PDA

View Full Version : Map of Slavic y-dna in Greece, compiled by user Passa



Pages : [1] 2

Sikeliot
07-23-2016, 07:46 PM
and given permission to me to post.

These are the subclades of R1a and I2b that are pertinent to Slavic migration, meaning almost half of northern Greeks have a y-dna that can be traced back to Slavs, down to 10% on the islands.

No part of Greece has been untouched.

https://s31.postimg.org/eid6xv8kr/13770535_690365121117806_5102015285444749814_n.jpg

Kanenas
07-23-2016, 11:44 PM
and given permission to me to post.

These are the subclades of R1a and I2b that are pertinent to Slavic migration, meaning almost half of northern Greeks have a y-dna that can be traced back to Slavs, down to 10% on the islands.

No part of Greece has been untouched.

https://s31.postimg.org/eid6xv8kr/13770535_690365121117806_5102015285444749814_n.jpg

What are these subclades? Probably you mean I2a. On what sources was the map based? Can he make a table with the data and the sources. It would have been much more informative. Unless he is trying to mislead some people.

Almost half of the Northern Greeks today descend from Asia Minor and Pontic Greeks. I believe those are not included in 'Macedonian Greek' samples.

Illyro-Vlach
07-24-2016, 01:13 AM
1. What is with the Cretan outlier? Migration from the mainland?
2. Epirus seems to have gotten little Slavic penetration with the Pindus Mountains acting as a barrier. Please note that the west part of the Pindus Mountain Range was home to the most Aroumanian communities in the Balkans during the Ottoman Era.

Sikeliot
07-24-2016, 02:26 AM
1. What is with the Cretan outlier? Migration from the mainland?

Yes, which is also likely the case for all of the islands.

Constantine
07-24-2016, 03:17 AM
Any studies showing Greeks (autosomally) clustering with Slavic speakers yet?

Sikeliot
07-24-2016, 04:10 AM
Any studies showing Greeks (autosomally) clustering with Slavic speakers yet?

That when compared to Sicilians and Cretans they shift in the direction of Ukraine/Russia, should be sufficient. If you start in Sicily or Crete, Greeks are 1/4 of the way to Russia.

Tomenable
07-24-2016, 06:07 PM
Can you list exactly which subclades did you count?

Tomenable
07-24-2016, 06:15 PM
Any studies showing Greeks (autosomally) clustering with Slavic speakers yet?

From Kushniarevich et al., "Genetic Heritage of the Balto-Slavic Speaking Populations..." (2015):


(...) South Slavs in their turn share a similar number of IBD segments with East-West Slavs and with the ‘inter-Slavic’ Romanian, Hungarian and Gagauz populations (Fig 4B; Table G in S1 File). Notably, South Slavs share significantly fewer IBD segments for length classes 1.5–3 cM with their immediate geographic neighbors in south - Greeks, except Macedonian Greeks – than with the group of East-West Slavs (Fig 4B). Altogether, the analysis of IBD segment distributions revealed even patterns of IBD sharing among East-West Slavs–‘inter-Slavic’ populations (Hungarians, Romanians and Gagauz)–and South Slavs, i.e. across an area of assumed historic movements of people including Slavs. (...) we suggest that there is a “central-east European” genetic substratum in West and East Slavs, exemplified by NRY hgs R1a and the k3 ancestry component, and a “south-east European” one, featuring NRY hgs I2a and E plus the k2 ancestry component for South Slavs (Fig 2A and 2B, Fig 3, Table K in S1 File; Tables A,B in S1 File). Notably, the “south-east European” component does not extend to the whole Balkan Peninsula, as South Slavs are differentiated from Greek sub-populations except Macedonian Greeks (Fig 2A, Fig 4B) [55]. (...)

sciencediver
07-24-2016, 06:46 PM
Sikeliot,

All europeans score some baltic and east euro, does that make us all slavs?The least slavicized Greeks are the Cypriots for example, are they more/less Greek than Northern Greeks?

Tomenable
07-24-2016, 06:50 PM
Cypriots are of mostly Non-Indo-European stock.

sciencediver
07-24-2016, 07:00 PM
Cypriots are of mostly Non-Indo-European stock.

and so are Greeks...
https://f.hypotheses.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/727/files/2015/06/Haak-et-al-2015-Figure-3-Admixture-Proportions-in-Modern-DNA-With-Linguistic-and-Historical-Origins-Added.png

Gravetto-Danubian
07-24-2016, 07:02 PM
What are these subclades? Probably you mean I2a. On what sources was the map based? Can he make a table with the data and the sources. It would have been much more informative. Unless he is trying to mislead some people.

Almost half of the Northern Greeks today descend from Asia Minor and Pontic Greeks. I believe those are not included in 'Macedonian Greek' samples.

Based on several studies of Greek Macedonians , since 2000. It's a well studied area
It includes all modern Greek Macedonians .

Remember that Macedonia was almost wholly depopulated by 620 AD (outside notable exceptions - such as towns like Thessalniki and Philippi), so with no Slavs and Anatolian/ Armenian Byzantines, there'd be no modern "Greek Macedonians""

Tomenable
07-24-2016, 07:03 PM
Sciencediver,

Bronze Age and Iron Age Greeks were probably more autosomally Yamnaya-like than modern Greeks.

Sikeliot
07-24-2016, 07:05 PM
Cypriots are of mostly Non-Indo-European stock.

Cypriots are mostly descended from the pre-Greek natives of the island, who would have had affinity to the Levant.

sciencediver
07-24-2016, 07:06 PM
Based on several studies of Greek Macedonians , since 2000
It includes all modern Greek Macedonians . Remember that Macedonia was almost wholly depopulated by 620 AD, so with no Slavs and Anatolian/ Armenian Byzantines, there'd be no modern "Greek Macedonians""

theres no such thing as wholy depopulated... where do the E-V13 lineages in Northern Greece come from? Poles and Armenians?

Tomenable
07-24-2016, 07:08 PM
Sikeliot / Passa can you tell us which subclades were included as Slavic ???

Gravetto-Danubian
07-24-2016, 07:15 PM
theres no such thing as wholy depopulated... where do the E-V13 lineages in Northern Greece come from? Poles and Armenians?

Please read more carefully SD
I said "Macedonia was almost wholly depopulated"
It's beyond doubt. Several landscape surveys have been conducted in almost every Greek region by Western and Greek scholars, and even modern Greek scholars now admit the massive population flux occurred in the Middle Ages

But of course, this does not mean all of Greece was depopulated. Several towns esp along the eastern coast of Greece continued though the dark ages of the 7-9th century

As for EV13 specifically, I cannot yet answer , but will be able to do so in a couple of years
As I've mentioned elsewhere, we need to dissect within and beyond E-V13. It obviously arrived in the Neolithic, but I suspect it re-expanded in the Middle Ages from somewhere in the Balkans .
? Epirus ? Peloponnesus

Sikeliot
07-24-2016, 07:15 PM
E-V13 could have spread with Arvanites.

Tomenable
07-24-2016, 07:17 PM
You know what. Maybe let's wait for ancient DNA from Greece.

And I mean complete aDNA - including Y-DNA and autosomes.

sciencediver
07-24-2016, 07:21 PM
Sciencediver,

Bronze Age and Iron Age Greeks were probably more autosomally Yamnaya-like than modern Greeks.

If the yamnaya theory is proved correct, which i doubt, then it means that all modern europeans are less Yamnaya-like than their ancestors. Until then though, you'd better have better arguments.

sciencediver
07-24-2016, 07:33 PM
Please read more carefully SD
I said "Macedonia was almost wholly depopulated"
It's beyond doubt. Several landscape surveys have been conducted in almost every Greek region by Western and Greek scholars, and even modern Greek scholars now admit the massive population flux occurred in the Middle Ages

But of course, this does not mean all of Greece was depopulated. Several towns esp along the eastern coast of Greece continued though the dark ages of the 7-9th century

As for EV13 specifically, I cannot yet answer , but will be able to do so in a couple of years
As I've mentioned elsewhere, we need to dissect within and beyond E-V13. It obviously arrived in the Neolithic, but I suspect it re-expanded in the Middle Ages from somewhere in the Balkans .
? Epirus ? Peloponnesus

A huge influx of Slavs and other Grecophones doesn't imply the area got totally depopulated. You know very well that scholars' analyses lack the accuracy of scientific genetic research...

@Sikeliot: The E-V13 STR clusters in Macedonia and in most of Greece are not the same as the Albanian ones.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-24-2016, 07:46 PM
A huge influx of Slavs and other Grecophones doesn't imply the area got totally depopulated. You know very well that scholars' analyses lack the accuracy of scientific genetic research...

@Sikeliot: The E-V13 STR clusters in Macedonia and in most of Greece are not the same as the Albanian ones.

I think the genetic evidence suggests similar- as Tomenable stated
We can tentatively estimate a 50% slavic impact in Gr Macedonia (of course, this was more like80% in the Middle Ages, as Slavs were used as soldiers / transferred out by the emperors) genetically (autosomes, Y DNA).
Of course, I stress this is tentative and simplistic without aDNA.
Some of the southernmost Danubian Slavs already had Greek like and Thracian admixture before they arrived. And the problem is they cremated mostly !

Passa
07-24-2016, 07:47 PM
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mx140ag0148h7e2/GREEK%20Y-DNA.ods?dl=0

^A table with all Greek Y-DNA data I could find, and which I used for the map. R1a and most of I were assumed to be Slavic.

sciencediver
07-24-2016, 08:02 PM
I think the genetic evidence suggests similar- as Tomenable stated
We can tentatively estimate a 50% slavic impact in Gr Macedonia (of course, this was more like80% in the Middle Ages, as Slavs were used as soldiers / transferred out by the emperors) genetically (autosomes, Y DNA).
Of course, I stress this is tentative and simplistic without aDNA.
Some of the southernmost Danubian Slavs already had Greek like and Thracian admixture before they arrived. And the problem is they cremated mostly !

South Slavic admixture in Greece was already estimated by Hellenthal et al, at 37%.

http://admixturemap.paintmychromosomes.com/

The 80% slavic estimation you're suggesting for Macedonia is a bit too generous .In my opinion an invading population cannot outnumber a native one by such a margin, but like you said one cannot speculate so I'd wait for some medieval and ancient DNA as well.

Kanenas
07-24-2016, 08:02 PM
Based on several studies of Greek Macedonians , since 2000. It's a well studied area
It includes all modern Greek Macedonians .

Remember that Macedonia was almost wholly depopulated by 620 AD (outside notable exceptions - such as towns like Thessalniki and Philippi), so with no Slavs and Anatolian/ Armenian Byzantines, there'd be no modern "Greek Macedonians""

Am I wrong to ask for sources? I think not. And he should clarify which subclades he considers 'Slavic'. We can guess of course.

Greece overall isn't a well studied area.

About what it includes, I don't know what the sampling method of each study is. They should state if they include those with Asia Minor and Pontic origin or not. They should also say which cities of Greek Macedonia they sample.

About the depopulation I would like a citation too.

I am one of those who think that Slavic input in Greece as a whole is significant but unquantifiable currently.

Kanenas
07-24-2016, 08:14 PM
Also, Thracians were the majority in Macedonia according to Strabo. There were also Epirotes, Illyrians and others.

Basically we should ask if a certain subclade which is thought to be 'Slavic' could have existed among Thracians. If that's true that subclade could have existed among late antiquity Greeks, for example. Of course there were many medieval movements of people in Greece and almost everywhere in Europe.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-24-2016, 08:14 PM
Am I wrong to ask for sources? I think not. And he should clarify which subclades he considers 'Slavic'. We can guess of course.

Greece overall isn't a well studied area.

About what it includes, I don't know what the sampling method of each study is. They should state if they include those with Asia Minor and Pontic origin or not. They should also say which cities of Greek Macedonia they sample.

About the depopulation I would like a citation too.

I am one of those who think that Slavic input in Greece as a whole is significant but unquantifiable currently.

Do you really know so little about your own country ?
Sure, I'll happily let you know soon

Kanenas
07-24-2016, 08:17 PM
I know everything about my country.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-24-2016, 08:23 PM
I know everything about my country.

Lol
Ok. I'll educate you the scientific, non chauvinistic evidence

sciencediver
07-24-2016, 08:27 PM
Mtdna-wise Northern Greeks are also not far from the rest of Greece , as opposed to medieval Byzantine Sagalassos, in Anatolia. Which again, proves scholars wrong.


The archaeological site of Sagalassos is located in Southwest Turkey, in the western part of the Taurus mountain range. Human occupation of its territory is attested from the late 12th millennium BP up to the 13th century AD. By analysing the mtDNA variation in 85 skeletons from Sagalassos dated to the 11th–13th century AD, this study attempts to reconstruct the genetic signature potentially left in this region of Anatolia by the many civilizations, which succeeded one another over the centuries until the mid-Byzantine period (13th century BC).


Haplogroup composition in Sagalassos was investigated by means of the PCA (Supplementary Table 9). In the two-dimensional plot (Supplementary Figure S1), which explains 32% of the total variation, Sagalassos is located in a marginal position, close to a cluster of populations from the Caucasus (the Georgian sample being the closest to Sagalassos), the East Mediterranean (Cyprus and Rhodes) and the samples from the Near/Middle East. In this pool of populations, contribution of haplogroups U3, N1, U1 and HV to the first and second PC was found to be particularly high (Supplementary Figure S2).

Yellow dots:
https://snag.gy/aKfm38.jpg



Source:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3083616/

Tomenable
07-24-2016, 10:15 PM
So this map from the OP is showing combined frequency of R-M17 + I-M423.

Passa told me.

Sikeliot
07-24-2016, 10:29 PM
If the northern Greek sample here does include people of Anatolian refugee status, then this means more than half of northern Greeks have a direct Slavic line.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-24-2016, 10:33 PM
If the northern Greek sample here does include people of Anatolian refugee status, then this means more than half of northern Greeks have a direct Slavic line.

I'm pretty sure they didn't simply choose northern Greeks with Slavic heritage, as we know that's quite an unlikely strategy, and given that many ? most people of Slavic descent in Greece by now are thoroughly Greek and would probably not even know that 1500 years ago their patriline spoke Slavic
The studies (Semino, Pericic, Grugni, etc) used random chosen group, most likely from Thessaloniki . All samples selection data is available in the studies, which are all well known

As for the number it's hard to say; R1a is likely all/ most from Slavs. I2a is probably more complex

Sikeliot
07-24-2016, 10:37 PM
Why wouldn't it ?
The studies (Semino, Pericic, Grugni, etc) used random chosen group, most likely from Thessaloniki . All samples selection data is available in the studies, which are all well known

As for the number it's hard to say; R1a is likely all/ most from Slavs. I2a is probably more complex

Historically it makes sense. The Greek ethnicity was created through assimilation of other groups, on top of the native Greeks.. this is how the Aegean islands became Greek, how Cyprus became Greek, how Sicily was once Greek. Obviously in mainland Greece, many Slavs became Greek.

I hate to bring in phenotypes, but many Greeks show the Slavic influence phenotypically, too.

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 05:42 AM
It would be nice to see what subclades of R1a do Greeks actually have.

Because the FTDNA "Greek Project" has scarcely any info on subclades.

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 05:50 AM
South Slavic admixture in Greece was already estimated by Hellenthal et al, at 37%.

http://admixturemap.paintmychromosomes.com/
What about Greek admixture in South Slavs? For example it is obvious even just from looking at Y-DNA frequencies, that South-East Slavs (Bulgarians and Macedonians) are genetically mostly Non-Slavic. Also autosomal data (genetic distances from other Balto-Slavs) shows that they are largely Non-Slavic. Some of the most common Y-DNA haplogroups among modern Bulgarians are E1b and J2, both of which have been identified in ancient DNA samples from Thracian burials. Thracian aristocrat - sample K8 - belonged to J2a1a1b2 (clade PF5197); whereas Thracian commoner - sample P192-1 - belonged to E1b1b1a1b (clade Z1919). Another Thracian aristocrat - sample T2G2 - belonged to an unknown haplogroup, but neither E, J, I nor G.

vettor
07-25-2016, 06:16 AM
and given permission to me to post.

These are the subclades of R1a and I2b that are pertinent to Slavic migration, meaning almost half of northern Greeks have a y-dna that can be traced back to Slavs, down to 10% on the islands.

No part of Greece has been untouched.

https://s31.postimg.org/eid6xv8kr/13770535_690365121117806_5102015285444749814_n.jpg

Are you mixing up slavic with ancient thracians ,?

Táltos
07-25-2016, 06:37 AM
It would be nice to see what subclades of R1a do Greeks actually have.

Because the FTDNA "Greek Project" has scarcely any info on subclades.

Your best bet is to look here. https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1a?iframe=yresults
I have to admit it's late for me and I only got to page 4. So far not many Greek results. Again I didn't go through them all though.

sciencediver
07-25-2016, 06:55 AM
What about Greek admixture in South Slavs? For example it is obvious even just from looking at Y-DNA frequencies, that South-East Slavs (Bulgarians and Macedonians) are genetically mostly Non-Slavic. Also autosomal data (genetic distances from other Balto-Slavs) shows that they are largely Non-Slavic. Some of the most common Y-DNA haplogroups among modern Bulgarians are E1b and J2, both of which have been identified in ancient DNA samples from Thracian burials. Thracian aristocrat - sample K8 - belonged to J2a1a1b2 (clade PF5197); whereas Thracian commoner - sample P192-1 - belonged to E1b1b1a1b (clade Z1919). Another Thracian aristocrat - sample T2G2 - belonged to an unknown haplogroup, but neither E, J, I nor G.

Sure , but are any of these clades exclusive to Greeks ? The majority of ancient Balkanites were most likely E-V13, J2a, J2b, R1b-L23 , G and the ones in the North could have had some I2 as well, who knows. But can we associate any of these clades with specific ethnic groups without more information and further analysis?

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 07:10 AM
There is not enough of ancient DNA from the Balkans to say what the majority of them were.

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 07:12 AM
There is not enough of ancient DNA from the Balkans to tell what the majority of them were.

sciencediver
07-25-2016, 07:20 AM
There is not enough of ancient DNA from the Balkans to tell what the majority of them were.

yea, that's why I listed all the possible haplogroups.

sciencediver
07-25-2016, 07:24 AM
Cypriots are mostly descended from the pre-Greek natives of the island, who would have had affinity to the Levant.

There are already some DNA papers on Cypriots though.

https://snag.gy/dAKIrO.jpg

Gravetto-Danubian
07-25-2016, 07:40 AM
What about Greek admixture in South Slavs? For example it is obvious even just from looking at Y-DNA frequencies, that South-East Slavs (Bulgarians and Macedonians) are genetically mostly Non-Slavic. Also autosomal data (genetic distances from other Balto-Slavs) shows that they are largely Non-Slavic. Some of the most common Y-DNA haplogroups among modern Bulgarians are E1b and J2, both of which have been identified in ancient DNA samples from Thracian burials. Thracian aristocrat - sample K8 - belonged to J2a1a1b2 (clade PF5197); whereas Thracian commoner - sample P192-1 - belonged to E1b1b1a1b (clade Z1919). Another Thracian aristocrat - sample T2G2 - belonged to an unknown haplogroup, but neither E, J, I nor G.

U mean the geneiker's calls from the old paper by Bastumante.?
A lot of interpolation was involved in those calls so Id wait for propper aDNA

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 08:11 AM
U mean the geneiker's calls from the old paper by Bastumante.?

Here are my sources about Thracian DNA:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3824117/
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/05/more...nomes-from.html (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/05/more-info-on-two-thracian-genomes-from.html)
http://polishgenes.blogspot.com.au/2013/10...c-bulgaria.html (http://polishgenes.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/ancient-dna-from-prehistoric-bulgaria.html)
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30000...genetic-origins (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30000-Two-Iron-age-Thracians-found-to-have-totally-different-genetic-origins)
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30020...s-from-Bulgaria (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30020-New-autosomal-DNA-of-two-ancient-Thracian-Iron-Age-individuals-from-Bulgaria)
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/...e-age-bulgaria/ (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/more-y-snp-calls-from-iron-and-bronze-age-bulgaria/)
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/...age-bulgarians/ (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/mt-snp-calls-for-iron-and-bronze-age-bulgarians/)
http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/arti...al.pgen.1004353 (http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1004353)
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php...ll=1#post136599 (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6322-aDNA-of-South-Eastern-Europe-Catalogue-of-results-amp-impact-in-modern-groups&p=136599&viewfull=1#post136599)

07-25-2016, 08:33 AM
I find it difficult to call R1a Haplogroups to be explicitly Slavic in origin, since this whole area was like a cross roads for the Indo-Europeans for Millennia, "Slavic", is relatively a new naming of people on the scene after the fall of Rome, well before that the Indo-Euroeans/Scythians, and related peoples are said to have been R1a, and the 2nd branch of Indo-Eurpeans who eventually became the Latins/Germans/Celts were R1b.
During "Homers time", I assume that R1* was not present in Greece? or? did the Dorian invasions during the Greek dark age, bring in R1a + R1b? to the Greek world? I suppose only ancient DNA samples might tell us the answer.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-25-2016, 08:47 AM
Here are my sources about Thracian DNA:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3824117/
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/05/more...nomes-from.html (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/05/more-info-on-two-thracian-genomes-from.html)
http://polishgenes.blogspot.com.au/2013/10...c-bulgaria.html (http://polishgenes.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/ancient-dna-from-prehistoric-bulgaria.html)
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30000...genetic-origins (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30000-Two-Iron-age-Thracians-found-to-have-totally-different-genetic-origins)
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30020...s-from-Bulgaria (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30020-New-autosomal-DNA-of-two-ancient-Thracian-Iron-Age-individuals-from-Bulgaria)
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/...e-age-bulgaria/ (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/more-y-snp-calls-from-iron-and-bronze-age-bulgaria/)
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/...age-bulgarians/ (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/mt-snp-calls-for-iron-and-bronze-age-bulgarians/)
http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/arti...al.pgen.1004353 (http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1004353)
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php...ll=1#post136599 (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6322-aDNA-of-South-Eastern-Europe-Catalogue-of-results-amp-impact-in-modern-groups&p=136599&viewfull=1#post136599)

Thanks Tom
So as per my initial point, these 4 Thracian samples are all from one work- Carlos Bastumante & Martin Sikora several years ago. They themselves did not make an Y SNP calls, but did some basic PCA / ADMIX stuff which showed they cluster with Southern Europeans (all before the days of "CHG" being discovered, etc, mind you)

It was Genetiker who did the calls. Now I think he's very good, but the samples had very low SNP counts, and some of the calls were made by exclusion or interpolation. They certainly make sense, and are probably correct intuitively, but one can't go past the low quantity to sustain any real confidence in which specific haplogroups they might have been

But Sikora is now at GeoGenetics (same guys as Allentoft & Willerslev) and I suspect they've got samples from Romania, Bulgaria and hopefully more of the Balkans . Paper should be out soon , I hope

Gravetto-Danubian
07-25-2016, 08:51 AM
I find it difficult to call R1a Haplogroups to be explicitly Slavic in origin, since this whole area was like a cross roads for the Indo-Europeans for Millennia, "Slavic", is relatively a new naming of people on the scene after the fall of Rome, well before that the Indo-Euroeans/Scythians, and related peoples are said to have been R1a, and the 2nd branch of Indo-Eurpeans who eventually became the Latins/Germans/Celts were R1b.
During "Homers time", I assume that R1* was not present in Greece? or? did the Dorian invasions during the Greek dark age, bring in R1a + R1b? to the Greek world? I suppose only ancient DNA samples might tell us the answer.

All that is required is familiarity with the specific subclades of R1a which are present in the Balkans, their calculated ages, a comparison to other regions with R1a, as well as the now decent little aDNA set.

So of course we might find some R1a in ancient Balkans, but the point is that most modern R1a in the Balkans is due to Slavs (that is to say, all sub lineages of R1a in the Balkans are younger offshoots of parent clades found in the Balto-Slavic region, albeit some 5% are Z93 which might be associated with ancient Scythians or what have you). I'll stand by that :)

This has been discussed several times, I'm sure you can find it on the forum

07-25-2016, 09:05 AM
Thanks Gravetto-Danubian, I concur.:amen:

eastara
07-25-2016, 10:01 AM
The Bulgarian DNA project got a sponsor, who ordered the R1a pack for all available samples, who were not classified until now. So we already know the deeper branches and they all fall into the East European area. Even the rare R1a-Z93/Y15121 has matches in Poland. However it is not clear if they arrived with the Slavs or were on the Balkans since the Bronze age.

sciencediver
07-25-2016, 01:09 PM
Tomenable has a point here I think, ancient Greeks were most probably more Yamna-shifted than us. That said, we don't know by how much, at least not yet.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-25-2016, 01:26 PM
Tomenable has a point here I think, ancient Greeks were most probably more Yamna-shifted than us. That said, we don't know by how much, at least not yet.

And how did they "de-Yamnaya-fi", keeping in mind that the largest and latest documented migration to Greece were Slavs with significant CWC ancestry ?

This means we need to find a massive migration into Greece after Yamnaya (2500 BC) and before 500 AD from some EHG poor area, which mostly erased the initial Yamnaya impact.

2200 BC (the late Early Helladic "collapse") is a possibility for Migrations from Anatolia (documented archaeologically), otherwise it's very doubtful. Of course, we have to see the extent of impact Yamnaya made on mainland Greece in the first place.

A possibility is that Yamnaya never made much impact, and Greece has only gradually accumulated Yamnaya -like ancestry over the bronze and Iron Ages, with a final big impact in the Middle Ages

Volat
07-25-2016, 01:35 PM
South-East Slavs (Bulgarians and Macedonians) are genetically mostly Non-Slavic. Also autosomal data (genetic distances from other Balto-Slavs) shows that they are largely Non-Slavic.

Come on! They are Slavs as any Slavs, so long as they want to be associated with Slavs. Our Slavic ancestors became numerous by accepting different people into their communities. I've seen Serbs searching for pictures of Baltid looking southern Slavs, because they want to be part of the wider Slavic community. It's touching to seem them this way. :)

Gravetto-Danubian
07-25-2016, 01:37 PM
Come on! They are Slavs as any Slavs, so long as they want to be associated with Slavs. Our Slavic ancestors became numerous by accepting different people into their communities. I've seen Serbs searching for pictures of Baltid looking southern Slavs, because they want to be part of the wider Slavic community. It's touching to seem them this way. :)

Don't worry
Tom has probably never been to the Balkans
My brother & little nephew (pic) probably look more "Slavic" than most Poles; but of course south Slavs have taken on many palaeo-Balkan traits
Diversity is a good thing
10629

Volat
07-25-2016, 01:49 PM
Don't worry
Tom has probably never been to the Balkans
My brother & little nephew (pic) probably look more "Slavic" than most Poles; but of course south Slavs have taken on many palaeo-Balkan traits
Diversity is a good thing


I appreciate Balkan touch to southern Slavic culture. The tune of Bulgarian gaida is awesome.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elOkNCu9Zbs

Sikeliot
07-25-2016, 07:12 PM
Even if some of these haplogroups are Thracian or ancient rather than Slavic, they show a substantial influence in Greece from Northeast Europe/Russia etc.

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 08:04 PM
And how did they "de-Yamnaya-fi".

^ Cummulative effect of all migrations from Anatolia and other Greek/Byzantine domains to "Greece proper".

Sikeliot
07-25-2016, 08:34 PM
^ Cummulative effect of all migrations from Anatolia and other Greek/Byzantine domains to "Greece proper".

But IBD sharing with Levantines for instance is low. This would disprove the notion of a massive flood of Near Easterners into Greece.

Kanenas
07-25-2016, 09:35 PM
And how did they "de-Yamnaya-fi", keeping in mind that the largest and latest documented migration to Greece were Slavs with significant CWC ancestry ?

This means we need to find a massive migration into Greece after Yamnaya (2500 BC) and before 500 AD from some EHG poor area, which mostly erased the initial Yamnaya impact.

2200 BC (the late Early Helladic "collapse") is a possibility for Migrations from Anatolia (documented archaeologically), otherwise it's very doubtful. Of course, we have to see the extent of impact Yamnaya made on mainland Greece in the first place.

A possibility is that Yamnaya never made much impact, and Greece has only gradually accumulated Yamnaya -like ancestry over the bronze and Iron Ages, with a final big impact in the Middle Ages

I mostly agree on that.

But the haplogroups we call 'Slavic' are haplogroups that are commonly found in people who today speak Slavic languages. Slavic languages are attested late though. Their origin is uncertain and the mainstream theories can be wrong.

We know that the Poles spoke Slavic 500 years ago but we don't know (with evidence) what language was spoken there 1000 and 2000 years ago. We know that their nobles promoted Sarmatism and that "Tatars who had settled in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and were loyal to the Polish state were viewed by Polish followers of Sarmatism as peers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatism

Bulgars were language converts. Poles could have been language converts too.

There was Scythian (supposedly 'Eastern Iranian' although that's also not proven), Turkic and Magyar presence in Eastern Europe.

If the Danube Basin hypothesis is correct some R1a Slavs can be slavicized natives. Even if the mainstream theories are correct some 'Slavic' subclades could have been absorbed by neighboring people early on and spread with them.

(We have the example or Romance language which expanded in Celtic and non-IE regions in Western Europe.)

Gravetto-Danubian
07-25-2016, 09:49 PM
I mostly agree on that.

But the haplogroups we call 'Slavic' are haplogroups that are commonly found in people who today speak Slavic languages. Slavic languages are attested late though. Their origin is uncertain and the mainstream theories can be wrong.

We know that the Poles spoke Slavic 500 years ago but we don't know (with evidence) what language was spoken there 1000 and 2000 years ago. We know that their nobles promoted Sarmatism and that "Tatars who had settled in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and were loyal to the Polish state were viewed by Polish followers of Sarmatism as peers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatism

Bulgars were language converts. Poles could have been language converts too.

There was Scythian (supposedly 'Eastern Iranian' although that's also not proven), Turkic and Magyar presence in Eastern Europe.

If the Danube Basin hypothesis is correct some R1a Slavs can be slavicized natives. Even if the mainstream theories are correct some 'Slavic' subclades could have been absorbed by neighboring people early on and spread with them.

(We have the example or Romance language which expanded in Celtic and non-IE regions in Western Europe.)

Some assimilation is of course always involved, especially in the Balkans and northern Russia, but Slavic expansion was definitely a demographic phenomenon. It's been shown in numerous ways, including complex stats with autosomal DNA, which is actually the most accurate. The Slavs in 500 AD expanded from eastern Romania, southern Poland and western Ukraine.

Poles were never Sarmatians, and Sarmatians didn't really ever settle Poland apart from stray individuals in 100 BC whose modern legacy is virtually negligible . It was just a myth propagated by some nobles to distinguish themselves, similar to how the Byzantines claimed they're Romans who had nothing to do with ancient Hellenes, but on a much weaker basis; nor do the Magyars play too much of a role outside Hungary (although a little group of Christianised Magyars were settled by Basil in the middle of Macedonia ;))

Volat
07-25-2016, 09:51 PM
I mostly agree on that.

But the haplogroups we call 'Slavic' are haplogroups that are commonly found in people who today speak Slavic languages. Slavic languages are attested late though. Their origin is uncertain and the mainstream theories can be wrong.

We know that the Poles spoke Slavic 500 years ago but we don't know (with evidence) what language was spoken there 1000 and 2000 years ago. We know that their nobles promoted Sarmatism and that "Tatars who had settled in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and were loyal to the Polish state were viewed by Polish followers of Sarmatism as peers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatism

Bulgars were language converts. Poles could have been language converts too.

There was Scythian (supposedly 'Eastern Iranian' although that's also not proven), Turkic and Magyar presence in Eastern Europe.

If the Danube Basin hypothesis is correct some R1a Slavs can be slavicized natives. Even if the mainstream theories are correct some 'Slavic' subclades could have been absorbed by neighboring people early on and spread with them.

(We have the example or Romance language which expanded in Celtic and non-IE regions in Western Europe.)

1,000 years ago Poles spoke Slavic attested in written chronicle that they ('Lyakhs' named after Lendian Slavic tribes) were Slavs. 2,000 years ago there were no Poles. There was a group of Slavic tribes speaking similar dialects. The place of Slavic settlement 2,000 years ago is disputed. But Slavs existed since ancient times. Slavic language full of archaisms like Baltic languages is the proof.

Sarmatism concept was popular among Polish nobility. For a reason Polish nobility wanted to be different to common folks. Similar legend existed among Lithuanian nobility; they descended from Romans. Just like with Sarmatism among Polish nobility Lithuanian nobility wanted to be different from common folks.

Danube basin hypothesis is outdated. Slavs origins is further north between upper Vistula and middle Dniepr rivers.

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 10:05 PM
This means we need to find a massive migration into Greece after Yamnaya (2500 BC) and before 500 AD from some EHG poor area, which mostly erased the initial Yamnaya impact.

As well as between 500 AD and 2016 AD.

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 10:09 PM
As for Polish nobility, I don't have samples from other regions, but here is one from Mazovia:

Mazovian nobility (n=146):

R1a - 77 (52,74%)
R1b - 23 (15,75%)
I2 - 14 (9,59%)
I1a - 8 (5,48%)
J2b2a - 7 (4,79%)
C3b - 5 (3,42%)
E1b1b1a2 - 4 (2,74%)
G2a - 3 (2,05%)
R2 - 2 (1,37%)
N1c1a - 2 (1,37%)
Q - 1 (0,68%)

And when it comes to R1a, the breakdown for major subclades is as follows:

R1a-M458 - 44
R1a-Z280 - 32
R1a-Z282* - 1

So there is total lack of Indo-Iranian R1a-Z93 in this sample of 146 Mazovian noblemen.

Kanenas
07-25-2016, 10:14 PM
@Volat

What's that chronicle? Chronicles aren't evidence. I am one of those who don't immediately dismiss what they say even if it sounds weird but we cannot consider what they say as facts of course.

There is a chronicle, for example, which says that (about Franks):

The author of the Chronicle of Fredegar claimed that the Franks came originally from Troy and quoted the works of Vergil and Hieronymous, but the Franks are not mentioned in those works, except in a general way by Hieronymous.[14] The chronicle describes Priam as a Frankish king whose people migrated to Macedonia after the fall of Troy. In Macedonia, the Franks then divided. The European Franks reached Francia under King Francio, just as Romulus went to Rome. Another branch, under King Turchot, became the Turks. Fredegar stated that Theudemer, named king of the Franks by Gregory, was descended from Priam, Friga and Francio.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks#Mythological_origins

(It's important to note that the name 'Turks' was used by 'Byzantines' for Magyars. I don't know if the 'Turks' of this text are the people who we today call like that or if the authors refers to Magyars or some other people. I have the Latin text but I haven't read it)


And another one that says (about Irish peole):

The Lebor Gabála, which was probably first written in the 11th century AD by Christian monks, purports to be a history of Ireland and the Irish (the Gaels). It tells us that all mankind is descended from Adam through the sons of Noah, and that a man named Fénius Farsaid (descendant of Noah's son Japheth) is the forebear of the Gaels. Fénius, a prince of Scythia, is described as one of 72 chieftains who built the Tower of Babel. His son Nel weds Scota, daughter of an Egyptian pharaoh, and they have a son named Goídel Glas. Goídel crafts the Goidelic (Gaelic) language from the original 72 languages that arose after the confusion of tongues. Goídel's offspring, the Goidels (Gaels), leave Egypt at the same time as the Israelites (the Exodus) and settle in Scythia. After some time they leave Scythia and spend 440 years wandering the Earth, undergoing a series of trials and tribulations akin to those of the Israelites, who spent 40 years wandering in the wilderness. Eventually, they reach Iberia by sea and conquer it. There, Goídel's descendant Breogán founds a city called Brigantia, and builds a tower from the top of which his son Íth glimpses Ireland.[2][3] Brigantia refers to Corunna in Galicia (which was then known as Brigantium)[4] and Breogán's tower is likely based on the Tower of Hercules, which was built at Corunna by the Romans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milesians_(Irish)

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 10:16 PM
And R1b breakdown among Mazovian nobility:

R1b-U152 - 6
R1b-L21 - 4
R1b-Z2103 - 3
R1b-U106 - 2
==========
R1b-M269 (unassigned, need SNP test) - 8

As for I2 (in total 14 in that sample of 146):

I2-L621+ = 13
I2-M223+ = 1

And I1:

I1a (DF29+) (other SNPs not tested) - 4
I1a1* (Z2336+) 'Polish' cluster - 3
I1a1b (Z2336+ L22+) 'Northern Cluster' - 1

Volat
07-25-2016, 10:27 PM
@Volat

What's that chronicle? Chronicles aren't evidence. I am one of those who don't immediately dismiss what they say even if it sounds weird but we cannot consider what they say as facts of course.
The Tale of Bygone years also known as the Prime Chronicle compiled around 1110-1112 in Kiev listing Slavic tribes known to the author in his present and immediate past. In the chronicle the author states Lyakhs settled in Vistula basin from whom Lutici, Masovians, Pomeranians descended. The author explicitly stated which tribes were Slavic and which were not.

Kanenas
07-25-2016, 10:59 PM
Some assimilation is of course always involved, especially in the Balkans and northern Russia, but Slavic expansion was definitely a demographic phenomenon. It's been shown in numerous ways, including complex stats with autosomal DNA, which is actually the most accurate. The Slavs in 500 AD expanded from eastern Romania, southern Poland and western Ukraine.

Poles were never Sarmatians, and Sarmatians didn't really ever settle Poland apart from stray individuals in 100 BC whose modern legacy is virtually negligible . It was just a myth propagated by some nobles to distinguish themselves, similar to how the Byzantines claimed they're Romans who had nothing to do with ancient Hellenes, but on a much weaker basis; nor do the Magyars play too much of a role outside Hungary (although a little group of Christianised Magyars were settled by Basil in the middle of Macedonia ;))

Could these Magyars in Macedonia have had non-Z93 R1a? If the answer is yes then non-Z93 R1a in Macedonia isn't nessecarily entirely Slavic.

The predominant haplogroup of the Scythians was R1a-Z93? What were the haplogroups of the numerous Turkic groups in Eastern Europe? There were some Pechenegs to the north of Pannonia according to Constantine VII.
And 'Byzantines' used Pecheneg mercenaries (among others).

Similar problems exist about many haplogroups. For example a significant minority of Chuvash people belong to subclades haplogroup E1b
5/23 E-L117 here https://www.familytreedna.com/public/chuvashia?iframe=yresults

If I make a test with FtDNA and turn out to be E-L117 (predicted) how would I know if my ancestor who gave me the haplogroup was Greek, Roman, Albanian or even a Chuvash-like Bulgar?
It's wrong to label haplogroups 'Slavic', 'Greek', 'Roman', 'Phoenician' etc.

Sikeliot
07-25-2016, 11:03 PM
If anyone wants an autosomal result, I found a person from Syracuse, in Sicily. This along with Ragusa is one of the most Greek areas of the island. Their North European affinity on most calculators is indeed higher than the average on the island.

So it can be inferred that ancient Greeks did have some degree of North European affinity, though lower than today.

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 11:19 PM
Could these Magyars in Macedonia have had non-Z93 R1a?

So far it seems that Magyars were N1c-Tat and their modern descendants survive among Hungarian-speaking Szeklers from Transylvania:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8017-Split-The-Early-Turks-Distribution-amp-Demographic-Outcomes&p=172796&highlight=Magyars#post172796


And in this 2008 study, 2 out of 2 elite Magyar males (Y-DNA samples) belonged to N1c haplogroup:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2008.00440.x/abstract

N1c is associated with Uralic languages so it makes sense that Magyars from elite burials were N1c.

According to one study, 6.52% of Szeklers have N1c-Tat (the same, which was found in two elite burials of 10th century Magyar warriors):

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8017-Split-The-Early-Turks-Distribution-amp-Demographic-Outcomes&p=172879&highlight=L1034#post172879


Szekler in Transylvania do carry N1c, as ”Results proved that there is at least one Hungarian ethnic group, the Seklers with a non-negligible frequency of hg N-Tat (6.52%) in Eastern Centtral Europe. Seklers (Hung. ‘Székely’), one of the largest Hungarian-speaking populations in Transylvania with approximately 600,000 people, are settled mainly in Mures, Harghita and Covasna counties in Central Romania. Seklers were considered the finest warriors of medieval Transylvania, but their origin is subject to debate”.

Source: p. 7, YSNP L1034: limited genetic link between Mansi and Hungarian-speaking populations.

Link to this study: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00438-014-0925-2


What were the haplogroups of the numerous Turkic groups in Eastern Europe? There were some Pechenegs to the north of Pannonia according to Constantine VII.
And 'Byzantines' used Pecheneg mercenaries (among others).

Only mtDNA is available - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16596944

Sikeliot
07-25-2016, 11:44 PM
Ok here are some results from Syracuse, Sicily. You can see they do shift north compared to most Sicilians, as do people from Ragusa which was another heavily Greek part of the island.

I am using Dodecad World9, MDLP K23, Near East Neolithic K13 and Eurogenes EUTest:

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic_Baltic 38.25
2 Southern 35.56
3 Caucasus_Gedrosia 24.43
4 African 1.22
5 Australasian 0.53

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Greek (Dodecad) 2.79
2 Ashkenazy_Jews 3.09
3 Sicilian (Dodecad) 3.21
4 S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) 3.46
5 S_Italian (Dodecad) 4.25
6 Ashkenazi (Dodecad) 4.58
7 C_Italian (Dodecad) 5.78
8 O_Italian (Dodecad) 8.37
9 Tuscan (HGDP) 11.33
10 Sephardic_Jews (Behar) 11.75
11 TSI30 (Metspalu) 12.25
12 Morocco_Jews (Behar) 13.47
13 Bulgarian (Dodecad) 18.21
14 Romanians (Behar) 18.54
15 Bulgarians (Yunusbayev) 19.24
16 North_Italian (HGDP) 20.1
17 Cypriots (Behar) 20.35
18 N_Italian (Dodecad) 20.37
19 Turkish (Dodecad) 20.95
20 Canarias (1000 Genomes) 23.31

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 94% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 6% Lithuanian (Dodecad) @ 0.52
2 94% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 6% Lithuanians @ 0.52
3 93% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7% Polish (Dodecad) @ 0.53
4 93.2% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 6.8% Belorussian (Behar) @ 0.53
5 93.5% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 6.5% Swedish (Dodecad) @ 0.54
6 91.1% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 8.9% Hungarians (Behar) @ 0.55
7 93.4% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 6.6% Norwegian (Dodecad) @ 0.56
8 92.8% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.2% Argyll (1000 Genomes) @ 0.56
9 92.5% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.5% CEU30 (1000Genomes) @ 0.56
10 92.5% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.5% Ukranians (Yunusbayev) @ 0.57
11 92.4% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.6% German (Dodecad) @ 0.57
12 92.3% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.7% Dutch (Dodecad) @ 0.57
13 92.9% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.1% Irish (Dodecad) @ 0.58
14 92.9% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.1% Orcadian (HGDP) @ 0.58
15 92.6% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.4% British (Dodecad) @ 0.58
16 93% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7% Orkney (1000 Genomes) @ 0.59
17 92.1% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.9% Mixed_Germanic (Dodecad) @ 0.6
18 93.2% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 6.8% Russian_B (Behar) @ 0.61
19 92.5% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.5% Kent (1000 Genomes) @ 0.61
20 92.7% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 7.3% British_Isles (Dodecad) @ 0.62


Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 36.97
2 European_Early_Farmers 23.02
3 European_Hunters_Gatherers 12.39
4 Near_East 10.32
5 North_African 6.41
6 South_Central_Asian 5.62
7 Ancestral_Altaic 1.40
8 South_Indian 1.34
9 Austronesian 1.02


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Ashkenazi_Jew @ 2.074164
2 Sicilian_Siracusa @ 3.036724
3 Sicilian_East @ 3.657523
4 Sicilian_West @ 3.732946
5 Ashkenazi @ 4.224804
6 Sicilian_Trapani @ 4.309191
7 Sicilian_Agrigento @ 4.807841
8 Romanian_Jew @ 5.063300
9 Maltese @ 5.458970
10 Sicilian_Center @ 6.483786
11 Cretan @ 6.551810
12 French_Jew @ 6.581755
13 Italian_South @ 6.750440
14 Greek_Athens @ 7.378973
15 Greek @ 8.048398
16 Greek_Phokaia @ 8.163262
17 Italian_Abruzzo @ 8.317431
18 Central_Greek @ 8.584759
19 Italian_Jew @ 9.174335
20 Greek_Peloponnesos @ 9.234392

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Greek_Northwest +50% Sephardic_Jew @ 1.884614


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Ashkenazi_Jew +25% Greek_Northwest +25% Sephardic_Jew @ 1.442211




# Population Percent
1 CHG_EEF 34.39
2 ANATOLIA_NEOLITHIC 21.94
3 NATUFIAN 14.95
4 IRAN_NEOLITHIC 13.97
5 EHG 7.14
6 SHG_WHG 4.88
7 SUB_SAHARAN 1.5
8 SE_ASIAN 1.23

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Sicilian 2.63
2 Jew_Ashkenazi 5.58
3 Greek 5.59
4 Italian_South 6.57
5 Albanian 7.72
6 Jew_Moroccan 11.26
7 Turkish_Istanbul 12.48
8 Bulgarian 12.77
9 Turkish 13.3
10 Cypriot 14.27
11 Turkish_Balekesir 15.79
12 Romanian 15.85
13 Jew_Tunisian 16.37
14 Jew_Libyan 16.76
15 Turkish_Adana 17.03
16 Turkish_Aydin 17.07
17 Turkish_Kayseri 17.68
18 Lebanese 19.97
19 Turkish_Trabzon 20.89
20 Croatian 21.1


# Population Percent
1 EAST_MED 29.04
2 WEST_MED 17.96
3 ATLANTIC 12.53
4 NORTH-CENTRAL_EURO 11.46
5 MIDDLE_EASTERN 11.19
6 WEST_ASIAN 11.02
7 SOUTH_BALTIC 5.33
8 EAST_EURO 1.04
9 WEST_AFRICAN 0.42

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 South_Italian_&_Sicilian 2.26
2 AJ 6.42
3 GR 6.5
4 Tuscan 10.38
5 North_Italian 15.27
6 RO 20.07
7 PT 21.41
8 TR 21.5
9 Serbian 21.86
10 ES 23.31
11 Assyrian 24.83
12 IQ 24.98
13 Samaritan 25.34
14 Armenian 25.51
15 FR 26.25
16 Mandean 26.68
17 Druze 26.81
18 AT 27.22
19 HU 27.72
20 Kurdish 27.93

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 93.4% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 6.6% FR @ 1.3
2 92.1% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 7.9% PT @ 1.32
3 94.9% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 5.1% English @ 1.37
4 94.9% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 5.1% Cornish @ 1.38
5 94.8% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 5.2% NL @ 1.38
6 92.9% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 7.1% ES @ 1.39
7 94.6% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 5.4% West_&_Central_German @ 1.4
8 95.3% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 4.7% DK @ 1.4
9 95.5% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 4.5% South_&_Central_Swedish @ 1.4
10 95.5% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 4.5% NO @ 1.42
11 95.3% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 4.7% Orcadian @ 1.43
12 89.7% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 10.3% North_Italian @ 1.43
13 95.5% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 4.5% Scottish @ 1.45
14 95.4% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 4.6% IE @ 1.46
15 94.1% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 5.9% AT @ 1.48
16 95.8% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 4.2% North_Swedish @ 1.51
17 86.1% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 13.9% Tuscan @ 1.54
18 94.6% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 5.4% HU @ 1.63
19 96.4% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 3.6% South_Finnish @ 1.63
20 96.7% South_Italian_&_Sicilian + 3.3% EE @ 1.67

Tomenable
07-25-2016, 11:51 PM
which was another heavily Greek part of the island.

Heavily Greek for sure, but still certainly not as much Greek as "Greece proper".

Surely a lot of inhabitants were native Sicilians and Hellenized (culturally Greek) descendants of native Sicilians.

So "Greece proper" had to be even more northern-shifted already in Ancient times.

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 12:15 AM
Heavily Greek for sure, but still certainly not as much Greek as "Greece proper".

Surely a lot of inhabitants were native Sicilians and Hellenized (culturally Greek) descendants of native Sicilians.

So "Greece proper" had to be even more northern-shifted already in Ancient times.

Well of course. But my point is that we can at least be sure that ancient Greeks were more northern shifted than most of today's Sicilians, and likely never were similar to today's Calabrese, Cretans, Dodecanese, nor Cypriots.

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 12:23 AM
Likewise, the way that people seem to plot from Messina/Catania/Enna implies to me that the northeast corner of Sicily is virtually untouched of most if not all foreign ancestry and unlike the southeast corner (Syracuse/Ragusa), there was more Hellenization and less ancestry from Greece proper.

I've seen many from Messina score, on Dodecad K12, less than 10% North European.That is very low.

sciencediver
07-26-2016, 05:50 AM
Yamnaya was sadly an inferior culture though, otherwise they wouldn't have waited to migrate to southern europe (Italy and Greece) in order to develop any civilization whatsoever.

Morges
07-26-2016, 07:19 AM
Heavily Greek for sure, but still certainly not as much Greek as "Greece proper".

Surely a lot of inhabitants were native Sicilians and Hellenized (culturally Greek) descendants of native Sicilians.

So "Greece proper" had to be even more northern-shifted already in Ancient times.

Greek DNA in South Italy is in the coasts, but even in the Greek cities there were many hellenized Italics too.

Tomenable
07-26-2016, 07:25 AM
IIRC Jared Diamond wrote that the Mediterranean world is a geographical region naturally better suited for civilization.

Volat
07-26-2016, 07:26 AM
Yamnaya was sadly an inferior culture though, otherwise they wouldn't have waited to migrate to southern europe (Italy and Greece) in order to develop any civilization whatsoever.

People of Yamnaya had nomadic culture. They lived in grasslands , so pastoralist culture was an obvious choice. The invention of the wheel and chariots in bronze age was probably equivalent to ballistic missile with nuclear war-heads in modern time. If their culture was inferior why all Europeans including Greeks and Italians speak the language derived from the language spoken by people of Yamnaya?

Morges
07-26-2016, 07:41 AM
Likewise, the way that people seem to plot from Messina/Catania/Enna implies to me that the northeast corner of Sicily is virtually untouched of most if not all foreign ancestry and unlike the southeast corner (Syracuse/Ragusa), there was more Hellenization and less ancestry from Greece proper.

I've seen many from Messina score, on Dodecad K12, less than 10% North European.That is very low.

Do you have changed opinions about Ennesi?anyway Messina and Catania city and coast yes but inland towns of these two provinces as well as Enna have accertated North Western Italian settlements. I want to see results from Randazzo, San Fratello, Nicosia, Roccella Valdemone ecc ecc.

Volat
07-26-2016, 08:21 AM
The predominant haplogroup of the Scythians was R1a-Z93? What were the haplogroups of the numerous Turkic groups in Eastern Europe? There were some Pechenegs to the north of Pannonia according to Constantine VII.

Scythian was a generic term for different peoples living north of Black sea and Caspian. They spoke different languages . Steppe and forest-steppe Scythians had different physical anthropologies. Likely, different scythian groups had different haplogroups anything from Z93 to G2a to Z280.

Volat
07-26-2016, 08:33 AM
Some people point to non-Slavic ancestry of Balkan Slavs. The same people often state northern Greeks having Slavic ancestry. That's a bit contradictory.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-26-2016, 08:48 AM
Could these Magyars in Macedonia have had non-Z93 R1a? If the answer is yes then non-Z93 R1a in Macedonia isn't nessecarily entirely Slavic.

The predominant haplogroup of the Scythians was R1a-Z93? What were the haplogroups of the numerous Turkic groups in Eastern Europe? There were some Pechenegs to the north of Pannonia according to Constantine VII.
And 'Byzantines' used Pecheneg mercenaries (among others).

Similar problems exist about many haplogroups. For example a significant minority of Chuvash people belong to subclades haplogroup E1b
5/23 E-L117 here https://www.familytreedna.com/public/chuvashia?iframe=yresults

If I make a test with FtDNA and turn out to be E-L117 (predicted) how would I know if my ancestor who gave me the haplogroup was Greek, Roman, Albanian or even a Chuvash-like Bulgar?
It's wrong to label haplogroups 'Slavic', 'Greek', 'Roman', 'Phoenician' etc.

Yes haplogroups predate and aren't singly synonymous with ethnic groups. But one has to ask which was the largest, most recent and documented migration - Slavs, not old / extinct like Scythians. Of course, in 2000 BC, Slavs were just one tribe which gradually linguistically expanded, reached a critical mass, then migrated in all directions.

Some Turkic tribes could be R1a, but as we've seen, it's almost all z93. The Magyar group were small and settled in Vardar (north) Macedonia, not south part, and in one little community compared to the multitude of Slavic tribes

I think what happened- although poorly attested - is that the Byzantine state was in perilous conditions in the 600s. Heraclius made a hard decision- he decided to abandon the Balkan Danube frontier physically (but not ideologically) in order to consolidate the Byzantine population around the certain Greek towns, and perhaps even more importantly, defend Anatolia (which was wealthier) against Persians and Arabs. He must have had some kind of agreement with the Slavs, letting them settle even the Greek countryside .
so long as they acknowledged the overall rule of the emperor, they could live in their own communities, with their own archontes. They accepted Christianity early, and all this is attested by numerous seals of Slavic leaders throughout Greece, some already having Christian names like Jovan & Petar.

We don't hear much about it in sources probably because they exactly did what they were told, apart from the odd trouble and rebellion (eg of taxes were raised)- but a metaphorical version is presented in the chapter on Serbs & Croats in DAI centuries later. They probably lived peacefully and intermarried, and the problems only really began when the Bulgars began to expand into Macedonia in the 850s; over 2 centuries later, and the area and people were stuck in the middle of wars, much like modern era.

I think it is pretty clear, if it wasn't for slavs, Greece wouldn't exist. Centuries of Roman wars, famine, plagues , earthquakes etc devastated the Balkan countryside, and the Byzantine emperors realised these guys aren't too bad, they can be byzantinized, and indeed they were, esp in south. We know many emperors, priests/ Monks, etc had Slavic roots, sometimes downplayed by past Greek scholars, but all the evidence is overwhelming. Really, we need to shake off what has been pushed by certain Athenian sectors in the past 4 decades. Certainly, Slavs seem to have been part of the furniture in Greece for 1500 years.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-26-2016, 08:57 AM
People of Yamnaya had nomadic culture. They lived in grasslands , so pastoralist culture was an obvious choice. The invention of the wheel and chariots in bronze age was probably equivalent to ballistic missile with nuclear war-heads in modern time. If their culture was inferior why all Europeans including Greeks and Italians speak the language derived from the language spoken by people of Yamnaya?


Yamnaya was sadly an inferior culture though, otherwise they wouldn't have waited to migrate to southern europe (Italy and Greece) in order to develop any civilization whatsoever.


We can't compare apples with oranges, and who's better or "more developed". First, let's remember that the highly developed Balkan copper age cultures collapsed in the Danube- Morava-Axios heartland, with Neolithic survivals in central & southern Greece, and Pannnonia-Carpathia. Elsewhere, there is a large settlement hiatus for several hundred years.

On the other hand, Yamnaya was excellently adapted for its environment, and indeed expanded in several directions, albeit it appears to have learned much of its technology (wheels, metallurgy) from neighbours like Majkop and C-T, possibly even a migration from Majkop.

However, Yamnaya's move into the Balkans doesn't look like a conquest. They occupied specific steppe-like areas of the Danube way, Thracian plain, etc. They maybe brought goods and languages with them also ?

They don't appear to have moved into or displaced the territory of settled Balkan groups , like Ezero or Sitagroi. I'm sure they had interaction, trade, intermarriage, of course the odd wars too. I think there might have been some colonization of Thrace by Iran-Anatolian Chalc. groups also.

So we really need Balkan aDNA to see the genetic effects of all these interactions, from several cultures; but I suspect Balkan Bronze Age will be a very complex
Mix

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 01:08 PM
and so are Greeks...
https://f.hypotheses.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/727/files/2015/06/Haak-et-al-2015-Figure-3-Admixture-Proportions-in-Modern-DNA-With-Linguistic-and-Historical-Origins-Added.png

That's not an indo-european component, just Yamna like ancestry, which does not necessarily mean they descend from Yamna steppe nomads.

It would be rather silly if Belarusians were less than half Slavic :dance:

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 01:10 PM
I don't remember seeing any autosomal studies on Greeks clustering with Slavs...

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 01:27 PM
I don't remember seeing any autosomal studies on Greeks clustering with Slavs...

As I've said to everyone who has replied with this: look where they plot next to Sicilians, and there is your answer. They're 1/4 of the way toward Russia, if you begin in Sicily.

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 01:29 PM
Greek DNA in South Italy is in the coasts, but even in the Greek cities there were many hellenized Italics too.

You do recognize that Greek DNA in southern Italy is a northward-shifting influence for them, right? People from Syracuse and Ragusa, where Greek DNA is stronger, shift slightly north of people from Messina, Palermo, Agrigento, or Catania. The only exception is if the Greek DNA was from the islands, as they were mostly Hellenized people themselves an already similar to people in Sicily.

On the other hand, people from Trapani shift north too, but that is due to Germanic influence, not Greek or NE European.

Morges
07-26-2016, 03:00 PM
Ragusa was a city founded by Siculi as well as Modica, in the nowadays province of Ragusa only two settlements were Greeks: Casmenai=modern Comiso and Camarina=modern Santa Croce Camerina.


You do recognize that Greek DNA in southern Italy is a northward-shifting influence for them, right?
No, I only say that Greek input is stronger in the coastal towns of South Italy and Sicily but the colonization didn't replaced the local Italic populations.



As I've said to everyone who has replied with this: look where they plot next to Sicilians, and there is your answer. They're 1/4 of the way toward Russia, if you begin in Sicily.
Mainlander with accertated Slav settlements yes but Islander with no Slav input no, so which was the original ancient Greek DNA?only aDNA can answer.

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 04:10 PM
Ragusa was a city founded by Siculi as well as Modica, in the nowadays province of Ragusa only two settlements were Greeks: Casmenai=modern Comiso and Camarina=modern Santa Croce Camerina.

No, I only say that Greek input is stronger in the coastal towns of South Italy and Sicily but the colonization didn't replaced the local Italic populations.



Mainlander with accertated Slav settlements yes but Islander with no Slav input no, so which was the original ancient Greek DNA?only aDNA can answer.

I suspect that the mainland always plotted north of Sicily, but that Slavic influence increased the difference. The point that must be emphasized is the "Italic" populations were mostly pre-Indo European Neolithic people (of strongly West Asian origin from the Bronze Age) and had very limited Indo-European DNA, hence why the population today has very little.

And when you remove Germanic influence in southern Italy, you end up with a population close to Cypriots. Keep in mind that island Greeks have a Slavic influence on par with Sicilians' Germanic influence, and higher than Calabria's Germanic influence.. both groups would be Cypriot-like without these influences.

Ragusa does not have many towns founded by Greeks, but they had a large number of settlers, both from Greece and from Syracuse.

Kanenas
07-26-2016, 04:52 PM
We can't compare apples with oranges, and who's better or "more developed". First, let's remember that the highly developed Balkan copper age cultures collapsed in the Danube- Morava-Axios heartland, with Neolithic survivals in central & southern Greece, and Pannnonia-Carpathia. Elsewhere, there is a large settlement hiatus for several hundred years.

On the other hand, Yamnaya was excellently adapted for its environment, and indeed expanded in several directions, albeit it appears to have learned much of its technology (wheels, metallurgy) from neighbours like Majkop and C-T, possibly even a migration from Majkop.

However, Yamnaya's move into the Balkans doesn't look like a conquest. They occupied specific steppe-like areas of the Danube way, Thracian plain, etc. They maybe brought goods and languages with them also ?

They don't appear to have moved into or displaced the territory of settled Balkan groups , like Ezero or Sitagroi. I'm sure they had interaction, trade, intermarriage, of course the odd wars too. I think there might have been some colonization of Thrace by Iran-Anatolian Chalc. groups also.

So we really need Balkan aDNA to see the genetic effects of all these interactions, from several cultures; but I suspect Balkan Bronze Age will be a very complex
Mix

Which emperors were Slavic?

Do you know that Argolis and Corinthia in Peloponnese which have above 40% ''Slavic'' DNA according to the map were mostly Albanian-speaking after the 15th century until the creation of the Greek state?

Arberesh in South Italy are 20% I2a + 5% I1. I2a in Northeastern Peloponnese (if we assume that it didn't exist at all) can be from the migration of Tosk Albanians.

Agamemnon
07-26-2016, 05:15 PM
I suspect much of what is labeled "Slavic" here could equally be due to the Yamna and CW affinities of the earliest Greek-speaking communities. Without ancient data from Chalcolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age Greece as well as more resolution on the R1a and I2a lineages found in Greece nothing can be known for certain.


As I've said to everyone who has replied with this: look where they plot next to Sicilians, and there is your answer. They're 1/4 of the way toward Russia, if you begin in Sicily.

So are Albanians and Kosovars, I have yet to see you claim that they have significant Slavic input.

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 05:52 PM
So are Albanians and Kosovars, I have yet to see you claim that they have significant Slavic input.

They have some, but they likely always plotted north of Greeks... today, Greeks and Albanians are roughly equal. Thus, Greeks likely experienced more Slavic input while Albanians got some, but less... this might have gradually brought Greeks north to Albanians in plotting.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-26-2016, 05:55 PM
Which emperors were Slavic?
Let's dig them up and check
:)


Do you know that Argolis and Corinthia in Peloponnese which have above 40% ''Slavic'' DNA according to the map were mostly Albanian-speaking after the 15th century until the creation of the Greek state?

Arberesh in South Italy are 20% I2a + 5% I1. I2a in Northeastern Peloponnese (if we assume that it didn't exist at all) can be from the migration of Tosk Albanians.

Yes there is always the possibility that it is mediated via secondary effects, & blown up via local founder effects- always a risk with haploid lineages, as I mentioned on my initial -most post
But it doesn't detract from the overall picture one obtains from archaeology and genome wide data which points to a, let's say, "significant" impact

But let's wait for aDNA - it's the most sensible way forward to determine an overall paleodemographic history

vettor
07-26-2016, 06:03 PM
For the area in question and ignoring the ancients , one needs to define what or who are the

Servia , as this name does not apply to Serbia.

and, are the Bulgars a branch of the Avars , and if so where did they pick up the slavic tongue.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-26-2016, 06:03 PM
I suspect much of what is labeled "Slavic" here could equally be due to the Yamna and CW affinities of the earliest Greek-speaking communities. Without ancient data from Chalcolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age Greece as well as more resolution on the R1a and I2a lineages found in Greece nothing can be known for certain.


How much R1a-Z282 and I2-M423 do you expect to see in Bronze Age Greece ?

So far, zero of 15 (or so) aDNA Balkan samples are R1a
There will be some I1(M253) & I2a2-M223 in BA Balkans / Greece

Constantine
07-26-2016, 06:08 PM
As I've said to everyone who has replied with this: look where they plot next to Sicilians, and there is your answer. They're 1/4 of the way toward Russia, if you begin in Sicily.

Those Oracle-type results shouldn't be taken literally. As I'm sure you've observed, the same group can be modeled as many (sometimes ridiculous) combinations of totally different "ingredients."

They are obviously tools requiring interpretation by people with the requisite genetic knowhow.

As a layman, my first impression is (duh) Greece is geographically 1/4 the way from Sicily to Russia. My second impression is that the IE Greek speakers who invaded the Balkans came from somewhere in or near today's Russia.

Sikeliot
07-26-2016, 06:10 PM
As a layman, my first impression is (duh) Greece is geographically 1/4 the way from Sicily to Russia. My second impression is that the IE Greek speakers who invaded the Balkans came from somewhere in or near today's Russia.

The question would then be, is the difference in North Euro today between the two groups reasonable, if we assume Greek input on Sicily? The more Greek regions of southeast Sicily score 14-17% North Euro in results I've seen, versus 10-12% for the rest.

Tomenable
07-26-2016, 06:35 PM
Passa, does your map include samples from Lasithi Plateau?:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasithi_Plateau#Population_genetics_studies

Tomenable
07-26-2016, 06:44 PM
So far, zero of 15 (or so) aDNA Balkan samples are R1a

15 ??? Maybe if you are including Neolithic samples. But from the Metal Ages there are just a few.


There will be some I1(M253) & I2a2-M223 in BA Balkans / Greece

Who brought I1-M253 to BA Balkans / Greece ??? Remember that I1-M253 has a young TMRCA.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-26-2016, 07:36 PM
15 ??? Maybe if you are including Neolithic samples. But from the Metal Ages there are just a few.

Yep, and indeed




Who brought I1-M253 to BA Balkans / Greece ??? Remember that I1-M253 has a young TMRCA.

True. But there was some around Neolithic Hungary. Maybe some yet un-sequenced I1 in the Balkans is from Neolithic rather than Herules and Goths

Skerdilaidas
07-26-2016, 07:50 PM
Yep, and indeed





True. But there was some around Neolithic Hungary. Maybe some yet un-sequenced I1 in the Balkans is from Neolithic rather than Herules and Goths

All I1 seems to be West/North European derived, so far all I1 is Z63, Z58 and P109.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-26-2016, 08:01 PM
Fair enough, thanks for Skerd.
It's intersting that Albanians have decent whack of I1 (10%, isn't it). We know there were Gothic garrisons around Epirus

Skerdilaidas
07-26-2016, 08:10 PM
Fair enough, thanks for Skerd.
It's intersting that Albanians have decent whack of I1 (10%, isn't it). We know there were Gothic garrisons around Epirus

No problem. Yeah most certainly majority of I1 came down with Goths before Slavs came down to the Balkans, specifically Z63 and Z58. For example P109 and Z63 in Montenegro is most certainly from Vlahs, going by the tradition of the clans that belong to I1 there, especially Macura.

I would say from the studies I have seen I1 in Albanians it ranges from 3-7% depending on a region, and as I said, all seems to be Z63, Z58 or P109.

Bane
07-26-2016, 08:20 PM
It may be good to point to this post I wrote (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7176-Most-likely-source-of-haplogroup-R1a1a-in-Sicily-Greek-Slavic-Other&p=157358#post157358).

Regarding I-Z63 and I-P109, I think they should be analyzed separately because their geographic distribution does not overlap. My opinion is that I-Z63 came to Balkans some time before I-P109.

Tomenable
07-26-2016, 10:17 PM
Most common subclades of I1a-DF29 in Poland according to Peter Gwozdz:

I1a-Z63 = 1,5%
I1a-L22 = 1,5%
I1a-Y6340 = 1,4%
I1a-Z58 = 1,3%
other DF29 = 0,5%

sciencediver
07-26-2016, 10:28 PM
@Tomenable,

The R1a from Lassithi Plateau(frequency of r1a in said region about 20%) clusters with Balkan R1a so it is most likely slavic.

R1B is more complex:
Crete plots close to North Italy (I remind you that crete has about 7% U152 so maybe it dates from Venetian and Roman settlement?)
Lassithi plateau (36% R1b, very high ) on the other hand is pulled away from Italy, but it still clusters far from Balkan R1b.

https://snag.gy/KnxyPO.jpg

https://snag.gy/jvhsXN.jpg


Italy, Y-STR-based PCAs based on seven microsatellite markers, were generated. These PCAs are presented in Figure 5. The plot in panel A indicates a close genetic relationship between the Lasithi Plateau and the Balkans R1a1 lineages, whereas the Crete without the Lasithi Plateau group exhibits little or no affinity with respect to R1a1 lineages from the former populations and from Turkey (Figure 5a). In the case of the R1b haplogroup (Figure 5b), the PCA indicates that R1b lineages from both Cretan groups are more related to the lineages from North Italy than to those from Turkey or the Balkans. This affinity, however, is much more evident in the case of the Crete-without the Lasithi Plateau population.

Source:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6539399_Paleolithic_Y-haplogroup_heritage_predominates_in_a_Cretan_highl and_plateau

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 12:18 AM
The R1a from Lassithi Plateau (frequency of r1a in said region about 20%) clusters with Balkan R1a

Does Balkan R1a also cluster with North (West + East) Slavic R1a ???

sciencediver
07-27-2016, 01:16 AM
Does Balkan R1a also cluster with North (West + East) Slavic R1a ???

Are you asking me or is it a rhetoric question?

Skerdilaidas
07-27-2016, 02:07 AM
It's pretty obvious with who their R1a clusters. They keep referencing "Balkans", so who else has R1a in the Balkans.. Only 10 markers? Can't go anywhere with that. Also, I can't seem to find the results. Did any one find them or they just didn't get published?

sciencediver
07-27-2016, 05:08 AM
It's pretty obvious with who their R1a clusters. They keep referencing "Balkans", so who else has R1a in the Balkans.. Only 10 markers? Can't go anywhere with that. Also, I can't seem to find the results. Did any one find them or they just didn't get published?


http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v15/n4/extref/5201769x3.pdf

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 08:49 AM
We don't need to work with STRs, esp low level ones
Underhill 2015 gave a break down of major R1a subclades in the Balkans. Unfortunately, Albanians were not included in the study, but Greeks were. They had typical subclades seen in eastern Europe, whilst lacking older or parallel clades seen in Germany, Scandinavia or Asia.
The ftDNA database goes further into breakdowns, although Balkan pops are underrepresented. Those present are all nested rather 'downstream' within the EE (Balto-Slavic) R1a phylogeny, which strongly goes against a Bronze Age chronology

Agamemnon
07-27-2016, 11:24 AM
How much R1a-Z282 and I2-M423 do you expect to see in Bronze Age Greece ?

So far, zero of 15 (or so) aDNA Balkan samples are R1a
There will be some I1(M253) & I2a2-M223 in BA Balkans / Greece

R1a-Z282 is about 5,000 years old while I2-M423 is 10,000 years old at the very least, I would expect at least some to show up in Mycenaean samples.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 11:46 AM
R1a-Z282 is about 5,000 years old while I2-M423 is 10,000 years old at the very least, I would expect at least some to show up in Mycenaean samples.

Yep, I'm sure most people here know that.
But what will the odd, now extinct, Z282* which is not ancestral to modern Balkan CTS1211 or M458 prove ?
It's the same as if we find some parallel but non-ancestral branch of R1a in pre-2000 BC Indus

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 12:22 PM
within the EE (Balto-Slavic) R1a phylogeny, which strongly goes against a Bronze Age chronology

R1a-Z280 expanded already during the Bronze Age, as that Urnfield sample from Halberstadt shows.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 12:25 PM
R1a-Z280 expanded already during the Bronze Age, as that Urnfield sample from Halberstadt shows.

That's not the point.
Z280 was around by the Bronze Age, but not all the derivative branches which currently pre-dominate (NB in the current freq. & pattern). Their's was a significantly later expansion from certain subsets of that original Urnfield set, from a subset loci, which overrode most other Z280s, and completely so in southeastern Europe, if any had even wondered down to Greece in the first place
There's no Z280* in SEE, no Z282*, or any para-clades down there. It's all young and new

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 12:30 PM
but not the derivative branches which currently pre-dominate.

Several branches which currently predominate were already around, several other branches were not.

When I come back home I will tell you which branches were around and which have younger TMRCAs.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 12:31 PM
Several branches which currently predominate were already around, several other branches were not.

When I come back home I will tell you which branches were around and which have younger TMRCAs.

DOn't bother
When you get home learn how to read.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 12:32 PM
delete

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 12:38 PM
double post

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 12:39 PM
You are not only wrong, but also rude. Here are three examples of major, predominating branches of Z280 which are old enough even according to YFull; and three examples of younger branches - I made this graph some time ago. Names of branches are in a separate Excel file.

So at the moment I don't remember which subclades are these (I will check the Excel file when I get back):

https://s32.postimg.org/ug6du3e5x/TMRCAs_for_Z280.png

https://s32.postimg.org/ug6du3e5x/TMRCAs_for_Z280.png

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 12:42 PM
Legend:

TMRCA = where it starts getting thicker. Thickness at the bottom = relative frequency in FTDNA Polish Project.

olive picker
07-27-2016, 12:57 PM
For example P109 and Z63 in Montenegro is most certainly from Vlahs, going by the tradition of the clans that belong to I1 there, especially Macura.


Sort of off topic, but is there any vlach clan project I can see? What are the main haplogroups of vlachs?

Skerdilaidas
07-27-2016, 01:16 PM
Sort of off topic, but is there any vlach clan project I can see? What are the main haplogroups of vlachs?

Not that I know of. I haven't looked into it for a while now but from what I remeber briefly a study done by Bosch on Aromouns, they seemed to differ from region to region. The average I think was about 20% E- V13, 25% R1b, 23% J2 and about 25% I2a. Some groups in Macedonia had elevated R1a percentages though.

olive picker
07-27-2016, 01:44 PM
Not that I know of. I haven't looked into it for a while now but from what I remeber briefly a study done by Bosch on Aromouns, they seemed to differ from region to region. The average I think was about 20% E- V13, 25% R1b, 23% J2 and about 25% I2a. Some groups in Macedonia had elevated R1a percentages though.

Pretty similar to us then but it seems that they assimilated and had more contact with slavs than us.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 02:15 PM
Here are three examples of major, predominating branches of Z280 which are old enough even according to YFull; and three examples of younger branches - I made this graph some time ago. Names of branches are in a separate Excel file.

So at the moment I don't remember which subclades are these (I will check the Excel file when I get back):

https://s32.postimg.org/ug6du3e5x/TMRCAs_for_Z280.png


https://s32.postimg.org/ug6du3e5x/TMRCAs_for_Z280.png

That figure you posted is correct, but I would like to draw attention to a difference between time of formation, a TMRCA, and 'expansion phase' of individual lineages. Rather, you're just considering everything as a totality, with resulting erroneous conclusions

Look at this (rough, quick tree, with some omissions, and a crappy, half-logarithmic time scale), and lets focus on M458 because its easier, but same principles apply

10662



We note that|

-main branches within Z645 (Z93 vs Z283) split c. 5500 y BP (acc. to YFull)
- Z282 is 'born' almost immediately after (5000 yBP)
- age of formation (AF) and TMRCA of M458 is 4700 y BP
- this tells us that M417 and derived lineages (Z645) in Europe were enjoying geographic and demographic expansion c. 3000-2500 BC, as expected

Within / around M458
- there are several minor and paraclades (PF6155, M458*, PF7521)
- but the bulk are within Y2604
- Y2604 has an AF / TMRCA of 4500 yBP
- in turn, Y2604 is dominated by 2 large subclades - L260, and CTS 11962
- the latter also has a minor clade YP515, and a larger clade -L1029.
- I'm not sure exactly, but most Slavic people who are "M458" fall within L260 and L1029, in turn two or more subclades within them.
- their TMRCA all falls within the period 2300 - 1500 YBP !

The conclusion is Z282 was around 5000 years ago. A subset -M458- then arose, of which several branches existed between 4700 and 2000 years ago. It is difficult to guess at the demographic history of these several groups, but what is clear is that only 2 sub-clades within 1 of the few M458 clades really expanded, and these expanded & fragmented as doing so very recently - on average 1700 years ago.

So we have 3 different concepts.

1) Age of formation. This is when major clades split
2) TMRCA- age of most recent common ancestor of surviving lineages within a major clade. Sometimes, it matches AoF (eg as for M458). Sometimes it does not , eg L260 4500 YBP vs 2500 YBP (suggesting significant bottleneck ?))
3) a more nebulous 'expansion time'-which is when the lineages really began to expand and grow to their modern frequency and geo-spatial distribution.

The latter can be inferred (other formal methods exist)
a) through visual inference of reconstructed trees
b) Bayesian scatter plots, eg via BEAST programme
c) collateral analysis of autosomal data, eg IBD, etc


That is my understanding of it.

BTW- all Balkan M458 samples so far tested fall within derived states of L260 and L1029. By the contrary, para-clades and "non-expanded survivors" can be found mostly, but not exclusively, in northern Europe.

It's the same with Z280 groups, but the tree is more "bushy". But again only a few clades really "expanded" recently- which are the most prevalent and dominant in EE, others just "survived" from earlier (eg Iron Age) expansions.

Skerdilaidas
07-27-2016, 02:58 PM
Pretty similar to us then but it seems that they assimilated and had more contact with slavs than us.

Yeah kind of. I am not sure though what their J2 and R1b is. When I have some time later I will see if I could find the results from that Bosch study (if someone already has them, please post them).

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 08:06 PM
Gravetto-Danubian,

I wrote about Z280, and you responded mostly about M458... :wacko: :P

Anyway, coalescence times are extremely contentious and disputed even among experts...

This is why I think that we should rely more on ancient DNA evidence than TMRCA estimates.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 08:22 PM
As for I1:

How do people know that Goths were I1-Z63 and I1-Z58 ???

Langobards were mostly I1-L22 according to Boattini et al. 2014:

http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v114/n2/full/hdy201477a.html

Partecipanza group (16% of I1-L22) vs. control group (0% of I1-L22):

Excerpt:

"(...) Putting it all together, it seems plausible to relate historical and archaeological information with our molecular results, suggesting that a Lombard component may have had a key role in the foundation of Partecipanza. As it is obvious, we are not implying that hg I1-L22 coincides with ancient Lombards. Their original genetic variability is still unknown and probably varied in time and space. It is anyway reasonable to believe that I1-L22 was an important part of this [Langobard] background. (...)"

https://s22.postimg.org/shfar7ei9/Y+haplogroups+Partecipanza+group+vs+control+grou.p ng

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 09:37 PM
As for I1:

How do people know that Goths were I1-Z63 and I1-Z58 ???

Langobards were mostly I1-L22 according to Boattini et al. 2014:

http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v114/n2/full/hdy201477a.html

Partecipanza group (16% of I1-L22) vs. control group (0% of I1-L22):

Excerpt:

"(...) Putting it all together, it seems plausible to relate historical and archaeological information with our molecular results, suggesting that a Lombard component may have had a key role in the foundation of Partecipanza. As it is obvious, we are not implying that hg I1-L22 coincides with ancient Lombards. Their original genetic variability is still unknown and probably varied in time and space. It is anyway reasonable to believe that I1-L22 was an important part of this [Langobard] background. (...)"

https://s22.postimg.org/shfar7ei9/Y+haplogroups+Partecipanza+group+vs+control+grou.p ng

Whatever they were, Lombards did not settle south of Croatia
So the I1 seen in the rest of Balkans should be looked to groups which actually are documented to have settle the Balkans - Goths, Heruli, Gepidae.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 09:44 PM
Yes but my point was that we have evidence linking L22 with Lombards (see Boattini et al. 2014).

On the other, we do not have any evidence linking Z63 & Z58 with Goths. These are speculations.

sciencediver
07-27-2016, 09:48 PM
Gravetto-Danubian,

I wrote about Z280, and you responded mostly about M458... :wacko: :P

Anyway, coalescence times are extremely contentious and disputed even among experts...

This is why I think that we should rely more on ancient DNA evidence than TMRCA estimates.

all mainland Greek R1a is is either M458 or M558.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 09:55 PM
Yes but my point was that we have evidence linking L22 with Lombards (see Boattini et al. 2014).

On the other, we do not have any evidence linking Z63 & Z58 with Goths. These are speculations.

Ok.
So I1 came with the Trojans ?

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:03 PM
I'm not going to speculate on this.

Skerdilaidas
07-27-2016, 10:15 PM
I'm not going to speculate on this.

Because Z63 from the Balkans, an Albanian from Shkreli Clan and two Serbs from Macura Clan have done bigy and yfull analyses, TMRCA 1000ybp, plus most of their bigy matches are Western European. They are I1-Z63>Y16437. Probably all Z63 in the Balkans belongs to their branch and is of the same source, Germanic Tribes - only they could explain such distribution.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:19 PM
TMRCA 1000ybp

That's several centuries too late for Goths or barbarian migrations in general.

Probably just some Crusader Knight messing around with Balkan girls.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:29 PM
Double post.

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 10:30 PM
TMRCA 1000 years before present = around the First Crusade:

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

Are you claiming that Goths took part in the First Crusade ??? :

http://aventalearning.com/content168staging/2008AmHistA/unit1/images/HIS02-69.18772.jpg

Skerdilaidas
07-27-2016, 10:42 PM
Double post.

Do you actually know what TMRCA mean? And it's between the Albanian sample and the two Serbs, not between them and Western Europeans - they are a bit further. They do have a confirmed match in Belarus TMRCA 2200ybp: https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y16437/

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 11:05 PM
Yes I know what TMRCA means. Are they I-Y16437 or I-Y16434 ???

The former clade has TMRCA 1400 ybp, the latter one - 1000 ybp.


And it's between the Albanian sample and the two Serbs

No - TMRCA is between all people belonging to a given subclade, AFAIK.

Are these 3 guys the only known people belonging to this subclade?

Tomenable
07-27-2016, 11:06 PM
They do have a confirmed match in Belarus TMRCA 2200ybp: https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y16437/

Where do you see TMRCA 2200 ybp ??? It is formation age, not TMRCA. TMRCA is only 1400 ybp.

If they share a common ancestor with a guy from Belarus only 1400 ybp, then this subclade of I1 probably came to the Balkans with Slavs - not with Goths. Maybe it had moved to Belarus-Ukraine with some Non-Slavs, but later it was Slavicized - and then around 1400 ybp its carriers expanded as Slavic-speakers.

Skerdilaidas
07-27-2016, 11:30 PM
The Albanian guy has been identified at ftdna as I-Y16437 while the Macura seem to be I-Y16434, though yfull hasn't completed I guess the analyses of the Shkreli yet. I was told by someone that the TMRCA between the Macura and Belarusian is 2200ybp, didn't look into it to closely myself, but I see that now. Bigy has their TMRCA 1000ybp, but I guess they could be a bit more distantly related, perhaps 1200ybp. We will see once yfull lists him.

Skerdilaidas
07-28-2016, 01:24 AM
Ok finally on my laptop and got a closer look at their tree. So the Belorussian guy belongs to I-Y16435*, TMRCA 2200ybp as I said earlier, and it formed 4000ybp. I mixed them up because yfull seems to have updated their tree since last I had seen, and TMRCA 1400ybp is in fact between Shkreli and Macura, so he is the I-Y16437*. The TMRCA 1000ybp is between the two Macuras: https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Z63/

Shkreli indeed seems to belong to their ancestral clade, and this just further solidifies that Z63 has been in the Balkans most certainly before Slavs showed up, so it probably arrived between 250 - 500 AD.

Trojet
07-28-2016, 08:33 AM
Yes, the TMRCA between the Albanian and the two Macuras is 1400 ybp according to YFull:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y16437/

Since so far this MRCA is shared only by these three, we can assume that their I1-Z63 (Y16437) ancestor was in the Balkans by 600 AD when they split. It is argued by "experts" that YFull TMRCA's are underestimated by about 15%, so in this case their TMRCA would be 1600 ybp, or 400 AD, which is earlier than the arrival of Slavs in Balkans.

Tomenable
08-02-2016, 11:41 PM
I have made a map showing the frequency of just haplogroup R1a alone in Greece:

Data from Passa (Greece) + Karachanak 2013 (Bulgaria) + Noveski 2009 (Skopje):

b.d. = no data

https://s31.postimg.org/jkt8tday3/R1a_in_Greece.jpg

Constantine
08-03-2016, 03:02 AM
Interesting R1a levels are comparable on the (tested) Asia Minor coast.

Sikeliot
08-03-2016, 04:15 AM
Interesting R1a levels are comparable on the (tested) Asia Minor coast.

They are higher in Greece than in Macedonia and part of Bulgaria.

Constantine
08-03-2016, 04:30 AM
Latitude-wise, it matches up with the rest of Greece. What you'd expect if R1a was radiating out from the red areas (same color, in fact, as the Greek side of the Aegean).

The outlier is Crete, having it's own red zone, unless the red can be considered more of an arc. The red area on Crete is where the Sfakiotes (supposedly mainland Greeks of Spartan lineage) settled.

Gravetto-Danubian
08-03-2016, 10:31 AM
I have made a map showing the frequency of just haplogroup R1a alone in Greece:

Data from Passa (Greece) + Karachanak 2013 (Bulgaria) + Noveski 2009 (Skopje):

b.d. = no data

https://s31.postimg.org/jkt8tday3/R1a_in_Greece.jpg

Looks good
What programme did you use ?

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 10:47 AM
Looks good
What programme did you use ?

Thanks. I used GIMP.

sciencediver
08-03-2016, 11:46 AM
The red area on Crete is where the Sfakiotes settled.

the high r1a in crete is in rethymno.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rethymno
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ro2ijOk8JWc/SC8zx6avGkI/AAAAAAAAADQ/7hL-UB7IwTQ/s1600/data.jpg

Tomenable
08-03-2016, 01:03 PM
Also Crete's Lasithi Plateau has ca. 15% R1a.

sciencediver
08-03-2016, 02:07 PM
Lassithi Plateau is a special case, repopulated countless times over the centuries. Anyone interested to look further into the matter should study the history of the said region:

http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/pdf/uploads/oa_ebooks/oa_hesperia_supplements/HS18.pdf

Sikeliot
08-06-2016, 03:31 PM
The Slavic y-dna on the islands is clearly due to repopulation from the mainland.

Tomenable
08-06-2016, 08:22 PM
There were actually also Slavic pirates in the Mediterranean Sea.

Especially the Narentines (Paganoi) were famous for their raids:

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

Constantine
08-07-2016, 03:10 AM
The Slavic y-dna on the islands is clearly due to repopulation from the mainland.


Any autosomal DNA studies showing Greeks clustering with Slavic speakers yet? [Crickets....]

Gravetto-Danubian
08-07-2016, 03:22 AM
Any autosomal DNA studies showing Greeks clustering with Slavic speakers yet? [Crickets....]


Many Greeks are Slavic -shifted because of admixture
They'll never cluster with Slavs because Greeks have 50% + near eastern DNA
Even most south Slavs don't cluster with Slavs, because they have (in turn) significant Thracian / Greek/ Illyrian substrate.

Understand ? .....(crickets)

Sikeliot
08-07-2016, 04:20 AM
Any autosomal DNA studies showing Greeks clustering with Slavic speakers yet? [Crickets....]

Greek = the genetic equivalent of someone with 3 Sicilian grandparents and 1 Russian grandparent, in terms of admixture components.

If my maternal grandmother was Sicilian instead of Portuguese, I'd be more or less like a genetic Greek, as my maternal grandfather is Polish and father Sicilian.

Ignis90
08-07-2016, 02:33 PM
Greek = the genetic equivalent of someone with 3 Sicilian grandparents and 1 Russian grandparent, in terms of admixture components.


Sure, but Russians are not exactly the best proxy for the Slavic influence in the Balkans and Sicilians can't be a proxy for Ancient mainland Greeks since they have too much North African ancestry (sometimes reaching 10%).


I think we have to look at the closest population geographically to mainland Greeks - Albanians - which also happen to be non-slavic speaking. Modern Albanians might have a slight northern and eastern shift because it's hypothesized that they originated further North and East than modern Albania because of linguistic reasons. So ancient mainland Greeks (if they ever were homogeneous) should be slightly less steppes-shifted than modern Albanians, somewhat close to Tuscans in the Natufian-WHG cline.
Just my 2 cents.

Sikeliot
08-07-2016, 02:38 PM
I think we have to look at the closest population geographically to mainland Greeks - Albanians - which also happen to be non-slavic speaking. Modern Albanians might have a slight northern and eastern shift because it's hypothesized that they originated further North and East than modern Albania because of linguistic reasons. So ancient mainland Greeks (if they ever were homogeneous) should be slightly less steppes-shifted than modern Albanians, somewhat close to Tuscans in the Natufian-WHG cline.
Just my 2 cents.

But so did Greek speakers. The original Greek speakers (or proto-Greeks) likely came from the north and east as well.

Constantine
08-08-2016, 04:15 AM
I think we have to look at the closest population geographically to mainland Greeks - Albanians - which also happen to be non-slavic speaking. Modern Albanians might have a slight northern and eastern shift because it's hypothesized that they originated further North and East than modern Albania because of linguistic reasons.

I've read that Albanians (or the Gheg tribes, at least) have hefty Thracian influence. Thracians moved westward into the mountains and joined the south-moving Illyrians.

Skerdilaidas
08-08-2016, 05:37 AM
I've read that Albanians (or the Gheg tribes, at least) have hefty Thracian influence. Thracians moved westward into the mountains and joined the south-moving Illyrians.

What would you interpret as Thracian influence?

vettor
08-08-2016, 05:52 AM
What would you interpret as Thracian influence?

Because the illyrians did not arrive in northern albania prior to 350BC ............then they met the macedonians and fought war after war against them. Thracians have been in the balkans far far longer than the illyrians

Gravetto-Danubian
08-08-2016, 06:43 AM
Because the illyrians did not arrive in northern albania prior to 350BC ............then they met the macedonians and fought war after war against them. Thracians have been in the balkans far far longer than the illyrians


What do you make such bold and generic statements on ?
Neither groups existed prior to 3500 BC.

vettor
08-08-2016, 07:58 AM
What do you make such bold and generic statements on ?
Neither groups existed prior to 3500 BC.

I put down 350BC .......not 3500BC

Gravetto-Danubian
08-08-2016, 08:06 AM
I put down 350BC .......not 3500BC

Oh My mistake. ;)
So, you're suggesting there was no Illyrians in south-West Balkans until 350 BC ? If so, who lived there before, and from where did Illyrians arrive

vettor
08-08-2016, 09:37 AM
Oh My mistake. ;)
So, you're suggesting there was no Illyrians in south-West Balkans until 350 BC ? If so, who lived there before, and from where did Illyrians arrive

Epirotes, Corinthians and Macedonians

proto-Illyrians are non balkan people who moved south over time , reaching montenegro and northern albania to begin fighting Phillip II of Macedonia. They where stopped by Phillip and then we know what Phillip and his son Alexander did later.

Gravetto-Danubian
08-08-2016, 09:47 AM
Epirotes, Corinthians and Macedonians

proto-Illyrians are non balkan people who moved south over time , reaching montenegro and northern albania to begin fighting Phillip II of Macedonia. They where stopped by Phillip and then we know what Phillip and his son Alexander did later.

Illyrians didn't arrive at the time of Phillip- that seems to be your own idea
They'd been in the Balkans since Iron Age (700 BC), at least, seen by continuity of Glasinac-Matt culture, etc. in fact, it looks to me that (some) Epirotes were Hellenised Illyrians.

The only peple who "arrived" in the Hellenistic era were the Celts

Skerdilaidas
08-08-2016, 01:27 PM
Because the illyrians did not arrive in northern albania prior to 350BC ............then they met the macedonians and fought war after war against them. Thracians have been in the balkans far far longer than the illyrians

Where do you propose the Illyrians came from? I have seen scholars actually suggest the opposite, and in fact Illyrian domination of ancient northwestern Macedonia has been proposed from about 850 to 650 BCE before Macedonia became a power to recon with.

Constantine
08-08-2016, 03:48 PM
Maybe there are Albanians reading this that can clarify, but I believe Illyrians were concentrated farther north than modern Albania. The most recent waves into the region came from around modern Herzegovina. These were joined, at some point, by Thracian descendants coming from the eastern Balkan plains. These movements were most likely touched off by the Slavic advance. This all comes from "Mountains of Giants," by Coon, which I read like 10 years ago, so my memory is a bit foggy.

I'm sure many of you remember the "Thracian" remains from Bulgaria that were tested a few years back. Albanians and Greeks were more related to them than the actual Bulgarians (and I believe some Italian groups even more so).

Skerdilaidas
08-08-2016, 04:08 PM
Maybe there are Albanians reading this that can clarify, but I believe Illyrians were concentrated farther north than modern Albania. The most recent waves into the region came from around modern Herzegovina. These were joined, at some point, by Thracian descendants coming from the eastern Balkan plains. These movements were most likely touched off by the Slavic advance. This all comes from "Mountains of Giants," by Coon, which I read like 10 years ago, so my memory is a bit foggy.

I'm sure many of you remember the "Thracian" remains from Bulgaria that were tested a few years back. Albanians and Greeks were more related to them than the actual Bulgarians (and I believe some Italian groups even more so).

There were constant back and forth population movements in the Balkans ever since antiquity, and yes, some Gheg clans did come from further north, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there weren't any Ghegs in today's Albania, at least from the current data we posses. Genetically, Shkreli, Hoti and Krasniqi that came from up north are related to the Clans of Lezha and more distantly to Clans of Mirdita. That means Albanians inhabited their current lands and much more going back in time, but were pushed back by Slavs and also latter a bit by Ottomans. In the case of the Clans I have mentioned, Shkreli, Krasniqi, Hoti, Kryeziu and Mirdita (Orosh, Kushen, Spac), judging by their TMRCA, all belonging to J2b2, started expanding over 2000 years ago - probably from Mat and surrounding region. Can't see how Thracians factor in when having the time of their diversification in mind, at least of what we know as of today.

Many factors influenced such movements, trade, posture lands, blood fueds etc. Similar scenario probably existed also in ancient Illyrian lands, and they were attested to have lived much further southwest than current Albanian borders, actually. Glasinac type tumuli became common around 8th century BCE and extended all the up to northwest Macedonia (ancient Macedonia).

olive picker
08-08-2016, 04:10 PM
Maybe there are Albanians reading this that can clarify, but I believe Illyrians were concentrated farther north than modern Albania.

But Albanians have lived further north than they do now until recently. Even two extremely big clans alone hail from Hercegovina (which is a region which was slavicized only recently).

Skerdilaidas
08-08-2016, 04:35 PM
As for being more closely related autosomally to the Thracian sample than today's Bulgarians: makes sense. Greeks and Albanians pull their ancestry, at least partially, and more so than Balkan Slavs, from ancient populations of the Balkans, specifically the earlier farmers and the Indo-European settlers. It doesn't equate to us being 'Thracian', just basically means we descent from similar populations that inhabited ancient Thracia. We need more aDNA from the Balkans though to paint a clearer picture, specifically from exYugo territories, Albania and northern Greece.

Illyro-Vlach
08-08-2016, 04:52 PM
But Albanians have lived further north than they do now until recently. Even two extremely big clans alone hail from Hercegovina (which is a region which was slavicized only recently).

I'm still looking for evidence for this and waiting to see if others can provide it. So far, nothing.

olive picker
08-08-2016, 04:58 PM
I'm still looking for evidence for this and waiting to see if others can provide it. So far, nothing.

https://books.google.se/books?id=i2IpDAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage

Illyro-Vlach
08-08-2016, 05:52 PM
https://books.google.se/books?id=i2IpDAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage


Yeah, I've come across that. All the claims are based on oral traditions which is a good starting point but isn't actually firm evidence. These tribes were no doubt Catholic at the time (as many still are in Montenegro/Northern Albania) so there should be proof of these purported migrations from Hercegovina in Church documents but I have yet to come across any.

We have solid historical evidence that Albanian tribes were present in Pokuplje and Sandzak/Raska, both of which are in present-day Serbia proper. We also have tribes that straddled both sides of the present-day border between Montenegro and Albania and Montenegro/Kosovo. These oral traditions no doubt refer to the Sandzak of Hercegovina which encompassed a much larger parcel of land than today's Hercegovina as it included not only Modern Hercegovina but also North and East Montenegro (Stara Hercegovina) and Southeastern Bosnia (Foca and Gorazde). I haven't found any toponymic evidence of Albanians in this older Hercegovina. Instead it's full of Vlach toponyms such as Durmitor, Vlasenica, etc. There are some surnames in Hercegovina though that are of Albanian stock such as Zotovic among Serbs in Trebinje and Simlesha and Kelava among Croats all the way up in Livno where I'm from.

As usual I will keep digging and I think that the best route will be through church records either in Dubrovnik or in Bar.

vettor
08-08-2016, 06:23 PM
Illyrians didn't arrive at the time of Phillip- that seems to be your own idea
They'd been in the Balkans since Iron Age (700 BC), at least, seen by continuity of Glasinac-Matt culture, etc. in fact, it looks to me that (some) Epirotes were Hellenised Illyrians.

The only peple who "arrived" in the Hellenistic era were the Celts

In the late bronze age, the illyrians where in the areas from Vienna-pannonia-northern bosnia-istria , ..........they bordered the celts in western austria and where part of the amber trade route through to the adriatic sea.
modern albania was the dorians who came down south into greece ~1000BC. this area was replaced eventually by corinthian greeks and some of the 14 epirote tribes.

The illyrians where being pushed to go south by the celts on one side and the dacians on the other side. Eventually most of the illyrians where celtinized.

when the romans came, from ~200BC ........they found illyrians in modern dalmatia, bosnia and croatia and named it illyricum.
Albania with its 14 epirote tribes where already vassals of macedonia from the time of Philip II and remained under Macedonia in the hannibal/roman wars as macedonia was allied to hannibal and supplied him with supplies across the adriatic sea.

The great illyrian revolt against rome happened only by bosnian and pannonian illyrians
The Great Illyrian Revolt, (Bellum Batonianum or Pannonian Revolt[62]) was a major conflict[63] between an alliance of Illyrian communities and the Roman forces that lasted for four years beginning in AD 6 and ending in AD 9. In AD 6, several regiments of Daesitiates, natives of area that now comprises central Bosnia and Herzegovina, led by Bato the Daesitiate (Bato I), were gathered in one place to prepare to join Augustus's stepsonand senior military commander Tiberius in a war against the Germans. Instead, the Daesitiates mutinied and defeated a Roman force sent against them. The Daesitiates were soon joined by the Breuci[64] led by Bato of the Breuci (Bato II), another community inhabiting the region between the rivers Sava and Drava in modern Croatia.

The question one needs to ask is ...........what did the dacians speak before speaking Latin and what influence did they have in pushing into Paeonian and macedonian lands aiming for SW-Greece

The Romans knew the people who they ruled and named the lands to reflect this
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Roman_provinces_of_Illyricum%2C_Macedonia%2C_Dacia %2C_Moesia%2C_Pannonia_and_Thracia.jpg

Skerdilaidas
08-08-2016, 07:10 PM
Yeah, I've come across that. All the claims are based on oral traditions which is a good starting point but isn't actually firm evidence. These tribes were no doubt Catholic at the time (as many still are in Montenegro/Northern Albania) so there should be proof of these purported migrations from Hercegovina in Church documents but I have yet to come across any.

We have solid historical evidence that Albanian tribes were present in Pokuplje and Sandzak/Raska, both of which are in present-day Serbia proper. We also have tribes that straddled both sides of the present-day border between Montenegro and Albania and Montenegro/Kosovo. These oral traditions no doubt refer to the Sandzak of Hercegovina which encompassed a much larger parcel of land than today's Hercegovina as it included not only Modern Hercegovina but also North and East Montenegro (Stara Hercegovina) and Southeastern Bosnia (Foca and Gorazde). I haven't found any toponymic evidence of Albanians in this older Hercegovina. Instead it's full of Vlach toponyms such as Durmitor, Vlasenica, etc. There are some surnames in Hercegovina though that are of Albanian stock such as Zotovic among Serbs in Trebinje and Simlesha and Kelava among Croats all the way up in Livno where I'm from.

As usual I will keep digging and I think that the best route will be through church records either in Dubrovnik or in Bar.

Have such church records been published anywhere?

Skerdilaidas
08-08-2016, 07:13 PM
So Taulanti were Macedonian according to you, vettor?

vettor
08-08-2016, 07:23 PM
So Taulanti were Macedonian according to you, vettor?

no , they and the pathini where given safety by the macedonians to settle where they are..........they are stated as 2 minor illyrian tribes who fled the attacks by other illyrian tribes from modern bosnia.
Remember, the illyrians did not see themselves as one people .................the Romans from 146BC knew who lived where and who they where in regards to customs, traits etc


Answers will come once scholars decide what the dacians spoke before speaking Latin

Skerdilaidas
08-08-2016, 07:34 PM
no , they and the pathini where given safety by the macedonians to settle where they are..........they are stated as 2 minor illyrian tribes who fled the attacks by other illyrian tribes from modern bosnia.
Remember, the illyrians did not see themselves as one people .................the Romans from 146BC knew who lived where and who they where in regards to customs, traits etc


Answers will come once scholars decide what the dacians spoke before speaking Latin

Your knowledge regarding ancient populations of the Balkans is limited, vettor. It's beyond me why you chose to engage in such topics.

Illyro-Vlach
08-09-2016, 01:25 AM
Have such church records been published anywhere?


They've been the main source for non-elite movement (migrations) in that general area as the Catholic Church has done a great job over the centuries keeping records. Some are of course lost due to fires but there are many left. Even though surnames only really began appearing around the late 17th century, larger movements of people are still easy to deduce based on parish records.

Skerdilaidas
08-09-2016, 01:59 AM
They've been the main source for non-elite movement (migrations) in that general area as the Catholic Church has done a great job over the centuries keeping records. Some are of course lost due to fires but there are many left. Even though surnames only really began appearing around the late 17th century, larger movements of people are still easy to deduce based on parish records.

Yeah for sure, and for further south even Ottoman records to some extent are useful. However, looking at the records of Sandxhak of Shkodra of 1485, it's almost impossible to deduce who formed the clan for example lets say Kuci, Hoti or Kelmendi etc. plus we have to keep in mind that some of these Clans also have two layers, Hoti specifically, the Old and the New. It would be even harder if they were herders that had little to no contact with the civilised cities of Dalmatia, which is mostly likely the case I am thinking since they preserved their language and traditions (though their connection to other Albanian clans from Lezha and Mirditia sort of does confirm that they wondered up there, but the question is when, and how long they stayed). Also, where should we look? North, Herzegovina or Bosnia are large territories. They do mention "Kladusa" and "Jutbina" in some of their kreshnik (epic) songs as their place of origin, but I haven't been able to locate such places in Herzegovina or Bosnia. They could have very well come from northern Monte for all we know.

Also, Nopca studied them in detail back then so if such records existed I am pretty sure he would have gotten hold of them and used them in his study, he is Elsie's source in most of these Clans after all.

Illyro-Vlach
08-09-2016, 02:20 AM
Yeah for sure, and for farther south even Ottoman records to some extent are useful. However, looking at the records of Sandxhak of Shkodra of 1485, it's almost impossible to deduce who formed the clan for example lets say Kuci, Hoti or Kelmendi etc. plus we have to keep in mind that some of these Clans also have two layers, Hoti specifically, the Old and the New. It would be even harder if they were herders that had little to no contact with the civilised cities of Dalmatia, which is mostly likely the case I am thinking since they preserved their language and traditions (though their connection to other Albanian clans from Lezha and Mirditia sort of does confirm that they wondered up there, but the question is when, and how long they stayed). Also, where should we look? North, Herzegovina or Bosnia are large territories. They do mentioned "Kladusa" and "Jutbina" in some of their krashnik (epic) songs as their place of origin, but I haven't been able to locate such places in Herzegovina or Bosnia. They could have very well come from northern Monte for all we know.

Biscopal/Parish records would no doubt mention Albanian speakers in parishes as they do throughout the Bishopric of Bar where it's easy to see who the Albanian speakers were and who the Slavic ones were at any given time.

Ottoman Defters are a great resource except that they never listed actual surnames but instead only listed first names followed by that individual's father's name. I haven't dug into the Shkoder Defters at all and might have to take a look there.

There is a place called Velika Kladusa in Bosnia, but it's in the far, far northwestern corner of the country.


Also, Nopca studied them in detail back then so if such records existed I am pretty sure he would have gotten hold of them and used them in his study, he is Elsie's source in most of these Clans after all.

Is there a good English-language version of any studies of Gheg Tribes and Clans, particularly from the far north? I'd love to dig into that.

Skerdilaidas
08-09-2016, 02:37 AM
Biscopal/Parish records would no doubt mention Albanian speakers in parishes as they do throughout the Bishopric of Bar where it's easy to see who the Albanian speakers were and who the Slavic ones were at any given time.

Ottoman Defters are a great resource except that they never listed actual surnames but instead only listed first names followed by that individual's father's name. I haven't dug into the Shkoder Defters at all and might have to take a look there.

There is a place called Velika Kladusa in Bosnia, but it's in the far, far northwestern corner of the country.

Didn't know that. Have you seen them yourself and is there a place where I could locate them via internet? Interesting, quite far north, but you never know though, they might have went up there and stayed for a bit.


Is there a good English-language version of any studies of Gheg Tribes and Clans, particularly from the far north? I'd love to dig into that.

Not much actually besides Elsie's book, and he basically just touches them superficially to my opinion. Don't get me wrong though, it's still a good book to have as a reference since for some clans he does mention all the traditions related to their ancestry. Which Clans specifically are you more interested?

Illyro-Vlach
08-09-2016, 03:52 AM
Didn't know that. Have you seen them yourself and is there a place where I could locate them via internet? Interesting, quite far north, but you never know though, they might have went up there and stayed for a bit.

I've seen them myself as many of us have copies thanks to good ties with local Franciscan Priests. They're all scans of handwritten documents that are either in Latin language or in Croatian in Western Cyrillic (Arvatica/Bosancica) script so they are quite difficult to read. There are translations into Croatian around the internet but the best sources are the books that deal with onomastics/local history as they use these parish records as primary sources. In the coming future I'll pull out a few examples of scans of originals that I have in my possession and post them here when applicable.




Not much actually besides Elsie's book, and he basically just touches them superficially to my opinion. Don't get me wrong though, it's still a good book to have as a reference since for some clans he does mention all the traditions related to their ancestry. Which Clans specifically are you more interested?

What's the name of the Elsie book? I'm interested of course in the Hoti and Kelmendi and any other tribes that found themselves in present-day Montenegro and those like the Hoti who have oral traditions that they were once in Hercegovina.

Skerdilaidas
08-09-2016, 05:09 AM
I've seen them myself as many of us have copies thanks to good ties with local Franciscan Priests. They're all scans of handwritten documents that are either in Latin language or in Croatian in Western Cyrillic (Arvatica/Bosancica) script so they are quite difficult to read. There are translations into Croatian around the internet but the best sources are the books that deal with onomastics/local history as they use these parish records as primary sources. In the coming future I'll pull out a few examples of scans of originals that I have in my possession and post them here when applicable.
I read Serbian cyrillics, so maybe I could read them too? I would be really interested to see the parish of Bari, specifically the Albanian speaking communities there, of course if you ever have the time to share them.


What's the name of the Elsie book? I'm interested of course in the Hoti and Kelmendi and any other tribes that found themselves in present-day Montenegro and those like the Hoti who have oral traditions that they were once in Hercegovina.

Book is called the tribes of Albania, and costs about $100. Though for Hoti and Kelmendi you can find some of his entries on his site:
Hoti: http://www.albanianliterature.net/legends/legend_12.html
Kelmendi: http://www.albanianliterature.net/legends/legend_14.html

We have to keep in mind that Hoti are much older tribe and were powerful even during Balsa's time, of course this is the Old Hoti as they are known and now days are only a minority within their own clan (I have confirmed that a family that indetify as montenegrins today stem from them and have tested as R-CTS9219, like me, but quite distant from me though): https://books.google.ca/books?id=LvVbRrH1QBgC&pg=PA515&lpg=PA515&dq=hoti+fighting+mataguzi+for+posture+land&source=bl&ots=9hSUUuF7nf&sig=NFmHDOlo6RA-jfNsMXzvcLqkT6Q&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=hoti%20fighting%20mataguzi%20for%20posture%20lan d&f=false

New Hoti are all J2b2 while Kelmendi and Tripeshi seem to be E-V13, except for a family of Kelmendi from Tamare that have tested as J2b2 (not closely related at all to Hoti or Krasniqi).

Illyro-Vlach
08-09-2016, 06:05 AM
I read Serbian cyrillics, so maybe I could read them too? I would be really interested to the parish of Bari, specifically the Albanian speaking communities there, of course if you ever have the time to share them.

I'll contact a friend of mine who has everything on Bar (it should be in Latin script and language). All the Arbanasi of Croatian Dalmatia (Albanians who have become Croatians after emigrating there roughly 300 years ago) came from the area around Shestine in behind Bar towards Lake Skadar.

vettor
08-09-2016, 06:21 AM
Your knowledge regarding ancient populations of the Balkans is limited, vettor. It's beyond me why you chose to engage in such topics.

I think you should engage in Albanian affairs After the fall of the Roman empire, because clearly you fail to realise all the different people that passed through the area of modern Albania prior to and during the Roman empire.
You do realise that the main major road from Durres ( albania ) to Constantinople went through the main lands of modern Albania and yet one finds no records of the term albania until 150AD in any Roman records.......clearly the Romans knew everybody along the main roads as they protected these highways on a regular basis.

olive picker
08-09-2016, 03:33 PM
I'll contact a friend of mine who has everything on Bar (it should be in Latin script and language). All the Arbanasi of Croatian Dalmatia (Albanians who have become Croatians after emigrating there roughly 300 years ago) came from the area around Shestine in behind Bar towards Lake Skadar.

Thank you for this, man

J Man
08-09-2016, 07:11 PM
I read Serbian cyrillics, so maybe I could read them too? I would be really interested to the parish of Bari, specifically the Albanian speaking communities there, of course if you ever have the time to share them.



Book is called the tribes of Albania, and costs about $100. Though for Hoti and Kelmendi you can find some of his entries on his site:
Hoti: http://www.albanianliterature.net/legends/legend_12.html
Kelmendi: http://www.albanianliterature.net/legends/legend_14.html

We have to keep in mind that Hoti are much older tribe and were powerful even during Balsa's time, of course this is the Old Hoti as they are known and now days are only a minority within their own clan (I have confirmed that a family that indetify as montenegrins today stem from them and have tested as R-CTS9219, like me, but quite distant from me though): https://books.google.ca/books?id=LvVbRrH1QBgC&pg=PA515&lpg=PA515&dq=hoti+fighting+mataguzi+for+posture+land&source=bl&ots=9hSUUuF7nf&sig=NFmHDOlo6RA-jfNsMXzvcLqkT6Q&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=hoti%20fighting%20mataguzi%20for%20posture%20lan d&f=false

New Hoti are all J2b2 while Kelmendi and Tripeshi seem to be E-V13, except for a family of Kelmendi from Tamare that have tested as J2b2 (not closely related at all to Hoti or Krasniqi).

It is the ''New Hoti'' along with the Tripeshi that have the tradition of descending in the direct paternal line from Keq Preka correct?

vettor
08-09-2016, 07:25 PM
Since the Avars brought the slavs into modern montenegro and northwest Greece/albania in 580AD
Under Bayan I's leadership, the Avars expanded across Pannonia in every direction and, through conquest, enlarged their empire. A number of Slavic people had followed the Avars into Pannonia, and these were now subjects of Avar rule. The invasion of Greece followed.

Is the slavic legacy still in these places? ..........what about the Avar legacy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avars_(Caucasus)

I was also told that the Bulgars sprang from a branch of the Avars ,............but I am unsure what is true or not

Agamemnon
08-13-2016, 12:12 AM
But so did Greek speakers. The original Greek speakers (or proto-Greeks) likely came from the north and east as well.

It seems David also agrees with me on this:

"Chalcolithic Greeks will cluster with or near Anatolia_Chalcolithic.

But today, Greeks are much more northern than that. And not all of this northern shift can be attributed to Slavic incursions, especially not in Crete."

Sikeliot
08-13-2016, 05:21 AM
It seems David also agrees with me on this:

"Chalcolithic Greeks will cluster with or near Anatolia_Chalcolithic.

But today, Greeks are much more northern than that. And not all of this northern shift can be attributed to Slavic incursions, especially not in Crete."

Cretans do not plot north, they are like Sicilians.

Gravetto-Danubian
08-13-2016, 07:06 AM
It seems David also agrees with me on this:

[I]"Chalcolithic Greeks will cluster with or near Anatolia_Chalcolithic.

I think that was obvious a while back here (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3474-Bell-Beakers-Gimbutas-and-R1b&p=124689#post124689)

Back then I thought that Bronze Age Greece will have very little EHG (<10%), and (virtually) all their present EHG is due to Slavs. Whilst I still think this is more or less the case, the Klei6 Genome I asked Dave to analyse shows Levant shift; which might have offset more archaic steppe admixture. So I also wouldn't be surprised if some Myceneans plot close to (steppe-admixed) Bronze Age Hungary

Agamemnon
08-13-2016, 03:51 PM
Cretans do not plot north, they are like Sicilians.

Compared to Anatolia_Chl, they clearly lean towards Villabruna and EHG, in that sense they are indeed more northern, at least I assume that's what he meant.

Sikeliot
08-13-2016, 04:53 PM
Compared to Anatolia_Chl, they clearly lean towards Villabruna and EHG, in that sense they are indeed more northern, at least I assume that's what he meant.

I see. My guess is that before Crete received Greek influence from the mainland or Venetian influence, they may have been like Cypriots are today (same may have been true for Sicily before Italic, Greek, and Norman).

What I want to see is a Greek genome from right before they colonized the Mediterranean. I have waivered back and forth in my expectations of what they would have been like.

Star93
08-13-2016, 04:56 PM
Since the Avars brought the slavs into modern montenegro and northwest Greece/albania in 580AD
Under Bayan I's leadership, the Avars expanded across Pannonia in every direction and, through conquest, enlarged their empire. A number of Slavic people had followed the Avars into Pannonia, and these were now subjects of Avar rule. The invasion of Greece followed.

Is the slavic legacy still in these places? ..........what about the Avar legacy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avars_(Caucasus)

I was also told that the Bulgars sprang from a branch of the Avars ,............but I am unsure what is true or not


Yes, it would be interesting to find out the contribution of Avars to balkan populations but I havn't found an informative study as of yet.

Tag Heuer
08-13-2016, 07:52 PM
Since the Avars brought the slavs into modern montenegro and northwest Greece/albania in 580AD
Under Bayan I's leadership, the Avars expanded across Pannonia in every direction and, through conquest, enlarged their empire. A number of Slavic people had followed the Avars into Pannonia, and these were now subjects of Avar rule. The invasion of Greece followed.

Is the slavic legacy still in these places? ..........what about the Avar legacy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avars_(Caucasus)

I was also told that the Bulgars sprang from a branch of the Avars ,............but I am unsure what is true or not

caucasian avars have nothing to do with turkic avars, it's believed that magharulals ("caucasian avars") were ruled by turkic Avars, whom they got their new name from. Magharulals were ruled by turkic khan Surakat.

Illyro-Vlach
08-14-2016, 01:12 AM
Yes, it would be interesting to find out the contribution of Avars to balkan populations but I havn't found an informative study as of yet.

Off of the top of my head I think it was T that was found on the island of Hvar in Croatia that was a total outlier to the rest of the country and many are willing to attribute that to the Avars and their Balkan incursion.

Gravetto-Danubian
08-14-2016, 01:31 AM
Yes, it would be interesting to find out the contribution of Avars to balkan populations but I havn't found an informative study as of yet.

There has been an ancient study (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/06/02/056655), but only mtDNA, and from a non-core area.
For the impact of avars, we'd need to distinguish between their territory & peoples they ruled, and their actual core-group of mounted warriors. The former was densely pupulated, & consisted of mostly"Europoid" groups (Germanics, Slavs, Romans). They were settled in key regions of Eastern Europe, so their impact was profound . As for the avars themselves, we'd need propper full Genomes aDNA to clarify how many survived Charlemagnes assaults, and what legacy they passed on.

lgmayka
08-14-2016, 02:42 AM
Off of the top of my head I think it was T that was found on the island of Hvar in Croatia that was a total outlier to the rest of the country and many are willing to attribute that to the Avars and their Balkan incursion.
This 2003 paper (http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v11/n7/full/5200992a.html) mentions the unusual yDNA P(xR1) and mtDNA F on Hvar. The P(xR1) samples have DYS392=15, so they are almost certainly Q. This paper (http://bib.irb.hr/prikazi-rad?lang=en&rad=635803) confirms the Q haplogroup. According to YFull, DYS392=15 is characteristic of the entire Q-L275 clade (https://yfull.com/tree/Q-L275/).

Gravetto-Danubian
08-14-2016, 02:45 AM
This 2003 paper (http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v11/n7/full/5200992a.html) mentions the unusual yDNA P(xR1) and mtDNA F on Hvar. The P(xR1) samples have DYS392=15, so they are almost certainly Q.

Yes it was, confirmed in a 2013 paper (http://bib.irb.hr/prikazi-rad?lang=en&rad=635803)

Tomenable
11-27-2016, 09:36 PM
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mx140ag0148h7e2/GREEK%20Y-DNA.ods?dl=0

^A table with all Greek Y-DNA data I could find

Based on that data, I made these two things:

1) A PCA graph with convex hulls (there are two main clusters) and loadings biplot:

Red font shows two main haplogroups by area:

http://i.imgur.com/pbbyzjo.png

http://i.imgur.com/pbbyzjo.png

2) A map of clustering and two main haplogroups by area (based on data and PCA):

https://i.imgur.com/lJx60C5.png

https://i.imgur.com/lJx60C5.png

What do you guys think about it? Any ideas ???

eastara
11-28-2016, 02:20 AM
You can't build those maps based on current Greek population. Nea Nicomedia samples, for one are 100% refugees from North Western Anatolia. Whereever you see Nea in Greek toponymics, it usually means recent refugees from Anatolia, Black sea area, etc.

Bonacci
11-28-2016, 05:39 PM
There's no Slavic y-dna haplogroups just like there's no Jewish, African American or Italic haplogroups. Most of these Y-dna subclades exist much earlier than any Slavic, Romance speaker existed ever.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 12:45 PM
Most of these Y-dna subclades exist much earlier than any Slavic

Are you sure? According to Michał, a lot of for example R1a subclades are very young.

We are talking about TMRCAs (time to most recent common ancestor) of these clades.

You can also find these TMRCA estimates for example here: https://www.yfull.com

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 03:04 PM
Are you sure? According to Michał, a lot of for example R1a subclades are very young.

We are talking about TMRCAs (time to most recent common ancestor) of these clades.

You can also find these TMRCA estimates for example here: https://www.yfull.com

Calling R1a as a Slavic subclade equals with saying the R1b haplogroup is the essential of Czech and West Africans (North Cameronians)

If R1a is a slavic signal then 40% of North India, and good portion of West Eurasia is slavic as well. We're talking about a haplogroup which can be inherited from a single ancestor not a genetic marker which displays the majority of our ancestry. By accident and b0ottleneck effect R1a haplogroups might reach let's say 50% in a Turkish town. Does it mean those Turks are significant slavic genetically? obviously not.

I'm not trying to define anyone's identity but there's no such thing as a genetic slavic person, not even such thing as genetic Russian exists except if we consider Northwest Russia as a proxy of genetic Russian. Not even Poles are genetically Slavic, since it's rather an identity which barely even existed 5000 years ago. Maybe we would say that British weren't Brit 1000 years ago but saxons but now everyone call himself as Brit, not because they have an R1b halplogroup.

I'm a slav because my haplogroup is R1a, does it make sense? probadly not

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 03:20 PM
I mean that only some branches of R1a are Slavic. Not all of R1a.

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 03:29 PM
I mean that only some branches of R1a are Slavic. Not all of R1a.

I understand you totally. To me it equals with saying. Some branches of R1a are "Turanic". I understand the meaning of Pan Slav-ism but i honestly doubt such ethnicity as "Slavic" existed before the cultural uniformity of modern day Russia and East Europe along with the Balkans.

If this was true then Romanians (Romance speakers) would be genetically different to Bulgarians (Slavic speakers, Slavic identity and "Slavic genetically")

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 03:49 PM
Maybe we would say that British weren't Brit 1000 years ago

Percentages of ancestries and admixtures are given in these publications:

1) http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/07/17/022723

PDF: http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/07/17/022723.full.pdf

2) http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms10326

PDF: http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038/ncomms10326

3) http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v519/n7543/full/nature14230.html

PDF: http://www.nature.com.sci-hub.cc/nature/journal/v519/n7543/full/nature14230.html

4) http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/05/07/052084

PDF: http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/07/052084.full.pdf

5) http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/05/27/055855

PDF: http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/27/055855.full.pdf

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 03:53 PM
I'm a slav because my haplogroup is R1a, does it make sense? probadly not

It depends on which subclade of R1a do you have?

Some subclades may indicate that your direct paternal ancestor some generations ago was Slavic.

Because some subclades emerged among, and expanded with, Slavs.

Just like my subclade L617 likely indicates that my Bronze Age ancestor was one of Proto-Celts.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 03:57 PM
If R1a is a slavic signal then 40% of North India, and good portion of West Eurasia is slavic as well.

North India has R1a-Z93, which is Indo-Iranic, not Slavic. There was an explosive expansion of R1a-Z93 males in South Asia roughly during the times of the Aryan Invasion of North India:

Figure 4: Explosive male-lineage expansions of the last 15,000 years:

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v48/n6/fig_tab/ng.3559_F4.html

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v48/n6/images/ng.3559-F4.jpg

Source: http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v48/n6/full/ng.3559.html

There are some lineages of R1a (as well as of I2a) which exploded like this during Slavic expansions. If you carry one of these lineages, it indicates that you are descended from those Proto-Slavs.

Because expansion of Slavs was a demographic process, a massive migration.


If this was true then Romanians (Romance speakers) would be genetically different to Bulgarians

They actually are different, as far as I know.

Romanians are "more southern" genetically, despite living to the north of Bulgarians.

But Bulgarians of course are not 100% Slavic.


Some branches of R1a are "Turanic".

Mostly assimilated Iranic branches. Proto-Turks were likely of C, Q, N and L haplogroups:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4540-Y15121-Prussian-Sri-Lankan-subclade-within-R1a-Z2123&p=171588&viewfull=1#post171588

C, Q and N were main haplogroups of the Xiongnu. And an ancient Hunnic chieftain had L:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8066-DISCUSSION-THREAD-FOR-quot-Genetic-Genealogy-and-Ancient-DNA-in-the-News-quot&p=199435&viewfull=1#post199435

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 04:10 PM
I'm not trying to define anyone's identity but there's no such thing as a genetic slavic person

Well, all Europeans are a mixture of similar ancestral populations.

I will stick to my Eurogenes Steppe K10 score, which says that I am:

37% Mesolithic Western Hunter
29% Early Neolithic Farmer
30% Steppe Indo-European
4% all other admixtures

Maybe it's not 100% accurate but I like this balance 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3.

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 04:11 PM
Some R1a subclades are more common in Russia and a few might be eclusively North Eastern European specific, but it's still more accurate to say the spread of R1a haplgroups may be in line with Yamna culture or Yamna like ancestry.

R1a Z93 is more widespread in Indo Iranic, still it has the same origin as the North East European specific R1a haplogroups.
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/R1a_migration_map.jpg

The so called "Slavic" Russians also have only 47% R1a haplogroups while some Central Asians have higher, so it's rather a Yamna culture like ancestry rather district Slavic. Russian or any North East European groups never made any significant impact on the Balkans, so it's rather the connection with Mainland Eastern Europe which made it's presence appear even in Greece.

The reason it couldn't appear in West Europe because of the Alps and Pyrenes and other likely geographical factors, as we see it's absent in Italy and Western Europe generally.

http://slovio.com/slavic-gene/KirgizR1aDistribution.JPG


Edit: No, my y-dna isn't R1a i said it as an example.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 04:13 PM
^ Yamnaya samples found so far were mostly R1b, actually.

On the other hand, R1a dominated in Corded Ware culture.

Proto-Balto-Slavs (Trzciniec culture) were Corded Ware + WHG.

=======================

Today R1b is common in Iberia, but Copper Age Iberia = 0% of R1b:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9159-Iberia-and-Italy-during-the-Metal-Ages&p=199576&viewfull=1#post199576

This indicates that R1b expanded to Iberia from Eastern/Central Europe.

Iberian haplogroups during the Copper Age:

Ancient DNA sample (age) - Y-DNA haplogroup:

ATP12 (3010-2879 BC) - I2a2a2
ATP17 (3007–2871 BC) - I2a2a
ATP2 (2899-2678 BC) - H2
I1303 (2880-2630 BC) - I2a1a1
I0581 (2880-2630 BC) - I2a2a1
I1284 (2880-2630 BC) - I
I1302 (2880-2630 BC) - G2a2b2b
I1314 (2880-2630 BC) - G2a
I1274 (2880-2630 BC) - I2a2
I1277 (2568-2346 BC) - I2a2a

Total 10 samples, including:

I2a - 6 (= 60%)
I - 1 (= 10%)
G2a - 2 (= 20%)
H2 - 1 (= 10%)

R1b - 0 (= 0%)

By contrast, modern situation:

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups_by_region.shtml

Spain - R1b = 69%
Portugal - R1b = 56%

So obviously both R1a and R1b expanded from Eastern Europe with Indo-Europeans.

Not just R1a as used to be accepted several years ago.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 04:23 PM
The so called "Slavic" Russians also have only 47% R1a haplogroup

Russians are mixed with Uralic (Finno-Ugric) populations. They are not fully Slavic.

And Proto-Slavs almost certainly were not just R1a, but a mixture of R1a and I2a.

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 04:42 PM
Russians are mixed with Uralic (Finno-Ugric) populations. They are not fully Slavic.

And Proto-Slavs almost certainly were not just R1a, but a mixture of R1a and I2a.

Western Poles are mixed with Germanic otherwise they wouldn't come out as Half German half Eastern Polish, or is Eastern Polish have Russian admixture which makes them genetically more Eastern than Western Poles.

People who are considered Slavic all have some Siberian like admixture, so to assume pure Slavs must be 100% West Eurasian with no Uralic elements, where as Uralic, Finnic like admixture exist anywhere in the so called Slavic speakers, except maybe Western Poles and Bulgarians..


Some Poles genetically just as Siberian/Uralic as average Finns, Russians, so they aren't full Slavic anymore?

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/kkYA_GdC_Ov8x3tE5pWokoebtgEC3sTAyoARin2WDGc=w533-h580-no

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 04:59 PM
Only Northwest Germans are predominantly Germanic. Other regional German groups are very mixed.

For example modern West Germans tend to score a lot of "East Med" admixture in Eurogenes K15.

None of ancient Germanic and Celtic samples scored that admixture - so where did it come from?:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8408-Unetice-culture-was-clearly-multi-ethnic&p=199751&viewfull=1#post199751

Ancient Germanic samples:

http://i.imgur.com/eD9Uy0g.png

Ancient Celtic samples:

http://i.imgur.com/vbHmNLJ.png

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 05:02 PM
Some Poles genetically just as Siberian/Uralic as average Finns, Russians

These are Estonian Poles (Polish minority living in Estonia):

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2014/02/genetic-affinities-of-estonian-poles.html

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 05:19 PM
Assuming Celts are Slavic since their East European and Baltic elements are higher than Slavic Bulgarians. :noidea:

:focus:

Assuming Greeks have "Slavic" admixture that's no doubt compared to Sephardi Jews or Eastern Turks yet non Slavic Hungarians, Austrians have dozens of Haplogroups autosomal segments matching with Slavic speaker groups more than Greeks or even Bulgarians alone.

Yet those some of those groups never heard of Slavic invasion...

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 05:23 PM
their East European and Baltic elements are higher than Slavic Bulgarians.

South-Western Slavs (e.g. Croats) are more Slavic than South-Eastern Slavs (e.g. Bulgarians):

Bulgarian:

North Sea- 12.88
Atlantic- 15.88
Baltic- 16.38
Eastern European- 9.34
West Med- 13.76
West Asian- 11.88
East Med- 16.27
Red Sea- 2.18

Serbian:

North Sea- 18.84
Atlantic- 17.28
Baltic- 15.16
Eastern European- 12.76
West Med- 11.74
West Asian- 8.44
East Med- 12.18
Red Sea- 2.6

Croatian:

North Sea- 18.41
Atlantic- 17.516666
Baltic- 22.743333
Eastern European- 15.173333
West Med- 10.166666
West Asian- 6.6933333
East Med- 5.2533333
Red Sea- 1.2866666

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 05:28 PM
Hungarians, Austrians have dozens of Haplogroups autosomal segments matching with Slavic speaker groups

Hungarians and Austrians obviously assimilated a lot of Slavs.

Check my map of R1a haplogroup in Germany and in Austria:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8461-Map-of-haplogroup-R1a-in-Germany-and-Austria&p=184322&viewfull=1#post184322

Percent of R1a compared to Slavic-inhabited areas in 800 AD:

http://oi68.tinypic.com/6enpso.jpg

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 05:30 PM
South-Western Slavs (e.g. Croats) are more Slavic than South-Eastern Slavs (e.g. Bulgarians):

Bulgarian:

North Sea- 12.88
Atlantic- 15.88
Baltic- 16.38
Eastern European- 9.34
West Med- 13.76
West Asian- 11.88
East Med- 16.27
Red Sea- 2.18

Serbian:

North Sea- 18.84
Atlantic- 17.28
Baltic- 15.16
Eastern European- 12.76
West Med- 11.74
West Asian- 8.44
East Med- 12.18
Red Sea- 2.6

Croatian:

North Sea- 18.41
Atlantic- 17.516666
Baltic- 22.743333
Eastern European- 15.173333
West Med- 10.166666
West Asian- 6.6933333
East Med- 5.2533333
Red Sea- 1.2866666

There's no proof that East European or Baltic genetic components were brought there by Slavic speakers, as long as it's not proven by historical invasions or Russians settling down in large portions there. They could be 100% East European yet there's no any evidence those elements have anything to do with Slavs, rather it's part of the native genetic variations of Balkans/Central Europe.

They may labelled those genetic alleles as Baltic or East European since it peaks there not that it's an exclusively component brought by East Europe to the rest of the World.
Some North Indians, Afghans have 10-15% East European yet no documented Slavic invasion over there.

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 05:31 PM
Even European Jews have 8-10% Baltic, and some East European so they might be part of the "Slavic facade" :\

Mis
11-29-2016, 05:36 PM
Welcome to the new reverend.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 05:39 PM
There's no proof that East European or Baltic genetic components were brought there by Slavic speakers, as long as it's not proven by historical invasions or Russians settling down in large portions there. They could be 100% East European yet there's no any evidence those elements have anything to do with Slavs, rather it's part of the native genetic variations of Balkans/Central Europe.

There is evidence of Lithuanian-like & Ukrainian-like admixture in the Balkans, dating back to Slavic migrations:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4714572/

http://cdn.phys.org/newman/gfx/news/hires/2015/candnaeviden.jpg

http://www.ephotobay.com/image/picture-9-13.png

In my opinion Proto-Slavs were like 75% Lithuanians + 25% Circassians, so Lithuaian-like admixture = Slavs:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4967-The-origin-of-the-Slavs&p=198210&viewfull=1#post198210


Some North Indians, Afghans have 10-15% East European yet no documented Slavic invasion over there.

This is due to Indo-Iranic invasion. Proto-Indo-Iranians lived in Eastern Europe (Western Russia and Ukraine).

And ancient Proto-Indo-Iranian genomes score a lot of "Baltic" and "Eastern European" in Eurogenes K15.

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 05:41 PM
The problem is we're discussing about a group which can't be verbally nor genetically defined.

How would anyone tell what's Slavic? What's the definition of Slavic admixture? Were there any groups in the history that were labelled as "Slavs"? Are there any signals of "Slavic" genetic offspring across Europe which can be considered 100% Slavic?

--

I guess not. We're talking about own imaginations not real scientific facts.

^^
The admixture map posted by the poster above
The same authors detect Indian admixture as the most dominant in Romanians... Just lol

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 05:44 PM
Even European Jews have 8-10% Baltic, and some East European

European Jews for centuries lived among Slavs, who were their host populations.

And indeed European Jews have around 15-25% of Eastern European admixture:

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/07/10/063099.full.pdf

https://scarmilab.org/tagc/

See Figure 7. "A proposed model for the recent Ashkenazi Jewish history":

https://s15.postimg.org/e9937ih5n/Ashkenazim.png

Some part of it could be from citizens of the Khazar Khaganate converted to Judaism.

We have some Khazar ancient DNA and they had mostly West Eurasian haplogroups:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6388-Ashkenazi-Y-DNA-the-digest&p=143225&viewfull=1#post143225

So the idea that hypothetical Khazar admixture = East Asian admixture, was wrong.

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 05:46 PM
European Jews for centuries lived among Slavs, who were their host populations.

And indeed European Jews have around 15-25% of Eastern European admixture:

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/07/10/063099.full.pdf

https://scarmilab.org/tagc/

See Figure 7. "A proposed model for the recent Ashkenazi Jewish history":

https://s15.postimg.org/e9937ih5n/Ashkenazim.png

Some part of it could be from citizens of the Khazar Khaganate converted to Judaism.


Bullshit, most Jews never been to East Europe, the majority of Jews lived in Germany and their ancestry doesn't show any recent East European ancestry, maybe some Russian Jews have minor East European admixture, still it's not their major European genetic component.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 05:49 PM
Bullshit, most Jews never been to East Europe, the majority of Jews lived in Germany

What ??? You need to read more about Jewish history.

The majority of Europe's Jews lived in Poland-Lithuania:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/44/31/68/443168a8dfdbb0087dbcaf21774cf0b7.jpg

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/44/31/68/443168a8dfdbb0087dbcaf21774cf0b7.jpg

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 05:53 PM
According to Salo W. Baron, "A Social and Religious History of the Jews", by the end of the 18th century around 42-46% of all Jews in the world lived in Poland and Lithuania. Of course the percentage of all European Jews living in Poland-Lithuania was even higher. The second largest Jewish community in the world after Poland-Lithuania during the late 18th century, was in the Turkish Ottoman Empire.

When Prussia, Austria and Russia partitioned Poland, they acquired Jewish population. Later a lot of those Jews from parts of Poland annexed by Prussia, emigrated to Berlin and to other parts of Germany.

For example in 1932 Berlin had the largest Jewish community in Germany, and the vast majority of them were descended from Jews who lived in Poland before 1772, and later emigrated to Berlin.

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 05:57 PM
All slavs have East Eurasian admixture, if they had spread their genes in the whole Europe then traces of Siberian, Yakut like alleles would be visible, just like in Bulgarians at 1-3%, but Serbs, Croats have 0% East Eurasian ancestry at least not recent East Eurasian which can be detected in every Eastern Slavic population including a good portion of Poles.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xFUWsf1yLMQ/UDNSB8dbWXI/AAAAAAAAFmY/nCNMjOSlwsw/s1600/table_regression.png

Greeks, Tuscans, Armenians, North Italians, Sicilians, Sardinians are the closest Europeans to pure West Eurasians and lack any external Eurasian elements common in North and East Europeans which against the Slavic like admixture in these groups and makes this thread no points to discuss anymore..

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qCEiV81NI0c/UDJP0Y-C_LI/AAAAAAAAFjs/WJLXbhylaCM/s1600/f4_Sardinian_X_Han_San.png

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 06:05 PM
Ancient North Eurasians =/= East Eurasian population.

Modern East Asians have virtually zero of ANE admixture.

=========================

As for Ashkenazi Jews - they share most IBD with Sephardi Jews (due to common ancestry) and with East Europeans (due to admixtures in the last several centuries, from the Middle Ages until the 1900s).

See Doron M. Behar's 2013 publication:

https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/viewco...mbiol_preprints

Quote:

"(...) The greatest level of [ancestry] sharing was observed with Sephardi Jews, considerably greater than with other populations. Substantial sharing with Eastern Europeans was also observed, though at a much lower level. Sharing with most other populations was lower still. (...)"

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 06:13 PM
All slavs have East Eurasian admixture, if they had spread their genes in the whole Europe then traces of Siberian, Yakut like alleles would be visible, just like in Bulgarians at 1-3%, but Serbs, Croats have 0% East Eurasian ancestry at least not recent East Eurasian which can be detected in every Eastern Slavic population including a good portion of Poles.

Do you think that Proto-Slavs already had East Eurasian admixture?

In my opinion most of it is from much more recent admixture events.

In most of calculators I don't score any Siberian etc. My Eurogenes K15:

Population
North_Sea 22.24
Atlantic 19.65
Baltic 25.41
Eastern_Euro 18.22
West_Med 5.35
West_Asian 6.36
East_Med 2.70
Red_Sea -
South_Asian 0.07
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

The only "exotic" thing that I score here is East Med. It looks like some kind of "civilized admixture", because ancient "barbarians" (like Celts or Germanics that I posted) did not have any East Med.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 06:19 PM
And here my Turkic K11 score:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-ObXiVfL-RzMlZDWml3UExKbmc/view

----------------------------
FINAL ADMIXTURE PROPORTIONS:
----------------------------

27.83% SE_European
5.33% W_Asian
0.00% SE_Asian
0.19% SSA
46.30% NE_European
0.80% Indian
18.00% NW_European
1.52% Turkic
0.00% Mongol
0.03% Papuan
0.00% NE_Asian

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 06:23 PM
I don't think that Proto-Slavs had any East Asian.

Most of East Asian in present-day Slavic populations is from much later events.

Such as for example Mongol Invasions of Medieval Europe.

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 06:38 PM
Do you think that Proto-Slavs already had East Eurasian admixture?

In my opinion most of it is from much more recent admixture events.

In most of calculators I don't score any Siberian etc. My Eurogenes K15:

Population
North_Sea 22.24
Atlantic 19.65
Baltic 25.41
Eastern_Euro 18.22
West_Med 5.35
West_Asian 6.36
East_Med 2.70
Red_Sea -
South_Asian 0.07
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

The only "exotic" thing that I score here is East Med. It looks like some kind of "civilized admixture", because ancient "barbarians" (like Celts or Germanics that I posted) did not have any East Med.

Your "East European" which isn't East European but peaks in Udmurts or some other West Siberian groups has East Eurasian alleles as well as the Baltic component hides some East Eurasian, but all components with the exception of West Med, East Med, Atlantic has minor East Eurasian affinity.

East Med is Neolithic farmer related just like the West Med component in Europeans.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 06:40 PM
East Med is Neolithic farmer related just like the West Med component in Europeans.

Nope. All Neolithic farmers score only "West Med", they do not score any "East Med".

"East Med" is Post-Neolithic. For example Bronze Age Hungarians had some "East Med".

========================

Edit: I mean, "East Med" was present in Neolithic farmers - but not European ones.


Your "East European" which isn't East European but peaks in Udmurts or some other West Siberian groups has East Eurasian alleles as well as the Baltic component hides some East Eurasian, but all components with the exception of West Med, East Med, Atlantic has minor East Eurasian affinity.

This is Ancient North Eurasian (Afontova Gora, Malta Boy, etc.), rather than East Asian.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 06:50 PM
This is my Eurogenes ANE K7 score, ~19% Ancient North Eurasian but 0% East Eurasian:

Population
ANE 18.69
ASE 1.51
WHG-UHG 64.30
East_Eurasian -
West_African -
East_African 0.60
ENF 14.89

By comparison, here is a Northern Dutch guy (he posts on Eupedia as "Northener"):

Population
ANE 16.45
ASE 2.17
WHG-UHG 66.77
East_Eurasian -
West_African 0.10
East_African 0.76
ENF 13.75

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 06:58 PM
Yes, that's why i said "neolithic farmer like" but the two components isn't that far off, since both has related alleles so the calculators will often mislabel West med alleles as East Med and vica versa.

Back to topic the Baltic component seems to be some "Basal European" rather Slavic except if we don't consider Sicilians to be 15-25% East European related just like Ashkenazi Jews, as long as i know no Sicilian ever set foot in East Europe nor bring there "Slavic" wives but who knows. :\

From highest to lowest:

Serbian

North Atlantic - 27.10
Baltic - 27.32
West Med - 15.84
West Asian - 9.37
East Med - 15.63
Red Sea - 2.50
South Asian - 0.33
East Asian - 0.57
Siberian - 0.76
Amerindian - 0.03
Oceanian - 0.38
North-East African - 0.11
Sub-Saharan African - 0.06

Bulgarian

North Atlantic - 21.75
Baltic - 24.06
West Med - 17.91
West Asian - 11.91
East Med - 20.12
Red Sea - 1.95
South Asian - 0.11
East Asian - 0.52
Siberian - 0.43
Amerindian - 0.56
Oceanian - 0.41
North-East African - 0.11
Sub-Saharan African - 0.16

Albanian (Albania was isolated by mountains yet Baltic is strikingly higher than even in Greeks)

North Atlantic - 22.51
Baltic - 17.69
West Med - 21.31
West Asian - 11.4
East Med - 23.31
Red Sea - 2.59
South Asian - 0.22
East Asian - 0.37
Siberian - 0.15
Amerindian - 0.09
Oceanian - 0.26
North-East African - 0.01
Sub-Saharan African - 0.03

Central Greek

North Atlantic - 16.86
Baltic - 10.38
West Med - 21.47
West Asian - 15.44
East Med - 29.25
Red Sea - 5.03
South Asian - 0.29
East Asian - 0.24
Siberian - 0.14
Amerindian - 0.32
Oceanian - 0.56
North-East African - 0.03
Sub-Saharan African - 0.01

East Sicilian

North Atlantic - 16.46
Baltic - 9.03
West Med - 21.26
West Asian - 13.83
East Med - 29.91
Red Sea - 6.26
South Asian - 0.67
East Asian - 0.11
Siberian - 0.04
Amerindian - 0.17
Oceanian - 0.38
North-East African - 1.37
Sub-Saharan African - 0.56


So Irish are more Slavic than Bulgarians? :ranger:

Irish

North Atlantic - 52.23
Baltic - 24.02
West Med - 12.39
West Asian - 6.32
East Med - 1.41
Red Sea - 0.82
South Asian - 1.09
East Asian - 0.09
Siberian - 0.03
Amerindian - 0.99
Oceanian - 0.33
North-East African - 0.18
Sub-Saharan African - 0.10

---

Portuguese are more slavic than Central Greeks? :behindsofa:


West_Scottish

North Atlantic - 53.18
Baltic - 23.35
West Med - 12.31
West Asian - 5.56
East Med - 1.72
Red Sea - 0.88
South Asian - 1.14
East Asian - 0.05
Siberian - 0.47
Amerindian - 0.80
Oceanian - 0.34
North-East African - 0.08
Sub-Saharan African - 0.12

Iberia

Portuguese

North Atlantic - 38.54
Baltic - 11.51
West Med - 25.32
West Asian - 2.43
East Med - 13.9
Red Sea - 3.63
South Asian - 0.42
East Asian - 0.14
Siberian - 0.25
Amerindian - 0.44
Oceanian - 0.67
North-East African - 1.72
Sub-Saharan African - 1.04

------

Afghan Pashtuns are as slavic as Central Greeks? lel

Afghan_Pashtun

North Atlantic - 8.26
Baltic - 10.18
West Med - 0.26
West Asian - 40.20
East Med - 7.01
Red Sea - 0.97
South Asian - 25.38
East Asian - 1.49
Siberian - 3.82
Amerindian - 1.30
Oceanian - 0.47
North-East African - 0.07
Sub-Saharan African - 0.59

Same about Punjabi Jatts

Punjabi_Jatt

North Atlantic - 7.52
Baltic - 10.46
West Med - 0.07
West Asian - 35.03
East Med - 0.74
Red Sea - 0.59
South Asian - 43.05
East Asian - 0.07
Siberian - 0.41
Amerindian - 1.30
Oceanian - 0.33
North-East African - 0.07
Sub-Saharan African - 0.38

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 07:08 PM
Yes, that's why i said "neolithic farmer like" but the two components isn't that far off, since both has related alleles so the calculators will often mislabel West med alleles as East Med and vica versa.

You could say the same about "Baltic" and "East Euro".

Especially that in Eurogenes K13 there is just "Baltic" and all of "East Euro" is counted as part of "Baltic".

"Eastern Euro" component was added only in K15.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 07:12 PM
Back to topic the Baltic component seems to be some "Basal European"

IIRC, Mesolithic Europeans score 4 components in Eurogenes K15:

- "North Sea"
- "Baltic"
- "Eastern Euro"
- "Atlantic"

"West Med" and "West Asian" were added only by Early Neolithic Farmers.

However, Early Neolithic Anatolian Farmers also carried some "Atlantic".

So "Atlantic" was present both among Mesolithic HG and Neolithic EEF.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 07:23 PM
Iberia

Portuguese

North Atlantic - 38.54
Baltic - 11.51
West Med - 25.32
West Asian - 2.43
East Med - 13.9
Red Sea - 3.63
South Asian - 0.42
East Asian - 0.14
Siberian - 0.25
Amerindian - 0.44
Oceanian - 0.67
North-East African - 1.72
Sub-Saharan African - 1.04

^ Edit: That is in Eurogenes K13, not in Eurogenes K15.

Some Copper Age and Bronze Age Iberians in Eurogenes K15:

1) ATP16 (years 3211-2866 BC) - kit M422959:

Population
North_Sea 4.97
Atlantic 38.78
Baltic -
Eastern_Euro -
West_Med 56.23
West_Asian -
East_Med -
Red_Sea -
South_Asian -
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

2) I1300 (years 2880-2630 BC) - kit M547763:

Population
North_Sea 11.89
Atlantic 32.72
Baltic -
Eastern_Euro -
West_Med 53.76
West_Asian -
East_Med -
Red_Sea 1.62
South_Asian -
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

3) I1281 (years 2880-2630 BC) - kit M784782:

Population
North_Sea 11.44
Atlantic 38.25
Baltic -
Eastern_Euro -
West_Med 50.31
West_Asian -
East_Med -
Red_Sea -
South_Asian -
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

4) I1303 (years 2880-2630 BC) - kit M734278:

Population
North_Sea 2.11
Atlantic 42.03
Baltic -
Eastern_Euro -
West_Med 55.85
West_Asian -
East_Med -
Red_Sea -
South_Asian -
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

5) I1280 (years 2880-2630 BC) - kit M855364:

Population
North_Sea 3.14
Atlantic 44.61
Baltic -
Eastern_Euro -
West_Med 51.82
West_Asian -
East_Med -
Red_Sea 0.42
South_Asian -
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

6) I1274 (years 2880-2630 BC) - kit M874014:

Population
North_Sea 12.18
Atlantic 39.73
Baltic -
Eastern_Euro -
West_Med 48.09
West_Asian -
East_Med -
Red_Sea -
South_Asian -
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

7) ATP9 (years 1700-1518 BC) - kit M116706:

Population
North_Sea 17.71
Atlantic 44.39
Baltic 0.49
Eastern_Euro -
West_Med 37.40
West_Asian -
East_Med -
Red_Sea -
South_Asian -
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

==========================

Population averages in Eurogenes K15:

Population North_Sea Atlantic Baltic Eastern_Euro West_Med West_Asian East_Med Red_Sea South_Asian Southeast_Asian Siberian Amerindian Oceanian Northeast_African Sub-Saharan

French_Basque 16.85 45.40 4.79 2.82 25.04 0.83 2.74 0.73 0.13 0.28 0.04 0.03 0.10 0.17 0.04
Portuguese 21.61 26.61 5.71 3.71 21.63 2.65 10.21 3.55 0.45 0.13 0.15 0.28 0.41 2.06 0.85
Spanish_Andalucia 15.69 31.45 5.58 2.99 23.21 3.99 11.30 2.49 0.48 0.18 0.46 0.04 0.31 1.32 0.52
Spanish_Aragon 18.12 35.04 5.17 2.95 23.35 2.00 8.96 2.85 0.27 0.15 0.16 0.22 0.21 0.47 0.08
Spanish_Cantabria 19.95 32.02 5.93 4.22 23.95 2.17 6.59 2.68 0.31 0.04 0.07 0.26 0.30 0.91 0.61
Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha 17.84 33.09 4.72 3.46 22.53 3.48 9.32 3.19 0.30 0.11 0.08 0.13 0.06 1.40 0.28
Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon 20.52 29.84 7.19 2.38 20.82 2.77 9.35 3.61 0.16 0.24 0.07 0.16 0.13 1.92 0.84
Spanish_Cataluna 21.75 29.63 6.92 4.00 20.70 3.10 9.73 1.88 0.48 0.36 0.06 0.03 0.29 0.56 0.50
Spanish_Extremadura 19.86 28.49 4.72 3.60 21.52 3.09 10.75 4.67 0.39 0.01 0.01 0.36 0.10 1.48 0.95
Spanish_Galicia 23.22 24.88 6.54 3.91 21.78 2.42 8.93 4.48 0.88 0.19 0.13 0.12 0.03 1.52 0.96
Spanish_Murcia 19.87 29.93 4.85 3.06 20.83 2.52 11.69 3.13 0.27 0.61 0.39 0.50 0.12 1.57 0.67
Spanish_Valencia 17.55 32.77 6.17 3.66 21.94 2.78 10.99 1.90 0.63 0.12 0.04 0.21 0.33 0.45 0.45

Bonacci
11-29-2016, 07:32 PM
You could say the same about "Baltic" and "East Euro".

Especially that in Eurogenes K13 there is just "Baltic" and all of "East Euro" is counted as part of "Baltic".

"Eastern Euro" component was added only in K15.

East European is basically Baltic with components which catches more Eastern related call it ANE or North Eurasian like alleles.
Baltic also catches some ANE or even minor Siberian related components, but with less frequency and it has definitely more Neolithic related components compared to East Euro.
(otherwise it wouldn't appear so widespread in almost every European ethnic group)


^ Edit: That is in Eurogenes K13, not in Eurogenes K15.

Some Copper Age and Bronze Age Iberians in Eurogenes K15:

1) ATP16 (years 3211-2866 BC) - kit M422959:

Population
North_Sea 4.97
Atlantic 38.78
Baltic -
Eastern_Euro -
West_Med 56.23
West_Asian -
East_Med -
Red_Sea -
South_Asian -
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

French_Basque 16.85 45.40 4.79 2.82 25.04 0.83 2.74 0.73 0.13 0.28 0.04 0.03 0.10 0.17 0.04
Portuguese 21.61 26.61 5.71 3.71 21.63 2.65 10.21 3.55 0.45 0.13 0.15 0.28 0.41 2.06 0.85
Spanish_Andalucia 15.69 31.45 5.58 2.99 23.21 3.99 11.30 2.49 0.48 0.18 0.46 0.04 0.31 1.32 0.52
Spanish_Aragon 18.12 35.04 5.17 2.95 23.35 2.00 8.96 2.85 0.27 0.15 0.16 0.22 0.21 0.47 0.08
Spanish_Cantabria 19.95 32.02 5.93 4.22 23.95 2.17 6.59 2.68 0.31 0.04 0.07 0.26 0.30 0.91 0.61
Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha 17.84 33.09 4.72 3.46 22.53 3.48 9.32 3.19 0.30 0.11 0.08 0.13 0.06 1.40 0.28
Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon 20.52 29.84 7.19 2.38 20.82 2.77 9.35 3.61 0.16 0.24 0.07 0.16 0.13 1.92 0.84
Spanish_Cataluna 21.75 29.63 6.92 4.00 20.70 3.10 9.73 1.88 0.48 0.36 0.06 0.03 0.29 0.56 0.50
Spanish_Extremadura 19.86 28.49 4.72 3.60 21.52 3.09 10.75 4.67 0.39 0.01 0.01 0.36 0.10 1.48 0.95
Spanish_Galicia 23.22 24.88 6.54 3.91 21.78 2.42 8.93 4.48 0.88 0.19 0.13 0.12 0.03 1.52 0.96
Spanish_Murcia 19.87 29.93 4.85 3.06 20.83 2.52 11.69 3.13 0.27 0.61 0.39 0.50 0.12 1.57 0.67
Spanish_Valencia 17.55 32.77 6.17 3.66 21.94 2.78 10.99 1.90 0.63 0.12 0.04 0.21 0.33 0.45 0.45

The Indo European or Yamna like ancestry has spread through all of South and West Europe after the Neolithic period. Only Sardines remained relavively unmixed compared to other South European groups. Acient Iberia was in between Basques and Sardinians in terms of genetic components it seems.
It'd be interesting what the Ibero-Maurisians would be i'd think them to have more extra Berber like ancestry.

I think the West Asian, Baltic components appeared together in West Europe which might support the "Indo-Aryan/European" invasion through Europe as
both West Asian and ANE related alleles are associated with Metal Age Invaders.

Tomenable
11-29-2016, 07:54 PM
Acient Iberia was in between Basques and Sardinians in terms of genetic components it seems.

Neolithic and Copper Age Iberia = Sardinians; Bronze Age Iberia = Basques.

Michał
11-30-2016, 09:51 AM
I'm a slav because my haplogroup is R1a, does it make sense? probadly not
Even in case your specific subclade under R1a is indeed strongly (and quite specifically) associated with modern Slavic populations, it won't make you a Slav automatically (as your ethnic identity is of course a much more complex issue). However, this will certainly make it much more likely (or nearly certain) that your distant purely paternal ancestors were among the expanding Early Slavs.

Tomenable
12-02-2016, 12:48 PM
Peter Gwozdz has recently updated his table of "most Polish" Y-DNA subclades:

http://www.gwozdz.org/polishclades.html


News

New topic 18 Oct 2016 Poland Concentration Table. A list of haplogroups most concentrated in Poland.

Interestingly, first two most Polish-specific subclades do not belong to R1a:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9208-Two-quot-most-Polish-quot-Y-DNA-subclades-do-not-belong-to-R1a&p=200497#post200497

Bonacci
12-04-2016, 01:50 PM
Even in case your specific subclade under R1a is indeed strongly (and quite specifically) associated with modern Slavic populations, it won't make you a Slav automatically (as your ethnic identity is of course a much more complex issue). However, this will certainly make it much more likely (or nearly certain) that your distant purely paternal ancestors were among the expanding Early Slavs.

While i agree that some specific subclades of R1a can be a signal of "Slavic" ancestry, i find it rather ethnocentric to associate haplogroups with language based groups. The mutation process of R1a been existed way before than any Indo-European groups even appeared - including Slavs.

The reason why this haplogroup is the most common today among people who belongs to some Eastern Slavic language branch, can be the result of bottleneck or founder effect when a relatively small numbers of men became the dominant father of a population. If these men were R1b or J1 then Slavs would be R1b or J1 today by purely accident.


A more accurate anser i found while checking the definition of Slavs:

Europeans are divided on three dominant language groups, Romance, Germanic, and Slavic, where the commonality is the ancestral language from the time of the Roman Empire. This division was established in medieval times, centuries before the genetics or blood types were known. Czechs share more genetic types with Celtics and Germanic people than Slavs, yet due its language they are considering Slavic. Bulgarians were not Slavs, but a nation from central Volga migrating into Balkans during the movement of the nation, but their language was influenced and developed as a Slavic.
The ancient land of the Slavic people was just north of Carpathians where they disbursed into three (some of the research says into four) distinct migration directions around 500AD. This was the foundation of the present three Slavic linguistic groups: Western, Southern, and Eastern (the fourth one would be northern at Novgorod area of Russia). Each Slavic wave intermingled with local population, in the case of Czech Republic and Slovakia they mixed with Langobardians. In the Balkans the mixed with remains of Roman civilization and Ostrogoths. The eastern and northern Slavs with Vikings. Each Slavic nation developed own statehood and used either Latin or Greek civilization as their model not each other. Slavs were divided alongside of the religion, which was more important than distant ancestry. Medieval and early modern Catholic Slavs did not deal with Orthodox Slavs. Poland position was unique due trade and military influences, but Czechs, Slovenes, Croats, and Slovaks were not interacting with Eastern Slavs. Western Slavs were also deeply influenced by German world where Prague was a twice a capital of the Holy Roman Empire.

!!!

The idea of Slavic commonality was not know until French Revolution. For example medieval Czechs were only aware of language association with Poland. The language association between Russia and Czech was not know until 1800, when Suvorov troops were stationed in Bohemia during the War of the Second Coaltion. So not until modern era, Slavs were often not aware of shared common ancestry, and the idea of Slavichood in the 19th century was condemned to failure. Relationship among Slavic nations varies from deep hatred, to respect, to admiration, to total indifference.

lgmayka
12-04-2016, 04:12 PM
Medieval and early modern Catholic Slavs did not deal with Orthodox Slavs.
I must point out that this is a gross historical oversiimplification at best. The historical relationship between the two churches has been "complicated."

- Isidore of Kiev (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isidore_of_Kiev) played a major role at the Ecumenical Council of Florence (1439), which formally reunited the two churches, albeit only temporarily. Isidore was at various times the Byzantine Metropolitan of Kiev and Moscow, the Latin Patriarch of Constantinople, and the Dean of the Roman College of Cardinals. For his efforts, he was twice imprisoned by the Grand Duke of Moscow, who opposed reunion.

- The 1596 Union of Brest (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_Brest) formally reunited the Ruthenian (Belarusian-Ukrainian) Church (headed by Kiev) with the Catholic Church. Over the centuries, ferocious religious, political, and military opposition has eroded much but not all of the success of this reunion. The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Greek_Catholic_Church) has survived, and now thrives among Ukrainians and their worldwide diaspora.

- The 1658 Treaty of Hadiach (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Hadiach) envisioned a joint Polish-Lithuanian-Ukrainian Commonwealth. Unfortunately, neither side fully ratified the agreement, which fell apart--to the great detriment of both sides.

Michał
12-04-2016, 04:34 PM
While i agree that some specific subclades of R1a can be a signal of "Slavic" ancestry, i find it rather ethnocentric to associate haplogroups with language based groups. The mutation process of R1a been existed way before than any Indo-European groups even appeared - including Slavs.
If not counting some "unreasonable extremists" (like our colleague bolek, ;) ), there is probably no one on this forum who would consider the entire haplogroup R1a (or any of its major parts, like M417, Z645 or Z283) to be associated with Slavic ancestry. What we discuss here is more than a dozen of relatively young subclades (with each one being about 2000-2500 years old) that show very strong (and quite specific) association with modern Slavic-speaking populations. Importantly, with just few exceptions (like YP569) all of them seem to be relatively common in all three (or at least in 2 out of 3) major Slavic subpopulations (ie. among Eastern, Western and Southern Slavs). Both the relatively young age and the very wide distribution pattern in different Slavic groupings make it practically impossible to not associate these clades with Early Slavic expansion. BTW, the same applies to the so-called Slavic clade under I2a (ie. I2a-CTS10228). It is simply hard to find a reasonable alternative scenario that would explain a putative non-Early Slavic origin of the very large population of about 20 mln modern I2a-CTS10228 patrilineages or about 15 mln modern R1a-L1029 patrilineages (in each case including mostly Eastern, Western and Southern Slavs).

Importantly, since the vast majority of R1a in Central and Eastern Europe can be assigned to one of those specifically Slavic (or at least Balto-Slavic) subclades, this is the major reason why the frequency of the entire haplogroup R1a in particular countries or regions in this part of Europe is frequently considered to be one of the major indicators of Slavic ancestry (which of course makes some sense, at least in all those situations when we have no reason to suspect that either Z93 or some other non-Slavic clades significantly contributed to the overall frequency od R1a).



The reason why this haplogroup is the most common today among people who belongs to some Eastern Slavic language branch, can be the result of bottleneck or founder effect when a relatively small numbers of men became the dominant father of a population. If these men were R1b or J1 then Slavs would be R1b or J1 today by purely accident.

Agreed. It just happened that it probably was mostly R1a and I2a (or some specific subclades under these two haplogroups) and not some other haplogroups (with a few exceptions, like R1b-PH2302), so there is no reason to fight people for calling all these very specific subclades "Slavic".



The idea of Slavic commonality was not know until French Revolution. For example medieval Czechs were only aware of language association with Poland. The language association between Russia and Czech was not know until 1800, when Suvorov troops were stationed in Bohemia during the War of the Second Coaltion. So not until modern era, Slavs were often not aware of shared common ancestry, and the idea of Slavichood in the 19th century was condemned to failure. Relationship among Slavic nations varies from deep hatred, to respect, to admiration, to total indifference.
I'm afraid this has nothing to do with the discussed question. Even if all Slavs stopped using Slavic languages today (while suddenly switching to English or Mandarin) and lost their Slavic identity, this could not have changed the obvious fact that all patrilineages in question descend most likely from a relatively small group of expanding Early Slavs.

Volat
12-04-2016, 04:35 PM
> Medieval and early modern Catholic Slavs did not deal with Orthodox Slavs.

Roman Catholic Poles had a long history with Orthodox Ukrainians and Belarusians in Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth since 1569. Even earlier, when eastern Galicia became part of Poland since King Casimir III in 1340. They probably had trade relations even earlier and stroke deals to fight pagan neighbours. So yes, oversimplification.