Classify Ukrainians

Yes but its hard to deny that slovenians are at least paternally largely descended from slavs. I mean genetically they arent completely slavic and they do have more western european type ancestry as well but still id say they are about 50 percent slavic genetically. I mean even slovaks nobody claims them as pure slavs but on a pca plot and on admixture calculators they end up being anywhere from 70-85 percent slavic (if ukrainians/south russians/ eastern poles are a refernce)

Obviously no one is racially pure but there is actual slavic admixture in the balkans even in serbia or bulgaria at around 20 percent or so.


You are a descendant of Romans though Angela ;)

Sent from my KIW-L21 using Tapatalk

As to your bolded comment, that's absolutely true (maybe even more than that) and I've never denied it. In fact, I've been saying that over and over again, but it doesn't seem to have gotten through.

As to the "Roman" ancestry for me, I also agree, but there's other stuff there that would have my father rolling in his grave. :) Those Ligures who were in both Emilia and Liguria and whom the "Romans" of that era eventually defeated, even if it was tough, were part "Celtic". They didn't all get sent back to Switzerland and Hungary the way he told me. Also, if some of the names in my family trees are any indication, there might be some "Lombard" (which he considered German) in there too, although the "Lombards" may have been a mix it turns out. It's all a lot more complicated than the holdover Fascist Era Italian ideas that my father was taught.

As I said, that's fine with me. I accept them all because they together formed the people among whom I was born, and with whom I spend my childhood, and whom I miss so dearly when I'm not there.

They can drive me crazy, but when I'm back it's like putting on a comfortable pair of slippers and feeling "at home".
 
Until we get a Slavic sample from migration period to the Balkans and compare it with present day populations to check the similarity,all this is empty talk you can claim whatever.Not that make any difference,still just an amateur talk.
 
Last edited:
Here it is: "Craniometric Relationships among Medieval Central European Populations: Implications for Croat Migration and Expansion":

cranio-pca.jpg

The positions of the analyzed Croatian sites in relation to the observed clusters were as follows. Sites from the east Adriatic coast: Nin, Bribir, Mravinci, and Danilo were located in the lower right part of the plot in the cluster of Polish sites. Nin, the most important early medieval Croatian site, occupied almost the same position as Cedynia, an early medieval site from northern Poland.

The results of these analyses are fairly consistent with the report written by the anonymous writer in the 30th chapterof the “De AdministrandoImperio” (16). Principal components analysis suggested that early medieval Croats were of Slavic origin and shared a common homeland with early medieval Poles, possibly in modern Poland and almost certainly in “… an area north of Bavaria …” from where they migrated to the east Adriatic coast(16).

http://www.academia.edu/11750795/Cr...pulations_Implications_for_Croat_ethnogenesis
 
edit............
 
Last edited:
Slovenians are genetically the most similar to North Slavs (especially West Slavs) out of all South Slavic groups, Croats probably come 2nd. North-Eastern Poles (Mazovians etc.), Belarusians and some Russian groups are mixed with Balts, so they are probably not representative of Early Slavs. Poles from Sudovia region (Suwalszczyzna) actually seem to be just Polonized West Balts (Sudovians/Yotvingians and Old Prussians) with not so much of Slavic admixture.

Polish R1a contains many subclades which are of Baltic rather than Slavic origin, and there is a north-east to south-west cline of N1c frequency in Poland. Russians are also mixed with Finno-Ugric peoples and other groups which had lived in Russia before Slavs - according to most theories the original Proto-Slavic homeland was to the west of Russia. But some scholars identify Proto-Slavs with Claudius Ptolemy's Stavanoi and Σουοβενοι - Suobenoi (Suovenoi) from Russia:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14042a.htm

Slavs

At present the customary name for all the Slavonic races is Slav. This name did not appear in history until a late period, but it has superseded all others. The general opinion is that it appeared for the first time in written documents in the sixth century of the Christian era. However, before this the Alexandrian scholar Ptolemy (about A.D. 100-178) mentioned in his work, "Geographike hyphegesis", a tribe called Stavani (Stavanoi) which was said to live in European Sarmatia between the Lithuanian tribes of the Galindae and the Sudeni and the Sarmatic tribe of the Alans. He also mentioned another tribe, Soubenoi, which he assigned to Asiatic Sarmatia on the other side of the Alani. According to Safarik these two statements refer to the same Slavonic people. Ptolemy got his information from two sources; the orthography of the copies he had was poor and consequently he believed there were two tribes to which it was necessary to assign separate localities. In reality the second name refers very probably to the ancestors of the present Slavs, as does the first name also though with less certainty. The Slavonic combination of consonants sl was changed in Greek orthography into stl, sthl, or skl. This theory was accepted by many scholars before Safarik, as Lomonosov, Schlözer, Tatistcheff, J. Thunmann, who in 1774 published a dissertation on the subject. It was first advanced probably in 1679 by Hartknoch who was supported in modern times by many scholars. Apart from the mention by Ptolemy, the expression Slavs is not found until the sixth century. The opinion once held by some German and many Slavonic scholars that the names Suevi and Slav were the same and that these two peoples were identical, although the Suevi were a branch of the Germans and the ancestors of the present Swabians, must be absolutely rejected. Scattered names found in old inscriptions and old charters that are similar in sound to the word Slav must also be excluded in this investigation.


After the reference by Ptolemy the Slavs are first spoken of by Pseudo-Caesarios of Nazianzum, whose work appeared at the beginning of the sixth century; in the middle of the sixth century Jordanes and Procopius gave fuller accounts of them. Even in the earliest sources the name appears in two forms. The old Slavonic authorities give: Slovene (plural from the singular Slovenin), the country is called Slovensko, the language slovenesk jazyk, the people slovensk narod. The Greeks wrote Soubenoi, but the writers of the sixth century used the terms: Sklabenoi, Sklauenoi, Sklabinoi, Sklauinoi. The Romans used the terms: Sclaueni, Sclauini, Sclauenia, Sclauinia. Later authors employ the expressions Sthlabenoi, Sthlabinoi, while the Romans wrote: Sthlaueni, Sthlauini. In the "Life of St. Clement" the expression Sthlabenoi occurs; later writers use such terms as Esklabinoi, Asklabinoi, Sklabinioi, Sklauenioi. The adjectives are sclaviniscus, sclavaniscus, sclavinicus, sclauanicus. At the same time shorter forms are also to be found, as: sklaboi, sthlaboi, sclavi, schlavi, sclavania, later also slavi. In addition appear as scattered forms: Sclauani, Sclauones (Sklabonoi, Esthlabesianoi, Ethlabogeneis). The Armenian Moises of Choren was acquainted with the term Sklavajin: the chronicler Michael the Syrian used the expression Sglau or Sglou; the Arabians adopted the expression Sclav, but because it could not be brought into harmony with their phonetical laws they changed it into Saklab, Sakalib, and later also to Slavije, Slavijun. The anonymous Persian geography of the tenth century used the term Seljabe.


Various explanations of the name have been suggested, the theory depending upon whether the longer or shorter form has been taken as the basis and upon acceptance of the vowel o or a as the original root vowel. From the thirteenth century until Safarik the shorter form Slav was always regarded as the original expression, and the name of the Slavs was traced from the word Slava (honour, fame), consequently it signified the same as gloriosi (ainetoi). However, as early as the fourteenth century and later the name Slav was at times referred to the longer form Slovenin with o as the root vowel, and this longer form was traced to the word Slovo (word, speech), Slavs signifying, consequently, "the talking ones," verbosi, veraces, homoglottoi, consequently it has been the accepted theory up to the present time. Other elucidations of the name Slav, as clovek (man), skala (rock), selo (colony), slati (to send), solovej (nightingale), scarcely merit mention. There is much more reason in another objection that Slavonic philologists have made to the derivation of the word Slav from slovo (word). The ending en or an of the form Slovenin indicates derivation from a topographical designation. Dobrowsky perceived this difficulty and therefore invented the topographical name Slovy, which was to be derived from slovo. With some reservation Safarik also gave a geographical interpretation. He did not, however, accept the purely imaginary locality Slovy but connected the word Slovenin with the Lithuanian Salava, Lettish Sala, from which is derived the Polish zulawa, signifying island, a dry spot in a swampy region. According to this interpretation the word Slavs would mean the inhabitants of an island, or inhabitants of a marshy region. The German scholar Grimm maintained the identity of the Slavs with Suevi and derived the name from sloba, svoba (freedom). The most probable explanation is that deriving the name from slovo (word); this is supported by the Slavonic name for the Germans Nemci (the dumb). The Slavs called themselves Slovani, that is, "the speaking ones", those who know words, while they called their neighbours the Germans, "the dumb", that is, those who do not know words.

Ptolemy's ethnonym Σουοβενοι might be Slavic, related to Slovenians, but also might be Finno-Ugric, related to Suomi.
 
edit................
 
From what I remember of my history, a lot of the Slavic population actually was moved there after a lot of repopulation.

Yeah, extreme Southern Ukraine used to be sparsely populated until the 18th century when it was colonized:

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

New_Russia_on_territory_of_Ukraine.png


007_Ukrainian_Cossack_Hetmanate_and_Russian_Empire_1751.jpg


Before that, in the 15th century, Crimean Khans settled Nogay Tatars on the Steppe along the Black Sea coast:

Nogais.png
 
In the map below thick red lines show the boundaries of densely settled territories as of year 1454. In the 1500s and 1600s Poland expanded this settled area further to the south. For example in 1550 the town of Sich was founded, and that was the beginning of Cossacks:

https://postimg.org/image/urkb0c11t/

Mapa4.jpg
 
Anyway people posted in the OP are from Western and Central Ukraine, regions such as: Volhynia, Galicia, Podolia, Polesia, Kiev, Cherkasy, Chernigov, Bratslav, Bukovina, Bessarabia, Carpathians, Zakarpattia.
 
BTW those plates are from my website actually... Those weren't posted. Third guy is clearly Mongoloid.

Central Ukrainians


uk-centr3.jpg


Steppe Ukrainians

p0088.jpg
 
Those Carpathian samples look indeed really similar to Albanians and Yugoslavians.
 
As I said, that's fine with me. I accept them all because they together formed the people among whom I was born, and with whom I spend my childhood, and whom I miss so dearly when I'm not there.

They can drive me crazy, but when I'm back it's like putting on a comfortable pair of slippers and feeling "at home".
I can't hold back the tears, that was beautiful, Angela! My heartstrings are torn! You made a man like me cry, not an easy task I assure you!
 
Yeah, Eastern Ukrainians look more like Russians.
All of them looks like today's Russians.
Thank you for my family album, post more, please.
Those chins, eyebrows and noses are absolutely common here.
The differences you see are mostly related to their lifestyle, sun, food etc.
 

This thread has been viewed 37594 times.

Back
Top