New map of Slavic Y-DNA

"There are 2 from Magyar period also (possible Y4460 & S17250)"

"Actually, we don't know whether this is is indeed I2a-Din (for this we would need to identify some mutations downstream of L621, or even downstream of CTS10228)"

" New entry YF09727 [MM: from France!] splits the old I-CTS10228 level: He tested negative for at least 6 of the SNPs currently listed as tree-equivalent to CTS10228. Thus, his patrilineage is a much earlier offshoot and not part of the I2a-Dinaric expansion."

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread...nd-coming-soon&p=255823&viewfull=1#post255823

btw. 900-1000 AD is medieval not aDNA!
 
gyms said:
"There are 2 from Magyar period also (possible Y4460 & S17250)"

"Actually, we don't know whether this is is indeed I2a-Din (for this we would need to identify some mutations downstream of L621, or even downstream of CTS10228)"

" New entry YF09727 [MM: from France!] splits the old I-CTS10228 level: He tested negative for at least 6 of the SNPs currently listed as tree-equivalent to CTS10228. Thus, his patrilineage is a much earlier offshoot and not part of the I2a-Dinaric expansion."

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread...nd-coming-soon&p=255823&viewfull=1#post255823

btw. 900-1000 AD is medieval not aDNA!
Click to expand...

Keep coping
 
gyms said:
Keep dreaming.
Click to expand...

You're the one dreaming for thinking I2a1b is Scandinavian lol. Like I said, if you're basal perhaps its Bastarnae, Goths etc. But if you're downstream CTS10228 you need to find a way to explain why it is everywhere Slavs are and not everywhere Vikings were. Slavic Pirates! they were a thing in Southern Sweden you know. I am L1029 myself. While I am basal so other possibilities exist, in all probability it still probably moved with Sklavenoi before having a founder effect in Albania. I accept it. Despite no ADNA its still probably the case but we will see.

Diversity is usually indicative of origins(in the absence of ADNA). Most diversity for I2a1b is in southern Poland. R1a diversity in Romania etc. If you want to feel special you can say perhaps the a mix of Bastarnae, and free Dacians were the progenitors of Proto-Slavs, but that still doesn't change that its most recent transmission into your lands were from Slavs.
 
How can this possibly be true when these are shown before Slavic presence in the Mediterranean areas?:

"Some deep clades of E-V13, G2a, J2b2a and R1b-Z2103 may also be of Slavic origin"
 
Pericles said:
How can this possibly be true when these are shown before Slavic presence in the Mediterranean areas?:

"Some deep clades of E-V13, G2a, J2b2a and R1b-Z2103 may also be of Slavic origin"
Click to expand...

I think he means in terms of specific clades. There are some clades more commonly found in Slavic countries suggesting they spread with the slavic migrations. Not that it is originally Slavic derived. Same as I have an Albanian founder clade(found only in Albanians) under a Proto-Slavic haplogroup(L1029). Doesn't change the ancestor coming from Northern and Eastern Europe, but the clade that developed from that ancestor is currently Albanian specific. So I imagine "Some deep clades of E-V13, G2a, J2b2a and R1b-Z2103 may also be of Slavic origin", means some DEEP clades developed and spread with Slavs, making it Slavic at that point in time. If you go to the baseline its not Slavic. This is merely in terms of migration, since it takes only a couple generations or so to replace the majority of your genome.
 
In this thread many times colorful statistics are used from blog.vayda.pl. Be careful with this "statistics". I am Admin of YP728 & Subclade project. So, I know phylogeny and distribution of YP417 < L1029 very well. Author sais YP417 is Russia/Ukraine and it is result of Kiev culture etc. But it is not proper conclusion. YP417 is a part of L1029 and its Western migrations (4-8 cent.) were mainly from upper Vistula to NW Russia through Belarus and to Balkans (mainly South of Bulgaria, Rodops, Haskovo). About 25-30 per cent is left in West of Belarus (Poland, West Prussia, Sweden, Danmark). Be careful with Vayda's statistics. It seems I know what mistake is made by Vayda. It is including of numerous Ashkenazi branch M12402. But it is incorrect because of their own specific cultural area and distribution. So, Vayda shows many Latvians, Romanians, Ukrainians. But we have not any Latvians and Romanians. Ukrainians have their minor amount. Vayda should know haplogroups of Kiev culture, Pripyat river etc - they are I2a1, CTS1211, Z92... No L1029.
 
I also agree with an Upper Vistula origin of L1029; my clade of YP445 is predominantly German today-I envision it having originated in the Czech lands after its ancestor went through the Moravian Gate from southeast Poland, and then having gone up the Elbe into central Germany.
 
Aspar said:
That map looks good.
It shows how significant was the depopulation of the Balkans during the Medieval and it's population with new, Slavic people, especially in the western Balkans, where the percentage of these Slavic lineages in some places is more than 70%.
The Slavic lineages in Anatolia can be explained with the historical fact that the Byzantines moved Slavic tribes from Greece to the depopulated areas of Anatolia.
Some of those Slavic tribes changed alliance and moved in the territory of the Caliphate, hence we find Slavic lineages in northern Mesapotamia as well.
Also there is more recent factor, the Ottoman Empire, the janissaries and the converted Balkan people that moved in Anatolia after the Ottoman collapse in the Balkans.
Click to expand...
I dont want to brake you little theory here but:
Either part of Greece were depopulated and the population replaced with Slavs, or the Slavic input is as low as the second map shows.
You cant have both.
The first map is based on a questionable dating method from ONE dating company(russian) based on ONE dating method, in an area of genetics that there isnt a consensus yet.
The second map though is based on science and representative samples of the individual DNA and the population groups.
You can take the raw data from one company, and the raw data of a second test from a second company, and analyse them both by the algorithm of a third company or GedMAtch, and they will yield the same matching results more or less.
 
I think that Lithuania and Latvia or even Estonia might have more Slavic Y-DNA than on the map mentioned in the title of that topic.

I suppose than in Lithuania much of R1a (maybe even most) and (almost) all I2a is from Slavs, not Balts. Balts had not I2a-Y3120, but there may be about 5% of that haplogroup in this country.

M458 can be found in Lithuania (where its frequency may be about 6%) and even in Estonia. Ancient Balts probably have no M458 at all, at least, especially its young subclades (TMRCA about 2000 ybp) like YP256, YP1337, L1029 (most common) and YP515. Of course they had no I-Y3120 (which has TMRCA about 2100-2200 ybp according to YFull) in ancient times.

Many Balts, especially in Lithuania, may have East or West Slavic Y-DNA, which is usually R1a (more frequently) or I2a (more rarely). Most popular clades of CTS1211 (YP343 and Y35) and probably even some branches of usually "more eastern" Z92 are most probably Slavic, not Baltic.
 
Why would you think so? Archeologically, it is former Baltic tribes who extended much into current Slavic territories and not vice versa. Therefore, it is more likely that current Slavic people (like Belorussians) that carry Baltic y-dna, don't you agree?
 
Ygorcs said:
I think the perception of Gauls and Germanics as tall may have had more to do with, first of all, very broad generalizations based on some outliers (mainly distinguished warriors), and secondly and most importantly not exactly due to genetics, but to lifestyle, as Greeks and Romans as a whole were heavily agriculturalist peoples, and the "barbarians" to their north still led a more "natural" lifestyle with much more stock breeding, hunting and gathering coupled with agriculture. There are several indications that in general farmer peoples, especially in very populated (= less resources per capita) regions, were shorter than pastoralist or hunter-gatherer people.
Click to expand...
1.70 of ancient grecoromans should be considered High .
Statistics indicate that most germanic countries would reach that avarage height only in the 20thst century.
 
Ever heard of the Justinianic plague? Or the multitude of Slavic tribes that settled in Greece? They were hellenized, eventually, but unless the Byzantines executed every single one of them, they would've left some impact in the overall genetics of Greece.

There's plenty of maps featuring current and former Slavic toponyms in Greece, I'd link one but this is my first post so I'll have to forgo that. Either they skip this bit of history in Greek history classes, or you're being wilfully ignorant due to some sort of political agenda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top