Page 51 of 54 FirstFirst ... 414950515253 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 510 of 532

Thread: E-V13 in Bulgarian Iron Age

  1. #501
    Registered Users
    Posts
    761
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Albanian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V13

    Albania
    Quote Originally Posted by eastara View Post
    There is only one person in the Bulgarian DNA project, who is proven L241 by SNP testing, but there are a few strongly predicted. DYS464a,b = 16,16 is a strong indicator for this branch. Just now came the 111 STR for another person, who is waiting Big Y. He is very close to this branch:
    https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-A7065/
    There are also a couple of Bulgarians in the Balkan Mountain project proven FGC76265*.
    There is a new Bulgarian belonging to this, let's see what's his deeper clade.

    He was tested with FTDNA.

  2. #502
    Registered Users
    Posts
    319
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Bulgarian
    mtDNA (M)
    T2

    Bulgaria
    I have found also one with Bulgarian flag on FTDNA tree under BY5650/BY150229. However, I could not find him in any project, could be also Bulgarian Turk.

  3. #503
    Registered Users
    Posts
    761
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Albanian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V13

    Albania
    Nah, the one i am saying is ethnic Bulgarian. I have talked with him personally.

  4. #504
    Registered Users
    Posts
    434
    Ethnicity
    Macedonian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y16729
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by eastara View Post
    There is only one person in the Bulgarian DNA project, who is proven L241 by SNP testing, but there are a few strongly predicted. DYS464a,b = 16,16 is a strong indicator for this branch. Just now came the 111 STR for another person, who is waiting Big Y. He is very close to this branch:
    https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-A7065/
    There are also a couple of Bulgarians in the Balkan Mountain project proven FGC76265*.
    There is also a person, an ethnic Macedonian from the ethnographic region of western North Macedonia where people called Mijaci live, who belongs to E-A7065 from what I've heard. However I'm not sure where the guy in question was tested. The rumors I believe were licking by some guys in close connection with the Serbian DNA Project Poreklo.
    If I were to guess, this clade and probably whiole E-L241 is in close connection with people known by the Romans and the Ancient Greeks as Dacians, Getae and other related tribes who lived on the territory of modern Romania. I've heard that E-L241 is probably the most diverse subclade of E-V13 among the Serbs. Probably played a major part in the ethnogenesis of the South Slavs.
    Last edited by Aspar; 12-21-2020 at 08:08 AM.
    Distance to: Aspar_scaled
    0.01995435 35.00% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2 + 65.00% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02156914 40.60% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av1 + 59.40% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02223177 55.20% Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215 + 44.80% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19
    0.02300447 61.80% BGR_IA:I5769 + 38.20% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19

  5. #505
    Registered Users
    Posts
    434
    Ethnicity
    Macedonian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y16729
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Also with the new update of YFULL tree, there are major changes in the dating of TMRCA for E-V13 and it's downstream. I don't know if this is final or just temporary, as some say it might be bug however the new TMRCA would explain quite well why E-V13 is so suspiciously missing in the EBA Bulgaria and Pannonia. The TMRCA of E-V13 is now 4300 ybp, which is at the end of EBA.
    Distance to: Aspar_scaled
    0.01995435 35.00% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2 + 65.00% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02156914 40.60% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av1 + 59.40% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02223177 55.20% Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215 + 44.80% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19
    0.02300447 61.80% BGR_IA:I5769 + 38.20% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19

  6. #506
    Registered Users
    Posts
    761
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Albanian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V13

    Albania
    There must be some error with their algorithm, since it looks most of Y-DNA clades were afffected. They are probably working on finding the bug.

    Otherwise i think, we still don't have enough data, it's logically to expect somewhere near East Alps - Carpathian Mountains to be found. I don't see other explanations.

    Or, it is as Aspurg was mentioning: Initially Cetina Culture who migrated into Central Balkans: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...CE858DA8E407B2 then spread out. But this doesn't explain the earlier splits further North.

    Worth to note it: Kapitan Andreevo and related Svilengrad cultures didn't practice cremation but rather inhumation.
    Last edited by Hawk; 12-21-2020 at 08:52 AM.

  7. #507
    Registered Users
    Posts
    434
    Ethnicity
    Macedonian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y16729
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    We need MBA aDNA from countries around the Carpathians and the Carpathian Basin. It's obvious the huge diversity of CTS1273 clades in the region of Hungary and Slovakia. There is diversity in almost any downstream of CTS1273, such as E-L540, E-Y35953, E-BY3880. Even E-FT7781 and some basal E-CTS9320 found in modern Ossetians are complementing the theory of E-V13 dwelling around the Carpathians as these clades could have been absorbed by steppe cultures such as Srubna, Noua, Coslogeni that were in close proximity to the Carpathians.
    But yeah, probably we are dealing with mountain dwellers who survived the EBA Indo-European intrusion up in the mountains. So the communication line between the East Alps and the Carpathians it's a possibility.
    However, bug or not, the new dates are more in line with our idea of LBA-EIA introduction of E-V13 in the Balkans.
    Last edited by Aspar; 12-21-2020 at 09:25 AM.
    Distance to: Aspar_scaled
    0.01995435 35.00% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2 + 65.00% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02156914 40.60% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av1 + 59.40% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02223177 55.20% Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215 + 44.80% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19
    0.02300447 61.80% BGR_IA:I5769 + 38.20% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Aspar For This Useful Post:

     Hawk (12-21-2020),  Riverman (12-21-2020)

  9. #508
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,488
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    There is also a person, an ethnic Macedonian from the ethnographic region of western North Macedonia where people called Mijaci live, who belongs to E-A7065 from what I've heard. However I'm not sure where the guy in question was tested. The rumors I believe were licking by some guys in close connection with the Serbian DNA Project Poreklo.
    If I were to guess, this clade and probably whiole E-L241 is in close connection with people known by the Romans and the Ancient Greeks as Dacians, Getae and other related tribes who lived on the territory of modern Romania. I've heard that E-L241 is probably the most diverse subclade of E-V13 among the Serbs. Probably played a major part in the ethnogenesis of the South Slavs.
    That's what Poreklo says about haplogroup E, but the text wasn't changed for over a year now:
    Paternal Haplogroup E is among Serbs represented predominantly by its subclade V13. It is relatively uniformly distributed across Serb population in different regions, with slightly greater frequency in southern regions, like southern Serbian province of Kosovo and Metohiјa. Highest frequency of V13 in Serb population (over 50%) is recorded in eastern part of Montenegro known as Brda (“Hills”), the home of three largest Serb clans that belong to different subclades of V13: Vasojevici (PH1246>BY14151), Kuci (CTS5856>Z5018>Z16661>BY165837) and Bjelopavlici (CTS5856>Z5017>Z16988>BY155589). Another frequent subclade of V13 among Serbs that also originates from single bloodline from Montenegro is CTS5856>Z5017>Z19851>A18833. However, most diverse subclade of V13 in Serb population is CTS5856>Z5018>L241 which is distributed in all regions settled by Serbs, and unlike previously mentioned subclades, it’s represented by large number of not so numerous bloodlines. Other E subclades like V22, M84 and Z841 are represented in small percentages.
    https://www.poreklo.rs/2019/06/12/y-...-ethnic-serbs/

    What matters most is always the TMRCA, what the last point in time was, that the ancestors lived together. If it was still in the Bronze Age, then, even if its about minor subclades, we have no prove of a common Iron Age ethnicity which harboured all the ancestors. Like a Greek, Roman or Celtic spread would from one macro-region to another, like from Gallia to Serbia, or vice versa, would always imply something younger than 800 BC, best something like 400 BC-500 AD. If we don't have that, we can't pin it down.

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

     Aspar (12-21-2020)

  11. #509
    Registered Users
    Posts
    434
    Ethnicity
    Macedonian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y16729
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    That's what Poreklo says about haplogroup E, but the text wasn't changed for over a year now:


    https://www.poreklo.rs/2019/06/12/y-...-ethnic-serbs/

    What matters most is always the TMRCA, what the last point in time was, that the ancestors lived together. If it was still in the Bronze Age, then, even if its about minor subclades, we have no prove of a common Iron Age ethnicity which harboured all the ancestors. Like a Greek, Roman or Celtic spread would from one macro-region to another, like from Gallia to Serbia, or vice versa, would always imply something younger than 800 BC, best something like 400 BC-500 AD. If we don't have that, we can't pin it down.
    Of course, I must have said the starting point or progenitor of the clade lived on territories inhabited by the people known as Dacians, Getae, Moesians etc. However with the new update, the TMRCA of E-L241 is only 2200 ybp., So not even IA but the Imperial Roman period. Of course, with these fluctuations regarding TMRCA there are no spaces for being quite sure or leaving no space for other scenario. And if we blindly follow the new circumstances, it's very tempting to place this clade under Moeasian, Dacian label having in mind that it's diverse in Romania and Ukraine but also Serbia. Also the late antiquity sample from Rome is in a clade with a person from Ukraine. There are English people as well but no one thinking rationally will place the starting point of E-L241 in England.
    Last edited by Aspar; 12-21-2020 at 10:44 AM.
    Distance to: Aspar_scaled
    0.01995435 35.00% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2 + 65.00% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02156914 40.60% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av1 + 59.40% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02223177 55.20% Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215 + 44.80% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19
    0.02300447 61.80% BGR_IA:I5769 + 38.20% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Aspar For This Useful Post:

     Riverman (12-21-2020)

  13. #510
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,488
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    Of course, I must have said the starting point or progenitor of the clade lived on territories inhabited by the people known as Dacians, Getae, Moesians etc. However with the new update, the TMRCA of E-L241 is only 2200 ybp., So not even IA but the Imperial Roman period. Of course, with these fluctuations regarding TMRCA there are no spaces for being quite sure or leaving no space for other scenario. And if we blindly follow the new circumstances, it's very tempting to place this clade under Moeasian, Dacian label having in mind that it's diverse in Romania and Ukraine but also Serbia. Also the late antiquity sample from Rome is in a clade with a person from Ukraine. There are English people as well but no one thinking rationally will place the starting point of E-L241 in England.
    To me it rather looks like a glitch, because of this:

    SNPs mutate far less often than STRs. Back mutations are extremely uncommon. Most authorities consider the average time of a SNP mutation to be 150 years although Yfull.com uses 144 years plus 60 (as the age of the man tested) . Like STR mutations are handed down from father to son.
    https://sites.google.com/site/ydnasn...-for-genealogy

    If they calculate like that, how can the age estimate shrink by one third or more out of a sudden? That's obviously an error. If its no error, they must have changed the age estimates for all, and count the SNP's differently than so far, which is rather unlikely everything considered.

Page 51 of 54 FirstFirst ... 414950515253 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Jewish or Bulgarian???
    By CyrylBojarski in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-12-2020, 05:33 PM
  2. Bulgarian Yamnaya is odd
    By JRD in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-04-2020, 09:47 PM
  3. Looking at Iron age Nordic and Iron age England
    By firemonkey in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-06-2020, 09:55 PM
  4. Bulgarian L21
    By Kopfjäger in forum R1b-L21
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 10-10-2017, 09:33 AM
  5. Bronze Age Bulgarian
    By Arame in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-30-2015, 09:00 AM

Posting Permissions

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