Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 75

Thread: Slavic Heritage

  1. #21
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,661
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Moldovlah View Post
    "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.
    The best sample we can use as a proxy is from Czechia:
    CZE_Early_Slav:RISE569,0.12862,0.129988,0.068259,0 .046835,0.02739,0.013387,0.007285,0.014076,-0.001841,-0.018406,-0.000812,-0.004346,0.003717,0.007156,-0.010993,-0.003182,0.011604,-0.002027,-0.002388,-0.004752,0.005615,0.000618,0.001725,-0.000964,-0.006706

  2. #22
    Banned
    Posts
    186
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Neo-Ottomanist
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    The best sample we can use as a proxy is from Czechia:
    CZE_Early_Slav:RISE569,0.12862,0.129988,0.068259,0 .046835,0.02739,0.013387,0.007285,0.014076,-0.001841,-0.018406,-0.000812,-0.004346,0.003717,0.007156,-0.010993,-0.003182,0.011604,-0.002027,-0.002388,-0.004752,0.005615,0.000618,0.001725,-0.000964,-0.006706
    This is not Kievan Rus so how can it be Slavic?

    You got origin date for that sample?

  3. #23
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,661
    Sex

    The sample was posted on Eurogenes Blog and you can follow the debate there.

    Two Bohemian Bell Beaker genomes from Allentoft et al. 2015 - RISE568 and RISE569 - are labeled as early Czech Slavs in the new Mathieson et al. 2017 preprint (see rows 148 and 149 in the spreadsheet here).

    Obviously these samples were initially wrongly dated to the Bronze Age and misidentified. They really date to 600-900 CE and 660-770 calCE, respectively.
    https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/...m-bohemia.html

    And please stop with your "Kievan Rus", the Rus were originally Varangians, Vikings and they helped to form the first proto-states in Eastern Europe with a Slavic majority, even though, depending on the region, they were mixed with Baltic, Viking, Finnic etc. The Kievan Rus can be considered the Eastern branch of the Slavic expansion, but they have nothing to do with the Western branches or Proto-Slavs in general. What you argue is like me saying "what have the Goths or Vikings to do with Germanics, they were not part of the Frankish state..."
    Slavs as a genetic and ethnolinguistic group of early Medieval Europe have nothing to do with the Rus.
    Last edited by Riverman; 07-24-2020 at 10:10 AM.

  4. #24
    Banned
    Posts
    186
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Neo-Ottomanist
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    The sample was posted on Eurogenes Blog and you can follow the debate there.



    https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/...m-bohemia.html
    That sample is post Magyar, Avar, invasions it was at the time of the Bulgar invasion and just preceding Pecheneg/Khazar dispersal and Cuman invasion. That is clear Germanic/Turkic mix. Gepids didn't speak Slavic language so they are not Slavic. They were Gothic people, same as Vandals and Visigoths.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Posts
    186
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Neo-Ottomanist
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    And please stop with your "Kievan Rus", the Rus were originally Varangians, Vikings and they helped to form the first proto-states in Eastern Europe with a Slavic majority, even though, depending on the region, they were mixed with Baltic, Viking, Finnic etc.
    Why the frustration?

  6. #26
    Registered Users
    Posts
    306
    Sex
    Location
    Germany
    Ethnicity
    German
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b (> R-CTS4528)
    mtDNA (M)
    U5b2b3

    Germany Imperial
    While RISE569 shows very Slavic-like genetically, RISE568 that is from the same context appears half Slavic-like and half Germanic-like. It´s hard what to statistically conclude from n=2 in this context.
    Last edited by rothaer; 07-24-2020 at 04:28 PM.

  7. #27
    Registered Users
    Posts
    306
    Sex
    Location
    Germany
    Ethnicity
    German
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b (> R-CTS4528)
    mtDNA (M)
    U5b2b3

    Germany Imperial
    Quote Originally Posted by btree View Post
    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).
    Thanks for information. You maybe know in 1945/1946 there were some 13 million Germans expelled from Eastern Germany and the territories in question (now governed by Poland and Czechia) were resettled with Poles and Czechs. So if you refer to today settlemet conditions as you did when showing ethnic Czechs in 1991, this will not be applicable for the time your respective ancestors lived. I guess this was pre 1945, wasn´t it? So in the following I will just refer to pre 1945 settlement conditions. Here´s an ethnicity and language map from the time before expulsion (can be magnified):

    https://imgur.com/ITM5CBd

    Red is German people and you can see there were no Czechs in Northern Bohemia at the border. This means you can see Chemnitz - if you compare, where it is - is rather far from where Czechs lived at that time. People indigenous to Chemnitz were all Germans.

    Teschen/Cieszyn area (Teschen is mentioned in the map) actually was mixed Polish/Czech/German. An indigenous individual from there could have had any of these ethnicities.

    As for Silesia as a whole it´s not mixed. It does contain German areas and Polish areas. (You also wouldn´t say Europe is mixed English and Finnish, would you? It just does comprise both English areas and Finnish areas.) Now, Glogau (on Polish Glogów) is situated in pure German area of Silesia. Of course a foreigner could show up at any place in the world and I do not know your particular ancestor, but people indigenous to Glogau were always Germans.

    As for your ancestor born in Northeast Germany I´d have to know the location to determine what ethnicity indigenous people have. But you maybe can check that on the ethnicity map above.
    Last edited by rothaer; 07-24-2020 at 06:15 PM.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to rothaer For This Useful Post:

     Riverman (07-24-2020)

  9. #28
    Registered Users
    Posts
    769
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2a1b2a1b (A6105)
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a1b3

    Canada Ukraine
    FYI. "Kievan Rus" is a concept invented in the 19th c. It did not exist in mediaeval times and certainly not in the Chronicle of Bygone years.
    In those times there was only "Rus", itself a concept with a number of meanings. In the Chronicle itself, it is used in three ways: (1) As the name designating the conquering superstratum which supposedly established itself in Kyiv ca. 882 (there are many problems associated with this but this is not the venue to discuss them. I'm only giving the bare facts as stated in the Chronicle. In this initial use then, "Rus" designated the new ruling class centred in Kyiv under Oleg. It was not per se an ethnic concept. The Chronicle states that the Rus comprised "Varangians, Kryvichians, Slovenians of the north, Merians and others" It was thus a purely political concept. (2) In the edition of the Chronicle made by Nestor of Kyiv (writing between 1091 and 1113) the original "Rus" becomes a Scandinavian ("Varangian") tribe which migrated wholesale to the East under Rurik. And became Slavicized within a couple of generations. (3) From about the mid-10th c. the name "Rus" becomes the new exclusive ethnic name of the Polyanian Slavic tribe of Kyiv with whom these incomers had thoroughly fused. The name "Polyane" disappears from the record. And the Chronicle states about them "The Polyane are today called the Rus". They were also called "Ruthenians". So it's all rather complicated. There are also no more Scandinavian "Rus" in the Chronicle after the mid-10th century. Only "Varangians" remain (of various backgrounds, mostly Swedish and Danish), occasionally hired as mercenaries by the princes of Kyiv (and also the Greeks). The new Slavic Rus of Kyiv remained distinct from the other Slavs of their large state (including the Suzdalians) for many centuries (it's all in the chronicles).

  10. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to George For This Useful Post:

     Aha (07-24-2020),  Alain (07-24-2020),  DMXX (07-24-2020),  Riverman (07-24-2020),  rothaer (07-24-2020),  Ryukendo (07-24-2020),  Táltos (07-26-2020)

  11. #29
    Registered Users
    Posts
    306
    Sex
    Location
    Germany
    Ethnicity
    German
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b (> R-CTS4528)
    mtDNA (M)
    U5b2b3

    Germany Imperial
    Quote Originally Posted by George View Post
    FYI. "Kievan Rus" is a concept invented in the 19th c. It did not exist in mediaeval times and certainly not in the Chronicle of Bygone years.
    In those times there was only "Rus", itself a concept with a number of meanings. In the Chronicle itself, it is used in three ways: (1) As the name designating the conquering superstratum which supposedly established itself in Kyiv ca. 882 (there are many problems associated with this but this is not the venue to discuss them. I'm only giving the bare facts as stated in the Chronicle. In this initial use then, "Rus" designated the new ruling class centred in Kyiv under Oleg. It was not per se an ethnic concept. The Chronicle states that the Rus comprised "Varangians, Kryvichians, Slovenians of the north, Merians and others" It was thus a purely political concept. (2) In the edition of the Chronicle made by Nestor of Kyiv (writing between 1091 and 1113) the original "Rus" becomes a Scandinavian ("Varangian") tribe which migrated wholesale to the East under Rurik. And became Slavicized within a couple of generations. (3) From about the mid-10th c. the name "Rus" becomes the new exclusive ethnic name of the Polyanian Slavic tribe of Kyiv with whom these incomers had thoroughly fused. The name "Polyane" disappears from the record. And the Chronicle states about them "The Polyane are today called the Rus". They were also called "Ruthenians". So it's all rather complicated. There are also no more Scandinavian "Rus" in the Chronicle after the mid-10th century. Only "Varangians" remain (of various backgrounds, mostly Swedish and Danish), occasionally hired as mercenaries by the princes of Kyiv (and also the Greeks). The new Slavic Rus of Kyiv remained distinct from the other Slavs of their large state (including the Suzdalians) for many centuries (it's all in the chronicles).
    Thanks for this. Can you tell out of the chronicles if "Varangians" are identified only with recent individuals from Sweden (and maybe Denmark) or also with indigenous to Russia/Kiew area individuals (like "Rus" term developed)?
    Can there be determined whether Finland-Finns also could be "Varangians"?
    Last edited by rothaer; 07-24-2020 at 06:26 PM.

  12. #30
    Registered Users
    Posts
    445
    Sex
    Location
    Tallinn
    Ethnicity
    Ukrainian
    Y-DNA (P)
    N-L550 > Z16975
    mtDNA (M)
    H10a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R-L21 > Z17662
    mtDNA (P)
    I3

    Ukraine Lithuania European Union Estonia Scotland
    Quote Originally Posted by rothaer View Post
    Thanks for this. Can you tell out of the chronicles if "Varangians" are identified only with recent individuals from Sweden (and maybe Denmark) or also with indigenous to Russia/Kiew area individuals (like "Rus" term developed)?
    Can there be determined whether Finland-Finns also could be "Varangians"?
    Important to note that "Rus" and "Russia" are different terms and mean different things. There is no continuity between these two. Rus is a medieval people/place/class, while Russia was established in 1721 by new ideology and policy of the Moscow Tsardom.

    According to genetic studies of the Rurikids (the Varangian princely line) they have closest Y-DNA matches in nowadays Sweden, somewhere norther of Stockholm, which matches what was known about them. I have heard speculations that the line came to Sweden via Kven People.
    Hidden Content
    > Hidden Content
    >> R1a1a1b1a2a1a1a1j1

  13. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Aha For This Useful Post:

     DgidguBidgu (07-25-2020),  George (07-24-2020),  Riverman (07-24-2020),  Táltos (07-26-2020)

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •