South Slavic Genetic Heritage

[Talos_of_first_claw]

Hello,

I was curious if we knew which ancient peoples made up the modern South Slavs, and to what percentage?

[CyrylBojarski]

Native population of Balkans, Early Slavs and Anatolians.

Early Slavic - HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2
Native Balkan - BGR_IA
Anatolian - modern Anatolian Greeks, I did not find better ancient proxy
Traces of Turkic - RUS_Nomad_MA

Target: Serbian
Distance: 1.5170% / 0.01517049
54.6 Slavic
32.0 Native_Balkan
12.6 Anatolian
0.8 Nomad_Turkic

Target: Montenegrin
Distance: 1.4322% / 0.01432159
53.4 Slavic
34.0 Native_Balkan
11.6 Anatolian
1.0 Nomad_Turkic

Target: Croatian
Distance: 1.7395% / 0.01739476
67.2 Slavic
25.8 Native_Balkan
5.8 Anatolian
1.2 Nomad_Turkic

Target: Bosnian
Distance: 1.6482% / 0.01648150
63.2 Slavic
21.0 Native_Balkan
15.6 Anatolian
0.2 Nomad_Turkic

Target: Macedonian:Central
Distance: 2.4849% / 0.02484895
41.6 Native_Balkan
35.0 Slavic
23.4 Anatolian

Target: Bulgarian
Distance: 1.2909% / 0.01290906
43.0 Slavic
33.4 Native_Balkan
21.0 Anatolian
2.6 Nomad_Turkic


Probably Croatians also need Western European proxy, but I do not know what it the best for it.

I wonder if it was true, that Anatolians settled in Balkans, that leave big genetic step on Balkan population, distance is much lower with additional Anatolian, than with just BGR_IA

[Riverman]

Native population of Balkans, Early Slavs and Anatolians.

Early Slavic - HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2
Native Balkan - BGR_IA
Anatolian - modern Anatolian Greeks, I did not find better ancient proxy
Traces of Turkic - RUS_Nomad_MA

I think these references are not optimal. It leaves a large gap between BGR_IA and Greeks from Anatolia for example. This inflates the "Anatolian" ancestry by a lot, when it should be more mainland Greek and Roman like for the most part.

Hello,

I was curious if we knew which ancient peoples made up the modern South Slavs, and to what percentage?

The knowledge will improve with more samples from the ancient Balkans, especially Thracians and more Roman Age ones.

[CyrylBojarski]

I think these references are not optimal. It leaves a large gap between BGR_IA and Greeks from Anatolia for example. This inflates the "Anatolian" ancestry by a lot, when it should be more mainland Greek and Roman like for the most part.



The knowledge will improve with more samples from the ancient Balkans, especially Thracians and more Roman Age ones.

What samples would you recommend instead?

[Chnodomar]

What samples would you recommend instead?

Try Mycenaean and Empuries samples for ancient Greek and Italic_IA samples for Roman influence, perhaps.

[CyrylBojarski]

Try Mycenaean and Empuries samples for ancient Greek and Italic_IA samples for Roman influence, perhaps.

Distance is much worse without Anatolian Greek

Target: Serbian
Distance: 1.6188% / 0.01618848
55.8 HUN_Avar_Szolad
23.4 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2
18.8 BGR_IA
2.0 RUS_Nomad_MA

Target: Bulgarian
Distance: 1.7417% / 0.01741701
44.2 HUN_Avar_Szolad
19.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2
18.2 BGR_IA
13.4 GRC_Mycenaean
4.6 RUS_Nomad_MA


With modern Anatolian Greek and samples you recommended



Target: Serbian
Distance: 1.4688% / 0.01468807
55.4 HUN_Avar_Szolad
17.2 BGR_IA
14.2 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2
10.8 Greek_Central_Anatolia
1.6 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
0.8 RUS_Nomad_MA

Target: Bulgarian
Distance: 1.2182% / 0.01218197
42.2 HUN_Avar_Szolad
21.4 Greek_Central_Anatolia
14.2 BGR_IA
11.2 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2
6.2 Iberia_Northeast_Empuries1
2.4 GRC_Minoan_Lassithi
2.4 RUS_Nomad_MA


I can not find Italic_IA sample in datasheet

[Talos_of_first_claw]

Avar is the Slavic sample?

[Riverman]

Avar is the Slavic sample?

Yes, it is.

[Talos_of_first_claw]

Yes, it is.

Were they Slavicized?

Also is the Anatolian from the Ottomans?

[Riverman]

Were they Slavicized?

Also is the Anatolian from the Ottomans?

Slavs were pushed, governed, suppressed, sometimes allied with Avars. So the Avar rule meant a rather East Asian derived (most likely Turkic in origin) elite on top and a lot of other people, but especially Slavs in their commoners ranks. It is known that the Avars used Slavs as cannon fodder and the Slavic people made numerous uprisings against the Avars. So the Slavs and Avars were enemies for the most part, but the Avar intrusion into Europe and their terror resulted in the widespread dispersion of Slavs for two reasons:
- First, Slavs fled from the Avars in all directions. Whole people and tribes moved to different geographical regions to escape the Avars, just like the Visigoths and other Germanics fled the Huns generations before.
- Secondly the Avars controlled and used various Slavic people, so they were put where they wanted them, which faciliated the Slavic spread and Slavs could settle in their zone of control. Like the regions the Avars conquered from the Germans were newly settled by Slavs allied with Avars or controlled by the Slavs more directly.

The story of Avars and Slavs is therefore pretty similar to the one of Huns and Germanics earlier. They were, originally, sworn enemies, but when the Avars broke the Slavic resistance, the Slavs split into those who
- remained free by escaping, conquering new places for themselves
- those allying up with Avars
- Slavic groups which were suppressed by the Avars and constantly raised up against their rule.

And, obviously, the position of a Slavic tribe could change from hostile to friendly towards the Avars numerous times. The sample provided is just a Slav under Avar rule in the Avar time.