Saw this one posted on anthrog. I couldn't get much out of it due to it seemed like lots of talking about excavated subjects being on steppe cline, which could mean lots of things, and the focus is just talking about mt. What's decisive and new?
I think I mentioned that a Decea (Suvorovo group) male was essentially straight up EEF, and had Y-DNA H2, from another team's preprint which Niktin also collaborates with. He mentions that Usatavo (some of them? ) had considerable EEF. That would parallel my hunch that EEF was present (to account for the obvious cultural links) but diluted and EHG/CHG increased toward 3000 bc.
He also comments that Usatovo culture could have taken place 500 yeras earlier than previously thought, in the first half of 4th millennium BC, (c. 4000-3500 BC).
Whether the model of farmers from Moldova-Romania contributing some ancestry or from the Caucasus sort of direction works better, depends on what sort of admixed individuals we find, and I guess from this this talk - and bear in mind I mainly skipped through it rather than watched the whole thing because of how boring these talks become when its going through published results - is that I didn't really get a clear impression of whether they do find admixed individuals that directly throw light on that question? Like is it just his opinion that admixture would be likely from that direction or is there an actual autosomal result that supports that? I couldn't tell from just skipping through this thing.
The argument is that there's a "reciprocal relationship" between Sredny Stog and Trypilla, so if Yamnaya is derived from Sredny Stog, then like Sredny Stog it has ancestry from Trypilla.
But I guess that's not to say that there can't be some minor Caucasus ancestry in Yamnaya, especially since this type of ancestry does show up clearly in a few of the Usatovo samples from the western end of the steppe. And we have the Yamnaya Ozera outlier female as well.
If we were to get more outliers like Ozera, we might see actual Caucasian admixture (rather than Mesolithic stuff). Otherwise Majkop is too late to be relevant for any non-statistically fabricated models
"The argument is that there's a "reciprocal relationship" between Sredny Stog and Trypilla"
The Trypillian samples from that cave have some steppe-related ancestry, right? And there's also the steppe woman found in a Trypillian setting. So it could be there was some wife-exchanging happening at that stage, maybe that's what he means.
Genetic history of Slovenia: 1. High variation during late Roman sites (c. 3rd to 5th cent.) - diversity centred on southern Europe - however, many outliers - PCA outliers have non-trivial African ancestry
2. Less variation (but similar ancestry) in earlier post-Roman sites (c. 5th to 6th cent.) - distribution remains centred around southern Europe - fewer outliers overall - some cluster with the Caucasus - but most with present-day southern European populations - no significant African ancestry, some individuals with some Asian ancestry instead
3. Chronological gap in the 7th to 8th centuries (only one site, n=5)
4. In the 9th-10th century, we see a sudden shift to ancestry associated with northeast Europe - communities now largely cluster with more north-eastern populations - everyone fits with European variation - Asian/African gene flow gone
Y-chromosomal DNA analyses of Slavic-Avar population from the Medieval burial ground Cífer-Pác (soon to be published) - https://i.postimg.cc/4JNVqPHN/Slavic-Avar-Slovakia.png
If I'm not mistaken, Davidski already converted some of these Czechs to g25 some time ago. See this thread: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?23595-New-Samples-from-Migration-Era-and-Early-Medieval-Moravia
Where are the PCAs you posted from? Some unreleased studies?
Unrelated to the topic, but a new article on the interactions between MLBA steppe cultures and BMAC, Kulturkugel model, and genetic imprint of early Indo-Aryans in Asia: https://nezihseven.substack.com/p/genetic-imprint-of-early-indo-aryans
"He also mentioned a sample with very surprising ancestry from one of the kurgans. Any bets on what he's talking about there?"
If you are referring to Csongrad kurgan that is mentioned at ~36 minutes, where he states he is not at liberty to elaborate on the autosomical make up: David Anthony et al did spill some knowledge.
"A migrant from the steppes buried in Hungary at Csongrad-Kettëshalom Bastanya, contemporary with Khvalynsk, had Y-haplogroup Q1b, and autosomal DNA similar to Khvalynsk. This steppe male was part of a diaspora of steppe males into the Danube valley that occurred about 4400–4200 BCE. "
Re Slovenia Seems like collapse of Late Antique social & demographic structure occurred ~ 600 AD Low population levels for a century then population growth post Slavic migrations
That a number of Suvorovo/Novodanilovska samples (Giurgiulesti and Csongrad) and Eneolithic samples such as Usatovo and the samples from Revova kurgan are on the Steppe/Yamnaya cline.
And as Rob said before, another Suvorovo sample is a clean EEF.
@Davisdski @Romulus “ Sredny Stog mixed with Trypilla you moron.
Not BBC, CWC or Yamnaya.
CWC and BBC have Globular Amphora ancestry.”
Yes, but because Yamnaya, CWC & BBC are from Sredny Stog, and SS’s mixed with Triplyans, then overall Corded and Bell Beakers have some Tripolye but mostly GAC ancestry.
Whatever I don't want to go through this for the hundredth time.
I watched the presentation, key points:
-They have a bunch of new samples from Kurgans in the NW Pontic. -Suvorovo Kurgan contained a Neolithic Farmer. -Paper by Nick Patterson on them is coming out end of the year.
Any ideas as to when N1 showed up in Eastern Europe? It looks like the Iron Age now, so much for Maciamo’s bs. How much of an autosomal impact did these folks have on modern day Balts and Poles (East Asian/Siberian-like ancestry)?
I don't know if you remember or not, but about a week ago I was asking if you had samples from two preprints with Sredny Stog samples. It turns out the data got made public on one of them just a few days ago.
I was hoping we could get G25 coords from this study if they do not already exist? Thank you
@Simon Stevin You can get 5-15% for modern balts, more for russians and finns, bit less (~3-5%) as you move westward depending on the source used for the North Asian ancestry. Some of the autosomal ancestry seems to have been present in NE europe already since BOO times.
see Lamnidis et al 2018 Peltola et al 2023 Lazaridis et al 2018 (pink component) Jeong et al 2018 Feldman et al 2021 Tambets et al 2018
Orpheus seems to have an agenda to inflate east eurasian admixture in northern and eastern Europeans like many do for some reason. Perhaps to make them more "mixed", whatever, he claims even western Europeans have it.
See this: https://arxaiogenetiki.blogspot.com/2023/03/dna.html
"The main possible historical sources from which may have originated are: three, Huns, Scythians, and Mongols"
Makes no sense, how many Mongol uniparentals are found? The main bulk of east eurasian DNA, which is in the far north and northeast of Europe is related to Uralics.
Quick plot of samples from Davidski - "Genetic continuity, isolation, and gene flow in Stone Age Central and Eastern Europe - Preliminary" - https://imgur.com/a/OggiUVh
Compared to Progress_En, ukr104 primarily enriched with UKR_N, also some TUR_Barcin_N possibly.
In distance difference between ukr104 and RUS_Afanasievo, ukr104 is closer to Euro_HG while RUS_Afanasievo probably due to sharing more bottleneck with other Steppe_EMBA (and Steppe_En) and has more SE orientation in PCA, so is relatively closer to both other Steppe_EMBA groups and to lesser degree to present day North Caucasus people, CHG, Turan_CA, etc.
It seems like you can get to Afanasievo through convergence of ukr104, Khvalynsk and Progress_En, with small pure Barcin_N: https://imgur.com/a/oeeeMwv
There was some significant substructure in Sredny Stog. Not as significant as in Khvalynsk, where there were essentially two populations, but enough not to really bother with getting extra southern stuff for Afanasievo.
Some ignorant idiot had that to say in Wikipedia (Western Steppe Herders entry), following the Reich BROAD lab’s 2022 drivel:
A 2022 study concludes that Yamnaya ancestry can be modelled as a mixture of an as yet unsampled admixed EHG/CHG population with a second source from the south Caucasus, and rejects Khvalynsk Eneolithic as a source population for the Yamnaya cluster. The study also contradicts suggestions that European farmer populations of the Cucuteni-Trypillia and Globular Amphora cultures contributed ancestry to Yamnaya, as Yamnaya lack the additional hunter-gatherer ancestry found in European farmers, and carry equal proportions of Anatolian and Levantine ancestry, unlike European farmers who carry predominantly Anatolian ancestry.
Yamnaya did NOT have a second wave of Southern Caucasian immigration with equal amounts of Levantine and Anatolian, but a significant GAC and mainly CTC admixture from Poland and Romania. 18% farmer is a lot!
And Maykop did mix with Yamnaya, if that’s what people refer to, but its impact was minimal.
Last but not least, Dr. Reich and Co., the Potter’s Wheel and the Kurgans originated in the Balkans, not in West Asia.
@Rob I have to give you long overdue credit, that many theories of yours turned out to be true.
I do disagree with you re: GAC language being of WHG derivation, since we have the example of both Basques and Etruscans being of overwhelmingly Eastern European (i.e. Indo-European) patrilineal haps only to learn non-IE languages from their mothers. I suspect that the same scenario is true pertaining to GAC.
@AR And on the immediate sentences after that I'm writing that any siberian ancestry precedes all these three historically plausible sources and it's pretty old. Did you forget to translate that or did you just not get it? Lmfao
There's also no inflation anywhere, did you think that "10% ->24%" was referring to nganasan? Is the translator you're using this bad? There weren't any 100% nganasan-like people in europe, which means that a 5% nganasan ancestry somewhere came from a 50% or 33% nganasan source, which means 5% becomes 10% or 15% from that admixed source. Greek isn't that hard to autotranslate so you either missed it (lazy) or didn't understand it (stupid) Thanks for the views though!
@Davidski I already referenced that study, they find that there's north asian ancestry in north europe since before any scythian/mongol/hun/etc invasion (that's my conclusion as well). If you tried to present it as a comeback then that's weaker than your deadlift PR, since they find ~5% nganasan in Estonia which agrees with what papers like Lamnidis et al 2018 found. In their chromo three ancient samples score 8%, 11% and 19% too. Over 15%, and if we're talking about the carriers of the N haplos (which weren't 100% nganasan-like) which is probably what Simon alluded to, then this ancestry goes up to 30% and higher. Moving westward the north asian source will go down to 1-3% on average at most so that's a 3-5%. Exactly what I said. Bad reading comprehension perhaps Thanks for agreeing with me though
Wasn't this Sredny ukr104 supposed to be evidence of Yamnaya origin from SS as per Davidski?
It is much more distant from Progress than even Yamnaya with much more Ukr_N like admixture. Seems like Progress ancestry diluting farther away it was from the epicentre. SS was a sink, not a source.
Hmm maybe I was too quick to dismiss Scythians contributing any NA ancestry to North/East Europe as an unsubstantiated rationalization by historians. From two blogposts back our friend Suevi informed us of this: "Genetic identification of Slavs in Migration Period Europe using an IBD sharing graph"
"One of the clusters in the IBD graph emerged that includes nearly all individuals in the dataset annotated archaeologically as “Slavic”. According to PCA a hypothesis for the origin of this population can be proposed: it was formed by admixture of a Baltic-related group with East Germanic people and Sarmatians or Scythians."
@Matt What's a rough % estimate of CTC in that sample, considering what Nikitin said?
You don't have a clue what you're talking about because you don't know anything about how these analyses work.
There's always some noise in these tests mainly because the sources of admixture are not perfect so the algorithms have to compensate by shifting the ancestry proportions.
Another problem is that the different types of data, like modern versus ancient, aren't 100% compatible, and again this causes noise.
Here's an analysis of Siberian ancestry that I did a while back using only transversion SNPs, to minimize some of these problems. The ancestry proportions are more accurate than in any of the papers you cited.
If you don't believe what I'm saying, then get in touch with someone like Iosif Lazaridis or Nick Patterson and show them this comment. Let's see what they say.
If you tried to present it as a comeback then that's weaker than your deadlift PR, since they find ~5% nganasan in Estonia which agrees with what papers like Lamnidis et al 2018 found.
Estonians aren't Balts. They're Uralics.
So tell us again how Balts have 5-15% Siberian ancestry you moron.
"No, there are many more Sredny Stog samples on the way."
Interesting. It would mean that sredny and dereivka would have the special honor of being the source of 2 wildly different ancestries - ukr_n and yamnaya.
These 'eastern' guys are just from the broader Khvalynsk (or Volga-Caspian) network, expectedly given the known links between eastern Balkans & Khvalynsk. They appear to have been clients/ allies and evidently there are some rather direct links between these two distant regions which cut out other more close groups such as the Dereivka -R1b-V88 clans.
The collapse of Varna was not due to raids from Khvalynsk but due to the rise of the Tiszapolgar group, which became the new metallurgical monopoly. When Varna collapsed so too did the power base of Khvalynsk chiefs. Hence, post-4000 BC, a new steppe power group appears to have arisen closer to the Dnieper-Don region, consistent with a different set of uniparental lineages and a more western genomic profile.
So do you understand now why I'm calling you a dumb troll?
If not, here are two of your awesome quotes side by side. Emphasis is mine.
You can get 5-15% for modern balts.
If you tried to present it as a comeback then that's weaker than your deadlift PR, since they find ~5% nganasan in Estonia which agrees with what papers like Lamnidis et al 2018 found.
@Davidski Any info on the dating of the upcoming Sredny samples?
@Davidski Estonians are geographically Baltic Europeans and don't have a sinificant difference in siberian ancestry with lithuanians, or norwegians for that matter. It hovers around 4% with the occasional outlier (hence 15%+ total from N carriers as we can already see in the paper you posted) Also thanks for reminding me of Saag's paper, I made sure to include his findings since they agree with all the other papers I linked ahaha
Your reading comprehension really sucks so I'll try again: 5-15% ancestry in modern (geographical) balts, as well as scandinavians and lower levels further west are not 5-15% north asian but 5-15% (in some cases higher) BOO-like. "Carriers of N haplos" refers to this, an intermediate population (or more than one population throughout time apparently) which carried haplos and languages. Nganasan ancestry is roughly 50% or 1/3 of that, which is what all papers find. I can see why there's some confusion though, Simon asked "How much of an autosomal impact did these folks have on modern day Balts and Poles (East Asian/Siberian-like ancestry)?" and I didn't initially clarify that 5-15% refers to these folks which weren't 100% siberian (not even close), I guess you saw it as 5-15% "East Asian/Siberian-like", which is not the case. That was the conclusion in my article as well (supported by Saag too now with examples), max Nganasan you can get in most of Europe is 2-5% up to 15% (Finland is in Europe) which becomes roughly 5-25% (lower on the west, higher in the northeast) depending on the nganasan ancestry carrier population proxy (initial N haplo carriers in Europe), BOO-like or not This isn't even controversial, it's consensus now.
Latvians and Lithuanians have less Siberian influence than Estonians, because they're Balts and Estonians are Uralics. A child can work this out by using open source samples and software.
By your own admission Estonians only have ~5% Siberian admix. Therefore you pulled this out of your ass.
"Andrzejewski said... @Samuel Andrews The anti-White wokeness in our country’s academia has reached epic pandemic proportions."
These accusations are laughable given that at least 3 of Reich's close associates are openly on the conservative side of the political spectrum, and they don't try particularly hard to hide it. Twitter is an open site, you can find out yourself (hint: one of them has been the subject of a series of posts by Davidski). Not everyone who doesn't agree with a specific hypothesis about prehistory is 'woke'. Some people in this hobby like to imagine that the future of mankind hinges on whether Yamnaya had 10% Trypillian or 10% Caucasian ancestry, in reality 99% of the general population doesn't follow and doesn't care about ancient DNA (or even prehistory in general).
@alex “ one of them has been the subject of a series of posts by Davidski)”
Lazaridis comes off as a liberal judging by his Twitter posts.
Reich himself comes from a family of Holocaust survivors, so perhaps his glasses are a tad tinted by his possible unwillingness to acknowledge an Indo-European red-haired skillful elite who originated in Eastern Europe’s Western Steppe instead of West Asia or the Caucasus mountains?
Having a lot of ANE isn't a good indicator of any type of look or lacking a certain look.
That's not how genotype/phenotype stuff works.
You can get selection for some particular traits in one population and not in another, even though both groups might have the same basic ancestry.
You need to think about these sorts of details, instead of assuming that ratios of basic ancestral components can be informative about more than just ancestry.
A bit unrelated but is EEF ancestry hidden in modern SC Asian Pops in ADMIXTURE. The reason I ask is because I have seen some formal statistic outputs which show that they have high affinity towards ANF rich populations. For example I saw one D stat output which showed Baloch showed high affinity to ANF farmers, and a pashtuns showing higher affinity towards Sardinians than they did with Sindhis or other South Asians. The particular d stats that I am talking about were posted by Kurd on Anthrogenica.
"Reich himself comes from a family of Holocaust survivors, so perhaps his glasses are a tad tinted by his possible unwillingness to acknowledge an Indo-European red-haired skillful elite who originated in Eastern Europe’s Western Steppe instead of West Asia or the Caucasus mountains?"
So he doesn't agree with you because he's a Jew. Got it.
I don't think there's any evidence that they were red-haired, maybe the IrisPlex method uses "Jewish science" and we need something better :)
@alex Haha spot on. To make things even better, even if someone's favorite theory/fantasy is proven true, nothing changes in his life or his peoples' life or his country's future. It's a brief ego boost at best
@Andrze Eh more like on the 20-25% side. As for phenotypes, David's response to you is spot on so I suggest listening to someone who (I assume) you respect
@Davidski Imagine being this cringe at your age. Yes you can easily get 5-15% ancestry from whoever introduced the N y haplos in Europe in geographical Balts, Scandinavians and others, with 5-15% covering all the variation depending on their their north asian ancestry. If they were like BOO they were at best 50% siberian so 5% siberian becomes 10% BOO-like + N haplo. Would you look at that, 10% falls right in the middle of 5-15% In fact 15% might be too conservative since 17% was detected in MA Estonia, imagine the slavic speakers further east. You were kind enough to admit this via Saag demonstrating it (lmao again) so at this point I accept your concession.
There's definitely an anti Central European bias emerging in genetics, but I dont think it has to do 'wokenesss' directly (which is a instead a tool to oppress the middle Class by silencing and scaring it into obedieance)
Alex should read Reich's book more carefully. The narrative invention highlights consistent population turnovers in Central Europe, whilst claiming BB originated in the far west, and Greeks having 90% continuity with the bronze age, as an example. It's got to do with the 'otherness' of Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, northern Balkans, and bad omens of Germany. Western Anglophone audiences are familiar with Iberia & Greece, and even Near East, so such narratives can fit in more easily into public perception . Same with North American audiences, and how every secoond paper has to mention native American ancesty, as if that has anything remotely to do with Europe or Steppe Majkop. It brings in acceptance by familiarity
W.r.t to the Caucasus angle, it flows from 2 major backgrounds. The Germans are obsessed with the region. Useful research of course, but not when it obscures the truth. So Hansen & his students are perpetually claiming that pastoralism was introduced via the Caucasus, despite opposite evidence, and this largely stems from Germany's national inferiority complex against Slavs. The second factor is Russian archaeology. Their excavations are good, but they have a bizarre style, lack original and critical thought and a need to invent separate neolithicization flow not involving Europe. hence they invent claims about 'exotic' & independent origins coming either directly from Israel, or even more far-fethced claims about some mysterious spread from the Far East and conflating possible pottery infleuences with the actual process of domesticates.
The Caucasus theory is obvously popular amongst GReek antho enthusiasts, in part due to the their being scared of Slavs & what is means for the creation of their national narrative (despite mainlanders often being Greek speaking Slavs themselves).
We can hardly say that South Slavs are Slavs ,let alone Greeks.Even a great part of Skopjans seem to be largely Slavophone Albanians,Greeks ,Vlachs and Greco-Paeonians.
Don't make statements that highlight you as Orpheus' equally-retarded cousin.
Firstly, Skopje is a city, not a country. Secondly, there is huge amount of Slavic ancestry across the Balkans, even in Greece. It got partially re-southernized during the high Middle Ages, e.g. due to incorporation of Albanian tribes into Serbian clans. Complex topic, from your comments, it doesn't seem you'd be capable of understanding
@Davidski I'd be a fool to claim such thing but there's a difference between indeed an important Slavic element versus "Greek speaking Slavs".Now trying to quantify it is a difficult endeavor at the moment due to overlapping components with some ancient samples here in Balkans/Greece and depending on the sources you can get quite different models so I'm not going to get into it ,we need transects.
@Rob 1)Isn't that a double standard? Greeks from South Italy and Asia minor were "Greek" but you and Greeks are Slav?something doesn't fit well here. 2)40% maybe in some specific uppermost northern areas. 3)Can you name some settlements where I can find these descendants of Sicilians and Asian minorites?Or even better ,if you know can you fund some tests for them? 4)Re-southernized /Slavicized ,isn't it the same?
''1)Isn't that a double standard? Greeks from South Italy and Asia minor were "Greek" but you and Greeks are Slav?''
Not at all. Slavs came from trans-Danubia in large numbers and that's how they imparted their effects across the Balkans. They are genetically, culturally & linguistically Slavs. Being Greek is a more complex matter which involved a large process of cultural adoption of Greek identity and languaeg shift. Why am I a Slav ? Because my lineages are from the north & my parents spoke that language I guess . Not rocket science.
2)40% maybe in some specific uppermost northern areas.
Conservative estimate. Inland areas like Bosnia are basically 100% Slav-related I2a and R1a. Makes claims like yours & Orpheus sound utterly uninformed
3) ''3)Can you name some settlements where I can find these descendants of Sicilians and Asian minorites?Or even better ,if you know can you fund some tests for them?''
You mean you;re not aware that Greek speaking communities existed in Sicily and Asia Minor, and there were mass resettlements into Greece after Byzantine collapse ?
4) ''4)Re-southernized /Slavicized ,isn't it the same?''
1)No different than Greeks then , the Hellenization of the east was also a case of large numbers moving there , we are probably talking about a six-digit number moving in from Greece proper and the archaic colonies ,it wasn't simply a case of good local kids going to Greek school.The fact that there was also cultural assimilation on top of that does not change the fact that the Greekness of most was/would turn out organic.I mean If some tribes in Central Asia today have false legends of Greek origin ,imagine them at that time who actually had that and who would be a little more educated.The case is no different to that of Turks.. or the Serbians with their Albanian clans.Other than that no much can be said about genetics of the broader geography(Italy ,Greece,Balkans &Anatolia) yet besides shifts in some cases.As I said there's countless models one can make and they are all as possible as the other until better data comes out.And this is relevant for the South Italy part too.
3)I'm aware ,what I'm not aware is of the "mass" part and If it has any relevance to moderns or if it has to what extent.The reliability of the chronicle is also debated.And without even counting the movements of foreign speakers later ,there has been constant mobility between regions.Pretty much any interregional/inter-Greek migration that you can imagine has happened at one point or another.
''Other than that no much can be said about genetics of the broader geography(Italy ,Greece,Balkans &Anatolia) yet besides shifts in some cases.As I said there's countless models one can make and they are all as possible as the other until better data comes out.''
At this stage, the evidence doesn't hold much scope for 'anything is possible'. In fact, all was clear even before aDNA. Time/slice archaeology and historical records have revealed it all. This was only obscured by New School immobilists and various nationalist agendas.
aDNA will just quantify and provide admixture dates, and show interesting exotic outliers from Egypt or Armenia.
folks ancestral to sredni stog yamnaya have already been found. It is all written on the wall save from the nay sayers
From approximately 5,000 BP, an ancestry component appears on the eastern European plains in Early Bronze Age Steppe pastoralists associated with the Yamnaya culture and it rapidly spreads across Europe through the expansion of the Corded Ware complex (CWC) and related cultures1,2. We demonstrate that this “steppe” ancestry (Steppe_5000BP_4300BP) can be modelled as a mixture of ~65% ancestry related to herein reported hunter-gatherer genomes from the Middle Don River region (MiddleDon_7500BP) and ~35% ancestry related to hunter-gatherers from Caucasus (Caucasus_13000BP_10000BP) (Extended Data Fig. 4). Thus, Middle Don hunter-gatherers, who already carried ancestry related to Caucasus hunter-gatherers (Fig. 2), serve as a hitherto unknown proximal source for the majority ancestry contribution into Yamnaya genomes
IMO dont hold admixture % too tightly for older Pops, by whatever method. It appears to vary widely by set-up. What's important is the overall populations tructure and relations. But I'd say 10-30% ANE in CHG & 10-20% in WHG is realistic.
I think its main hypothesis is weak and based on a genetic determinist fallacy. Just because I find Andrez's argument ridiculous doesn't mean I agree with whatever Lazaridis says.
@Rob
Bulgarians and North Macedonians have a good amount of Imperial Roman/Byzantine ancestry, and modern Greeks have even more of it. What language did these Imperial Romans and Byzantines speak?
"Secondly, there is huge amount of Slavic ancestry across the Balkans, even in Greece. It got partially re-southernized during the high Middle Ages, e.g. due to incorporation of Albanian tribes into Serbian clans. It got partially re-southernized during the high Middle Ages, e.g. due to incorporation of Albanian tribes into Serbian clans"
This happened in the western and northern Balkans, Bulgarians and N. Macedonians already had Imperial Roman admixture. The Medieval samples from Ryahovets, Veliko Tarnovo look to be straight-up Byzantine-Slav mixes and one of them plots close to modern Bulgarians (who have more paleo-Balkan admix)
I don't believe there's a thing like a German national inferiority complex against Slavs. Why should there be one? Because of the defeat in WW2? Western Germany soon thereafter became part of the Euro-Atlantic alliance and due to the prospering economy and the political freedom had good reasons to feel superior against the communist eastern block. Eastern Germany on the other hand developped a feeling of connection and friendship with Russia that still lasts on, even now that it is really out of place. What unites many Germans from both sides is a feeling of guilt towards Russia, because of the ruthless war their fathers and grandfathers have fought there. This is also a kind of simplemindedness, because the war was not against Russia alone, but against the Soviet Union, and Ukrainians and Belarusians have suffered a lot, too. But this is another typical weakness of eastern and western Germans alike: They are not fully aware of the countries inbetween Germany and Russia. Of course I'm exaggerating, and it may be slowly changing now, but as a subconscious tendency this is still appreciable.
@Rob "this largely stems from Germany's national inferiority complex against Slavs." Slavs were considered as inferiors, even subhumans. It was a shame and often hidden when you had slavic ancestry, even remote (by ex: Kurt Gerstein mariage was not seen favorably by his family, because his wife had some slavic ancestry, even if she was a pastor's daughter). It was probably since the Carolingian period, since the Franks went raiding for slaves in the slavic lands. Remember that the first specimen of Neanderthal was thought to be the remains of a Russian soldier. Today, Germany has difficulties to cope with its history. But it isn't an inferiority complex. And Germans are still very much into "german blood".
The main point is there are people claiming that not even South Slavs have Slavic ancestry, let alone Greeks. Obviously that's nosense and now theyre back pedalling
''Bulgarians and North Macedonians have a good amount of Imperial Roman/Byzantine ancestry, and modern Greeks have even more of it. What language did these Imperial Romans and Byzantines speak?'
I haven't actually looked into modern populations in detail however the broad aspects can be easily sketched out. To begin, people on Anthro fora approach it all wrong when they start speculating about Iron Age tribes like Paeonians, ancient Macedonians, Dardanians, Bessi with regard to modern central Balkan peoples. This is pseudo-historical because such groups didn't exist at the relevant time (even if inscriptions occassionaly recall visions of the past). To understand modern Greeks, Albanians, Macedonians, etc, then the realistic time frame is the Middle Age/ middle Byzantine period. For ex; when the Romans conquered Macedonia, the original Macedonians - held together by military/ aristocratic bonds to the king - had their flower die off and the rest dispersed & lost cohesion. Central towns like Pella were virtually abandoned or became villages, and new towns like Thessaloniki were created out of new settlers, often drawing in from the broader Mediterranean region, new infrastructure built, etc. This became the new Macedonia - a Roman provincial construct still using Greek as the LF.
The earliest history of Macedonian Slavs is actually from southern Macedonia & Thessaly. The region had become depopulated after the problematic 500s and by 640 there are numerous Slavophone tribes in the region, so much that Slavic was spoken in Thessaloniki itself. The settlement of more northern regions of Macedonia by Slavophone groups might have been later (paradoxically), maybe closer to 800s. A Romance-speaking population of the so-called Komani-Kruja culture certainly existed in NW Macedonia (Ohrid).
Bulgarians probably have varied substrate, there was a lot of population shifting occurring by the Bulgars. Some Greeks from southern Thrace. But let's not worry about Bulgarians, they're a confused nation who have it all backwards - their Slavic component come from the Morava region (7 Slavic clans moved to the Bulgar southern flank at medieval Varna), the Antes theory is BS. They then took the name of their Mongolian masters & then try to pretend the latter were actually Ancient Aryans from Bactria.
''This happened in the western and northern Balkans, Bulgarians and N. Macedonians already had Imperial Roman admixture. The Medieval samples from Ryahovets, Veliko Tarnovo look to be straight-up Byzantine-Slav mixes and one of them plots close to modern Bulgarians (who have more paleo-Balkan admix)''
That supports my point contra Curtis, which was a history-defining migration of Slavs occurred c. 600 AD, which impacted much of the Balkans. By contrast, the process of secondary 'native' (re-)admixture was heterogenoues - it had multiple sources over hundreds of years. Hence these are different phenomena. And if the proto-Slavs didnt fly directly from Latvia, but already had more southern admixture (a sizable portion of provincial Balkan population appears to have been re-settled north by the Avars), then this would lead to under-estimating their overall impact when people are plugging in Latvia_BA into their calculators.
I enjoyed the video and am anxious to see the published paper or papers, but I do wish Nikitin was into Y-DNA rather than mtDNA. Also I hate waiting for papers. Crap!
Germans aren't the ones whose ethnic name has entered the dictionary as the word for "slave" in dozens of different cultures.
They have contributed more than Slaves/Slavs ever had or ever will.
They come off as self-hating and willfully tamp down on pride more than anything, claiming they suffer from an inferiority complex is moronic.
The only people that would claim they suffer from an inferiority complex... would of course be Slavs/Slaves. What a shock. Projection of course.
There has never been a group of people, in the history of mankind, as successful as the Germanic people. This infuriates Slavs/Slaves since they had nothing to do with it and are not welcome either to claim it as their heritage.
The fact that Slavs sit right next to them yet have done nothing speaks to cognitive and behavioral genetic differences.
I was referring more to an institutional thing, not the everyday modern German who probably doesn’t bother with such thoughts A lot of BB research, not much on CWC. They skip over the evidence of pastoralism in East Central Europe and look straight to the Caucasus. Anyhow it was just an offhand remark.
@ gimby
the term entered popular parlance via the Arab adaptation - Saqaliba- after a troop of Slavs defeated by the Byzantine army were sold to the Arabs as slaves. Their strength & aesthetics were evidently awe-inspiring so it apparently created a market for Slavic and other east European slaves.
I think I know precisely who this Gimby20 fellow is. The language, writing style, and strong antipathy towards Slavs all check out. The funny thing is he is not Germanic or any type of European, he is some cranky middle eastern anthrotard - or perhaps that is just one of his LARP identities, who knows.
Many of the Slavic slaves probably enjoyed more prestige than Gimby20's ancestors in the muslim world, as they often held prestigious posts than the general population.
@Davidski, "It is too early to say"; although I see the dream that all the European peoples will homogenize into a single nation called Europe, a single people with one body of law, one national assembly, movement between nations eroding and dissolving all national distinctions into a single people governed from Brussels, proceeds apace across the Channel.
I see the dream that all the European peoples will homogenize into a single nation called Europe, a single people with one body of law, one national assembly, movement between nations eroding and dissolving all national distinctions into a single people governed from Brussels, proceeds apace across the Channel.
East Germans... Well, it's true many people have been submissive to the Russians over the last 50 years - perhaps all those peoples have strong inferiority complexes?
As a slight coda, I do respect your opinions on genetics and providing a place for discussion of that; as with all blogs, silly to get into too much off-topic argument with the guy putting some otherwise interesting things out there.
Speaking of Germans and Poles, isn’t their farmer ancestry both GAC in common, but their Steppe component comes from slightly different sources? IIRC, Poles are overwhelmingly from CWC R1a paternal markers in contrast to Germans having a majority R1b (via BBC), a considerable I2a (assimilated GAC rather than Yamnaya, since none of them have Yamnaya per se), and only a minority is R1a Corded?
You can't take everything back as far as BBC, CWC or whatever.
There have been more recent founder effects in Europe that have changed Y-haplogroup frequencies.
Each major ethnic/linguistic group in Europe has a particular mix of several different Y-haplogroups due to founder effects during their expansions, and not because of being straight line descendants of any archeological cultures from the Copper Age or even Bronze Age.
I think you can take pre-proto-Germanic & early Balto-Slavic, as with other languages, back to the Bronze Age. That's not unrealistic, although their main expansions ocurred much later.
As Andrze said, we see R1b-U106 as a kind of northern/ para -BB lineage taking root in Jutaland up the Elbe, R1a-L664 and R1a-Z284 from CWC, I1 and I2a2 from TRB/ GAC, all coming together somewhere in N/NW Europe. These then expanded into Scandinavia ad back south
IMO early Balto-Slavic formed somwhere between Poland & Belarus, with a Baltic-BA type population. Slavic per se closer to the Carpathian region, with the incorporation of ''I2a-Din'', amongst other elements, at some later point.
"As per historical records, most slaves in Rome were Germanic and from Sicily."
The geographical or ethnic origin of Roman slaves was too diverse to claim that the majority of them came from a specific region. As for Sicily, it is not my understanding that the majority of Rome's slaves came from there. It was indeed an important source of slaves during the late Republic, but there is a significant difference between that and asserting that the majority of slaves came from there and Germany. This is not historically accurate.
@alex Keep in mind that ethnonyms are assumed to have biological substance, since ethnic identity assumes a common biological origin with anyone who shares the same identity (often trans-national). To avoid getting entangled in the pilpul of some definitely not mentally ill gigacopers, just reduce everything to a biological origin, otherwise any ethnic identity is null and void without it (literally made up). But it can still be used, and this is the problem because it creates the illusion of genetic similarity due to (fake) ethnic similarity.
With the convergence of various I1, I2, R1b (U106, L238, S1200, and even V1636) and R1a (Z284 and L664) lines, I wonder where in this mix Q1b fits in. We have L527 and L804 among the aforementioned lines in Germanic populations. Were these lineages hunter gatherer related legacies within the TRB/GAC populations of Northern-Central Europe, or were they brought by CWC males via the steppes/forrest steppes?
Good presentation from Prof. Nikitin. Obviously he’s limited in terms of how much he can share, but some interesting points:
1. Revova kurgan from Revova, Ukraine in western Ukraine (3800 BC) appears to be possibly directly related to a male mediated migration from the northern Caucasus. This is because his previous research on this kurgan indicated that the main burial contained a man and a woman, the woman belonging to mt. haplogroup U4 related to steppe heavy Mesolithic Hunter gatherers from Eastern Europe. He mentions that this other sample show ties to Maykop or maybe steppe Maykop. However, 3800 BC is older than Maykop, so maybe some other ancient group from the northern Caucasus is behind this migration from the Caucasus to western Ukraine and Moldova. This is a very interesting kurgan with a stone cist burial with a disarticulated skeleton (male) coated in red ochre. The stone architecture of the kurgan contained a cromlech and stone plates organized in such a manner that, if viewed from above, resembles a giant sort of turtle. Never really seen anything quite like it.
2. Giurgiulesti Kurgan/Pit Grave appears to have uniparental links (Grave 3) to the Caucasus as indicated by Nikitin in a previous publication (per personal communication with David Reich). Since Prof. Nikitin’s presentation indicates that grave 3 has a local, Iron Gates derived mitochondrial line, it would stand to reason that his Y DNA line is the one that comes from Kotias Klde, Georgia.
According to Nikitin, the transition period between 4200-3900 BCE is the sweet spot for this first wave of kurgans/very early pit graves. This roughly coincides with climactic shift in the region that saw plummeting temperatures during that same time period and a possible expansion of pastoralists/agro pastoralists from the vicinity of the Caucasus, I’m assuming NW Caucasus and the Kuban steppe.
I interpret all of this to mean that there is likely some sort of secondary migration from the Caucasus area to the western steppe sometime between about 4500-3900 BCE, maybe 4200 BCE (estimated date of Giurgiulesti burial).
118 comments:
Would it be possible to add these 17x (if I didn't miss anything) pre-Medieval and Medieval Czech samples to Global25?
LIB2
LIB3
LIB4
LIB5
LIB7 (Early Medieval)
LIB11
LIB12
POH3
POH11
POH13
POH27
POH28
POH36
POH39
POH40
POH41
POH44
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB39997
I don't have time for anything right now.
Saw this one posted on anthrog. I couldn't get much out of it due to it seemed like lots of talking about excavated subjects being on steppe cline, which could mean lots of things, and the focus is just talking about mt. What's decisive and new?
Well, he's saying basically that Yamnaya formed from Sredny Stog after it mixed with Trypilla.
He also mentioned a sample with very surprising ancestry from one of the kurgans. Any bets on what he's talking about there?
I think I mentioned that a Decea (Suvorovo group) male was essentially straight up EEF, and had Y-DNA H2, from another team's preprint which Niktin also collaborates with.
He mentions that Usatavo (some of them? ) had considerable EEF. That would parallel my hunch that EEF was present (to account for the obvious cultural links) but diluted and EHG/CHG increased toward 3000 bc.
He also comments that Usatovo culture could have taken place 500 yeras earlier than previously thought, in the first half of 4th millennium BC, (c. 4000-3500 BC).
Whether the model of farmers from Moldova-Romania contributing some ancestry or from the Caucasus sort of direction works better, depends on what sort of admixed individuals we find, and I guess from this this talk - and bear in mind I mainly skipped through it rather than watched the whole thing because of how boring these talks become when its going through published results - is that I didn't really get a clear impression of whether they do find admixed individuals that directly throw light on that question? Like is it just his opinion that admixture would be likely from that direction or is there an actual autosomal result that supports that? I couldn't tell from just skipping through this thing.
@Matt
Skip to around 54:35.
The argument is that there's a "reciprocal relationship" between Sredny Stog and Trypilla, so if Yamnaya is derived from Sredny Stog, then like Sredny Stog it has ancestry from Trypilla.
But I guess that's not to say that there can't be some minor Caucasus ancestry in Yamnaya, especially since this type of ancestry does show up clearly in a few of the Usatovo samples from the western end of the steppe. And we have the Yamnaya Ozera outlier female as well.
@ Matt
If we were to get more outliers like Ozera, we might see actual Caucasian admixture (rather than Mesolithic stuff). Otherwise Majkop is too late to be relevant for any non-statistically fabricated models
… not that either scenario is mutually exclusive
Usatavo appears to have some direct links with Majkop
Davidski said...
"The argument is that there's a "reciprocal relationship" between Sredny Stog and Trypilla"
The Trypillian samples from that cave have some steppe-related ancestry, right? And there's also the steppe woman found in a Trypillian setting. So it could be there was some wife-exchanging happening at that stage, maybe that's what he means.
Genetic history of Slovenia:
1. High variation during late Roman sites (c. 3rd to 5th cent.)
- diversity centred on southern Europe
- however, many outliers
- PCA outliers have non-trivial African ancestry
2. Less variation (but similar ancestry) in earlier post-Roman sites (c. 5th to 6th cent.)
- distribution remains centred around southern Europe
- fewer outliers overall
- some cluster with the Caucasus
- but most with present-day southern European populations
- no significant African ancestry, some individuals with some Asian ancestry instead
3. Chronological gap in the 7th to 8th centuries (only one site, n=5)
4. In the 9th-10th century, we see a sudden shift to ancestry associated with northeast Europe
- communities now largely cluster with more north-eastern populations
- everyone fits with European variation
- Asian/African gene flow gone
PCA - https://i.postimg.cc/t9b0HZzM/Genetic-history-Slovenia.jpg
Y-chromosomal DNA analyses of Slavic-Avar population from the Medieval burial ground Cífer-Pác (soon to be published) - https://i.postimg.cc/4JNVqPHN/Slavic-Avar-Slovakia.png
@Suevi
If I'm not mistaken, Davidski already converted some of these Czechs to g25 some time ago. See this thread:
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?23595-New-Samples-from-Migration-Era-and-Early-Medieval-Moravia
Where are the PCAs you posted from? Some unreleased studies?
@ulfing
Yes, but there are some new samples (LIB4, LIB5, LIB7, LIB12 and POH39) that haven't been converted yet.
The PCAs are from unpublished HistoGenes study.
https://youtu.be/ZkFDpgyoXK8?t=1376
Unrelated to the topic, but a new article on the interactions between MLBA steppe cultures and BMAC, Kulturkugel model, and genetic imprint of early Indo-Aryans in Asia: https://nezihseven.substack.com/p/genetic-imprint-of-early-indo-aryans
@David
"He also mentioned a sample with very surprising ancestry from one of the kurgans. Any bets on what he's talking about there?"
If you are referring to Csongrad kurgan that is mentioned at ~36 minutes, where he states he is not at liberty to elaborate on the autosomical make up: David Anthony et al did spill some knowledge.
https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/reich.hms.harvard.edu/files/inline-files/10.1515_pz-2022-2034.pdf
"A migrant from the steppes buried in Hungary at Csongrad-Kettëshalom Bastanya, contemporary with Khvalynsk, had Y-haplogroup Q1b, and autosomal DNA similar to Khvalynsk. This steppe male was part of a diaspora of steppe males into the Danube valley that occurred about 4400–4200 BCE. "
Re Slovenia
Seems like collapse of Late Antique social & demographic structure occurred ~ 600 AD
Low population levels for a century then population growth post Slavic migrations
Same as can be expected in most of Balkans
Well, he's saying basically that Yamnaya formed from Sredny Stog after it mixed with Trypilla.
I've been telling you this since 2015. BBC, CWC, Yamnaya, all share this origin.
@Matt
"What's decisive and new?"
That a number of Suvorovo/Novodanilovska samples (Giurgiulesti and Csongrad) and Eneolithic samples such as Usatovo and the samples from Revova kurgan are on the Steppe/Yamnaya cline.
And as Rob said before, another Suvorovo sample is a clean EEF.
@Romulus
I've been telling you this since 2015. BBC, CWC, Yamnaya, all share this origin.
Sredny Stog mixed with Trypilla you moron.
Not BBC, CWC or Yamnaya.
CWC and BBC have Globular Amphora ancestry.
You've been pushing some bullshit agenda that BBC and CWC are from Trypilla.
Do you understand now?
@Davisdski @Romulus “
Sredny Stog mixed with Trypilla you moron.
Not BBC, CWC or Yamnaya.
CWC and BBC have Globular Amphora ancestry.”
Yes, but because Yamnaya, CWC & BBC are from Sredny Stog, and SS’s mixed with Triplyans, then overall Corded and Bell Beakers have some Tripolye but mostly GAC ancestry.
Yeah Sredny Stog ceased to exist in 3500 BCE because they were conpletely assimilated into CT. The Steppw migration did not begin until 2950
Steppe migrations started well before 4,000 BCE you knucklehead.
See that's why steppe ancestry shows up in Hungary and Armenia at that time.
And Afanasievo in Mongolia is older than 2,950 BCE anyway.
Whatever I don't want to go through this for the hundredth time.
I watched the presentation, key points:
-They have a bunch of new samples from Kurgans in the NW Pontic.
-Suvorovo Kurgan contained a Neolithic Farmer.
-Paper by Nick Patterson on them is coming out end of the year.
@Davidski
Any ideas as to when N1 showed up in Eastern Europe? It looks like the Iron Age now, so much for Maciamo’s bs. How much of an autosomal impact did these folks have on modern day Balts and Poles (East Asian/Siberian-like ancestry)?
N-L1026 was already in Europe during the Bronze Age.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/12/the-boo-people-earliest-uralic-speakers.html
Balts have a lot of N-L1026. Poles only a couple per cent.
But the autosomal impact was minimal, close to zero even in Balts.
@Davidski
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB59598
Hello David,
I don't know if you remember or not, but about a week ago I was asking if you had samples from two preprints with Sredny Stog samples. It turns out the data got made public on one of them just a few days ago.
I was hoping we could get G25 coords from this study if they do not already exist? Thank you
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB59598
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1966812/v1
@Simon Stevin You can get 5-15% for modern balts, more for russians and finns, bit less (~3-5%) as you move westward depending on the source used for the North Asian ancestry. Some of the autosomal ancestry seems to have been present in NE europe already since BOO times.
see
Lamnidis et al 2018
Peltola et al 2023
Lazaridis et al 2018 (pink component)
Jeong et al 2018
Feldman et al 2021
Tambets et al 2018
@Orpheus
You can get 5-15% for modern balts.
This is one of the dumbest things you've written here. You would need to go east of the Volga to see something like 15% Siberian ancestry.
The papers you cited are either wrong or you misinterpreted the details.
This paper explains the situation in the Baltic area.
https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(19)30424-5
Let's see if you can understand this pretty picture.
https://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/083161d6-5418-4b87-b243-bfaa4c80569f/fx1.jpg
@davidski
Orpheus seems to have an agenda to inflate east eurasian admixture in northern and eastern Europeans like many do for some reason. Perhaps to make them more "mixed", whatever, he claims even western Europeans have it.
See this: https://arxaiogenetiki.blogspot.com/2023/03/dna.html
"The main possible historical sources from which may have originated are: three, Huns, Scythians, and Mongols"
Makes no sense, how many Mongol uniparentals are found? The main bulk of east eurasian DNA, which is in the far north and northeast of Europe is related to Uralics.
@AR
I'm not surprised.
The claim of 5-15% Siberian ancestry in Balts is pretty wild.
I've never seen a paper claiming such a thing.
Orpheus is a troll. A really dumb one at that.
@Copper Axe
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FgoXEX5kt8KHXLjD0dh2LaUOLMRZqv3b/view?usp=sharing
Quick plot of samples from Davidski - "Genetic continuity, isolation, and gene flow in Stone Age Central and Eastern Europe - Preliminary" - https://imgur.com/a/OggiUVh
Compared to Progress_En, ukr104 primarily enriched with UKR_N, also some TUR_Barcin_N possibly.
In distance difference between ukr104 and RUS_Afanasievo, ukr104 is closer to Euro_HG while RUS_Afanasievo probably due to sharing more bottleneck with other Steppe_EMBA (and Steppe_En) and has more SE orientation in PCA, so is relatively closer to both other Steppe_EMBA groups and to lesser degree to present day North Caucasus people, CHG, Turan_CA, etc.
It seems like you can get to Afanasievo through convergence of ukr104, Khvalynsk and Progress_En, with small pure Barcin_N: https://imgur.com/a/oeeeMwv
@Matt
There was some significant substructure in Sredny Stog. Not as significant as in Khvalynsk, where there were essentially two populations, but enough not to really bother with getting extra southern stuff for Afanasievo.
@Davidski
Thanks for the coordinates, much appreciated!
Some ignorant idiot had that to say in Wikipedia (Western Steppe Herders entry), following the Reich BROAD lab’s 2022 drivel:
A 2022 study concludes that Yamnaya ancestry can be modelled as a mixture of an as yet unsampled admixed EHG/CHG population with a second source from the south Caucasus, and rejects Khvalynsk Eneolithic as a source population for the Yamnaya cluster. The study also contradicts suggestions that European farmer populations of the Cucuteni-Trypillia and Globular Amphora cultures contributed ancestry to Yamnaya, as Yamnaya lack the additional hunter-gatherer ancestry found in European farmers, and carry equal proportions of Anatolian and Levantine ancestry, unlike European farmers who carry predominantly Anatolian ancestry.
@Samuel Andrews The anti-White wokeness in our country’s academia has reached epic pandemic proportions.
Yamnaya did NOT have a second wave of Southern Caucasian immigration with equal amounts of Levantine and Anatolian, but a significant GAC and mainly CTC admixture from Poland and Romania. 18% farmer is a lot!
And Maykop did mix with Yamnaya, if that’s what people refer to, but its impact was minimal.
Last but not least, Dr. Reich and Co., the Potter’s Wheel and the Kurgans originated in the Balkans, not in West Asia.
@Rob I have to give you long overdue credit, that many theories of yours turned out to be true.
I do disagree with you re: GAC language being of WHG derivation, since we have the example of both Basques and Etruscans being of overwhelmingly Eastern European (i.e. Indo-European) patrilineal haps only to learn non-IE languages from their mothers. I suspect that the same scenario is true pertaining to GAC.
Can anyone inform me how come most commentators ignore the fact that CHG has 1/3 Mal’ta Burret or Yana just like EHG has 75%?
Most people gloss over the fact that the original WSH (before admixing fairly heavily with EEF) had 50% ANE from both sources.
@AR And on the immediate sentences after that I'm writing that any siberian ancestry precedes all these three historically plausible sources and it's pretty old.
Did you forget to translate that or did you just not get it? Lmfao
There's also no inflation anywhere, did you think that "10% ->24%" was referring to nganasan? Is the translator you're using this bad? There weren't any 100% nganasan-like people in europe, which means that a 5% nganasan ancestry somewhere came from a 50% or 33% nganasan source, which means 5% becomes 10% or 15% from that admixed source. Greek isn't that hard to autotranslate so you either missed it (lazy) or didn't understand it (stupid)
Thanks for the views though!
@Davidski I already referenced that study, they find that there's north asian ancestry in north europe since before any scythian/mongol/hun/etc invasion (that's my conclusion as well).
If you tried to present it as a comeback then that's weaker than your deadlift PR, since they find ~5% nganasan in Estonia which agrees with what papers like Lamnidis et al 2018 found. In their chromo three ancient samples score 8%, 11% and 19% too. Over 15%, and if we're talking about the carriers of the N haplos (which weren't 100% nganasan-like) which is probably what Simon alluded to, then this ancestry goes up to 30% and higher. Moving westward the north asian source will go down to 1-3% on average at most so that's a 3-5%. Exactly what I said. Bad reading comprehension perhaps
Thanks for agreeing with me though
Wasn't this Sredny ukr104 supposed to be evidence of Yamnaya origin from SS as per Davidski?
It is much more distant from Progress than even Yamnaya with much more Ukr_N like admixture. Seems like Progress ancestry diluting farther away it was from the epicentre. SS was a sink, not a source.
First rough run.
Target: ukr104:ukr104
Distance: 1.9134% / 0.01913423 | R3P
51.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
37.2 ukr160
11.6 TJK_Sarazm_En
Hmm maybe I was too quick to dismiss Scythians contributing any NA ancestry to North/East Europe as an unsubstantiated rationalization by historians. From two blogposts back our friend Suevi informed us of this:
"Genetic identification of Slavs in Migration Period Europe using an IBD sharing graph"
"One of the clusters in the IBD graph emerged that includes nearly all individuals in the dataset annotated archaeologically as “Slavic”. According to PCA a hypothesis for the origin of this population can be proposed: it was formed by admixture of a Baltic-related group with East Germanic people and Sarmatians or Scythians."
@Matt What's a rough % estimate of CTC in that sample, considering what Nikitin said?
@vAsiSTha
Wasn't this Sredny ukr104 supposed to be evidence of Yamnaya origin from SS as per Davidski?
No, there are many more Sredny Stog samples on the way.
@Orpheus
You don't have a clue what you're talking about because you don't know anything about how these analyses work.
There's always some noise in these tests mainly because the sources of admixture are not perfect so the algorithms have to compensate by shifting the ancestry proportions.
Another problem is that the different types of data, like modern versus ancient, aren't 100% compatible, and again this causes noise.
Here's an analysis of Siberian ancestry that I did a while back using only transversion SNPs, to minimize some of these problems. The ancestry proportions are more accurate than in any of the papers you cited.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2020/07/ancient-ancestry-proportions-in-present.html
If you don't believe what I'm saying, then get in touch with someone like Iosif Lazaridis or Nick Patterson and show them this comment. Let's see what they say.
@Orpheus
If you tried to present it as a comeback then that's weaker than your deadlift PR, since they find ~5% nganasan in Estonia which agrees with what papers like Lamnidis et al 2018 found.
Estonians aren't Balts. They're Uralics.
So tell us again how Balts have 5-15% Siberian ancestry you moron.
"No, there are many more Sredny Stog samples on the way."
Interesting. It would mean that sredny and dereivka would have the special honor of being the source of 2 wildly different ancestries - ukr_n and yamnaya.
You've got it backwards, as usual.
Yamnaya is a mixture between proto-Sredny Stog and Ukraine N.
Proto-Sredny Stog was very similar to Progress, but older.
This population moved west very early. One such sample will come from Copper Age Hungary.
These 'eastern' guys are just from the broader Khvalynsk (or Volga-Caspian) network, expectedly given the known links between eastern Balkans & Khvalynsk.
They appear to have been clients/ allies and evidently there are some rather direct links between these two distant regions which cut out other more close groups such as the Dereivka -R1b-V88 clans.
The collapse of Varna was not due to raids from Khvalynsk but due to the rise of the Tiszapolgar group, which became the new metallurgical monopoly. When Varna collapsed so too did the power base of Khvalynsk chiefs. Hence, post-4000 BC, a new steppe power group appears to have arisen closer to the Dnieper-Don region, consistent with a different set of uniparental lineages and a more western genomic profile.
@Orpheus
So do you understand now why I'm calling you a dumb troll?
If not, here are two of your awesome quotes side by side. Emphasis is mine.
You can get 5-15% for modern balts.
If you tried to present it as a comeback then that's weaker than your deadlift PR, since they find ~5% nganasan in Estonia which agrees with what papers like Lamnidis et al 2018 found.
FYI, Latvians and Lithuanians are Balts.
@Davidski Any info on the dating of the upcoming Sredny samples?
@Davidski Estonians are geographically Baltic Europeans and don't have a sinificant difference in siberian ancestry with lithuanians, or norwegians for that matter. It hovers around 4% with the occasional outlier (hence 15%+ total from N carriers as we can already see in the paper you posted)
Also thanks for reminding me of Saag's paper, I made sure to include his findings since they agree with all the other papers I linked ahaha
Your reading comprehension really sucks so I'll try again: 5-15% ancestry in modern (geographical) balts, as well as scandinavians and lower levels further west are not 5-15% north asian but 5-15% (in some cases higher) BOO-like. "Carriers of N haplos" refers to this, an intermediate population (or more than one population throughout time apparently) which carried haplos and languages. Nganasan ancestry is roughly 50% or 1/3 of that, which is what all papers find.
I can see why there's some confusion though, Simon asked "How much of an autosomal impact did these folks have on modern day Balts and Poles (East Asian/Siberian-like ancestry)?" and I didn't initially clarify that 5-15% refers to these folks which weren't 100% siberian (not even close), I guess you saw it as 5-15% "East Asian/Siberian-like", which is not the case. That was the conclusion in my article as well (supported by Saag too now with examples), max Nganasan you can get in most of Europe is 2-5% up to 15% (Finland is in Europe) which becomes roughly 5-25% (lower on the west, higher in the northeast) depending on the nganasan ancestry carrier population proxy (initial N haplo carriers in Europe), BOO-like or not
This isn't even controversial, it's consensus now.
@Orpheus
Latvians and Lithuanians have less Siberian influence than Estonians, because they're Balts and Estonians are Uralics. A child can work this out by using open source samples and software.
By your own admission Estonians only have ~5% Siberian admix. Therefore you pulled this out of your ass.
You can get 5-15% for modern balts.
Dumb troll.
"Andrzejewski said...
@Samuel Andrews The anti-White wokeness in our country’s academia has reached epic pandemic proportions."
These accusations are laughable given that at least 3 of Reich's close associates are openly on the conservative side of the political spectrum, and they don't try particularly hard to hide it. Twitter is an open site, you can find out yourself (hint: one of them has been the subject of a series of posts by Davidski). Not everyone who doesn't agree with a specific hypothesis about prehistory is 'woke'. Some people in this hobby like to imagine that the future of mankind hinges on whether Yamnaya had 10% Trypillian or 10% Caucasian ancestry, in reality 99% of the general population doesn't follow and doesn't care about ancient DNA (or even prehistory in general).
There's definitely bias and probably some sort of agenda at play here.
Otherwise, it's hard to imagine why anyone would want to push this idea that Yamnaya is ~25% Armenian-related.
It's an absurd claim.
@alex “ one of them has been the subject of a series of posts by Davidski)”
Lazaridis comes off as a liberal judging by his Twitter posts.
Reich himself comes from a family of Holocaust survivors, so perhaps his glasses are a tad tinted by his possible unwillingness to acknowledge an Indo-European red-haired skillful elite who originated in Eastern Europe’s Western Steppe instead of West Asia or the Caucasus mountains?
Iran_N has at least 50% ANE. Why do all reconstructions depict them as Semitic looking?
Having a lot of ANE isn't a good indicator of any type of look or lacking a certain look.
That's not how genotype/phenotype stuff works.
You can get selection for some particular traits in one population and not in another, even though both groups might have the same basic ancestry.
You need to think about these sorts of details, instead of assuming that ratios of basic ancestral components can be informative about more than just ancestry.
List of samples with at least 15% CHG-like and ANE-like admixture.
https://i.ibb.co/Jrd0JC1/39486854.png
A bit unrelated but is EEF ancestry hidden in modern SC Asian Pops in ADMIXTURE. The reason I ask is because I have seen some formal statistic outputs which show that they have high affinity towards ANF rich populations. For example I saw one D stat output which showed Baloch showed high affinity to ANF farmers, and a pashtuns showing higher affinity towards Sardinians than they did with Sindhis or other South Asians. The particular d stats that I am talking about were posted by Kurd on Anthrogenica.
"Reich himself comes from a family of Holocaust survivors, so perhaps his glasses are a tad tinted by his possible unwillingness to acknowledge an Indo-European red-haired skillful elite who originated in Eastern Europe’s Western Steppe instead of West Asia or the Caucasus mountains?"
So he doesn't agree with you because he's a Jew. Got it.
I don't think there's any evidence that they were red-haired, maybe the IrisPlex method uses "Jewish science" and we need something better :)
@alex Haha spot on. To make things even better, even if someone's favorite theory/fantasy is proven true, nothing changes in his life or his peoples' life or his country's future. It's a brief ego boost at best
@Andrze Eh more like on the 20-25% side. As for phenotypes, David's response to you is spot on so I suggest listening to someone who (I assume) you respect
@Davidski Imagine being this cringe at your age. Yes you can easily get 5-15% ancestry from whoever introduced the N y haplos in Europe in geographical Balts, Scandinavians and others, with 5-15% covering all the variation depending on their their north asian ancestry. If they were like BOO they were at best 50% siberian so 5% siberian becomes 10% BOO-like + N haplo. Would you look at that, 10% falls right in the middle of 5-15%
In fact 15% might be too conservative since 17% was detected in MA Estonia, imagine the slavic speakers further east.
You were kind enough to admit this via Saag demonstrating it (lmao again) so at this point I accept your concession.
There's definitely an anti Central European bias emerging in genetics, but I dont think it has to do 'wokenesss' directly (which is a instead a tool to oppress the middle Class by silencing and scaring it into obedieance)
Alex should read Reich's book more carefully. The narrative invention highlights consistent population turnovers in Central Europe, whilst claiming BB originated in the far west, and Greeks having 90% continuity with the bronze age, as an example.
It's got to do with the 'otherness' of Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, northern Balkans, and bad omens of Germany. Western Anglophone audiences are familiar with Iberia & Greece, and even Near East, so such narratives can fit in more easily into public perception . Same with North American audiences, and how every secoond paper has to mention native American ancesty, as if that has anything remotely to do with Europe or Steppe Majkop. It brings in acceptance by familiarity
W.r.t to the Caucasus angle, it flows from 2 major backgrounds. The Germans are obsessed with the region. Useful research of course, but not when it obscures the truth. So Hansen & his students are perpetually claiming that pastoralism was introduced via the Caucasus, despite opposite evidence, and this largely stems from Germany's national inferiority complex against Slavs.
The second factor is Russian archaeology. Their excavations are good, but they have a bizarre style, lack original and critical thought and a need to invent separate neolithicization flow not involving Europe. hence they invent claims about 'exotic' & independent origins coming either directly from Israel, or even more far-fethced claims about some mysterious spread from the Far East and conflating possible pottery infleuences with the actual process of domesticates.
The Caucasus theory is obvously popular amongst GReek antho enthusiasts, in part due to the their being scared of Slavs & what is means for the creation of their national narrative (despite mainlanders often being Greek speaking Slavs themselves).
@alex
What's your take on the Southern Arc paper?
Do you believe it was an objective and accurate effort?
@Rob
We can hardly say that South Slavs are Slavs ,let alone Greeks.Even a great part of Skopjans seem to be largely Slavophone Albanians,Greeks ,Vlachs and Greco-Paeonians.
@Curtis
South Slavs are called Slavs because they speak Slavic languages and they have a lot of original Slavic ancestry.
And are you claiming there's no Slavic ancestry in Greece?
Curtis
Don't make statements that highlight you as Orpheus' equally-retarded cousin.
Firstly, Skopje is a city, not a country.
Secondly, there is huge amount of Slavic ancestry across the Balkans, even in Greece. It got partially re-southernized during the high Middle Ages, e.g. due to incorporation of Albanian tribes into Serbian clans. Complex topic, from your comments, it doesn't seem you'd be capable of understanding
@Orpheus
If they were like BOO they were at best 50% siberian so 5% siberian becomes 10% BOO-like + N haplo.
The data from Saag shows that even in Estonia the people who introduced Y-HG N were overwhelmingly European.
Balts do not have anything resembling Siberian ancestry at 5-15%.
You're a moron.
@Davidski I'd be a fool to claim such thing but there's a difference between indeed an important Slavic element versus "Greek speaking Slavs".Now trying to quantify it is a difficult endeavor at the moment due to overlapping components with some ancient samples here in Balkans/Greece and depending on the sources you can get quite different models so I'm not going to get into it ,we need transects.
@Rob
1)Isn't that a double standard? Greeks from South Italy and Asia minor were "Greek" but you and Greeks are Slav?something doesn't fit well here.
2)40% maybe in some specific uppermost northern areas.
3)Can you name some settlements where I can find these descendants of Sicilians and Asian minorites?Or even better ,if you know can you fund some tests for them?
4)Re-southernized /Slavicized ,isn't it the same?
" Curtis
''1)Isn't that a double standard? Greeks from South Italy and Asia minor were "Greek" but you and Greeks are Slav?''
Not at all. Slavs came from trans-Danubia in large numbers and that's how they imparted their effects across the Balkans. They are genetically, culturally & linguistically Slavs.
Being Greek is a more complex matter which involved a large process of cultural adoption of Greek identity and languaeg shift.
Why am I a Slav ? Because my lineages are from the north & my parents spoke that language I guess . Not rocket science.
2)40% maybe in some specific uppermost northern areas.
Conservative estimate. Inland areas like Bosnia are basically 100% Slav-related I2a and R1a. Makes claims like yours & Orpheus sound utterly uninformed
3) ''3)Can you name some settlements where I can find these descendants of Sicilians and Asian minorites?Or even better ,if you know can you fund some tests for them?''
You mean you;re not aware that Greek speaking communities existed in Sicily and Asia Minor, and there were mass resettlements into Greece after Byzantine collapse ?
4) ''4)Re-southernized /Slavicized ,isn't it the same?''
No, clearly different set of processes and order
@Rob
1)No different than Greeks then , the Hellenization of the east was also a case of large numbers moving there , we are probably talking about a six-digit number moving in from Greece proper and the archaic colonies ,it wasn't simply a case of good local kids going to Greek school.The fact that there was also cultural assimilation on top of that does not change the fact that the Greekness of most was/would turn out organic.I mean If some tribes in Central Asia today have false legends of Greek origin ,imagine them at that time who actually had that and who would be a little more educated.The case is no different to that of Turks.. or the Serbians with their Albanian clans.Other than that no much can be said about genetics of the broader geography(Italy ,Greece,Balkans &Anatolia) yet besides shifts in some cases.As I said there's countless models one can make and they are all as possible as the other until better data comes out.And this is relevant for the South Italy part too.
3)I'm aware ,what I'm not aware is of the "mass" part and If it has any relevance to moderns or if it has to what extent.The reliability of the chronicle is also debated.And without even counting the movements of foreign speakers later ,there has been constant mobility between regions.Pretty much any interregional/inter-Greek migration that you can imagine has happened at one point or another.
@Andrzejewski "Iran_N has at least 50% ANE. Why do all reconstructions depict them as Semitic looking?"
What paper have you read which claims they're at least 50% ANE? LOL. That's impossible.
@ Curtis
''Other than that no much can be said about genetics of the broader geography(Italy ,Greece,Balkans &Anatolia) yet besides shifts in some cases.As I said there's countless models one can make and they are all as possible as the other until better data comes out.''
At this stage, the evidence doesn't hold much scope for 'anything is possible'. In fact, all was clear even before aDNA. Time/slice archaeology and historical records have revealed it all. This was only obscured by New School immobilists and various nationalist agendas.
aDNA will just quantify and provide admixture dates, and show interesting exotic outliers from Egypt or Armenia.
folks ancestral to sredni stog yamnaya have already been found. It is all written on the wall save from the nay sayers
From approximately 5,000 BP, an ancestry component appears on the eastern European plains in Early Bronze Age Steppe pastoralists associated with the Yamnaya culture and it rapidly spreads across Europe through the expansion of the Corded Ware complex (CWC) and related cultures1,2. We demonstrate that this “steppe” ancestry (Steppe_5000BP_4300BP) can be modelled as a mixture of ~65% ancestry related to herein reported hunter-gatherer genomes from the Middle Don River region (MiddleDon_7500BP) and ~35% ancestry related to hunter-gatherers from Caucasus (Caucasus_13000BP_10000BP) (Extended Data Fig. 4). Thus, Middle Don hunter-gatherers, who already carried ancestry related to Caucasus hunter-gatherers (Fig. 2), serve as a hitherto unknown proximal source for the majority ancestry contribution into Yamnaya genomes
@ Andrze, Anveṣaṇam
IMO dont hold admixture % too tightly for older Pops, by whatever method. It appears to vary widely by set-up. What's important is the overall populations tructure and relations.
But I'd say 10-30% ANE in CHG & 10-20% in WHG is realistic.
"Davidski said...
@alex
What's your take on the Southern Arc paper?"
I think its main hypothesis is weak and based on a genetic determinist fallacy. Just because I find Andrez's argument ridiculous doesn't mean I agree with whatever Lazaridis says.
@Rob
Bulgarians and North Macedonians have a good amount of Imperial Roman/Byzantine ancestry, and modern Greeks have even more of it. What language did these Imperial Romans and Byzantines speak?
"Secondly, there is huge amount of Slavic ancestry across the Balkans, even in Greece. It got partially re-southernized during the high Middle Ages, e.g. due to incorporation of Albanian tribes into Serbian clans. It got partially re-southernized during the high Middle Ages, e.g. due to incorporation of Albanian tribes into Serbian clans"
This happened in the western and northern Balkans, Bulgarians and N. Macedonians already had Imperial Roman admixture. The Medieval samples from Ryahovets, Veliko Tarnovo look to be straight-up Byzantine-Slav mixes and one of them plots close to modern Bulgarians (who have more paleo-Balkan admix)
@Rob
I don't believe there's a thing like a German national inferiority complex against Slavs. Why should there be one? Because of the defeat in WW2? Western Germany soon thereafter became part of the Euro-Atlantic alliance and due to the prospering economy and the political freedom had good reasons to feel superior against the communist eastern block. Eastern Germany on the other hand developped a feeling of connection and friendship with Russia that still lasts on, even now that it is really out of place. What unites many Germans from both sides is a feeling of guilt towards Russia, because of the ruthless war their fathers and grandfathers have fought there. This is also a kind of simplemindedness, because the war was not against Russia alone, but against the Soviet Union, and Ukrainians and Belarusians have suffered a lot, too. But this is another typical weakness of eastern and western Germans alike: They are not fully aware of the countries inbetween Germany and Russia. Of course I'm exaggerating, and it may be slowly changing now, but as a subconscious tendency this is still appreciable.
@Rob
"this largely stems from Germany's national inferiority complex against Slavs."
Slavs were considered as inferiors, even subhumans. It was a shame and often hidden when you had slavic ancestry, even remote (by ex: Kurt Gerstein mariage was not seen favorably by his family, because his wife had some slavic ancestry, even if she was a pastor's daughter).
It was probably since the Carolingian period, since the Franks went raiding for slaves in the slavic lands.
Remember that the first specimen of Neanderthal was thought to be the remains of a Russian soldier.
Today, Germany has difficulties to cope with its history. But it isn't an inferiority complex.
And Germans are still very much into "german blood".
@ Alex
The main point is there are people claiming that not even South Slavs have Slavic ancestry, let alone Greeks. Obviously that's nosense and now theyre back pedalling
''Bulgarians and North Macedonians have a good amount of Imperial Roman/Byzantine ancestry, and modern Greeks have even more of it. What language did these Imperial Romans and Byzantines speak?'
I haven't actually looked into modern populations in detail however the broad aspects can be easily sketched out.
To begin, people on Anthro fora approach it all wrong when they start speculating about Iron Age tribes like Paeonians, ancient Macedonians, Dardanians, Bessi with regard to modern central Balkan peoples. This is pseudo-historical because such groups didn't exist at the relevant time (even if inscriptions occassionaly recall visions of the past). To understand modern Greeks, Albanians, Macedonians, etc, then the realistic time frame is the Middle Age/ middle Byzantine period. For ex; when the Romans conquered Macedonia, the original Macedonians - held together by military/ aristocratic bonds to the king - had their flower die off and the rest dispersed & lost cohesion. Central towns like Pella were virtually abandoned or became villages, and new towns like Thessaloniki were created out of new settlers, often drawing in from the broader Mediterranean region, new infrastructure built, etc. This became the new Macedonia - a Roman provincial construct still using Greek as the LF.
The earliest history of Macedonian Slavs is actually from southern Macedonia & Thessaly. The region had become depopulated after the problematic 500s and by 640 there are numerous Slavophone tribes in the region, so much that Slavic was spoken in Thessaloniki itself. The settlement of more northern regions of Macedonia by Slavophone groups might have been later (paradoxically), maybe closer to 800s. A Romance-speaking population of the so-called Komani-Kruja culture certainly existed in NW Macedonia (Ohrid).
Bulgarians probably have varied substrate, there was a lot of population shifting occurring by the Bulgars. Some Greeks from southern Thrace. But let's not worry about Bulgarians, they're a confused nation who have it all backwards - their Slavic component come from the Morava region (7 Slavic clans moved to the Bulgar southern flank at medieval Varna), the Antes theory is BS. They then took the name of their Mongolian masters & then try to pretend the latter were actually Ancient Aryans from Bactria.
''This happened in the western and northern Balkans, Bulgarians and N. Macedonians already had Imperial Roman admixture. The Medieval samples from Ryahovets, Veliko Tarnovo look to be straight-up Byzantine-Slav mixes and one of them plots close to modern Bulgarians (who have more paleo-Balkan admix)''
That supports my point contra Curtis, which was a history-defining migration of Slavs occurred c. 600 AD, which impacted much of the Balkans. By contrast, the process of secondary 'native' (re-)admixture was heterogenoues - it had multiple sources over hundreds of years. Hence these are different phenomena.
And if the proto-Slavs didnt fly directly from Latvia, but already had more southern admixture (a sizable portion of provincial Balkan population appears to have been re-settled north by the Avars), then this would lead to under-estimating their overall impact when people are plugging in Latvia_BA into their calculators.
@Folker
You're missing an important detail there.
Germans have indeed suffered from an inferiority complex over the ages, and this is why they had the need to feel superior.
I won't go into the details here, because all of this goes back to the Roman period, but surely you can fill in the blanks for yourself.
I enjoyed the video and am anxious to see the published paper or papers, but I do wish Nikitin was into Y-DNA rather than mtDNA. Also I hate waiting for papers. Crap!
Germans aren't the ones whose ethnic name has entered the dictionary as the word for "slave" in dozens of different cultures.
They have contributed more than Slaves/Slavs ever had or ever will.
They come off as self-hating and willfully tamp down on pride more than anything, claiming they suffer from an inferiority complex is moronic.
The only people that would claim they suffer from an inferiority complex... would of course be Slavs/Slaves. What a shock. Projection of course.
There has never been a group of people, in the history of mankind, as successful as the Germanic people. This infuriates Slavs/Slaves since they had nothing to do with it and are not welcome either to claim it as their heritage.
The fact that Slavs sit right next to them yet have done nothing speaks to cognitive and behavioral genetic differences.
@gimby20
It's a historical fact that the main sources of slaves in the Roman Empire were Germany and Sicily.
And yeah, the German inferiority complex was one of the main causes of WWII.
WWII is Germany's "greatest achievement". And they lost it.
@ old Europe
“folks ancestral to sredni stog yamnaya have already been found. It is all written on the wall save from the nay sayers”
Have you looked at it with G25 , if it’s been done ?
@ SimonW
I was referring more to an institutional thing, not the everyday modern German who probably doesn’t bother with such thoughts
A lot of BB research, not much on CWC. They skip over the evidence of pastoralism in East Central Europe and look straight to the Caucasus. Anyhow it was just an offhand remark.
@ gimby
the term entered popular parlance via the Arab adaptation - Saqaliba- after a troop of Slavs defeated by the Byzantine army were sold to the Arabs as slaves. Their strength & aesthetics were evidently awe-inspiring so it apparently created a market for Slavic and other east European slaves.
I think I know precisely who this Gimby20 fellow is. The language, writing style, and strong antipathy towards Slavs all check out. The funny thing is he is not Germanic or any type of European, he is some cranky middle eastern anthrotard - or perhaps that is just one of his LARP identities, who knows.
@Rob
Many of the Slavic slaves probably enjoyed more prestige than Gimby20's ancestors in the muslim world, as they often held prestigious posts than the general population.
This is your brain on Euro-nationalism... lol
@Matt
Tell us about the benefits of Brexit. lol
@ Matt
Which aspect of these facts, delivered in pristine high order, are deemed “nationalistic” by the neutral English gentleman?
@Rob, maybe Germans having a national inferiority complex towards Slavs of all people lol.
Lol. Anyone who makes good beer is ok in my books
@Davidski, "It is too early to say"; although I see the dream that all the European peoples will homogenize into a single nation called Europe, a single people with one body of law, one national assembly, movement between nations eroding and dissolving all national distinctions into a single people governed from Brussels, proceeds apace across the Channel.
@Matt
You don't think Germans have been submissive to Russians over the last 70 years?
It's one of the reasons why we have a war in Europe at the moment.
@Matt
I see the dream that all the European peoples will homogenize into a single nation called Europe, a single people with one body of law, one national assembly, movement between nations eroding and dissolving all national distinctions into a single people governed from Brussels, proceeds apace across the Channel.
lol
East Germans... Well, it's true many people have been submissive to the Russians over the last 50 years - perhaps all those peoples have strong inferiority complexes?
Well not Poles, that's for sure. We're the reason why the Berlin Wall collapsed.
And I actually meant West Germans, obviously. Think about it.
lol
Learn some history dipshit.
Hey, it's your blog; you do you, but I have to bow out on that "high" note.
As a slight coda, I do respect your opinions on genetics and providing a place for discussion of that; as with all blogs, silly to get into too much off-topic argument with the guy putting some otherwise interesting things out there.
Idle chit chat, Matty. Don’t take it too seriously but there’s always truth in jest, and that shouldn’t be offensive
@All
I just blocked a bunch of very strange comments from obvious trolls about Germans, Poles, and the history of slavery.
Let's get back on topic.
Doesn't the DNA evidence indicate that most slaves in the Roman Empire came from the eastern Mediterranean?
Speaking of Germans and Poles, isn’t their farmer ancestry both GAC in common, but their Steppe component comes from slightly different sources? IIRC, Poles are overwhelmingly from CWC R1a paternal markers in contrast to Germans having a majority R1b (via BBC), a considerable I2a (assimilated GAC rather than Yamnaya, since none of them have Yamnaya per se), and only a minority is R1a Corded?
@A
Doesn't the DNA evidence indicate that most slaves in the Roman Empire came from the eastern Mediterranean?
As per historical records, most slaves in Rome were Germanic and from Sicily.
There's currently no way to challenge this view with ancient DNA, because there aren't enough samples from Roman slave burial sites.
@Andrzejewski
You can't take everything back as far as BBC, CWC or whatever.
There have been more recent founder effects in Europe that have changed Y-haplogroup frequencies.
Each major ethnic/linguistic group in Europe has a particular mix of several different Y-haplogroups due to founder effects during their expansions, and not because of being straight line descendants of any archeological cultures from the Copper Age or even Bronze Age.
I think you can take pre-proto-Germanic & early Balto-Slavic, as with other languages, back to the Bronze Age. That's not unrealistic, although their main expansions ocurred much later.
As Andrze said, we see R1b-U106 as a kind of northern/ para -BB lineage taking root in Jutaland up the Elbe, R1a-L664 and R1a-Z284 from CWC, I1 and I2a2 from TRB/ GAC, all coming together somewhere in N/NW Europe. These then expanded into Scandinavia ad back south
IMO early Balto-Slavic formed somwhere between Poland & Belarus, with a Baltic-BA type population. Slavic per se closer to the Carpathian region, with the incorporation of ''I2a-Din'', amongst other elements, at some later point.
@Orpheus
If you attempt to post bullshit here again I'll delete all of your posts.
I just find it hilarious that Orpheus is deluded enough to host a blog.
"As per historical records, most slaves in Rome were Germanic and from Sicily."
The geographical or ethnic origin of Roman slaves was too diverse to claim that the majority of them came from a specific region. As for Sicily, it is not my understanding that the majority of Rome's slaves came from there. It was indeed an important source of slaves during the late Republic, but there is a significant difference between that and asserting that the majority of slaves came from there and Germany. This is not historically accurate.
@alex Keep in mind that ethnonyms are assumed to have biological substance, since ethnic identity assumes a common biological origin with anyone who shares the same identity (often trans-national).
To avoid getting entangled in the pilpul of some definitely not mentally ill gigacopers, just reduce everything to a biological origin, otherwise any ethnic identity is null and void without it (literally made up). But it can still be used, and this is the problem because it creates the illusion of genetic similarity due to (fake) ethnic similarity.
@John Smith
Well, we can also add Gauls and Greeks to that list.
With the convergence of various I1, I2, R1b (U106, L238, S1200, and even V1636) and R1a (Z284 and L664) lines, I wonder where in this mix Q1b fits in. We have L527 and L804 among the aforementioned lines in Germanic populations. Were these lineages hunter gatherer related legacies within the TRB/GAC populations of Northern-Central Europe, or were they brought by CWC males via the steppes/forrest steppes?
Good presentation from Prof. Nikitin. Obviously he’s limited in terms of how much he can share, but some interesting points:
1. Revova kurgan from Revova, Ukraine in western Ukraine (3800 BC) appears to be possibly directly related to a male mediated migration from the northern Caucasus. This is because his previous research on this kurgan indicated that the main burial contained a man and a woman, the woman belonging to mt. haplogroup U4 related to steppe heavy Mesolithic Hunter gatherers from Eastern Europe. He mentions that this other sample show ties to Maykop or maybe steppe Maykop. However, 3800 BC is older than Maykop, so maybe some other ancient group from the northern Caucasus is behind this migration from the Caucasus to western Ukraine and Moldova. This is a very interesting kurgan with a stone cist burial with a disarticulated skeleton (male) coated in red ochre. The stone architecture of the kurgan contained a cromlech and stone plates organized in such a manner that, if viewed from above, resembles a giant sort of turtle. Never really seen anything quite like it.
2. Giurgiulesti Kurgan/Pit Grave appears to have uniparental links (Grave 3) to the Caucasus as indicated by Nikitin in a previous publication (per personal communication with David Reich). Since Prof. Nikitin’s presentation indicates that grave 3 has a local, Iron Gates derived mitochondrial line, it would stand to reason that his Y DNA line is the one that comes from Kotias Klde, Georgia.
According to Nikitin, the transition period between 4200-3900 BCE is the sweet spot for this first wave of kurgans/very early pit graves. This roughly coincides with climactic shift in the region that saw plummeting temperatures during that same time period and a possible expansion of pastoralists/agro pastoralists from the vicinity of the Caucasus, I’m assuming NW Caucasus and the Kuban steppe.
I interpret all of this to mean that there is likely some sort of secondary migration from the Caucasus area to the western steppe sometime between about 4500-3900 BCE, maybe 4200 BCE (estimated date of Giurgiulesti burial).
Post a Comment