PDA

View Full Version : Ancient R1a-M458 in Aral Sea, Southern Ural and Kuban River (Northern Caucasus)



Bulat
12-23-2016, 05:53 AM
The R1a-M458 subclade migrated to the Tarim in the Bronze Age (First Migration), moving together with carriers R1a-Z93 from the West, from Europe. This First Migration was through the Southern Ural, and perhaps, the results of the paleo-DNA of Mezhovskaya culture with R1a-Z645 subclade — relate to Proto-Tocharian population. The problem still is that researchers can not to tie with Proto-Tocharians a specific archaeological culture from the tribes of Andronovo-Srubna ethnic generality.

The author of this study links the R1a-M458 subclade with the representatives of Tocharians-Celtic languages (the part of Centum group of the Indo-European languages).

http://suyun.info/userfiles/bulletin/2016-8/M458.png


Look at here >>>

http://suyun.info/index.php?LANG=ENG&p=3_05102016_8_4

Romilius
12-23-2016, 08:22 AM
The R1a-M458 subclade migrated to the Tarim in the Bronze Age (First Migration), moving together with carriers R1a-Z93 from the West, from Europe. This First Migration was through the Southern Ural, and perhaps, the results of the paleo-DNA of Mezhovskaya culture with R1a-Z645 subclade — relate to Proto-Tocharian population. The problem still is that researchers can not to tie with Proto-Tocharians a specific archaeological culture from the tribes of Andronovo-Srubna ethnic generality.

The author of this study links the R1a-M458 subclade with the representatives of Tocharians-Celtic languages (the part of Centum group of the Indo-European languages).

http://suyun.info/userfiles/bulletin/2016-8/M458.png


Look at here >>>

http://suyun.info/index.php?LANG=ENG&p=3_05102016_8_4

So we returned to the idea that only R1a has a role in IE spread?

lyakh
03-25-2017, 05:53 PM
It looks very interesting. Are there confirmed M458 lineages? Is it possible that Tocharians carried M458?

Who are people mentioned on the graph? Are they contemporary people? Or are they confimed ancient cases of M458+?

Is it possible that lineages of M458 present in Poland (like L260 and CTS11962) come from non-Slavic people, but from the folk which was not Slavic in antiquity and was slavicised?

lgmayka
03-25-2017, 07:24 PM
The Nogais Y-DNA Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/nogais/default.aspx?section=yresults) has only a small number of members, but one is confirmed R-M458.

Dibran
08-23-2017, 04:26 PM
I was under the understanding M458 is Slavic? How do we reconcile the occurrence of this haplogroup among the Tocharians?

Does this suggest not all M458 is Slavic, or perhaps that M458 was absorbed by the Slavs?

For example Albanian is indo European and most likely traveled with R1 lineages(I think R1b moreso). Yet, R1 lineages are less dominant(with exception of R1b), with the majority of Albanian lineages predating Indo European expansion. Does this suggest then that, just because a lineage is most commonly found in one ethnicity, that it doesn't necessarily mean it is originated from them, but absorbed by them?

Brent.B
01-06-2018, 06:20 PM
I was under the understanding M458 is Slavic? How do we reconcile the occurrence of this haplogroup among the Tocharians?

Does this suggest not all M458 is Slavic, or perhaps that M458 was absorbed by the Slavs?

For example Albanian is indo European and most likely traveled with R1 lineages(I think R1b moreso). Yet, R1 lineages are less dominant(with exception of R1b), with the majority of Albanian lineages predating Indo European expansion. Does this suggest then that, just because a lineage is most commonly found in one ethnicity, that it doesn't necessarily mean it is originated from them, but absorbed by them?

Perhaps the Scythians/Sarmatians carried M458?

I understand that most people say the Scythians/Sarmatians were Indo-Iranians, but I read an interesting article challenging that: https://www.google.com/amp/s/borissoff.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/was-scythian-an-iranian-language/amp/. I'm unframilair with the Scythians/Sarmatians, so i'd be interested to see what people here have to say about it.

There is another thread on the forums here https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?11287-R1-M458-could-it-be-spread-by-Sauromats-and-Alans... interesting possibility at least?

Bulat
09-27-2018, 04:36 PM
It looks very interesting. Are there confirmed M458 lineages? Is it possible that Tocharians carried M458?

Who are people mentioned on the graph?
BEHPS642 = paleo-dna of Tarim.


BEHPS232 and etc. = really men from R1a-M458 cluster, who lives now, modern men.

Dibran
09-29-2018, 01:36 AM
BEHPS642 = paleo-dna of Tarim.


BEHPS232 and etc. = really men from R1a-M458 cluster, who lives now, modern men.


It looks very interesting. Are there confirmed M458 lineages? Is it possible that Tocharians carried M458?

Who are people mentioned on the graph? Are they contemporary people? Or are they confimed ancient cases of M458+?

Is it possible that lineages of M458 present in Poland (like L260 and CTS11962) come from non-Slavic people, but from the folk which was not Slavic in antiquity and was slavicised?

I read somewhere alot of basal M458 was showing up in Northern and Southern Kavkaz, among Nogai, and karakalpaks. In Shapsough and Adyghe upwards of 10-20 percent supposedly(according to one study). They belonged to L1029. I have a few shapsough and adyghe matches(albeit very far back) that are L1029-YP263. Its elevation in these peoples is what led me to the hypothesis that it was carried by Volga Bulgars, and Pannonian Avars. It's occurrence in central Europe and the Balkans correlating to their rule, with I2-Din/Z280 being more characteristic of Slavic tribes.

Though I understand this is problematic for some, to assume it is not originally Slavic would lead to a dilemma considering its overwhelming elevation in central Europe. Tying these folk to Z93 only makes it seem like the mark they left was but a whimper.

I even have a founder effect in my line(found only in Albanians so far). On the Russian forums someone claimed these occurrences were Slavs that were assimilated and not native. What is your position? If basal M458 is showing up alot in these areas, it could be a hint as to its possible origin point. Much like basal M420 is mostly found in Iran. Though if Tocharians were M458, how the hell did it make it this far west into Europe? Pannonian Avars? Volga Bulgars? Proto-Slavs? All 3?

I know ancient times were very turbulent, so I am not as quick as some to assign absolutes as to the nature of its origin. Especially with the lack of ADNA to give it any strength of argument. The position that is pushed by many to assign a completely unanimous Slavic character to the line is bias to say the least. It is purely motivated by modern distributions which aren't characteristic of the past.

My personal theory is that its occurrence in the Balkans is primary due to Volga Bulgars, Avars, and Proto-Slavs. Though I believe(given its dominance among them) that Z280/I2-Din are more characteristic of the Slavic tribes.

There are mainy writings(to be taken with grain of salt of course) that the west Slavic tribes that rebelled against the Avar rule were themselves born of Avar men, and Slavic women, overthrowing their masters. This tidbit makes me think some M458 could be the result of the Avars. Otherwise when you strip it away, these peoples barely left a genetic mark anywhere they went. This doesn't exactly add up when we are told how common rape, and concubines were among these steppe folk.

Its occurrence in Adyghe are also interesting. They are very against mixing from what I have read. Assuming it is indeed Proto-Slavic, it would have had to be absorbed into them sometime in the late iron age for it to have passed all this time as native tribesman.

Dibran
09-29-2018, 03:08 AM
BEHPS642 = paleo-dna of Tarim.


BEHPS232 and etc. = really men from R1a-M458 cluster, who lives now, modern men.


The Nogais Y-DNA Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/nogais/default.aspx?section=yresults) has only a small number of members, but one is confirmed R-M458.

Here is the paper that mentioned M458 among these folk. In Circassian folk that is. Shapsug, Adyghe, Dargins.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7027/6dbac0f6dde72ec3c3419925b3cb705135ad.pdf

Paper Mention of M458 in Nogai: " Although some of these European haplotypes (R1a-M458) are also found among Turkic-speaking Nogais, Karanogais and Volga Tatars (Supplementary Fig. 7)"

Volga is where the Bulgars spread from. I wouldn't be surprised if a significant amount of M458 in the Balkans is linked to Bulgars and or Avars. After all, it reaches its highest amounts in the regions ruled by the Bulgars, Romania, Bulgaria, Macedonia etc. it drops significantly throughout the rest of the Balkans.

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep30197

https://i.postimg.cc/J7bQ5YM1/M458.png


I can't read this paper but according to these M458 graphs, it appears to reach 25 percent in some cases. More than many Slavic populations outside of Poles and maybe Bulgars.

https://www.academia.edu/14671212/Muratov_B.A._Suyunov_R.R._Nogay_klanlar%C4%B1n_soy _k%C3%B6keni_ETP_Suyun_g%C3%B6re_yap%C4%B1lan_etno genomic_ke%C5%9Fif_sonu%C3%A7lar_BEHPS_P.94-121_Vol.1_2_1_7_December_2014_

Generalissimo
09-29-2018, 06:15 AM
The hotspot for R1a-M458 in terms of both diversity and frequency is Poland and Belarus.

This has nothing to do with any migrations from the Caucasus and everything to do with R1a-Z645-rich, Corded Ware-derived Trzciniec people.

Also, keep in mind that North Caucasians have Eastern European admixture, and some of them have a lot of it, while Poles don't have any North Caucasian ancestry that wasn't mediated through R1a-rich Corded Ware.

Btw, I'm skeptical that the Tarim Basin mummies and Tocharians belonged to R1a-M458. PCR- and STR-based ancient DNA results are often wrong, so we have to wait until they're validated by shotgun or capture NGS data.

Dibran
09-29-2018, 09:05 AM
The hotspot for R1a-M458 in terms of both diversity and frequency is Poland and Belarus.

This has nothing to do with any migrations from the Caucasus and everything to do with R1a-Z645-rich, Corded Ware-derived Trzciniec people.

Also, keep in mind that North Caucasians have Eastern European admixture, and some of them have a lot of it, while Poles don't have any North Caucasian ancestry that wasn't mediated through R1a-rich Corded Ware.

Btw, I'm skeptical that the Tarim Basin mummies and Tocharians belonged to R1a-M458. PCR- and STR-based ancient DNA results are often wrong, so we have to wait until they're validated by shotgun or capture NGS data.

Tarim or Tocharians aside, Trzciniec Culture is between 1900-1200BC, nearly 3200-3900 years ago. Long before Classical history. It could have easily moved in antiquity from this culture to the Caucasus or even split into various directions with some entering the Kuban and Volga moving later in the early Middle Ages with not only Slavs but Volga Bulgars and Pannonian Avars. The attitude by some that this haplogroup did not go anywhere and conveniently stayed in Pripyat marshes until the Slavs moved is absolutely asinine.

We also do not have any ancient DNA so this is all merely logical assumption with a sampling bias based on modern distributions. Using this approach one can assume that haplogroup G originated in the Caucasus if we had no ancient DNA in Southern Europe showing its presence in prehistory.

Nearly 2000 years between the Trzciniec culture and the start of the late iron and early Middle Ages. Adopting such a tunnel vision approach is assuming M458 were titans trapped in Tartarus waiting to be unleashed at a specific time. I reckon the men of this line could have migrated around east Europe and the Caucasus long before the formation of the Slavic or Proto Slavic ethnos did in the early Middle Ages.

The larger burden of proof lies on those with the assumption everyone no ands buts or ors that belonged to this line were all Slavic speaking in the early Middle Ages and nothing but.

Even larger when there’s no ancient dna record to back it up either. Volga Bulgars and Pannonian Avars are just as likely candidates that could have spread M458 as Proto-Slavs given proximity. Old Great Bulgaria overlaps the Trzciniec zone and Volga Bulgars fall within the Trzciniec cultural zone. They could have easily carried and spread M458. They were also defeated and overcome by the Mongol Horde which could have absorbed it into the Nogai/Karakalpaks. Presence in North and South Caucasus could be spread from Trzciniec culture into these zones early in the late iron to early Middle Ages with any of the possible cultures within that vicinity that absorbed it.

So Let’s wait and see. Distributions could fluctuate in the coming years as could surfacing of ancient dna shed more light on this matter.

Bulat
09-29-2018, 11:16 AM
I even have a founder effect in my line(found only in Albanians so far). On the Russian forums someone claimed these occurrences were Slavs that were assimilated and not native. What is your position?
My positiom:

The earliest R1a-M458 had Proto-Celtic-Tocharian languages.
The Tarimians also spoke Celtic-Tocharian language.
First R1a-M458 population - earliest proto-Celts in Europe.

leonardo
09-29-2018, 12:31 PM
My positiom:

The earliest R1a-M458 had Proto-Celtic-Tocharian languages.
The Tarimians also spoke Celtic-Tocharian language.
First R1a-M458 population - earliest proto-Celts in Europe.

Upon what evidence are you basing your theory? Please share some evidence to support this conjecture, as I never heard of this before. Are there any Celtic lines that are descended from R1a?

Dibran
09-29-2018, 07:34 PM
My positiom:

The earliest R1a-M458 had Proto-Celtic-Tocharian languages.
The Tarimians also spoke Celtic-Tocharian language.
First R1a-M458 population - earliest proto-Celts in Europe.

Interesting, what made you arrive to this conclusion? any supporting evidence?

Trziniec Culture is considered an offshoot of Corded Ware. I think it could have spread from that cultural horizon, east, south, and predominantly west. This could explain its occurrence in the region of the Volga and Urals(cultural horizon of Volga Bulgars), in Central Europe(with Pannonian Avars and Proto-Slavs) and further Eastward surprisingly upwards of 25 percent of M458 has been found in Nogai, KaraNogai, and to some degree among Karakalpaks. According to historical accounts, when the Old Volga Bulgars were overrun by Khazars(pushing some westward into the Balkans) some could have fallen under the Horde. Explaining how it has such a high occurrence in these Nogai tribes. It is also found upwards of 20 percent in North and South Caucasus, among Adyghe, Shapsug, Dargins, and Lezgins.

I assume it spread from the Trziniec culture and was simultaneously apart of Proto-Slavs, Avars, and Volga Bulgars. I don't think it came from Tarim/Tocharians. I don't think theres any evidence of that. I do not however subscribe to the tunnel vision view of some users that it is completely Slavic as if it was locked up in Pripyat for all time before moving in the middle ages. More likely than not, spreading from the aforementioned cultural horizon, it could have made its way in all the groups that reflect it today, and not necessarily a direct Slavic speaking ancestor in every single scenario. just like there are varying ethnicities carrying this line today, I imagine its movement in the past could have had various conduits of transmission aside from Slavic. Mostly the above mentioned. It all seems to be varying levels of conjecture considering the lack of any ancient ADNA.

Hopefully some surfaces eventually.

Pribislav
09-29-2018, 09:42 PM
Well I guess there's a possibility some minor M458 clades were spread by other (probably Germanic) peoples, but L1029 was clearly spread by Slavs, there's simply no way around it.

Dibran
09-30-2018, 12:44 AM
Well I guess there's a possibility some minor M458 clades were spread by other (probably Germanic) peoples, but L1029 was clearly spread by Slavs, there's simply no way around it.

That’s simply conjecture. Where’s the ADNA? How does one explain L1029 in Turkic and Kavkaz tribes? See, everyone speaks of evidence and conjecture but simply put there is no evidence. We have no ancient dna of L1029. Its occurrence in other groups could very well indicate it was carried more than just Slavs but possibly Volga Bulgars, and Pannonian Avars. I understand how neither is appealing due to the cultural bias.

God forbid many in Central Europe are not descended from Slavic speakers. Majority of what’s passed as truth on these forums are not even endorsed by actual science. That’s why you never find DNA companies dabbling in such conjecture.

I think people are free to hypothesize alternatives until ancient dna sheds light on these matters. You may think it ignorant that others disagree with your tunnel vision view on this matter but what’s more ignorant than the broad generalization on a haplogroup without any ancient dna and no knowledge of ancient migration outside of fallable written sources recorded generations after these events?

You profess that no ands buts or ors that everyone carrying this line back then without a doubt all spoke Slavic and only Slavic. No ancient dna. Just modern distributions to base assumption. No ancient DNA for the thousandth time. What evidence does such a broad generalization rest upon?

God forbid the Trzieniec Culture folk were assimilated into the Caucasus and Volga Bulgars or Avars. Were all M458 chained up and let out like dogs from the Pripyat in organized order?

Do you profess to know where every man migrated? Do you profess to know what language they spoke with certainty? Do you profess to know the cultures they ascribed or where their progeny became plenty? You somehow without any ancient DNA evidence know that in a matter of 2000-2300 years that none of these men migrated anywhere other than a neatly organized Slavic Polity.

That is a hell of a limited view. I guess all EV13 Slavs are all Albanians. Wait no that’s not right. Apparently there’s Slavic clades if EV13 too. God forbid some L1029 didn’t move with Slavs in the Middle Ages. Hell would freeze over.

I’m still waiting on ancient dna. Until then it’s all conjecture on all sides.

Pribislav
09-30-2018, 11:03 AM
How does one explain L1029 in Turkic and Kavkaz tribes?

It's easily explainable, it's presence among Turkic and Caucasus tribes is obviously due to assimilation of Slavs during the Middle Ages.


See, everyone speaks of evidence and conjecture but simply put there is no evidence. We have no ancient dna of L1029. Its occurrence in other groups could very well indicate it was carried more than just Slavs but possibly Volga Bulgars, and Pannonian Avars. I understand how neither is appealing due to the cultural bias.

God forbid the Trzieniec Culture folk were assimilated into the Caucasus and Volga Bulgars or Avars. Were all M458 chained up and let out like dogs from the Pripyat in organized order?

You should get your facts straight, I don't know how did you find connection between Trzciniec and Volga Bulgars and Avars, as they are separated in time by more than 15 centuries? It's reasonable to think L1029 was present among Bulgars and Avars, but instead of ridiculously unlikely possibility you proposed, you could've assume it is a result of assimilation of Slavs who lived nearby at that time, which is what every person with an unbiased/logical thinking and basic knowledge of history and archaeology would assume.


Do you profess to know where every man migrated? Do you profess to know what language they spoke with certainty? Do you profess to know the cultures they ascribed or where their progeny became plenty? You somehow without any ancient DNA evidence know that in a matter of 2000-2300 years that none of these men migrated anywhere other than a neatly organized Slavic Polity.

That is a hell of a limited view. I guess all EV13 Slavs are all Albanians. Wait no that’s not right. Apparently there’s Slavic clades if EV13 too. God forbid some L1029 didn’t move with Slavs in the Middle Ages. Hell would freeze over.

There is no need for this kind of meltdown, I said it earlier, and I'll say it again, having a Slavic paternal ancestor 200/500/1000 years ago isn't the worst thing in the world, and it doesn't make you any less Albanian than your E-V13 compatriots.

Dibran
09-30-2018, 01:36 PM
It's easily explainable, it's presence among Turkic and Caucasus tribes is obviously due to assimilation of Slavs during the Middle Ages.



You should get your facts straight, I don't know how did you find connection between Trzciniec and Volga Bulgars and Avars, as they are separated in time by more than 15 centuries? It's reasonable to think L1029 was present among Bulgars and Avars, but instead of ridiculously unlikely possibility you proposed, you could've assume it is a result of assimilation of Slavs who lived nearby at that time, which is what every person with an unbiased/logical thinking and basic knowledge of history and archaeology would assume.



There is no need for this kind of meltdown, I said it earlier, and I'll say it again, having a Slavic paternal ancestor 200/500/1000 years ago isn't the worst thing in the world, and it doesn't make you any less Albanian than your E-V13 compatriots.

Again you didn’t answer any questions with actual facts. You resort to ad hominem “oh you’re Albanian so your just mad it comes from Slavs” really intelligent reasoning skills you have there buddy. I don’t know how many times I have stated that it has moved with Proto Slavs? But only with Proto-Slavs? Your appeal to ridicule does not support your argument. Assuming my own is flimsy yours is equally if not more socabsent any ancient dna evidence.

Learn to read. I never said Avars and Bulgars came from Trziniec Culture. I said the Trziniec cultural zone occupied the same space as the Volga Bulgars and likely some from this culture were assimilated into their ranks prior to the migration waves.

No it’s not so simple as “Slavs were assimilated in the Middle Ages”. You can’t possibly know how early or late anyone was assimilated when many of the M458 in those groups only share a common ancestor with Slavs dating to 2000-2300 years ago. The migration wave was only 1500 years ago.

The burden of proof is on you who so arrogantly assumes that this line only moved with Slavic speaking people and was not assimilated into various ranks prior to the migration.

Also don’t mix up Slavs with Proto Slavs. Proto Slavs are only attested in the early Middle Ages with Slavs forming in the Middle Ages some time after migration.

Trzinienc culture is attested between 3900-3200 years ago. Occupying that same zone that fell under many moving groups that could have assimilated them. L1029 firmed 3100ypb. Long before the migration event.

No ones having a melt down but as I said the burden of proof is in you and your narrow minded scope of events. Where are the ancient remains? Do you profess to know where every individual carrying this line moved and lived prior to migration?

The time between the formation of L1029 and the actual migration is roughly 1600 years. In only a matter of 200 years my family has split and migrated to various countries.

But you profess to know exactly where everyone baring that genetic signature was in that stretch of time span. Your appeal to ridicule and ad hominem does not prove your point.

So I will say it one more time. Where’s the ancient dna remains? Do you think scientists take anything seriously absent ancient DNA to back it up? Let’s wait for the ancient dna evidence to shed light on the matter.

George
09-30-2018, 01:54 PM
Again you didn’t answer any questions with actual facts. You resort to ad hominem “oh you’re Albanian so your just mad it comes from Slavs” really intelligent reasoning skills you have there buddy. I don’t know how many times I have stated that it has moved with Proto Slavs? But only with Proto-Slavs? Your appeal to ridicule does not support your argument. Assuming my own is flimsy yours is equally if not more socabsent any ancient dna evidence.

Learn to read. I never said Avars and Bulgars came from Trziniec Culture. I said the Trziniec cultural zone occupied the same space as the Volga Bulgars and likely some from this culture were assimilated into their ranks prior to the migration waves.

No it’s not so simple as “Slavs were assimilated in the Middle Ages”. You can’t possibly know how early or late anyone was assimilated when many of the M458 in those groups only share a common ancestor with Slavs dating to 2000-2300 years ago. The migration wave was only 1500 years ago.

The burden of proof is on you who so arrogantly assumes that this line only moved with Slavic speaking people and was not assimilated into various ranks prior to the migration.

Also don’t mix up Slavs with Proto Slavs. Proto Slavs are only attested in the early Middle Ages with Slavs forming in the Middle Ages some time after migration.

Trzinienc culture is attested between 3900-3200 years ago. Occupying that same zone that fell under many moving groups that could have assimilated them. L1029 firmed 3100ypb. Long before the migration event.

No ones having a melt down but as I said the burden of proof is in you and your narrow minded scope of events. Where are the ancient remains? Do you profess to know where every individual carrying this line moved and lived prior to migration?

The time between the formation of L1029 and the actual migration is roughly 1600 years. In only a matter of 200 years my family has split and migrated to various countries.

But you profess to know exactly where everyone baring that genetic signature was in that stretch of time span. Your appeal to ridicule and ad hominem does not prove your point.

So I will say it one more time. Where’s the ancient dna remains? Do you think scientists take anything seriously absent ancient DNA to back it up? Let’s wait for the ancient dna evidence to shed light on the matter.

IMHO Slavs began to actively form as an ethno-linguistic community of clans sometime in the 2nd half of the 1rst millennium BCE, long after the end of the Trziniec/Sosnitsa culture. From the very beginning this community was dominated by a combination of specific I2a and R1a subclades. It's pretty clear that the I2a which developed into the contemporary Slavic version (CTS 10228) was not "Slavic" when originally formed (ca. 3500 BCE). Nor were the relevant "buddy" R1a subclades. So I certainly don't see L1029 as originally "Slavic". The subsequent history is probably rather complex. Unless I've misunderstood something, I gather that the current Yfull analyses indicate that the extant "early" subclades (and singletons) of L1029 are primarily non-Slavic.

leonardo
09-30-2018, 05:51 PM
Unless I've misunderstood something, I gather that the current Yfull analyses indicate that the extant "early" subclades (and singletons) of L1029 are primarily non-Slavic.

I can't see L1029 being anything but Balto-Slavic.

From FTDNA, their R-L1029 haplotree: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-L1029
From this tree (assuming the vast majority of those with stated German origin actually have West Slavic roots), the numbers overwhemingly indicate a Balto-Slavic origin.

From my tree at YFull: 13 from Poland, 9 from Russia, 9 from Sweden, 8 from Finland, 6 from Germany, 4 from Belarus, 4 from the Ukraine, 2 from Bulgaria, 2 from Estonia, 2 from the U.K., and 1 each from Italy, Slovakia, Lithuania, Albania, Norway, Czech Rep., Denmark, Norway, Romania, Hungary and China.

Dibran
09-30-2018, 06:47 PM
IMHO Slavs began to actively form as an ethno-linguistic community of clans sometime in the 2nd half of the 1rst millennium BCE, long after the end of the Trziniec/Sosnitsa culture. From the very beginning this community was dominated by a combination of specific I2a and R1a subclades. It's pretty clear that the I2a which developed into the contemporary Slavic version (CTS 10228) was not "Slavic" when originally formed (ca. 3500 BCE). Nor were the relevant "buddy" R1a subclades. So I certainly don't see L1029 as originally "Slavic". The subsequent history is probably rather complex. Unless I've misunderstood something, I gather that the current Yfull analyses indicate that the extant "early" subclades (and singletons) of L1029 are primarily non-Slavic.

This is my understanding as well. Which is why I mentioned before the collective formations of these cultural/ethnic units, that some may have migrated in small bands, being assimilated elsewhere, and that, theoretically some L1029 clades could have been assimilated before the migration waves into the expanse of Volga Bulgars or Avars, and that not all transmission of these lineages in totality were specifically Slavic speaking. In the same way that today you have L1029 or other clades, that are found in ethnically diverse peoples. The notion that it could not have been assimilated into other groups before the migration wave is highly ignorant, moreso arrogant to assume one knows exactly whats what when theres no ancient DNA or actual records/census to support such blind certainty.

Dibran
09-30-2018, 06:55 PM
I can't see L1029 being anything but Balto-Slavic.

From FTDNA, their R-L1029 haplotree: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-L1029
From this tree (assuming the vast majority of those with stated German origin actually have West Slavic roots), the numbers overwhemingly indicate a Balto-Slavic origin.

From my tree at YFull: 13 from Poland, 9 from Russia, 9 from Sweden, 8 from Finland, 6 from Germany, 4 from Belarus, 4 from the Ukraine, 2 from Bulgaria, 2 from Estonia, 2 from the U.K., and 1 each from Italy, Slovakia, Lithuania, Albania, Norway, Czech Rep., Denmark, Norway, Romania, Hungary and China.

That is your opinion. These nations, their names, and their borders did not exist in antiquity when this lineage was moving around. Drawing conclusions on the past based on modern distribution does not prove anything. Otherwise Everyone would claim that V13 in non-Albanian speaking groups migrated from the Balkans. This is simply not the case though, and there are several clades with a lineage that are more common in some areas than others.

Wheres the ancient DNA for this lineage? Do you think scientists take people seriously without evidence? No one thought J2b was Proto-Illyrian/Illyrian until they actually found ancient remains to support it. Hell a lot of people were trying to claim I2-Din was Illyrian before ancient DNA proved otherwise. So maybe we should wait before dealing absolutes, shall we?

Pribislav
09-30-2018, 08:55 PM
That is your opinion. These nations, their names, and their borders did not exist in antiquity when this lineage was moving around. Drawing conclusions on the past based on modern distribution does not prove anything. Otherwise Everyone would claim that V13 in non-Albanian speaking groups migrated from the Balkans. This is simply not the case though, and there are several clades with a lineage that are more common in some areas than others.

Well, E-V13 most likely did migrate from the Balkans. I just don't see why you had to specifically mention Albanians, as if they are the only ones in the Balkans carrying it.

leonardo
09-30-2018, 11:42 PM
That is your opinion. These nations, their names, and their borders did not exist in antiquity when this lineage was moving around. Drawing conclusions on the past based on modern distribution does not prove anything. Otherwise Everyone would claim that V13 in non-Albanian speaking groups migrated from the Balkans. This is simply not the case though, and there are several clades with a lineage that are more common in some areas than others.

Wheres the ancient DNA for this lineage? Do you think scientists take people seriously without evidence? No one thought J2b was Proto-Illyrian/Illyrian until they actually found ancient remains to support it. Hell a lot of people were trying to claim I2-Din was Illyrian before ancient DNA proved otherwise. So maybe we should wait before dealing absolutes, shall we?

I am citing the number of men with L1029 and the nations from where they state to originate. I assume it is rather factual. The pattern is clear. Out of 69, 58 come from the Balto-Slavic region, 3 from the Balkans, 2 from the U.K. and the rest are scattered. How do you explain such a migratory pattern?

leonardo
09-30-2018, 11:44 PM
That is your opinion. These nations, their names, and their borders did not exist in antiquity when this lineage was moving around. Drawing conclusions on the past based on modern distribution does not prove anything. Otherwise Everyone would claim that V13 in non-Albanian speaking groups migrated from the Balkans. This is simply not the case though, and there are several clades with a lineage that are more common in some areas than others.

Wheres the ancient DNA for this lineage? Do you think scientists take people seriously without evidence? No one thought J2b was Proto-Illyrian/Illyrian until they actually found ancient remains to support it. Hell a lot of people were trying to claim I2-Din was Illyrian before ancient DNA proved otherwise. So maybe we should wait before dealing absolutes, shall we?

I can speculate just as you do. By the way, where is the evidence for your theory?

George
10-01-2018, 12:48 AM
I am citing the number of men with L1029 and the nations from where they state to originate. I assume it is rather factual. The pattern is clear. Out of 69, 58 come from the Balto-Slavic region, 3 from the Balkans, 2 from the U.K. and the rest are scattered. How do you explain such a migratory pattern?


What do you make of these Yfull statistics for the earliest extant L1029 today? https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L1029/ Which other L1029 subclades do the FTDNA people represent?

Volat
10-01-2018, 05:56 AM
I can't see L1029 being anything but Balto-Slavic.

From FTDNA, their R-L1029 haplotree: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-L1029
From this tree (assuming the vast majority of those with stated German origin actually have West Slavic roots), the numbers overwhemingly indicate a Balto-Slavic origin.

From my tree at YFull: 13 from Poland, 9 from Russia, 9 from Sweden, 8 from Finland, 6 from Germany, 4 from Belarus, 4 from the Ukraine, 2 from Bulgaria, 2 from Estonia, 2 from the U.K., and 1 each from Italy, Slovakia, Lithuania, Albania, Norway, Czech Rep., Denmark, Norway, Romania, Hungary and China.


Balto-Slavic marker is R1a-Z92 (not to be mixed with Z93)


http://oi64.tinypic.com/15x1etj.jpg

leonardo
10-01-2018, 12:24 PM
Balto-Slavic marker is R1a-Z92 (not to be mixed with Z93)


http://oi64.tinypic.com/15x1etj.jpg

Can't there be more than one? And are we speaking of different eras? L1029 is about 2000 years old. I am not overly knowledgeable about linguistics, but isn't the Balto Slavic language split around this time?

leonardo
10-01-2018, 12:43 PM
What do you make of these Yfull statistics for the earliest extant L1029 today? https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L1029/ Which other L1029 subclades do the FTDNA people represent?

They appear support the data I provided by YFull. I do believe L1029 originated in the area where Michal calls the Slavic homeland: northern Ukraine, Southern Belarus, possibly eastern Poland. This would be the borderlands for what would become the Balts and the Slavs. So, yes, some of these individuals went in other directions, possibly with other non Baltic-Slavic tribes (like the sample from Italy?). The branches below L1029 appear to confirm the data I have posted, at least in my eyes. I know R-YP263 consists of mainly those with German (again, likely West Slavic patrilineage), Poland, Russian, Swedish, and Finnish, as well as a number of South Slavic samples (one from Ireland I would say is an anomaly). I believe R-YP263 originated in the Balto-Slavic region as well. Most went west. Some went south. Do you believe that such branches originated outside of what is typically considered the "Slavic homeland?"

Waldemar
10-01-2018, 12:58 PM
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but one of our R-L1029 matches bears rather uncommon German surname (Wendt). The origin of this surname is obvious, Wends (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wends) :)

leonardo
10-01-2018, 01:29 PM
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but one of our R-L1029 matches bears rather uncommon German surname (Wendt). The origin of this surname is obvious, Wends (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wends) :)

Yeah. I would guess the vast majority of German patrilineage is from West Slavic ancestry. I think the majority of tribes went west. Some went south. U.K. and Irish samples could be explained by West Slavic mercenaries or captured warriors by Germanic or Danish tribes. Can't figure out the sample from China though.

George
10-01-2018, 01:52 PM
They appear support the data I provided by YFull. I do believe L1029 originated in the area where Michal calls the Slavic homeland: northern Ukraine, Southern Belarus, possibly eastern Poland. This would be the borderlands for what would become the Balts and the Slavs. So, yes, some of these individuals went in other directions, possibly with other non Baltic-Slavic tribes (like the sample from Italy?). The branches below L1029 appear to confirm the data I have posted, at least in my eyes. I know R-YP263 consists of mainly those with German (again, likely West Slavic patrilineage), Poland, Russian, Swedish, and Finnish, as well as a number of South Slavic samples (one from Ireland I would say is an anomaly). I believe R-YP263 originated in the Balto-Slavic region as well. Most went west. Some went south. Do you believe that such branches originated outside of what is typically considered the "Slavic homeland?"

Well I'm not much of an expert I'm afraid, and defer readily to specialists like Michal as to genetic issues. What I found interesting in these "extant" early Yfull L1029 results is that (correct me if I'm wrong) they all refer to non=Slavs, and to branches of L1029 which are not noticeable among Slavs. Since L1029* plus the singletons represent developments which antedate the "big explosion" of circa 0-BCE/CE (2,000 ago) which seems associatable to Slavs and their expansions (plus assimilations by and to), and since L1029* arose more than a thousand years earlier, I would say that the theory that it was born in the Balto-Slav area, while possible, is not guaranteed. And the Albanian individual belongs to this early group of results.

George
10-01-2018, 01:56 PM
Yeah. I would guess the vast majority of German patrilineage is from West Slavic ancestry. I think the majority of tribes went west. Some went south. U.K. and Irish samples could be explained by West Slavic mercenaries or captured warriors by Germanic or Danish tribes. Can't figure out the sample from China though.

Well it is possible for sure. But amongst Ukrainians we have many people called "Moskal" who are not Russian-descended (in their case other explanations exists. "Muscovite" was also an appellative for draftees to the Russian armies in the 19th c.). And we also have "Lytvyns" who are not of Lithuanian descent, but were so called because they were merchant families trading with Lithuania.

Volat
10-01-2018, 02:02 PM
Can't there be more than one? And are we speaking of different eras? L1029 is about 2000 years old. I am not overly knowledgeable about linguistics, but isn't the Balto Slavic language split around this time?

Another Y-chr marker is N-M2783. The branch accounts in Balts (Lithuanians & Latvians) and Slavs ( Belarusians, Russians, Ukrainians, Poles). To some extent in Slovaks. In 85% of populations speaking Slavic and Baltic languages. How can it not be a marker common to most Slavs and Balts?

leonardo
10-01-2018, 04:24 PM
Well I'm not much of an expert I'm afraid, and defer readily to specialists like Michal as to genetic issues. What I found interesting in these "extant" early Yfull L1029 results is that (correct me if I'm wrong) they all refer to non=Slavs, and to branches of L1029 which are not noticeable among Slavs. Since L1029* plus the singletons represent developments which antedate the "big explosion" of circa 0-BCE/CE (2,000 ago) which seems associatable to Slavs and their expansions (plus assimilations by and to), and since L1029* arose more than a thousand years earlier, I would say that the theory that it was born in the Balto-Slav area, while possible, is not guaranteed. And the Albanian individual belongs to this early group of results.

That's why I am using the term Balto-Slav.

leonardo
10-01-2018, 04:29 PM
Another Y-chr marker is N-M2783. The branch accounts in Balts (Lithuanians & Latvians) and Slavs ( Belarusians, Russians, Ukrainians, Poles). To some extent in Slovaks. In 85% of populations speaking Slavic and Baltic languages. How can it not be a marker common to most Slavs and Balts?

I believe it is common among Balts. I have never read that any N haplogroup would be considered a core Slavic marker. Obviously, over thousands of years, peoples have integrated into groups through various means. An example would be the person with a recent ancestor that was Irish but he has R-YP263 y-dna. This is likely a result of some circumstance from many years ago, and this I would consider an anomaly. I think Balto-Slav is a more appropriate term when we consider patrilineage from several thousand years or so ago. After all, doesn't the evidence show that Slavs split, linguistically, around this time? And isn't what is considered commonly understood Slavic markers from an era closer to the present?

Volat
10-01-2018, 05:58 PM
I believe it is common among Balts. I have never read that any N haplogroup would be considered a core Slavic marker. Obviously, over thousands of years, peoples have integrated into groups through various means. An example would be the person with a recent ancestor that was Irish but he has R-YP263 y-dna. This is likely a result of some circumstance from many years ago, and this I would consider an anomaly. I think Balto-Slav is a more appropriate term when we consider patrilineage from several thousand years or so ago. After all, doesn't the evidence show that Slavs split, linguistically, around this time? And isn't what is considered commonly understood Slavic markers from an era closer to the present?

Shall we count the number of M2783 carriers in Slavic populations? For male populations in Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Poland: ((0.08*150)+(0.1*10)+(0.07*45)+(0.04*40))/2 =8.9mln. That's at least twice as many as 'entire' populations of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia collectively.
The marker is Slavic. PS Czech Republic and Slovakia have small frequencies of the marker too.

leonardo
10-01-2018, 06:05 PM
Shall we count the number of M2783 carriers in Slavic populations? For male populations in Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Poland: ((0.08*150)+(0.1*10)+(0.07*45)+(0.04*40))/2 =8.9mln. That's at least twice as many as 'entire' populations of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia collectively.
The marker is Slavic. PS Czech Republic and Slovakia have small frequencies of the marker too.

I did not know this. Thanks for the information. Doesn't this reinforce a Balto-Slavic connection at one time?

Dibran
10-01-2018, 06:18 PM
Well I'm not much of an expert I'm afraid, and defer readily to specialists like Michal as to genetic issues. What I found interesting in these "extant" early Yfull L1029 results is that (correct me if I'm wrong) they all refer to non=Slavs, and to branches of L1029 which are not noticeable among Slavs. Since L1029* plus the singletons represent developments which antedate the "big explosion" of circa 0-BCE/CE (2,000 ago) which seems associatable to Slavs and their expansions (plus assimilations by and to), and since L1029* arose more than a thousand years earlier, I would say that the theory that it was born in the Balto-Slav area, while possible, is not guaranteed. And the Albanian individual belongs to this early group of results.

The Albanian sample is actually me lolol. I have a founder effect characterized my one of my novels(Y333183). Currently only Albanians are part of my cluster(4). 3 other potential matches are testing. One via FTDNA and 2 with YSEQ. I didn't test all my novels so things could change. However, the current TMRCA between me and my Albanian match is 1100ypb. My matches with other L1029 are between 2000-2300ypb. This is why I presumed it arrived with the First Bulgarian Empire(given the TMRCA for the founder effect). All this could change however in the future. Michal places me in the parent clade of YP263. However, Yfull has stated this SNP is highly unstable and do not find it reliable so they believe my founder effect splits L1029 rather than the parent clade of YP263. I suppose time will tell.

George
10-01-2018, 06:37 PM
That's why I am using the term Balto-Slav.

And that's why I prefer the term Indo-European. There is no way of demonstrating that the original L1029 was "born" in the "Balto-Slav" area in 1100 BCE. We don't conclusively know where he was born. And the earliest extant L1029* is Italian (Yfull). All we can say is that today's L1029's are indeed LARGELY Slavic. And also that it is quite believable that SOME of today's extant L1029's were NEVER associated with Slavdom or even Balto-Slavdom. The currently available evidence is clear enough on that.

Dibran
10-01-2018, 07:04 PM
And that's why I prefer the term Indo-European. There is no way of demonstrating that the original L1029 was "born" in the "Balto-Slav" area in 1100 BCE. We don't conclusively know where he was born. And the earliest extant L1029* is Italian (Yfull). All we can say is that today's L1029's are indeed LARGELY Slavic. And also that it is quite believable that SOME of today's extant L1029's were NEVER associated with Slavdom or even Balto-Slavdom. The currently available evidence is clear enough on that.

Don't quote me on it(I could be wrong), but I believe Michal mentioned the Sardinian sample is from a study and technically belongs further downstream and is not actually basal L1029. Which makes me wonder why it hasn't been fixed after 2 years now? This doesn't take away from your point though, which I am in agreement with. With no ancient samples, and over 1600 years from its formation to the great migration, we can't possibly known with certainty absent evidence where it was prior to the migration. Most people seem to staunchly claim it is Slavic when we don't even have ancient DNA. Or even seem to be against the possibility that it was assimilated from Proto-Slavs and carried by non-slavic speakers before or during the migration event. As if such a thing is impossible. Relying on modern socio-political borders is quite misleading when determining the presence of these lineages in the past. Especially with the turbulent movement in the middle ages.

leonardo
10-01-2018, 07:17 PM
And that's why I prefer the term Indo-European. There is no way of demonstrating that the original L1029 was "born" in the "Balto-Slav" area in 1100 BCE. We don't conclusively know where he was born. And the earliest extant L1029* is Italian (Yfull). All we can say is that today's L1029's are indeed LARGELY Slavic. And also that it is quite believable that SOME of today's extant L1029's were NEVER associated with Slavdom or even Balto-Slavdom. The currently available evidence is clear enough on that.

Ok. Fair enough. But to use the term Indo European for a clade that is about 2000 years old is quite anachronistic. That time frame is likely after the split of Baltic and Slavic. Whereevr it originated, that founder had to speak a language and it likely was original I-E or more than one. It would have likely been the language in situ.

leonardo
10-01-2018, 07:18 PM
And that's why I prefer the term Indo-European. There is no way of demonstrating that the original L1029 was "born" in the "Balto-Slav" area in 1100 BCE. We don't conclusively know where he was born. And the earliest extant L1029* is Italian (Yfull). All we can say is that today's L1029's are indeed LARGELY Slavic. And also that it is quite believable that SOME of today's extant L1029's were NEVER associated with Slavdom or even Balto-Slavdom. The currently available evidence is clear enough on that.

Ok. Fair enough. But to use the term Indo European for a clade that is about 2000 years old is quite anachronistic. That time frame is likely after the split of Baltic and Slavic. Wherever it originated, that founder had to speak a language and it likely was not original I-E or more than one. It would have likely been the language in situ.

Volat
10-01-2018, 07:43 PM
Well it is possible for sure. But amongst Ukrainians we have many people called "Moskal" who are not Russian-descended (in their case other explanations exists. "Muscovite" was also an appellative for draftees to the Russian armies in the 19th c.). And we also have "Lytvyns" who are not of Lithuanian descent, but were so called because they were merchant families trading with Lithuania.

Moskal is the derogative term for the Russians nowadays. My grand great ancestors rememered the days when the term was applied to the Russians having no negative connotations

Ancestors of modern day Belarusians identified themselves Litvins (not Lithuanians) approximately to the west of Biarezina river and Rusyns approximately to the east of Biarezina river. The river French remember to these days where Napoleon lost many of his troops while crossing the river. "Berezina" is a synonym for disaster in French today. LOL.

Belarus was ethnographic region in north-east of Belarus, western Smolensk and southern Pskov region. This ethnographic region gave the name and ethnic identity to entire country. Well it was given during rule of Catherine II. Around the same time when Malorosian was given to most Ukrainians that was completely artificial ethnonym.

George
10-01-2018, 07:53 PM
Ok. Fair enough. But to use the term Indo European for a clade that is about 2000 years old is quite anachronistic. That time frame is likely after the split of Baltic and Slavic. Whereevr it originated, that founder had to speak a language and it likely was original I-E or more than one. It would have likely been the language in situ.

That's also fair enough. But note that the basal 1029* is actually 3,100 years old (or even slightly more by Michal's system). I only use "Indo-European" because I don't know for sure where exactly it originated: West? East? North? South? Maybe further evidence will eventually emerge.

Dibran
10-01-2018, 10:24 PM
That's also fair enough. But note that the basal 1029* is actually 3,100 years old (or even slightly more by Michal's system). I only use "Indo-European" because I don't know for sure where exactly it originated: West? East? North? South? Maybe further evidence will eventually emerge.

Isn’t the age roughly 2000-2300 years old? I understand it formed 3100ypb so it was originally that old. However, aren’t all living men today only 2000-2300 back to a common ancestor? Suggesting L1029 suffered. Major population drop. Maybe due to famine? Genocide? Or some other phenomena?

George
10-02-2018, 12:03 AM
Isn’t the age roughly 2000-2300 years old? I understand it formed 3100ypb so it was originally that old. However, aren’t all living men today only 2000-2300 back to a common ancestor? Suggesting L1029 suffered. Major population drop. Maybe due to famine? Genocide? Or some other phenomena?


It was in "survival mode" for a thousand years, like many other known clades. Nothing too unusual. Mine for instance (CTS 10228)had two such lengthy "bare survival" periods between 4200 BCE and 200 BCE.

Dibran
10-02-2018, 01:22 AM
It was in "survival mode" for a thousand years, like many other known clades. Nothing too unusual. Mine for instance (CTS 10228)had two such lengthy "bare survival" periods between 4200 BCE and 200 BCE.

Apologies for the confusion, but, could you elaborate on what you mean by survival mode? And how this relates to the gap of time between formation and current relation of all L1029 to 300BC-0AD as opposed to common ancestor being further back to 1100BC?

George
10-02-2018, 02:49 AM
Apologies for the confusion, but, could you elaborate on what you mean by survival mode? And how this relates to the gap of time between formation and current relation of all L1029 to 300BC-0AD as opposed to common ancestor being further back to 1100BC?

I think genetic expert L. Mayka explained this a while back on another thread. If I remember correctly, what it basically means is that a large number of subclades of a given "starter" (say L1029*) became extinct between formation time and our time. There may in fact have been a few branches which existed for a while other than those which made it until the tests of our time. When exactly they became extinct is not always clear. Checking some intermediary aDNA results (say from around 500 AD) may offer answers. So large gaps in time between "formation" and "ancestor of actually existing clades" (including present day singletons) indicates that the most successful "survivors" are the current branches. but does not actually prove that they were the only existing branches of the "gap period" although it is possible that they may in fact have been in this "solitary survival mode" even then.

Generalissimo
10-02-2018, 03:05 AM
Isn’t the age roughly 2000-2300 years old? I understand it formed 3100ypb so it was originally that old. However, aren’t all living men today only 2000-2300 back to a common ancestor? Suggesting L1029 suffered. Major population drop. Maybe due to famine? Genocide? Or some other phenomena?

You've sort of got it backwards.

Most Y-chromosome lineages are found at low frequencies for a long time and susceptible to extinction, but what the data show is that around 2000 years ago there was a very successful expansion by a subset of men belonging to L1029, and this expansion erased a lot of the diversity in L1029, as well as probably many other lineages that were in that gene pool.

Dibran
10-02-2018, 12:18 PM
You've sort of got it backwards.

Most Y-chromosome lineages are found at low frequencies for a long time and susceptible to extinction, but what the data show is that around 2000 years ago there was a very successful expansion by a subset of men belonging to L1029, and this expansion erased a lot of the diversity in L1029, as well as probably many other lineages that were in that gene pool.

“Erased a lot of diversity in L1029”

Says who? You realize L1029 was only discovered in 2012 roughly?

In a matter of 6 years various clades have been discovered. With NGS testing a founder effect was discovered in my line that likely splits L1029 or the parent clade of YP263(of Michals predictions are correct).

I wouldn’t jump the gun so quickly to say whether or not this is the case. It’s too early. NGS testing is also still too expensive for the average tester. The data at present is circumstantial and limited.

There’s also no ancient DNA for L1029 let alone M458.

6 years from now it could be an entirely different story.

Waldemar
10-02-2018, 01:41 PM
For example, my R-Y2912* match from YFull has not been listed in my Big Y FTDNA matches. It means that he's not related to me within the last approximate 1500 years (separated by at least 30 mutations), so R-Y2912 tree will eventually have some extra (relatively old) branches.

https://i.postimg.cc/vTkrGzq7/Screen_Hunter_2552_Oct._02_14.32.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/Kv4xKyQv/Screen_Hunter_2553_Oct._02_14.44.jpg
https://dna-explained.com/2018/01/12/working-with-the-new-big-y-results-hg38/

Dibran
10-02-2018, 02:24 PM
For example, my R-Y2912* match from YFull has not been listed in my Big Y FTDNA matches. It means that he's not related to me within the last approximate 1500 years (separated by at least 30 mutations), so R-Y2912 tree will eventually have some extra (relatively old) branches.

https://i.postimg.cc/vTkrGzq7/Screen_Hunter_2552_Oct._02_14.32.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/Kv4xKyQv/Screen_Hunter_2553_Oct._02_14.44.jpg
https://dna-explained.com/2018/01/12/working-with-the-new-big-y-results-hg38/

Very cool. Which sheds light on my point. There is diversity in the line, it just needs to be fleshed out with time, and more NGS testing. That being the case, I am sure theres more diversity in my line, if it indeed splits L1029, and or the parent clade of YP263. I have noticed with Yfull updates that L1029 TMRCA has been jumping between 2200ypb and 2000ypb. So it could increase the length of time the more diversified it becomes. Look how far its come in only 6 years since its discovery?

These tests will only become cheaper with time.

JoeyP37
10-04-2018, 07:11 PM
I have come to the conclusion that when the population expansion before the Slavic migrations happened, the men who sired the various subclades of L1029 were not living near each other. Daddy YP417 was most likely living around the Pripet Marshes, while Daddy YP263 and Daddy YP444 were in Poland. They were earlier called 'B Eastern' and 'B Western' because their distribution is not really connected. My own YP445 has its prime area Central Germany, in the early Slavic-German contact zone. Indeed, there are several villages whose names begin with 'Windisch' in the area of northern Wurttemberg where my paternal grandfather's paternal grandfather came from. So I believe, at least, YP444 is a Wendish clade, and that its ultimate ancestor, M458, was a main haplogroup of the Vistula Veneti, who were most likely a West Baltic group who became a key root-stock for the West Slavs. YP417, on the other hand, was most likely a main clade of the Antes people, explaining its distribution in East Slavs and easternmost South Slavs.

Dibran
10-04-2018, 08:20 PM
I have come to the conclusion that when the population expansion before the Slavic migrations happened, the men who sired the various subclades of L1029 were not living near each other. Daddy YP417 was most likely living around the Pripet Marshes, while Daddy YP263 and Daddy YP444 were in Poland. They were earlier called 'B Eastern' and 'B Western' because their distribution is not really connected. My own YP445 has its prime area Central Germany, in the early Slavic-German contact zone. Indeed, there are several villages whose names begin with 'Windisch' in the area of northern Wurttemberg where my paternal grandfather's paternal grandfather came from. So I believe, at least, YP444 is a Wendish clade, and that its ultimate ancestor, M458, was a main haplogroup of the Vistula Veneti, who were most likely a West Baltic group who became a key root-stock for the West Slavs. YP417, on the other hand, was most likely a main clade of the Antes people, explaining its distribution in East Slavs and easternmost South Slavs.

I am of the mind that M458/Z280 were more widespread in antiquity. I believe Balto-Slavs/Proto-Slavs were more spread out than historians claim. Finding Z280/M458 in Lusatian remains from the Tollense battle would further illustrate that point. The terms Slav/Balto-Slav are really not that old in a historical context. And they didn't pop out of thin air. I think The Proto-Slavs were from if not related to the Getae. Which are not exactly confirmed to be Dacian, but rather neighbors to them. Another name supposedly of Proto-Slavs was Sporoi. Or at least on tribe. Supposedly(correct me if I am wrong) means Spores, similar to the latin naming of the Germanic tribes(Germs) to illustrate the size and expanse of their dominion. Considering the size of Lusat/Trzieniec. I don't think they were trapped in the Pripyat until the middle ages. Escapes reason.

Bulat
02-09-2020, 11:44 PM
Something in this discussion completely you forgot that R1a-M458 was found in Central Asia, near the Aral Sea, the Amu Darya River. Karakalpak people have subclade R1a-M458, near the Aral sea. And this is not the Caucasus.

Dibran
02-13-2020, 01:26 PM
Something in this discussion completely you forgot that R1a-M458 was found in Central Asia, near the Aral Sea, the Amu Darya River. Karakalpak people have subclade R1a-M458, near the Aral sea. And this is not the Caucasus.

Source? And is it basal M458? Or is it a recent subclade that under M458 that only moved in the middle ages?

I would definitely like to see. As far as I know I haven't seen any central asians with M458. Even so, if they are young clades, is it not possible that some from Proto-Slavic lineages that were dispersed and absorbed by turkic clans could have brought it there? The lines in their case may be Central Asian now. However, how can we be sure that they belong to older branches of M458 that split before the migration era?

If there is evidence to suggest that there is some basal old M458 in Central Asia, than perhaps you may have a point. It could have just as easily moved from the west though, no?

After all, these Turkic tribes weren't exactly homogeneous and absorbed many into their ranks.

Bulat
02-17-2020, 06:54 PM
Source? And is it basal M458? Or is it a recent subclade that under M458 that only moved in the middle ages?


By the STR - ancient centuries, the era of bronze. 2nd millennium BC.
See the very first post in this theme.

Karakalpaks did only terminal snp R1a-M458+, result is +.

Dibran
02-17-2020, 06:59 PM
By the STR - ancient centuries, the era of bronze. 2nd millennium BC.
See the very first post in this theme.

Karakalpaks did only terminal snp R1a-M458+, result is +.

Did they actually test negative for clades descending from M458 or were they only tested up to M458? That would make a big difference. I was No Call for M458 before doing Yelite and finding a Albanian haplotype for L1029. Unless its deep testing they may belong further down from M458. For Instance some Tatars have L260/L1029 as well which are only from the Late Iron to Early Medieval.