A genetic history of the Balkans from Roman frontier to Slavic migrations

Man your are such an idiot. Just to pissed you off main land Greeks have 40 percent Slavic

These 40% slavic Greeks are from Bulgarophone/Slavophone communities and villages in Northern Greece from the Balkan wars.

It's hard to have that much in the mixed genetic landscape of what is currently Macedonia+Thrace (see Anatolians, plus very high mobility between all parts of the country). To give you an example, the pontic village that my grandparents created on a slope of a hill in Thessaloniki in the 1920s/30s has now the biggest Cretan community outside of Crete. Is that a pontic or a cretan village now in Macedonia? Or both and none at the same time? Greeks don't have your kind of Balkan tribalism, the only ones that kinda do are 1990s late pontic entries.

And, regardless of the fact, these are all historically attested facts from the Medieval times even, what is even the point of this pissing contest.
 
Hahaha but guess what main Greeks have 30 to 40 slavic any ways you ass

Call me dumb, but how can they know how much Slavic ancestry is in Greeks without at least any classical era samples? In addition to that, having samples from the entirety of Greece, not just one or two locations, to assess any potential regional variation in their profiles.
 
I did read but doesn't change that main Greek have a lot of Slavic dna
You obviously didn't when you literally claim that "Slavic" DNA exists in the balkans before the Slavic migrations
Delusional 🥳
Even an idiot can understand that the authors say eastern european ancestry=Steppe ancestry(yamnaya+later immigrations )
"We present evidence that Eastern European ancestry was sporadically present in the Balkans long before the Slavic migrations of late antiquity. "
 
Last edited:
A study covering the entirety of Balkans yet somehow we (Greeks ) are the "target" of bad faith comments once more like WE are the ones constantly obsessing over uniparentals and Slavic admixture and not some of our Balkan neighbours...
 
A study covering the entirety of Balkans yet somehow we (Greeks ) are the "target" of bad faith comments once more like WE are the ones constantly obsessing over uniparentals and Slavic admixture and not some of our Balkan neighbours...
They(obviously one particular Goofy above) are so obsessed with their delusions that they can't accept even basic facts mentioned in the study they claimed they read.
 
@Hawk I don't see any mena z2103s in the excel file, or am I going blind?

Everything is a variation of P312, Z2106/08 and PF7562/3.
I think i missread the paper

Five individuals belonged to R1b-Z2103. This lineage was present in the Balkans during the
Bronze Age and Iron Age [19,147,148,152], and thus some of these individuals could be patrilineal
descendants of Balkans Iron Age men. However, by the Late Iron Age, R1b-Z2103 was widely
distributed in Eastern Europe, the Eurasian Steppe and Armenia, which means that they could also
derive from new arrivals into the Balkans during the 1st millennium CE. In fact, two individuals
who belonged to R1b-Z2103 were clear outliers based on the autosomal data, I15551 with a Near
Eastern autosomal profile and I35014 with Eastern European-related ancestry.

Looks like one Eastern European, one Near Eastern.

I was texting from phone, so....
 
I think i missread the paper



Looks like one Eastern European, one Near Eastern.

I was texting from phone, so....

Τhank you, I5551 is listed as R-Z2105 terminal and I35014 as R-Y14300 which is downstream of Z2106 so not MENA. I will investigate the former further.
 
This is a crucial information,

However, over the later 6th and 7th centuries, as the Roman Empire (ruled from Constantinople, ∼1,000 km away) was confronted by pandemic plague and environmental, political, and military challenges, Roman control over this frontier was lost.

The end of imperial hegemony in the Balkans coincided with further population movements patchily attested in the historical record, including the arrival of the Slavs, whose migration to the region was, much like the arrival of Germanic groups in post-Roman Britain, significant enough to have a particularly lasting impact, reflected in the south Slavic languages widely spoken in the Balkans today.
Slavic-associated ancestry in present-day populations has been identified as far as the Peloponnese
(the southern tip of the Balkan Peninsula in present-day Greece), but the degree, timing, and character of permanent demographic impacts across the region have been poorly understood.



I think that the Proto-Albanian population was some good chunk of mixed E-V13, J2b2-L283 and R1b-Z2103 in Central Balkans, pushed from these waves of migrations deeper where they ended up in Albania.

Not all of them, some J2b2-L283 and R1b-Z2103 might have been Latinized Illyrian, some E-V13 might have been already with Byzantine garrisons.
 
It is possible, Greeks from this period would have been far more southern shifted prior to Slavic and Albanian migration and don't forget that Anatolia was inhabited by Greek like people until the Turkic invasions. South Italians is another possibility
Data obviously confirms Anatolian, Northern Levantine shift in the Balkans even encompassing Dalmatia.
 
I looked at the supplementals. Of the 8 E-V13 labeled as Balkan Iron Age, 4 are clearly south Thracian in profile and the other four are something else. One of these is shown as Albanian IA but with a very low feat, and the other three as Croat IA + Aegean IA. I am confident I identified them on the PCA, and 3 fall under the Bassarabi zone, just below Cinamak. One from Viminacium I think is Dacian, it is modeled as 81% IA Croatia and 19% Aegean but the fit is super low and there is not a single Viminacium sample on the PCA that aligns between IA Croatia and BA Aegean.

I15490 - E-CTS1273, South Thracian in profile.
I15504 - E-BY3880, South Thracian in profile.
I15518 - E-CTS1273, South Thracian in profile.
I15554 - E-BY3880, South Thracian in profile.
I15495 - E-CTS9320, this one is the one I think might be a Dacian, in the old PCA graph from the pre-print, this would be the sample that almost plots like a central European.
I15507 - E-BY3880, Bassarabi or half south Thracian, half Dacian
I15544 - E-BY3880, Bassarabi/Moesian local
I15553 - E-CTS1273, Bassarabi/Moesian local

It looks like most E-V13 in Viminacium are south Thracians, and if the authors want to capture local profiles they ought to consider taking samples from smaller settlements in the countryside. In Timacum Minus, only one E-V13 is south Thracian, and the rest are of unique profile, which should be local.

There is also a new E-V13 sample from Komardin, that plots fairly close to South Thracian, but somewhat different which the authors have modeled as half Croatian IA and half BA-IA Aegean. Probably another Dacian-Thracian mixed profile.

And the single R-Z1203 sample that is Balkan IA, seems to be Illyrian, and plots like a Daunian.

Once I got the G25 coordinates, I will take a closer look myself as well. Its a shame, like usual, that the subclades couldn't be determined more downstream. And the other big issue is that the local majority just cremated and lived on the countryside, so they are not even represented by these samples properly.
If there are some locals which transitioned to inhumation in that time frame, that's possible however, so a half South Thracian vs. Dacian composition would make perfect sense.

However, I wonder how one could properly distinguish, autosomally, with any certainty an individual of Dacian descend with minor "Imperial Roman" admixture from South Thracian or a South Thracian with minor Germanic-Celtic-Northern Illyrian admixture in the opposite direction. Its possible with larger samples but individually it could go wrong.

The only really interesting downstream assignment for me is from Croatia: I28388, E-FGC11457 - what about his profile? Also in comparison to the other samples from that site. Even if they are much later.
 
Call me dumb, but how can they know how much Slavic ancestry is in Greeks without at least any classical era samples? In addition to that, having samples from the entirety of Greece, not just one or two locations, to assess any potential regional variation in their profiles.
That seems a pretty good question
 
Looks like FTDNA will take care of a proper downstream assignment, as far as possible, from Göran Runström:

Another large study by Olalde et al. has been published: "A genetic history of the Balkans from Roman frontier to Slavic migrations"

Looks like around 80 male samples with a diverse set of Y-DNA haplogroups from mostly present-day Croatia and Serbia, but also Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, and Slovakia.

We will analyze and make the haplogroup results available in the next few weeks.
 
That seems a pretty good question
While you're at it, we need samples from the countryside, from the small villages and settlements. I know that in my town they found an intact female skeleton from 500AD in somebody's garden. I wonder if they could extract some DNA from it. They probably forgot they have her.
 
Once I got the G25 coordinates, I will take a closer look myself as well. Its a shame, like usual, that the subclades couldn't be determined more downstream. And the other big issue is that the local majority just cremated and lived on the countryside, so they are not even represented by these samples properly.
If there are some locals which transitioned to inhumation in that time frame, that's possible however, so a half South Thracian vs. Dacian composition would make perfect sense.

However, I wonder how one could properly distinguish, autosomally, with any certainty an individual of Dacian descend with minor "Imperial Roman" admixture from South Thracian or a South Thracian with minor Germanic-Celtic-Northern Illyrian admixture in the opposite direction. Its possible with larger samples but individually it could go wrong.

The only really interesting downstream assignment for me is from Croatia: I28388, E-FGC11457 - what about his profile? Also in comparison to the other samples from that site. Even if they are much later.
I28388 is modeled as a threeway mixture of Balkan local, Anatolian and Eastern European. I am only focusing on Balkan local profiles. Keep in mind the authors are not trying to find new clusters and are only using established ones as a proxy for modeling, so they would not know what is a Dacian or a Moesian profile, they use existing Balkan clusters to model them, but it's obvious the fit is passable, but not the real deal. Kind of like public school food, rated as grade D-, but edible.

This is where I think the Serbian E-V13s, J2b-L283, and R-Z2103 are.
zxHNr3Z.png



Edit: The authors have the descriptions mixed up, on table 6 they have the following model:
Gg0qDEk.png


But the first model is either impossible based on the PCA or they reversed components, Aegean is 81% and Croatia IA is 19%. This section of the table would change four of the samples in the graph. I updated the graph because of this.
 
Last edited:
Also, here is one of the most downstream assigned individuals, he is from Komardin, I27297:

Interestingly no Albanian moderns in this branch, even though there are Greeks, Turks, Persians and Armenians - which speaks for a more South Eastern distribution and its the Corvinus branch (Vlach).

Also bad that the Lepenski Vir sample is so low quality, it would have added another site from the Danube with more detail.
 
An assignment was done:
PribislavI28388; 700-900 AD; Dvorac, Nuštar, Croatia; E-Z5018>S2979>FGC11457>FGC11451>FGC11450>BY4856 (xBY50699)


FGC11457 level: FGC11449/Y13926/B409+ C>T (2T)

FGC11451 level: FGC11455+ C>G (3F)

FGC11450 level: FGC11450/Y15156+ G>A (1A)

BY4856 level: BY4856+ T>C (10C)



Moderns are more North Western, but the TMRCA is in the Vekerzug time frame.
 
Also, here is one of the most downstream assigned individuals, he is from Komardin, I27297:

Interestingly no Albanian moderns in this branch, even though there are Greeks, Turks, Persians and Armenians - which speaks for a more South Eastern distribution and its the Corvinus branch (Vlach).

Also bad that the Lepenski Vir sample is so low quality, it would have added another site from the Danube with more detail.
How old is this branch?
 
Back to the Transitional Period with the original spread of E-V13, 3.100 ybp. So very old for the E-V13 phylogeny.
 
Once I got the G25 coordinates, I will take a closer look myself as well. Its a shame, like usual, that the subclades couldn't be determined more downstream. And the other big issue is that the local majority just cremated and lived on the countryside, so they are not even represented by these samples properly.
I was wrong about the Viminacium Privoj, because the table in the supplementary section is misleading, they don't specify which portion is which. The Balkan IA profile that intrudes towards Central Europe might be R-Z2103, or a female sample.
 
There are Albanians under PH1173. At least I know of two samples, one from Tirane and one from Elbasan (so central Albania).


As for these samples, I only looked at the Z2103 ones thus far, more specifically I15551, I15552 and I15515, and man they are low quality. I15552 that was classified as CTS1450 granted is little better and was able to determine that he is at least Z2705-

I wonder if these crazy autosomal profiles that we are seeing among some of these samples actually has to do with the low quality of the samples…
 

This thread has been viewed 28169 times.

Back
Top