Genetic structure of the early Hungarian conquerors inferred from mtDNA and Y-DNA

berun:"The Y DNA samples can't be trusted as to be from true Magyars"
Who are the true Magyars?

By the time we speak those speaking Hungarian with SW Ural origins.
 
Don't worry about Berun... Everything is r1b and connected with cultures of conquerors is false for him. If there were quivers and weapons, I want to know if they are found in the four males' tombs... this would be a correct way to know if they were magyars, i.e. to link material culture with genetics. Obviously, a biased person like our friend only thinks about the dna (with a lot of prejudice) and not both the dna AND the archaelogical environment.

I don't know from where you get that I reject R1b as conquerors; just for amusement, can you explain?

Whichever the biased ideas I have, even if pissing off all archaeological data you are failing the most, why? because you just don't take into account History, and History tells us that Magyars came from SW Urals THROUGH "Ukrainan" lands in a process of two centuries, so R1b-U106 of the "Ukrainan" Gothi could be included into the Magyar advance just as they included Turkik tribes in their advance; also a lot of Germanic tribes roamed before all it in the Pannonian plains (Heruli, Lombardi, etc.) and who can say that they didn't left a genetic trace there? you? maybe they didn't carried weapons just thinking that with their brutish faces and painful shouts the enemy would flee?
 
I'm so sorry, but it isn't a problem to develop a deeper thinking... It's a matter to be honest and not clowns. If you were serious, then you would put on the table better arguments than "it's r1b, so it is impossible"... But I know that is even impossible for your biased way of thinking that a thought different from "r1b is shit" is very far from being real.

Well, before to develop deeper thinking you might try to develop reading-the-post-before-post-nonsense.

My biased way of thinking is based on an occult agenda titled "Occam's Razor", so even if Vikings (U106) were doing a lot of things in Russia by then, so that could arrive U106 to SW Urals, to me is more easy to cut all it simply thinking that such U106 is local or came by "Ukrainan" Gothi that addered the Magyar wave of advance.

Maybe the problem is that I read more than you about history.
 
By the time we speak those speaking Hungarian with SW Ural origins.

The Finno-Ugrian theory is based on the hypothetical family-tree model and chronology of the Indo-European ethno-linguistic group's evolution (17). The family-tree model assumes that the members of a defined ethno-linguistic group originated from a common ancestral people which spoke a common ancestral language and lived in a common ancestral homeland from which various groups migrated to form the distinct branches of an ethno-linguistic family. Thus, the Finno-Ugrian theory states that the Finno-Ugrian group separated from the ancestral Uralic group between 5000 and 4000 BC; between 3000 and 2000 BC the Finnic and Ugrian branches separated, and around 1000 BC the "proto-Hungarians" separated from the "Ob-Ugrians" and migrated Westward (18). However, the validity of this monolithic family-tree model has been increasingly questioned by several researchers, including some Indo-European scholars (19).
http://www.hunmagyar.org/tor/controve.htm

http://www.hungarianhistory.com/lib/hunspir/hsp05.htm

http://assets.cambridge.org/97805216/61423/sample/9780521661423ws.pdf

http://www.regeszet.org.hu/images/angol/a_011.pdf

http://www.chicagohungarians.com/radics/Origin1.htm


As you can see there is lots of theories and stereotyps about the origins of Hungarians.Make your choice.
 
However, the validity of this monolithic family-tree model has been increasingly questioned by several researchers, including some Indo-European scholars (19).

http://www.hungarianhistory.com/lib/hunspir/hsp05.htm

http://assets.cambridge.org/97805216/61423/sample/9780521661423ws.pdf

http://www.regeszet.org.hu/images/angol/a_011.pdf

http://www.chicagohungarians.com/radics/Origin1.htm


As you can see there is lots of theories and stereotyps about the origins of Hungarians.Make your choice.

The first link that you give us to read states:

Magyar - can greatly facilitate the deciphering of Sumerian writings. Cunei form writing was used by the Hungarians long before their arrival in the Carpathian Basin, and afterwards as well.

To discuss history and ancient genetics it's OK to me, but I'm not willing to expend time with bullshit or bullshit eaters.
 
To discuss history and ancient genetics it's OK to me, but I'm not willing to expend time with bullshit or bullshit eaters.

Perfect choice,berun.Same here.
 
I don't know from where you get that I reject R1b as conquerors; just for amusement, can you explain?

Whichever the biased ideas I have, even if pissing off all archaeological data you are failing the most, why? because you just don't take into account History, and History tells us that Magyars came from SW Urals THROUGH "Ukrainan" lands in a process of two centuries, so R1b-U106 of the "Ukrainan" Gothi could be included into the Magyar advance just as they included Turkik tribes in their advance; also a lot of Germanic tribes roamed before all it in the Pannonian plains (Heruli, Lombardi, etc.) and who can say that they didn't left a genetic trace there? you? maybe they didn't carried weapons just thinking that with their brutish faces and painful shouts the enemy would flee?

You seem very sure to state that Gothi were R-U106... were are the sources? Even in the Urals there are traces of R-U106... not only in Ukraine. As the study states, all the individuals were different autosomally from modern Hungarians... so also those I2 and R-U106 guys.
 
Gentlemen, no more foul language, and enough with the insults on this thread. Make your points in a civil manner. Am I clear?
 
You seem very sure to state that Gothi were R-U106... were are the sources? Even in the Urals there are traces of R-U106... not only in Ukraine. As the study states, all the individuals were different autosomally from modern Hungarians... so also those I2 and R-U106 guys.

Dr. McDonalds analysis

U106 men in eastern Europe tend to be dominated by a small number of haplogroups. Most notably, these are Z326 (circa 1300 BC, peak frequency in Germany) and FGC8590 (circa 300 BC, peak frequency in the Baltic States). Z326 is common in south eastern Europe; FGC8590 is common in north eastern Europe. They probably represent the result of two different migrations. The timing and exact origin of the Z326 migration is unclear, but the timing of the FGC8590 migration seems tied to its origin, so around 2000 years ago. I have previously associated it with the movement of the Gothic peoples into this region. In modern north-eastern Hungarian populations, it is likely that these two sub-clades make up around 1/3 of the U106 population. Some of the clades in the other 2/3 are likely to be tied to the same two migrations.

U106 is very rare in the Caspian-Pontic steppe, as the authors note. It's therefore likely that these two individuals represent native European populations, again as the authors note. However, it is possible that some of the Hun invaders represented the descendants of the original Gothic tribes that populated the Black Sea coasts in the 3rd century AD. Further resolution beyond S21 would be interesting, however it is likely that there would be no call on these results, and little possibility of extraction from the remaining samples. It is a shame they didn't manage to fully sequence them.
 
You seem very sure to state that Gothi were R-U106... were are the sources? Even in the Urals there are traces of R-U106... not only in Ukraine. As the study states, all the individuals were different autosomally from modern Hungarians... so also those I2 and R-U106 guys.

Thes sources are the logics: RISE98, the first U106 known, was found in Sweden (the country were the Gothi came out, from actual Gothaland), there is no ancient DNA from the diverse samples taken in European Russia and Hungary of the Bronce Age / Iron Age / Middle Ages till 900 AD providing U106, and U106 is a typical clade of the Germanic peoples, so that one in five is U106 in Sweden... so simple logics are quite practical in this case.

For the differences in autosomals... it even makes more strong the case that such "Magyars" were a composite tribe by the time that they reached the Pannonian plain. In fact what pushed them westwards would have pushed also other steppe tribes with them, so that the next step would be to make a "joint venture".
 
Thes sources are the logics: RISE98, the first U106 known, was found in Sweden (the country were the Gothi came out, from actual Gothaland), there is no ancient DNA from the diverse samples taken in European Russia and Hungary of the Bronce Age / Iron Age / Middle Ages till 900 AD providing U106, and U106 is a typical clade of the Germanic peoples, so that one in five is U106 in Sweden... so simple logics are quite practical in this case.

For the differences in autosomals... it even makes more strong the case that such "Magyars" were a composite tribe by the time that they reached the Pannonian plain. In fact what pushed them westwards would have pushed also other steppe tribes with them, so that the next step would be to make a "joint venture".

Logic isn't a reliable source, and even your Occam Razor isn't. For example: a certain surname was born in place A and then some people bearing that surname moved in places B and C. In the mean time, people in place A haven't less male heirs and the surname disappear. Instead, people in places B and C are flourishing and some other people bearing that surname move in places D and E. In two centuries we will have that surname only in place E. This is the history of many surnames in my area, even noble ones and mostly peasant ones. Then, put a haplogroup instead of the surname and, obviously, forget the documents that can help us to build a surname history. Without any document, how can you say with a certain degree of certainty that an haplogroup, like a surname, existing in a place is obviously native of that region?

Then, I agree with you that Magyars were a composite tribe, but I can't discard the possibility that those I2 and R-U106 could come from the Urals too, given also the fact that we haven't got Gothic Y-DNA.
 
Dr. McDonalds analysis

U106 men in eastern Europe tend to be dominated by a small number of haplogroups. Most notably, these are Z326 (circa 1300 BC, peak frequency in Germany) and FGC8590 (circa 300 BC, peak frequency in the Baltic States). Z326 is common in south eastern Europe; FGC8590 is common in north eastern Europe. They probably represent the result of two different migrations. The timing and exact origin of the Z326 migration is unclear, but the timing of the FGC8590 migration seems tied to its origin, so around 2000 years ago. I have previously associated it with the movement of the Gothic peoples into this region. In modern north-eastern Hungarian populations, it is likely that these two sub-clades make up around 1/3 of the U106 population. Some of the clades in the other 2/3 are likely to be tied to the same two migrations.

U106 is very rare in the Caspian-Pontic steppe, as the authors note. It's therefore likely that these two individuals represent native European populations, again as the authors note. However, it is possible that some of the Hun invaders represented the descendants of the original Gothic tribes that populated the Black Sea coasts in the 3rd century AD. Further resolution beyond S21 would be interesting, however it is likely that there would be no call on these results, and little possibility of extraction from the remaining samples. It is a shame they didn't manage to fully sequence them.

Really impressive, but this is an analysis on modern samples, or not? If yes, so I can't take it for sure... only ancient DNA can give a full answer. Obviously, that is the point I wanted to underline, is that Magyar ?lite could integrate only other people's ?lite... so those I2 and R-U106 were among the ?lite. Also Lombards assimilated many tribes in their migrations and their ?lite was also formed by italics when they arrived in Italy... see that study on the Partecipanze in San Giovanni in Persiceto by Boattini.
 
Logic isn't a reliable source, and even your Occam Razor isn't. For example: a certain surname was born in place A and then some people bearing that surname moved in places B and C. In the mean time, people in place A haven't less male heirs and the surname disappear. Instead, people in places B and C are flourishing and some other people bearing that surname move in places D and E. In two centuries we will have that surname only in place E. This is the history of many surnames in my area, even noble ones and mostly peasant ones. Then, put a haplogroup instead of the surname and, obviously, forget the documents that can help us to build a surname history. Without any document, how can you say with a certain degree of certainty that an haplogroup, like a surname, existing in a place is obviously native of that region?

Then, I agree with you that Magyars were a composite tribe, but I can't discard the possibility that those I2 and R-U106 could come from the Urals too, given also the fact that we haven't got Gothic Y-DNA.

It will be quite poetical, but it's not the same how a fallen leaf goes on with the wind as goes a fallen tree...

I'm not denying that such U106 came from Urals, but it is much less provable with actual data, being autochtone or Gothic DNA is the best explanation.
 
Gothic is best explained for R1b-U106, Slavic best explained for the I2-M423. I'm not sure why people argue the most obvious answer. There is no evidence these men arrived first generation from south Siberia.
 
Gothic is best explained for R1b-U106, Slavic best explained for the I2-M423. I'm not sure why people argue the most obvious answer. There is no evidence these men arrived first generation from south Siberia.

Extremly logical argument.Can you prove that?
The most obvious answer is:NO.
 
Gothic is best explained for R1b-U106, Slavic best explained for the I2-M423. I'm not sure why people argue the most obvious answer. There is no evidence these men arrived first generation from south Siberia.

They said that Yamnaya was best explained with a possible R1a... then R1b appeared and many people, who in their stubborn behaviour would have put their hands on fire like Mutius Scaevola in confirming that R1a would have appeared in Yamna culture, were (and some, I think, are) simply crying like babies without their favourite toy.

The evidence they were first generation Hugarians is inside the archaelogical environment: they were buried in a first generation graveyard. I don't know... is it so difficult to read and understand the paper? I don't find so strange that R-U106 and I-M423 were found among first Hungarians... we have those haplogroups in the Urals too. Obviously, a deeper analysis of the samples would help us to determine the exact subclade and tye it to a geographical area.
 
They said that Yamnaya was best explained with a possible R1a... then R1b appeared and many people, who in their stubborn behaviour would have put their hands on fire like Mutius Scaevola in confirming that R1a would have appeared in Yamna culture, were (and some, I think, are) simply crying like babies without their favourite toy.

The evidence they were first generation Hugarians is inside the archaelogical environment: they were buried in a first generation graveyard. I don't know... is it so difficult to read and understand the paper? I don't find so strange that R-U106 and I-M423 were found among first Hungarians... we have those haplogroups in the Urals too. Obviously, a deeper analysis of the samples would help us to determine the exact subclade and tye it to a geographical area.

We have only aDNA from the eastern part of Yamnaya culture and for a while we have a lot of reasons to belive that the western part of Yamnaya culture was populated predominantly by R1a folks. So it would be guys like you who would cry like babies when we get results of aDNA from the eastern part of Yamnaya culture.

Authentic Hungarians surely were not bearers of R-U106 and I-M423 subclades. Those R-U106 and I-M423 guys were just local folks subdued by their Hungarian masters. I guess it's pretty much obvious.
 
We have only aDNA from the eastern part of Yamnaya culture and for a while we have a lot of reasons to belive that the western part of Yamnaya culture was populated predominantly by R1a folks. So it would be guys like you who would cry like babies when we get results of aDNA from the eastern part of Yamnaya culture.

Authentic Hungarians surely were not bearers of R-U106 and I-M423 subclades. Those R-U106 and I-M423 guys were just local folks subdued by their Hungarian masters. I guess it's pretty much obvious.
Lot's of speculations to believe that the western part of Yamnaya Culture was populated by western clades of R1b. Let's wait and see.
 

This thread has been viewed 104983 times.

Back
Top