-U106>S263>S264>S497

I19358; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2-P312

I19359; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; R1b1a1b-M269

I19356; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a2b-L497>Z1815>Y7538>Z1816>Z1823>Z726>Z16775 (xZ16770,Z41654,Z41659,Z45000,FT6200,Z41151)

I20817; 300-200 BC; Faux Vesigneul, Chemin de Coupetz, Marne; France_GrandEst_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2b2b1-U152>Z36>CTS5531>CTS9981>Z37

I19916; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c1a1-U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z51>L562 (xCTS6554,S1491,F1947.2)

I13623; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a4d1-L21>DF13>Z253>Z19670

I13620; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1b1a1a2b1-U152>L2 (xS255,Z49,FGC22513)

I13621; 400-200 BC; Roquepertuse, Velaux, Bouches-du-Rhône; France_SouthEast_IA2; R1b1a1-P297 (xA9455,Z216,L356,M222,S691,Z16336,Z17830,Z16541,Z Z38,GG746)
Click to expand...


thanks

another J-L283 from northern "illyrian" balkan lands ...............could also be Histri group
 
If the leaked early Slav samples are like Poles and Ukrainians, that could vindicate the Greek Peloponnese study that was ripped for assuming invading Slavs were northern-like and not heavily Balkan-admixed. Maybe using Balkan Slavic samples would have given the opposite and incorrect impression that invading medieval Slavs were already Balkan-like.

One of the pillars of Greek replacement theory is Anatolians were settled in the Peloponnese after the Slavic settlements, to replace the original Greeks. The Peloponnese study also appears to refute that. Macedonia has a different settlement history, when it comes to Anatolia.
 
Archetype0ne said:
11 Samples in BA/IA Britain? or one sample named sample 11?
Click to expand...


I posted in the other thread about this
Upcoming paper ( we only have bam files at the moment )

6 - DF27 R1b1a1b1a1a2a
51 - U152 R1b1a1b1a1a2b (47 L2, 3 Z36, 1 Z56 / PF6601)
151 - L21 R1b1a1b1a1a2c
2 - DF19 R1b1a1b1a1a2e
238 - P312 R1b1a1b1a1a2

10 - U106
9 - R1a
4 - E1b1b1a1b1
19 - G2a2b2a
1 - H2
64 - I2 (51 - I2a1)
1 - I1
12 - J2 (1 J2a, 11 J2b)
1 - N1a1a1a1a1a1a
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 184617 times.

Back
Top