Y-DNA haplogroups of ancient civilizations

Hello all,

I found this site via some casual online searching for information on ancient Greek DNA and must say that the knowledge and discourse seems to be very high indeed! I have learned some things I did not know so I am certainly glad I found my way here.

That being said, as I kept reading I could not believe I was running into pages and pages of copy-and-paste propaganda to do with the FYROM-Greece dispute, for two main reasons. One, is it truly allowed that someone can post reams and reams of literal diarrhea culled from any-and-all of the main FYROM-ian revisionist sites? I mean if that is the case, logic would follow that I could now start copying-and-pasting any-and-all Greek sites as well and just do the same here in an attempt to rebut?

Is this seriously tolerated? Isn't that called spamming or ******** in most places?

The second reason, is that there is actually appears to be quite a limited knowledge on the subject frankly. I don't claim by any means to be other than a genetic illiterate, so I won't attempt to debate something that I have a limited knowledge in, but it seems the same can be said for almost all the posters here on the subject on ancient Macedonian history. If you ignore the obviously juvenile ranting’s of the one FYROM-ian poster, who seems to not have a clue in regards to the subject or context of what he/she is posting, there are some serious misconceptions on here.

First, to clarify, I will play devil's advocate and say that by even the most extreme definition, namely that the Macedonians were not "Greeks", then even so, they certainly were, and are, exclusively part of the Greek cultural legacy. Even from this extreme vantage point, ancient history is replete with this evidence. Even in this narrowest of interpretations, Herodotus, who visited Macedon and reported, "as the Macedonians themselves say..." that they themselves declared themselves as Greeks, and Thucydides later on concurs. You have the thousands of thousands of inscriptions, gravestones, coins and such all in Greek. If they didn't speak it, they certainly endorsed it to such a degree that in all the centuries of the Macedonian kingdom not one non-Greek testament remains. Then you have the mere fact that Macedon eventually conquered the southern Greek states, and then went on to conquer much of the known-world of the time, and inaugurated the Hellenistic era, so named because of the spread of Greek language and culture through all the lands they touched, to such a degree that even thousands of miles away, and eventually separated by hostile powers, the Indo and Bactrian Greek kingdoms leave no archaeologist or historian in doubt what language and culture they belonged to. Again, a Macedonian superpower so neglectful and disdainful of their own language and culture as to not leave one trace? French may have been the lingua franca of much of the nobility and diplomats at one time, but don’t tell me the English, Russians, or German and other peoples, just threw away their language so completely as to leave not a whiff of it? The same applies as well with English today.

Of course, that is again only giving the benefit of the doubt to the skeptics. I could go on all day about this, but suffice to say that when Hesiod in the 8th century BC is already including the Makedones as part of the larger Hellenic family, or when the Persians are referring to them alongside their fellow Ionian “Greeks” and the other Greeks are sending envoys to them to participate in the pan-hellenic festivals and this while Macedon is a minor regional power, far below the notice of Athens, Thebes, or Sparta, it’s really hard to believe the Macedones weren’t Greeks.

We could even trace the Macedonians right through the Middle Ages and Byzantine era to clearly show, they really had nothing to do with the late coming Slavic (and surprisingly, many Turkic) invaders that primarily occupy ancient Paeonia and today’s FYROM.

This is what is so irritating to most Greeks regarding FYROM. I would go to the length that I would hope that the Greek government never accepts a name with Macedonia in it period as being the only honest stance, but have to live with the realpolitik that it will most likely have to be a geographic qualifier.

On a side-note, would anyone be able to say which is the most likely "original" Indo-European haplogroup?
 
Hello all,

On a side-note, would anyone be able to say which is the most likely "original" Indo-European haplogroup?

There is no telling at the moment. However, if one looks at the Eurasian haplogroups R1a and R1b, there is a strong connection to the spread of Indo-European both to the west and east. The spread obviously included other groups beyond the R1 people, but the main thrust of the migrations appears to be strongly R1a/R1b.

Ancient DNA will provide more answers.
 
There is no telling at the moment. However, if one looks at the Eurasian haplogroups R1a and R1b, there is a strong connection to the spread of Indo-European both to the west and east. The spread obviously included other groups beyond the R1 people, but the main thrust of the migrations appears to be strongly R1a/R1b.

Ancient DNA will provide more answers.

Thanks! It will be fascinating to see what the next few years bring in terms of knowledge. It seems like most here definitely do not support the Renfrew Anatolian origin theory of the Indo-Europeans?
 
The Kurgan Hypothesis is still the most widely accepted model, but that does not mean Renfrew's theory has no good points. Take the archaic nature of the Anatolian languages, for example. Plus, the Yamna trail mysteriously disappears beyond the western border of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. But we see places like Ireland and Britain that speak Indo-European languages.

Did PIE develop among steppe people, or was it a joint development between an incoming population and the steppe folk?

Yeah, we definitely need more ancient DNA to make better inferences about anything. How many years ago was it that we all thought R1b was Paleolithic (although some still cling to it)? Just a few.
 
FamilyTreeDNA.com website which was the testing company used to determine the nearest Haplogroup assigment based on the individual's haplotype results from the Y-DNA paternal line test. These verbatim Haplogroup Descriptions and/or excerpts are copyrighted by FamilyTreeDNA.com and all rights to these descriptions are claimed by FamilyTreeDNA.com. These descriptions have been printed here with the permission of FamilyTreeDNA.
 
only 0.4% exhibited non-white DNA.
since when does Slavic and Turkish mean non-white?
 
As a Bulgarian I can try to say about the people that made my nations!
Thracian were E(V13), G2a,J2b with some minor R1b.
Bulgars were R1a,J2a with some minor L,Q and R1b.
Slavs were I2a,R1a with some minor E(V13) and G2a,J2b,because they assimilated a lot of Thracian!

Also R1a is connected to Indo European language just like J2a and G2a!Not R1b!!!!R1a,J2a and G2a is the thing that glue together Indo Europeans!

But most of all Maciamo really nice work!You put a lot of importance on R1b,it is the only thing I do not agree, but I guess this is your gene so that why! Really nice work! Compliments!
 
Why is it here spreading of lies and the evil Megali idea? It should be forbidden.
R u the only Bulgarian here? Now we are two
 
Slavic is 100 % white, Turks in Turkey are mostly white Muslims mixed with some Arabs, Indians and Africans, but not that much,so Slavic 100 % White ,Turkish like 85% white!
 
As a Bulgarian I can try to say about the people that made my nations!
Thracian were E(V13), G2a,J2b with some minor R1b.
Bulgars were R1a,J2a with some minor L,Q and R1b.
Slavs were I2a,R1a with some minor E(V13) and G2a,J2b,because they assimilated a lot of Thracian!

Also R1a is connected to Indo European language just like J2a and G2a!Not R1b!!!!R1a,J2a and G2a is the thing that glue together Indo Europeans!

But most of all Maciamo really nice work!You put a lot of importance on R1b,it is the only thing I do not agree, but I guess this is your gene so that why! Really nice work! Compliments!

Thracians E-V13?
since when?
is there any DNA search in ancient Tombs?
 
Since 4 Februari 87 BC he eh!
It is logic Bulgars were R1a,J2a people
Slavs were I2a,R1a people
Hellenics were J2b,R1b people
Ottoman Turks were R1b,J1, N people
E(V13) is typical for the first people in the Balkan Trachian(have nothing to do with Hellenic) and Ilyrian though Iliriayns are the fathers of the Slavs and were more I2a people.
I2a Ilyrians mixed with brave horse warriors called Scythians that we mostly R1a with some J2a and Slavs were born
Today Bulgarians are mixture of Bulgar,Slav,Trachian
Today Greeks are mixture of Helloenic,Trachian and Slavs
So we do have a lot in common!Cheers!
 
Here is a question I never see an answer to: If say R1b people all descend from the same group and DNA mutation rates are known why is variations in the R1b so great. seems like we all would have shared the same mutations over time? This goes for all haplotypes I'm just using mine as the example. Are there factors such as Mitochondrial dna, environment, diet ?
 
I like your thinking!

It is looks like not many of forum users are interested in I1 haplogroup ? Especialy I1 M253+ , probably I need to blame a bottleneck for few male individuals left to have a conversation.
ONSLO.
 
Here is a question I never see an answer to: If say R1b people all descend from the same group and DNA mutation rates are known why is variations in the R1b so great.

It isn't, at least not among R1b-L11 (which includes all the common kinds in Western and Central Europe, including yours). Diversity among I2 is much greater, for example.

It may seem like there are a lot of R1b variants, because we know so much about them. But that's because R1b is the most well-researched haplogroup, not because it's especially diverse.

seems like we all would have shared the same mutations over time?

Well, all R1b shares the SNP mutations common to R1b. But obviously, since Y lines mutate linearly, uncommon SNPs and broad haplotypes are always unlikely to converge.

This goes for all haplotypes I'm just using mine as the example. Are there factors such as Mitochondrial dna, environment, diet ?

There are likely environmental factors that can increase mutation rates, but this isn't well understood, and so far, hasn't been shown to throw off STR dating estimates.
 
I like your thinking!

It is looks like not many of forum users are interested in I1 haplogroup ? Especialy I1 M253+ , probably I need to blame a bottleneck for few male individuals left to have a conversation.
ONSLO.

Even though I'm I2, I like to talk about I1! And I find that there are plenty of people who share an interest in it, because even though it has a much younger TMRCA than I2, it is now quite common, and has interesting correspondences to plenty of ancient migrations.
 
Wow, even before I first came here I've been very impressed by your scientific observations, I'm very curious on what you would ay about the Ancient Macedonians.
 
Maciamo,

Could you explain why you associate I (I1 and 2) mostly with Germanic peoples (as derived from a Paleolithic route)? I ask because it seems to me quite odd that the earliest people in Europe (I) would end up appearing so late on the scene as a historic people (the Germanics). Were the Neolithic farmer and early Indo-Europeans so good at keeping I in Fennoscandia (and possibly the Balkans and the British Isles) that they didn't reemerge as a cultural force until the Germanic epoch?

Also, what about the cultural continuities between Germanic and Celtic peoples in historical areas where the two lived either side by side, or were indistinguishable until the first millennium AD? For instance, it is ambiguous whether some of the people the Romans addressed in central European were either Celtic or Germanic, and the continuity in cultural connections between the two is often very strong in certain areas and in historical place names.

There is also the matter of Bithynia, Turkey which has a weird spike in I2A2 that may either be representative of Thracians (which are widely considered Celtic) or Varangarian Goths. Which do you think that population would likely represent?
 
Slavic is 100 % white, Turks in Turkey are mostly white Muslims mixed with some Arabs, Indians and Africans, but not that much,so Slavic 100 % White ,Turkish like 85% white!

Whereas the Turks clearly have a great deal of continuity with ancient Greek settlers (and the various other European peoples) who settled in Turkey in antiquity, I think it is hard to say that they are 85 percent white overall. The Turkic peoples in general are usually a mix of Caucasoid and Mongoloid racial types, and the Turkic language group widely departed from the Indo-European language group.

Also, there are pockets of areas in the Balkans that have suffered a tremendous amount of invasion by Asiatic peoples over the years, from the Huns, to the Mongols, to the Turks. Slavs are most assuredly white, but there are areas in Slavic predominated lands where non-whites are to be found.
 
It seems that every Ancient civilization which is worth mentioning had high amounts of E1b1(b) and/or J2. Ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Ancient Greece (Minoans, Pelasgians), Persians, Phoenicians, Etruscans.
 

This thread has been viewed 713629 times.

Back
Top