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

[Çerç]

To get to almost 30% you have to pick the model that uses Greek_Empuries along with MODERN Russians or Mordvins but if you go there I don't see how this mixed model is less flawed than whatever Stamatoyannopoulos used (only moderns I think ? ) ...

It's not flawless of course, but a step in the right direction. Neither the Ingria sample nor modern Russians are perfect proxies for early Medieval Slavs. But Empuries samples are better modern Sicilians. Further improvements are necessary, especially with samples from 500 BC to 700 AD.

 

[Ralphie Boy]

One of this study’s conclusions is that Slavs did not completely replace Iron Age Balkan populations. Can’t recall, but did anyone argue otherwise, that Slavs almost completely replaced the natives?

In terms of modern Greeks, it’s ironic that if they have ancient Greek genetic connections, they would come through their partially Slavic ancestors who predated the arrival of Albanians and others. If Greeks have bona fide medieval Slavic ancestry from people who invaded and settled in Greece and not by proxy, they could also be carrying genes of those with whom the Slavs mixed, the Byzantine Greeks. But, we’ll see.

 

[ihype02]

One of this study’s conclusions is that Slavs did not completely replace Iron Age Balkan populations. Can’t recall, but did anyone argue otherwise, that Slavs almost completely replaced the natives.

We still don't know how the Slavs were when they came to Bulgaria.
But when you count in the Germanic admixture than you can see that more than 70% of Croats ancestors came to Croatia only after 200AD.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread...from-Migration-Era-and-Early-Medieval-Moravia
Some Slavic samples from medieval central Europe plot closer to Serbs and Bulgarians than to Poles.
Chances are they absorved that component during their road, but some natives of the region resemble North Italians so mixing that up gives us Croat-type.
The Bulgarian ones though.

 

[Ralphie Boy]

We still don't know how the Slavs were when they came to Bulgaria.
But when you count in the Germanic admixture than you can see that more than 70% of Croats ancestors came to Croatia only after 200AD.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread...from-Migration-Era-and-Early-Medieval-Moravia
Some Slavic samples from medieval central Europe plot closer to Serbs and Bulgarians than to Poles.
Chances are they absorved that component during their road, but some natives of the region resemble North Italians so mixing that up gives us Croat-type.
The Bulgarian ones though.

Thanks, I look very forward to any paper that might come out with early Slavic samples, as well as more from the ancient Balkans and particularly Greece. Certainly I am speculating about certain things. It can be frustrating waiting for so long. I took my first DNA test many years ago.

 

[lacreme]

Why Armenian? Are Armenians a proxy for somebody. Why there was some migration into Bulgaria from Armenia during the Ottoman period Armenians and Bulgarians don't mix. Heck Armenians and Greeks did not intermix. I don't think that there is an Armenian genetic footprint in Bulgaria unless you're talking about the 6,500 Armenians still in Bulgaria.

It's just a model that ihype02 requested to do, I didn't choose the components.

 

[Valerius]

Kind of wonder about some trolls showing up just to discredit the authenticity of this paper.

 

[blevins13]

There were rumors that Albanian scientists were testing DNA like this and destroying results because they didnt like them...Ancient Illyrians from Albania are very different than Albanians they said......What the hell? We will never get DNA from Albania if they keep doing that. We still dont have DNA from Albania. Just why??? When its known in Albania that Albanians are a multimix of Dacians, Thracians, Greeks, Slavs, Serbs and other groups and that Albanian is a Thracian language from way outside Albania, there will be huge outrage and thats what theyre trying to avoid i think......

Over one third of Albanian ancestry and probably way more is just pure Slavic!! Wow I never expected that much cos in Albania its veryyy downplayed by official histories who claim only Illyrian ancestors and sometimes Pelasgians...Thank you for the great great article Maciamo!!

In your first post, this is what you choose to post. Beautiful. Certainly Albanians are destroying any ancient DNA they can find, in addition are pushing Greeks, N.Macedonian, Serbs, Bulgarians do to the same. A lot is at stake here.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

 

[Riverman]

There were rumors that Albanian scientists were testing DNA like this and destroying results because they didnt like them...Ancient Illyrians from Albania are very different than Albanians they said......What the hell? We will never get DNA from Albania if they keep doing that. We still dont have DNA from Albania. Just why??? When its known in Albania that Albanians are a multimix of Dacians, Thracians, Greeks, Slavs, Serbs and other groups and that Albanian is a Thracian language from way outside Albania, there will be huge outrage and thats what theyre trying to avoid i think......

Over one third of Albanian ancestry and probably way more is just pure Slavic!! Wow I never expected that much cos in Albania its veryyy downplayed by official histories who claim only Illyrian ancestors and sometimes Pelasgians...Thank you for the great great article Maciamo!!

Rather, in such cases, when the results don't fit for ideological reasons, the paper need sometimes more time to get published, because the authors feel the need to double check and cross check their results, as well as being more careful as to what they write and how to interpret the results. So papers can be, for similar reasons, delayed. We had such a case with Yamnaya and Corded Ware, when some rather "woke" archaeologists had troubles with the genetic results, because they were too close to what Gustav Kossinna said.
Similar things happen all the time, if the results are "controversial", to put it that way.
But that they "destroy" samples is unrealistic, because that would become a scandal, since Albanians don't do it alone and there is no reason for doing so. Its not that loaded anyway. Also, there is no way to hide such conclusions. If samples from the surrounding countries being analysed, the models will be as qualified as if Albanian ancient DNA would have been tested itself. Because the modern national borders and those of ancient archaeological cultures are not the same.
If you just made that up, its provocative, if you read it somewhere, can you point to the source? Its in any case unrealistic. More realistic is, that paper get delayed if the results are "controversial", because that happens all the time, also in other fields of science.

 

[peloponnesian]

In terms of modern Greeks, it’s ironic that if they have ancient Greek genetic connections, they would come through their partially Slavic ancestors who predated the arrival of Albanians and others. If Greeks have bona fide medieval Slavic ancestry from people who invaded and settled in Greece and not by proxy, they could also be carrying genes of those with whom the Slavs mixed, the Byzantine Greeks. But, we’ll see.

Why is it ironic? Isn't this how any admixture event works?

 

[Pr0_]

Could these Kuline samples be Bulgarians or Hungarians ?

Only in the ninth century do we see the expansion of a strong Slav (or quasi-Slav) power into this region. Under a series of ambitious rulers, the Bulgarians - a Slav population which absorbed, linguistically and culturally, its ruling elite of Turkic Bulgars - pushed westwards across modern Macedonia and eastern Serbia, until by the 850s they had taken over Kosovo and were pressing on the borders of Rascia. Soon afterwards they took the western Macedonian town of Ohrid; having recently converted to Christianity, the Bulgar rulers helped to set up a bishopric in Ohrid, which thus became an important centre of Slav culture for the whole region. And at the same time the Bulgarians were pushing on into southern and central Albania, which became thoroughly settled by Bulgarian Slavs during the course of the following century.

 

[Archetype0ne]

There were rumors that Albanian scientists were testing DNA like this and destroying results because they didnt like them...Ancient Illyrians from Albania are very different than Albanians they said......What the hell? We will never get DNA from Albania if they keep doing that. We still dont have DNA from Albania. Just why??? When its known in Albania that Albanians are a multimix of Dacians, Thracians, Greeks, Slavs, Serbs and other groups and that Albanian is a Thracian language from way outside Albania, there will be huge outrage and thats what theyre trying to avoid i think......

Over one third of Albanian ancestry and probably way more is just pure Slavic!! Wow I never expected that much cos in Albania its veryyy downplayed by official histories who claim only Illyrian ancestors and sometimes Pelasgians...Thank you for the great great article Maciamo!!

Hey there ImpartialAmericanSci, could you please provide a source regarding Albanians destroying ancient samples? I am sure these ancient samples are R1a and I2a1-Dinaric, since you claim Albanians are 1/3 "Pure Slav" . A source or a model for that would also be helpful.

But who am I kidding, it is likely you have no sources. And are some hateful pleb larping. I wonder where your hate stems from

PS: There is ancient DNA coming out of 2 BA sites in Albania coming out soon. So far from one site we know R1b and L283 are present in Albania since the Bronze Age. Just like they were present in Vojvodina and Dalmatia and Etruria and Messapia and Nuragic Sardinia... I wonder if they have found any of South Slavic main branches from the BA, say R1a and I2a1 Dinaric even in Serbia or Croatia, since I am 80% sure you are some South Slav larping as an American :cool-v:. Not that I have anything against South Slavs, but I know that only there the propaganda is strong enough to create such larping haters.

 

[Ralphie Boy]

Why is it ironic? Isn't this how any admixture event works?

It would be ironic because to Fallmerayer types, Slavs and others replaced ancient Greeks (up to the early Byzantine period). But if it is not the case that they were replaced, it might very well be through their Slavic-admixed ancestors that Greeks carry older native genes.

 

[Pr0_]

Hey there ImpartialAmericanSci, could you please provide a source regarding Albanians destroying ancient samples? I am sure these ancient samples are R1a and I2a1-Dinaric, since you claim Albanians are 1/3 "Pure Slav" . A source or a model for that would also be helpful.

But who am I kidding, it is likely you have no sources. And are some hateful pleb larping. I wonder where your hate stems from

PS: There is ancient DNA coming out of 2 BA sites in Albania coming out soon. So far from one site we know R1b and L283 are present in Albania since the Bronze Age. Just like they were present in Vojvodina and Dalmatia and Etruria and Messapia and Nuragic Sardinia... I wonder if they have found any of South Slavic main branches from the BA, say R1a and I2a1 Dinaric even in Serbia or Croatia, since I am 80% sure you are some South Slav larping as an American :cool-v:. Not that I have anything against South Slavs, but I know that only there the propaganda is strong enough to create such larping haters.

There is no compelling evidence that proto-Albanians were Thracians or Dacians anyway. And even then, that supposedly Albanians have no Illyrian ancestry is pure propaganda. But I don't necessarily believe we are pure Illyrians either.

There were also a bunch of Aromanians/Vlachs that were assimilated in Kosovo/Northern Albania and Eastern Albania. So we are probably a mix of different Ancient Balkan tribes.

 

[Archetype0ne]

There is no compelling evidence that proto-Albanians were Thracians or Dacians anyway. And even then, that supposedly Albanians have no Illyrian ancestry is pure propaganda. But I don't necessarily believe we are pure Illyrians either.

There were also a bunch of Aromanians/Vlachs that were assimilated in Kosovo/Northern Albania and Eastern Albania. So we are probably a mix of different Ancient Balkan tribes.

Most certainly. It would be unwise to think otherwise. Plus it depends from region to region.
Say Malesia tribes, if you look at YDNA <=3% are Slavic. But overall in Albanian speaking communities they fluctuate 8%-20% depending on region. So you have places with more intermixing, and virtually hermetic regions, geography and history plays a role here.

Furthermore given the ethnogenesis of Albanian as an ethnos around 1400's (most western schools would have you believe that the first nations/nation states were created in Western Europe around the 100 year war, them being France and England, so its a controversial topic, but lets take 1400's knowing the history of our region, which they might have understudied), before that from the bronze age we have around 3000 years, and 600 years since then, so it is reasonable to assume further intermixing during these eras.

My point with that larper was different, and watch him be unable to produce any source or evidence for what he claims. I know Slavic Macedonian members on fora who only score 20% Slavic, while their group of friends the highest is 30-40%, but he would have us believe Albanians are 33% pure Slavs, whatever pure Slavs even means, since most Slavic members on fora can not seem to agree, and its a hotly debated topic.

If it was not so funny, the larper would be cringe.

 

[Riverman]

Most certainly. It would be unwise to think otherwise. Plus it depends from region to region.
Say Malesia tribes, if you look at YDNA <=3% are Slavic. But overall in Albanian speaking communities they fluctuate 8%-20% depending on region. So you have places with more intermixing, and virtually hermetic regions, geography and history plays a role here.

Furthermore given the ethnogenesis of Albanian as an ethnos around 1400's (most western schools would have you believe that the first nations/nation states were created in Western Europe around the 100 year war, them being France and England, so its a controversial topic, but lets take 1400's knowing the history of our region, which they might have understudied), before that from the bronze age we have around 3000 years, and 600 years since then, so it is reasonable to assume further intermixing during these eras.

My point with that larper was different, and watch him be unable to produce any source or evidence for what he claims. I know Slavic Macedonian members on fora who only score 20% Slavic, while their group of friends the highest is 30-40%, but he would have us believe Albanians are 33% pure Slavs, whatever pure Slavs even means, since most Slavic members on fora can not seem to agree, and its a hotly debated topic.

If it was not so funny, the larper would be cringe.

I think in the Balkans what really complicates things if talking about Slavs that "old Slavic" and "what Slavic tribes brought to a specific Balkan region" are two completely different things. Its clear that if an incoming later Slavic group looked closer to Bulgarians, it would automatically change the whole calculation by alot. But that is not "ancient" or "old" Slavic ancestry, but what happened after the Slavs entered Pannonia-Carpathian Basin and from there the Balkans. On the way, they might have picked different groups and admixtures up. Not all Slavic tribes the same, some more, some less. That's how even some Pannonian-Carpathian and generally Central European lineages might have come with the Slavs, yet being already intermediate by default between the old Slavs and the Balkan of that time. There are some candidate lineages for that.

Like Albanians too didn't just spread their "old Albanian" ancestry in some regions, but also something Vlach and Slavic they too had picked up on the way, up to this point. Every reference is just valid for the time in questions, since ethnic ancestral compositions are fluid. Proto-Balto-Slavic was still different from Proto-Slavic and old Slavic another category, with regional Slavic groups being yet another and so on. Without having more references for the Slavs in place, its difficult to estimate.

 

[Archetype0ne]

I think in the Balkans what really complicates things if talking about Slavs that "old Slavic" and "what Slavic tribes brought to a specific Balkan region" are two completely different things. Its clear that if an incoming later Slavic group looked closer to Bulgarians, it would automatically change the whole calculation by alot. But that is not "ancient" or "old" Slavic ancestry, but what happened after the Slavs entered Pannonia-Carpathian Basin and from there the Balkans. On the way, they might have picked different groups and admixtures up. Not all Slavic tribes the same, some more, some less. That's how even some Pannonian-Carpathian and generally Central European lineages might have come with the Slavs, yet being already intermediate by default between the old Slavs and the Balkan of that time. There are some candidate lineages for that.

Like Albanians too didn't just spread their "old Albanian" ancestry in some regions, but also something Vlach and Slavic they too had picked up on the way, up to this point. Every reference is just valid for the time in questions, since ethnic ancestral compositions are fluid. Proto-Balto-Slavic was still different from Proto-Slavic and old Slavic another category, with regional Slavic groups being yet another and so on. Without having more references for the Slavs in place, its difficult to estimate.

Completely agree. Hence why I brought up YDNA breakdown, which assuming non sex biased gene flow, big assumption, should not suffer from the flaws of autosomal comparisons.

As I have seen you in the Ancient Moravia Samples thread on Antrho, I am sure we both have been influenced by the educated arguments regarding what Slavic constitutes. And we both know there is no consensus, even among the more studious members.
For me the biggest shock were some theories regarding when we can say we have bona fine Slavs, and how late that was. It makes sense given how uniform the language was even in Old Church Slavonic etc, combined with the proven demographic boom. But finding out Slavs were not even like Balts which on a lot of models are used as their placeholder, but rather a specific mix of east west and Baltic of the 4th century was surprising to say the least.
Nonetheless I have to admit to only having read maybe 30/350 pages there so I might have missed something.

 

[Bill7]

Sir lets ask ourselves...why do all other countries from the Balkans have DNA samples and Albania somehooow doesnt...? Why even poorest Moldova does but Albania doesnt isnt it sus at all?? Its obvious by the rumors......theyve found the truth that Albanians are a half Slav Thracoid people in this DNA they threw out and Ancient Illyrians were a veryyy different people!! Pure direct descendants of Ancient Illyrians in all official history books but over one third pure Slavic in the article Maciamo posted...the rest from where? Romanians know their languages origins, South Slavs know, Greeks know, the very Slavic acc to this study Albanians do they or are they a heavily Slavicized panbalkanic mix w Thracoid base??

If Albos are half slavic half thraco-illyrian hybrid as you claim then South Slavs are on average 80% slavic which is definitely not the case.

 

[Hawk]

If Albos are half slavic half thraco-illyrian hybrid as you claim then South Slavs are on average 80% slavic which is definitely not the case.

~15% up to 25% is inevitable. More than that it doesn't make sense. But, less than ~15% also doesn't make sense, since this admixture is having an effect on modern calculators which are not smart enough in more advanced plotting. Their algorithm is very very basic.

 

[Archetype0ne]

If Albos are half slavic half thraco-illyrian hybrid as you claim then South Slavs are on average 80% slavic which is definitely not the case.

I doubt even Poles are 80% Slavic tbh. Depends what you take as the baseline (base population, historical period). My personal guess would be some insular populations, of "central" Slavs akin to Byelorussians would be the most "slavic", not even Russians or Poles due to admixture events from east and west.

But as you can see from analyzing his writing style this guy is some gen Z zoomer with mental health issues.

"Illyrians were a veryyy different people!! "

But definitively not who he claims to be, a) impartial, b) american.

"doesnt isnt it sus at all??"

In the past I would report such crap, but from my experience on here it does absolutely nothing, so might as well enjoy the freakshow.

 

[ihype02]

It's just a model that ihype02 requested to do, I didn't choose the components.

Where did you find the Thracian and modern components coordinates?
I found out those:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YKkEOtyV5SISvmY_FyS4YSLXCxxYt5_W/view