Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 75

Thread: Slavic Heritage

  1. #11
    Bronze Class Member
    Posts
    88
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Swedish & Eastern German
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Z74
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R-Y57
    mtDNA (P)
    H5'36

    Germany Sweden
    Quote Originally Posted by rothaer View Post
    Of course this is due to a respective proportion of Slavic ancestry. But there is no need for assuming more recent Slavic ancestry. I´ve no ancestors from the Sorabian area. I do have additional 1,5/16 ancestry from an area in West Prussia that was late Germanised (abt. 1830), but that´s just abt. 10% of ancestry. Other ancestors are hailing from Pomerania, Brandenburg, also east of the Oder river, Lower Silesia, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Northern Bohemia (Germans), and just a small part (1/16) from SW Germany.

    Slavic ancestry might well be from ostsiedlung times, i. e. esentially from 12th to 15th century, when the German new tribes (Neustämme) formed (like Pomeranians. Mecklenburgians, Upper Saxons, Silesians, Brandenburgians etc).
    Also, my last reply gave a little more information regarding the aspects of this but if I can trace back ancestry to Poland (in my case mostly Silesia), and 23andme also gives me multiple regions of Poland of which I have recent ancestry, that would be indicative of Polish ancestry right? Another thing I also forgot to add is that my grandpa's dad has a German name even though he was born in Silesia. Then again, Silesia is a mix of German, Polish, and Czech influence. My grandpa's mother however doesn't have a Germanic name even though I think she was born in North Eastern Germany. I still have to figure out more about her side though and her mother definitely looks like a babushka lol. Let me know what you think because I don't want to be incorrect about my Polish ancestry if I don't even have Polish at all, even though everything on my paper tree and genetics points to it (besides the names).
    23andme v5.9 - 29.3% Scandinavian, 16.7% French & German, 0.7% Finnish, 12.5% Broadly Northwestern European, 32% Eastern European, 5% Ashkenazi Jewish, 1.5% Italian, 1.9% Broadly European

    Paper Tree - 43.75% Swedish, 37.5% Eastern German, 6.25% Jewish, 12.5% Polish

  2. #12
    Banned
    Posts
    186
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Neo-Ottomanist
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2

    Quote Originally Posted by btree View Post
    Then again, Silesia is a mix of German, Polish, and Czech influence.
    It used to be, now in SIlesia some municipalities are majority transfers from southeast (Ukraine). If you get Silesia for 23andme it probably means your ancestor lived in Silesia before 1939.

  3. #13
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,052
    Sex

    I think Czech and less so but still Hungarian are very difficult to detect in the mix, because they are so mixed themselves and the regional differences are quite big.
    Czech_Hungarian.jpg

    Most calculators and companies fail to recognise my own Czech ancestry, even though its significant. And with G25 I can model it with a smaller amount of Polish or something else more clearly Slavic instead of real Czech. In most ancestry component results from the major companies Czechs show North Western or Germanic ancestry, which is correct, but their main ancestry of Slavic plus pre-Slavic Central European, sometimes minor East Asian, being shown as either Eastern European correctly (mainly 23andme) or jumping between Balkan and East European from one individual to the next (most of the others). Yet as you can see from this crude estimation, Czechs can vary as much between Slavic : Germanic as Eastern Germans do, just that they have regions in which they are almost 100 percent Slavic and others which are much closer to Bavarians and Austrians. This being also reflected by regional yDNA differences:
    https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....al-Differences

    So the "core Slavic" contribution by Czech ancestry can vary a lot, depending on the region the Czech ancestry was coming from.

  4. #14
    Banned
    Posts
    186
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Neo-Ottomanist
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    I think Czech and less so but still Hungarian are very difficult to detect in the mix, because they are so mixed themselves and the regional differences are quite big.
    Czech_Hungarian.jpg

    Most calculators and companies fail to recognise my own Czech ancestry, even though its significant. And with G25 I can model it with a smaller amount of Polish or something else more clearly Slavic instead of real Czech. In most ancestry component results from the major companies Czechs show North Western or Germanic ancestry, which is correct, but their main ancestry of Slavic plus pre-Slavic Central European, sometimes minor East Asian, being shown as either Eastern European correctly (mainly 23andme) or jumping between Balkan and East European from one individual to the next (most of the others). Yet as you can see from this crude estimation, Czechs can vary as much between Slavic : Germanic as Eastern Germans do, just that they have regions in which they are almost 100 percent Slavic and others which are much closer to Bavarians and Austrians. This being also reflected by regional yDNA differences:
    https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....al-Differences

    So the "core Slavic" contribution by Czech ancestry can vary a lot, depending on the region the Czech ancestry was coming from.
    "Core Slavic" is genetics from founders of Kievan Rus state in 9th century. Czechs are not "Core Slavic" they speak a dialect of Slavic language, much like Yugoslavians. They have genetics different from founders of Kievan Rus state.

  5. #15
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,052
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Moldovlah View Post
    "Core Slavic" is genetics from founders of Kievan Rus state in 9th century. Czechs are not "Core Slavic" they speak a dialect of Slavic language, much like Yugoslavians. They have genetics different from founders of Kievan Rus state.
    That's a viewpoint you can have, but the good thing about Czechs is we have the ancient DNA from an early Slav from Czechia. So we can compare directly how an early Central European Slav looked like and that's pretty close. Same as DEU_MA is not necessarily a "pure Germanic", but representative of the average of early Germanics which spread in Central Europe. So we can estimate the admixture between these events, the early expansion and colonisation by Germanics and Slavs respectively, and what kind of additional admixture they got. The main problem for this is not the Slavic or Germanic, but the pre-expansion regional DNA. Because for many regions we don't have the proper references.
    And the Kievan Rus had Germanic, Baltic and Finnic and other influences. Probably not every sample, but if you speak about the state, they had.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     Alain (07-26-2020)

  7. #16
    Banned
    Posts
    186
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Neo-Ottomanist
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    That's a viewpoint you can have, but the good thing about Czechs is we have the ancient DNA from an early Slav from Czechia. So we can compare directly how an early Central European Slav looked like and that's pretty close. Same as DEU_MA is not necessarily a "pure Germanic", but representative of the average of early Germanics which spread in Central Europe. So we can estimate the admixture between these events, the early expansion and colonisation by Germanics and Slavs respectively, and what kind of additional admixture they got. The main problem for this is not the Slavic or Germanic, but the pre-expansion regional DNA. Because for many regions we don't have the proper references.
    And the Kievan Rus had Germanic, Baltic and Finnic and other influences. Probably not every sample, but if you speak about the state, they had.
    What your saying is false. To refer a specific people as "Slavic" you have to examine original founders of beginning Slavic state and that is Kievan Rus. In 9th century Baltic, Finnic, Norse and Turkic people were under Sviatoslav in the chronicles these united tribes participated in sacking of Constantinople.

    In Czech lands at that time there were primarily Saxon Germanic tribes and a conglamoration of peoples.

  8. #17
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,052
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Moldovlah View Post
    What your saying is false. To refer a specific people as "Slavic" you have to examine original founders of beginning Slavic state and that is Kievan Rus. In 9th century Baltic, Finnic, Norse and Turkic people were under Sviatoslav in the chronicles these united tribes participated in sacking of Constantinople.

    In Czech lands at that time there were primarily Saxon Germanic tribes and a conglamoration of peoples.
    Which time?

    About how historical Czechs came into existence:
    https://english.radio.cz/czechs-are-...netics-8124928

    The Kievan Rus are totally unimportant for that issue, because the incoming Slavs in Central Europe can be recognised archaeologically most of the time, now with ancient DNA as well, and at that time we know they were there from historical accounts too. Long before the Kievan Rus, which were founded by Vikings, the Varangians, we have Samo's kingdom and later the Moravian state, which was more clearly Slavic than the early Kievan Rus (which were still Vikings) if talking about the culture of the formation:

    The kingdom saw the rise of the first ever Slavic literary culture in the Old Church Slavonic language as well as the expansion of Christianity after the arrival of St. Cyril and St. Methodius in 863 and the creation of the Glagolitic alphabet, the first alphabet dedicated to a Slavic language. Glagolitic was subsequently replaced by a simpler Cyrillic. The Cyrillo-Methodian cultural mission had significant impact on most Slavic languages and stood at the beginning of the modern Cyrillic alphabet.

    Moravia reached its largest territorial extent under the earl Svätopluk I (Svatopluk in Czech), who ruled from 870 to 894. Although the borders of his empire cannot be exactly determined, he controlled the core territories of Moravia as well as other neighbouring regions, including Bohemia, most of Slovakia and parts of Slovenia, Hungary, Poland and Ukraine, for some periods of his reign. Separatism and internal conflicts emerging after Svätopluk's death contributed to the fall of Great Moravia, which was overrun by the Hungarians who then included the territory of present-day Slovakia in their domains. The exact date of Moravia's collapse is unknown, but it occurred between 902 and 907.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Moravia

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     Alain (07-26-2020)

  10. #18
    Moderator
    Posts
    2,574
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Indo-Iranian/Balto-Slavic
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1a-Z93

    Quote Originally Posted by Moldovlah View Post
    What your saying is false. To refer a specific people as "Slavic" you have to examine original founders of beginning Slavic state and that is Kievan Rus. In 9th century Baltic, Finnic, Norse and Turkic people were under Sviatoslav in the chronicles these united tribes participated in sacking of Constantinople.

    In Czech lands at that time there were primarily Saxon Germanic tribes and a conglamoration of peoples.
    well no. Kievan Rus was mainly inhabited by early/Proto East-Slavic groups. Tribes of Kievan Rus not spread Slavic westwards and surely not as westward as Czechia. Actually Slavs arrived earlier in Czechia (6th and 7th century) than in many if not most parts of Kievan Rus, which were east and north of modern day Ukraine/Belarus

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Coldmountains For This Useful Post:

     Alain (07-26-2020),  Riverman (07-24-2020)

  12. #19
    Banned
    Posts
    186
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Neo-Ottomanist
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    Which time?

    About how historical Czechs came into existence:
    https://english.radio.cz/czechs-are-...netics-8124928

    The Kievan Rus are totally unimportant for that issue, because the incoming Slavs in Central Europe can be recognised archaeologically most of the time, now with ancient DNA as well, and at that time we know they were there from historical accounts too. Long before the Kievan Rus, which were founded by Vikings, the Varangians, we have Samo's kingdom and later the Moravian state, which was more clearly Slavic than the early Kievan Rus (which were still Vikings) if talking about the culture of the formation:



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Moravia
    Cyril and Methodius were what we call OG, Bulgarian.

  13. #20
    Banned
    Posts
    186
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Neo-Ottomanist
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2

    Quote Originally Posted by Coldmountains View Post
    well no. Kievan Rus was mainly inhabited by early/Proto East-Slavic groups. Tribes of Kievan Rus not spread Slavic westwards and surely not as westward as Czechia. Actually Slavs arrived earlier in Czechia (6th and 7th century) than in many if not most parts of Kievan Rus, which were east and north of modern day Ukraine/Belarus
    "Kievan Rus - In 9th century Baltic, Finnic, Norse and Turkic people were under Sviatoslav in the chronicles these united tribes participated in sacking of Constantinople."

    Can you provide genetic sample of this 6th century Slavic migration. I always heard this on internet but can't seem to find any genetic samples for it? Often I hear the Turkic Avars with origin in Rouran Khaganate (Mongolia) being used in this discussion, and the excuse is because they plot with outlier modern Belarusians.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-06-2019, 10:00 PM
  2. Replies: 388
    Last Post: 02-15-2019, 03:57 PM
  3. Can I consider myself Slavic?
    By Triggatomic in forum Eastern
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 04-23-2017, 04:52 AM
  4. My heritage- DNA
    By firemonkey in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 01-14-2017, 07:15 AM
  5. Poll: Pan-Slavic or individual Slavic language sections?
    By Administrator in forum Forum Support
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-25-2015, 04:07 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •