Huns, Avars and Hungars

The leader of the Hungarian conquerors was I2a L621 (S17250) associated with Slavs mostly south,also there is no any Slavic haplogroups among Avars,and so much connection between Avars and Sclaveni was told by historians.
 
It's associated today with southern Slavs because the more northern Slavs brought it to the southern Balkans.

The original bearers of it were probably from Cucteni-Tripolye.

The yDna doesn't necessarily tell you the autosomal signature.
 
No, not if by steppe you mean Yamnaya and Catacomb. They were probably darker than any modern Europeans. Re-read the Mathiesen and particularly the Sandra Wilde paper.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3977302/

If you're talking about the Andronovo types, they, as Markod indicated, probably picked up the lighter pigmentation in eastern Europe.

Plus, the Avars are mostly East Asian, and the Huns Eurasians. They're not going to have all of the European specific alleles for de-pigmentation. It's unclear whether East Asians at that time had high levels of their own different skin pigmentation snp.

No but i can clearly imagine Yamnaya people being half-Olive skin that tan a lot in the summer. But when i read " Dark Skin ", my mind goes with Dark Skin. So i'm question what does Dark Skin mean at this point? It was only 1'200 years ago, Europe was probably not that different as right now. So what in a modern perspective could those " Dark Skin " be? East Asians are not Dark Skinned, and if we consider Native Americans as Dark Skinned, this is a huge change on the perception. Knowing a lot of East Asians and Native Americans do have Pheomelanin, such as Natives Reddish Cheeks. The Sandra Wilde paper is too old at this point, we need modern humans with snps that match the ones of ancient types, to make us a phenotype idea of how it evolves and what it looks like from a modern perspective. Most of their samples got " Intermediate " wich for me sounds like Olive Skin, something very rarely seen in Europe nowadays, with only a minority of individuals from italy or iberia. Does it sounds right that the skin of central european only a thousand years ago would look like a northern indian? I think this study shows me that what geneticians considered genes or more specifically SNPS for Dark or Light skin are not quite the exact synergy wich gives Light skin in facts.
 
The leader of the Hungarian conquerors was I2a L621 (S17250) associated with Slavs mostly south,also there is no any Slavic haplogroups among Avars,and so much connection between Avars and Sclaveni was told by historians.

As far as I know it is not S17250 so we do not know younger subbranch of these samples.
 
Some things I find worth discussing considering this and the other studies about Huns and Hungarian conquerors:

1) Don't you find it a bit strange that these powerful peoples, mainly Huns and Avars, who apparently migrated en masse left such a tiny, almost nonexistant impact in the Y-DNA distribution of Eastern Europe, especially the Carpathian basin? Were they perhaps soooooo warlike and dedicated to warfare that that ended up becoming a huge reproductive/selective disadvantage for them and their lineages dwindled more and more along the time due to a much higher than average young death of their males? I assume that, given the nature of their conquest, there were many more males than females, so the negligible Mt-DNA impact could be explained that way even if the females were not dedicated to war. Or is it just that the subsequent "local" waves of conquest and expansion, like that of Slavs and Germans, wiped out physically most of the Avar and Hun descendants?

2) It's very nice to see ancient DNA confirming what linguists and historians had already assumed as likely, i.e. the connection between Huns and the Xiongnu. However, I was really convinced by the linguistics paper I have read about the Xiongnu having originally a Yeniseian language at least as their main lingua franca, considering the few evidences provided by loanwards and transcriptions of "Xiongnu language" in ancient Chinese sources, as well as possible borrowings in Turkic and Mongolic languages that can be reasonably explained via Yeniseian roots. Therefore, that would mean that, as it also happened later (for example, the way Turkic Kazkahs prevailed during the Mongol rule), a subset of the Xiongnu tribal confederation was probably Turkic and took advantage of the Xiongnu expansion and power to eventually establish its own Turkic-centered confederations (or at least confederations using Turkic as their official lingua franca), which would send waves after waves of conquering armies and accompanying migrants from the Late Antiquity to the High Middle Ages. This "flexible" and "assimilationist" ethnogenesis would also perfectly explain why the Turkic peoples are so varied genetically (some of them overwhelmingly West Asian, others overwhelmingly Northeastern European, others overwhelmingly Northeastern Asian and so on). (Personally I believe that the Huns and Avars represent the arrival of Oghur Turkic people, the only remnants of which today are the Chuvash - but in the past there were the Bulgars, Khazars and maybe the Cumans -, because only much later we do see strong evidences of Oghuz Turks arriving in Europe)

3) The Huns and Avars, being much earlier than the Hungarians, are possibly representative of the very first, still quite unmixed new waves of expansion from the Eurasian steppe, at least west of the Altai. Therefore, they could perhaps be related to the actual source of the Turkic languages (or at least of their expansion) before the formation of huge tribal confederations and concomitant widespread admixture from all sides that would result in much more "West Eurasian-like" Turkic samples in the later medieval era. Hungarians might thus represent a much later period when such big, flexible, readly assembled and disintegrated multiethnic confederations, prone to rapid language shift, too, had become much more "natural" in the steppe landscape, and with the East-West encounter much more consolidated, with a much more mixed population.
 
It's associated today with southern Slavs because the more northern Slavs brought it to the southern Balkans.

The original bearers of it were probably from Cucteni-Tripolye.

The yDna doesn't necessarily tell you the autosomal signature.
More northern stay in the north,those that came are in the south.The "original" homeland of this haplogroup from where it spread is yet debated.Cucuteni-tripolye is somewhere in the middle
240px-Cucuteni-Tripol%27ye_Culture_Outline_Map.png

9k=
 
As far as I know it is not S17250 so we do not know younger subbranch of these samples.
You have it in the results it is S17250

All of the samples under I2a L621 are S17250 as far i can see.
 
You have it in the results it is S17250

All of the samples under I2a L621 are S17250 as far i can see.

Comment on the Serbian portal Poreklo is that S17250 is negative and in Croatian that have x which means it's not that branch.
 
Avar Y-DNA is Turkic-Siberian or Eskimo-Chukchi - I'm guessing the former.
Yes, in the paper with Y STRs the Avar N clustered with Buryats, so it'll be Turko-Mongolic N-F4205. ("Genetic insights into the social organization of the Avar period elite in the 7th century AD Carpathian Basin"). In that paper the elite Avars had a very high proportion of East Asian mtDNA even though it was several generations after their arrival. Maybe the elite was relatively endogamous, hence not having that high a genetic impact on the general population?

Apparently there was an Old Russian phrase "they perished like the Avars" meaning "vanished without a trace". Seems apt.

The Conqueror N was N-M2019 and N-Z1936(xL1034). The former has a subclade N-PH1612 containing 2 Hungarians on Y Full.
 
All those L621 samples are xS17250, which means that they are negative on it. They have chosen S17250 probably because it's most common branch of CTS10228>Y3120 (they maybe thinked that if there are L621+ samples then they must be Y3120+, so because we have limited number of SNP-s it's better to analyze S17250). I just guess that's the reason.

The reason why there are no more + and - snp's for other hg's too is because ''
We selected 168 phylogenetically informative Y chromosome SNP-s 14 defining all major Hg-s and themost frequent Eurasian sub-Hg-s''. So, we have to wait for BAM files been available and to some good guys analyze it.
 
Balkan/Germanic/Avar Y-DNA seems to be associated with low status in the Magyar sample - probably indigenous. I2a/R1a were the big guys.

Same for the Avar sample. Eastern Y-DNA is associated with status.


The Avar E-V13+ burial is in no way of "lower status", it had silver plate belt (one of only two in the site, most had bronze plate belts), just because the information on the particular burial in this short paper is very low doesn't mean that it doesn't exist elsewhere..
 
This is one study where you dont want your ancient DNA to be found, unless you are Aspurg : P

Jokes aside, i am really amazed with quality and new horizonts this study opened, it really interprets one of really important North Balkan, Balkan but also European part of history
Also i see that they uploaded BAM files and we will probably manage to get information about deeper clades.
This is one very very very large, beautiful and important study!
 
So I2a1 is not a slavic marker. It was spread by Magyars, Bulgars, White Croats and other steppe people. No more turkic theories and slavs out of marshes theories, nice.
 
Regarding Slavic I2a, researchers of this study say the following:

"Hg I2a1a2b-L621 was present in 5 Conqueror samples, and a 6th sample form Magyarhomorog (MH/9)most likely also belongs here, as MH/9 is a likely kin of MH/16 (see below). This Hg of European origin is mostprominent in the Balkans and Eastern Europe, especially among Slavic speaking groups. It might have been amajor lineage of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture and it was present in the Baden culture of the CalcholiticCarpathian Basin."


As we can see there is no Slavic I2a1 haplogroup in Hun, early Avar and mid to late Avar samples. But it appears in Hungarian conqueror samples but also with few looks like joined minority haplogroups that were probably picked up somewhere on their way like J1, J2a, R1b, I1, and so on.


Slavic marker I2a was most certainly spread with early 7 century arriving Slavs rather then with any of these groups analysed in this study. Even tho with later arrival of Hungarians, there was again brought for sure a nice portion of Slavic groups. I would conclude that Hungarians used Slavs pratially as their allies and warriors in this process but also few other picked up HGs like mentioned above.

Regarding E1b-v13 haplogroup, as we can see its none existent in Early or Mid Huno-Avar period but it appears in one sample in late period and in one sample in Hungarian conquer period (opposing sides), it would be safe to assume that both samples were recruits into late Avar but also Conqueror sides, probably of Balkan origin.
 
Last edited:
Researches of this study say this bout E1b-v13, and i agree with them, only that i believe and there are overwhelming facts that E-v13 originated for sure in Europe and not Middle East lol, E-L618 was probably Middle East/N Africa born but even he emigrated to Europe pretty early on in Neolithic as it was found there already multiple times in ancient DNA.

Only 4800 years TMRCA part of E-v13 then later on spread in IE BA, before that it was smaller European population.


"The mediterranean haplogroup E1b1b1a1b1a-V13 was detected in an Avar (SzK/239) and a Conqueror (K2/6) sample, while this marker was not covered in another sample (K1/13, E1b1b- M215). This Hg originated in the Middle East and migrated to the Balkans and Western Asia during the Bronze Age."
 
This is one study where you dont want your ancient DNA to be found, unless you are Aspurg : P

:LOL:

Don't mess with Aspurg : p
 
So the leader is I2a1, all except one have dark eyes/hair, all buried with Magyar customs and horses and somehow they are slavs. Funny.
 
So the leader is I2a1, all except one have dark eyes/hair, all buried with Magyar customs and horses and somehow they are slavs. Funny.


Its not like that, and it was already said in first page that Slavic HGs among Hungarian conquerors can be valuated at around 30%.

Furthermore read this:

The genetic profile of the Avar and Conqueror leader groups seems considerably different, as latter groupis distinguished by the significant presence of European Hg-s; I2a1a2b-L621, R1b1a1b1a1a1-U106 and theFinno-Permic N1a1a1a1a2-Z1936 branch. Their Siberian N1a1a1a1a4 subclade also points at different sourcepopulations among ancestors of Yakuts, Evenks and Evens. Nevertheless the east Eurasian R1a subclade,R1a1a1b2a-Z94 seems to be a common element of the Hun, Avar and Conqueror elite. In contrast to Avars, allthree Hun lineages have paralleles among the Conquerors, but strong inferences cannot be drawn due to smallsample size.It is generally accepted that the Hungarian language was brought to the Carpathian Basin by theConquerors. Uralic speaking populations are characterized by a high frequency of Y-Hg N, which have often beeninterpreted as a genetic signal of shared ancestry. Indeed, recently a distinct shared ancestry component of likelySiberian origin was identified at the genomic level in these populations, modern Hungarians being a puzzlingexception36. The Conqueror elite had a significant proportion of N Hgs, 7% of them carrying N1a1a1a1a4-M2118and 10% N1a1a1a1a2-Z1936, both of which are present in Ugric speaking Khantys and Mansis 23. At the sametime none of the examined Conquerors belonged to the L1034 subclade of Z1936, while all of the Khanty Z1936lineages reported in 37 proved to be L1034 which has not been tested in the 23 study. Population genetic data ratherposition the Conqueror elite among Turkic groups, Bashkirs and Volga Tatars, in agreement with contemporaryIt is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.was not peer-reviewed) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.bioRxiv preprint first posted online Apr. 3, 2019; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/597997. The copyright holder for this preprint (which14historical accounts which denominated the Conquerors as “Turks”38. This does not exclude the possibility that theHungarian language could also have been present in the obviously very heterogeneous, probably multiethnicConqueror tribal alliance.


So i can agree with this, as it was obviously a European alliance of incomers from Carpathian Basin against more Asian like Huno-Avars. Furthermore Slavs were for sure under Hungarian control, no matter that one of leaders was of Slavic origin. Hungarian language prevailing rather then Slavic proves this. The leaders were actually these that originally brought Hungarian language and i guess they would be N1a1a1a1a2 samples that fit into Finno-Ugric branches and possibly one N1a1a1a1a4 sample.


Finno-Ugric language distribution so some things would be clearer:



Lenguas_finougrias.png
 
So the leader is I2a1, all except one have dark eyes/hair, all buried with Magyar customs and horses and somehow they are slavs. Funny.

In De Administrando Imperio it is written that
Other Croatians remained to Francia(Franks) and are now called White Croats, and they have their own prince, they are subject to Oton, great king of Francia, or Saxony (Saksias), and they are not baptized, they mutually married with Turks(Hungarians) and they are friends with them.

White Croats certainly mix with Hungarians but it's interesting that branch in that graves are probably former Dinaric north branches or some subclade in I-Y3120 branch.

https://yfull.com/tree/I-Y3120/

Makes sense because the mass of people went to the Balkans and they took I-S17250 subclade with them but considering that Croats have little of branch I-Y3120 the question is which direction of migration is in 10. century to Hungary and from where.

It might be peoples with branch I-Y4460 which would come from the east of Carpathians from direction of Ukraine and if we look at the present situation (YFull) then it would not have been White Croatians because these people(I-Y4460) migrate earlier(2200 ybp) from south Poland to Ukraine and later in the 10. century they return or coming to Hungary.

https://yfull.com/tree/I-Y4460/

The R1a in that graves is a branch which and Croatians has but which subbranch specifically we do not know so we can not assume direction of that migration.
 

This thread has been viewed 29702 times.

Back
Top