What Are Slavic countries?

[Piro Ilir]

A Serb feels more close with an Albanian, a Romanian, a Greek, rather than with a Russian and an Ukrainian.

 

[Johannes]

No dude, they are not. Around 1/3 are Slavic, and at least 1/3 is good part Slavic. It was a Slavic estate 1000 years ago, and they were assimilated.

Where do you get your "1/3" from???? Is it your usual guess?

 

[Johannes]

A Serb feels more close with an Albanian, a Romanian, a Greek, rather than with a Russian and an Ukrainian.

That is absolutely right: I visited Serbia, Croatia, Romania, and Bulgaria, and the Serbs looked very similar to Greeks, Bulgarians, and Albanians (or even Turks!).

 

[Ike]

So according to you and the other Pole the Slavs were all easily assimilated and everything was all pizzas and cup cakes after that?
I have visited Eastern Germany several times and all eastern Slav countries and I saw that most Germans did not look like Slavs. So if you want to use your imagination, its not going to work.:bored:
Besides we already found out that 10-20% of Eastern Germans R1a does not mean its all Slavic marker! (Tomenble)
Look: lets be honest: Most Eastern Germans do not look like Slavs. OK?

So, why do half of Eastern German cities still have Slavic names?

A Serb feels more close with an Albanian, a Romanian, a Greek, rather than with a Russian and an Ukrainian.

I'm not sure about that. Though, you could get a group of Serbs, Albanians, Romanians, Gerek, Russians and Ukraininas together, and see how they feel.

That is absolutely right: I visited Serbia, Croatia, Romania, and Bulgaria, and the Serbs looked very similar to Greeks, Bulgarians, and Albanians (or even Turks!).

Well that's a tricky matter - how does someone look like. Does Vladimir Klitschko look Slavic to you?

 

[Tomenable]

Johannes,

Modern Northern Slavs are autosomally (whole genome) - as well as in terms of Y-DNA - identical with Corded Ware, Sintashta and Unetice cultures - I have started a thread about this on our forum, and another one on Anthrogenica, people agree:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...ent-IE-samples-compared-to-modern-populations

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ent-IE-samples-compared-to-modern-populations

This shows for example, that RISE431 who lived 4000 years ago in Bruszczewo fortified settlement in Greater Poland, was ancestor of many modern Poles (he had R1a haplogroup of Y-DNA, and autosomally he was identical with modern North Slavs):

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?5237-Proto-Unetice-aDNA

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31514-Proto-Unetice-aDNA

Even Sintashta culture was autosomally identical with modern North Slavs. And Sintashta is considered to be Proto-Indo-Iranian.

Which shows that Proto-Indo-Iranians were identical with Proto-Balto-Slavs, both groups from the same R1a stock.

And modern Northern Slavs are the same as those ancient Proto- groups. Balts are more mixed with Finns.

===========================

As for Bruszczewo - it is 4000 years old and is the oldest fortified town in Central Europe:

"This is the oldest fortified town of this type in our part of Europe. Biskupin was built almost ten centuries later."

RISE431 - who was autosomally and in terms of Y-DNA identical with modern Poles - lived there.

He was buried in Kurgan IV of Łęki Małe kurgan cemetery, 15 km from Bruszczewo (that's where they buried their dead):

http://s12.postimg.org/nraxrr16l/Koscian_area.png

a lot of it was not "Slavic" but IE. Slavs evolved much later

Copper Age and Bronze Age samples from Corded Ware, Unetice and Sintashta are R1a + I2a haplogroups, and autosomally identical with modern Slavs. So modern Northern Slavs = direct descendants of those IE people from Corded Ware, Unetice and Sintashta without any significant autosomal genetic change. Now there is a direct and undeniable proof for this in ancient DNA.

From Unetice culture we now have both R1a and I2a samples.

 

[Tomenable]

Germans or Swedes

You do realize, that Scandinavians and Germans are totally different in terms of haplogroups and autosomal DNA?

Germans are much less Germanic than Scandinavians. Origin of paternal lineages of Germans from Germany:

Germanic IE*---------- 21,8%
TRB hybrid farmers** - 16,0%
======================
Italo-Celtic IE -------- 21,2%
Balto-Slavic IE ------- 16,4%
Neolithic farmers ----- 16,0%
Hunter-gatherers ----- 6,0%
Baltic Finnic ---------- 1,0%
Iranic & Turkic -------- 0,3%
Jewish Levite --------- 0,3%
various other --------- 1,0%

Total ---------------- 100,0%

But let's not forget about:

Maternal lineages: much more mixed.

*Here I included R1b-U106 and its downstream subcaldes, plus R1a-Z284 and its downstream subclades.
**TRB (Funnelbeaker) farmers with I1, were the so-called Pre-Germanic substrate in Scandianvia, check:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...sbandry-in-Sweden-4000-BC?p=465311#post465311

But those farmers lived not just in Scandinavia, and in other places they were absorbed by other IE groups.

 

[Johannes]

So, why do half of Eastern German cities still have Slavic names?

Why do 80% of SW United States towns, cities and counties have Spanish names? The Spanish colonists never reached more than 5-10% of the total population in the SW. The majority were mestizos and Indians. Also why do many cities and states in Mexico have Indian names??? The point is that people who conquer or take over other territories do not like to give new names to cities or geographical locations (they do in some cases but retain the majority of original ones). It's easier for them.

 

[Johannes]

Well that's a tricky matter - how does someone look like. Does Vladimir Klitschko look Slavic to you?

You have a good point. He does not look slavic at all to me. But this is what I asked Tomenable before: What exactly is a Slav? The word "slav" means "glory" or "pure" or "holy". It has nothing to do with race or phenotype. It's a linguistic construct. I have been to all Slavic countries and Ukraine many times and have seen a wide variation of phenotypes. I always thought that ancient Slavs must have looked exactly like Germans or Scandinavians. But they eventually looked "different" because they mixed with Skythians and Turkic-speaking nomads for hundreds of years.

 

[Johannes]

Johannes,

Modern Northern Slavs are autosomally (whole genome) - as well as in terms of Y-DNA - identical with Corded Ware, Sintashta and Unetice cultures - I have started a thread about this on our forum, and another one on Anthrogenica, people agree:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...ent-IE-samples-compared-to-modern-populations

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ent-IE-samples-compared-to-modern-populations

This shows for example, that RISE431 who lived 4000 years ago in Bruszczewo fortified settlement in Greater Poland, was ancestor of many modern Poles (he had R1a haplogroup of Y-DNA, and autosomally he was identical with modern North Slavs):

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?5237-Proto-Unetice-aDNA

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31514-Proto-Unetice-aDNA

Even Sintashta culture was autosomally identical with modern North Slavs. And Sintashta is considered to be Proto-Indo-Iranian.

Which shows that Proto-Indo-Iranians were identical with Proto-Balto-Slavs, both groups from the same R1a stock.

And modern Northern Slavs are the same as those ancient Proto- groups. Balts are more mixed with Finns.

===========================

As for Bruszczewo - it is 4000 years old and is the oldest fortified town in Central Europe:

"This is the oldest fortified town of this type in our part of Europe. Biskupin was built almost ten centuries later."

RISE431 - who was autosomally and in terms of Y-DNA identical with modern Poles - lived there.

He was buried in Kurgan IV of Łęki Małe kurgan cemetery, 15 km from Bruszczewo (that's where they buried their dead):

http://s12.postimg.org/nraxrr16l/Koscian_area.png

Copper Age and Bronze Age samples from Corded Ware, Unetice and Sintashta are R1a + I2a haplogroups, and autosomally identical with modern Slavs. So modern Northern Slavs = direct descendants of those IE people from Corded Ware, Unetice and Sintashta without any significant autosomal genetic change. Now there is a direct and undeniable proof for this in ancient DNA.

From Unetice culture we now have both R1a and I2a samples.

I agree with you. I always thought Corded Ware, Unitice, and Sintashta were the ancestor of Skythians, Balts, and Slavs. But at that time there were no "Skythians" "Balts" or "Slavs." Some migrated west and mixed with I1 and R1b populations and created the Germanics and probably Celts. So I guess if you want to go far back then, yes, that Germanics and Slavs (including the Skythians) were related mostly through R1a. But Slavs at that time must have looked very similar to Germanics. Slavs today are much more mixed.

 

[Johannes]

You do realize, that Scandinavians and Germans are totally different in terms of haplogroups and autosomal DNA?

Germans are much less Germanic than Scandinavians. Origin of paternal lineages of Germans from Germany:

Germanic IE*---------- 21,8%
TRB hybrid farmers** - 16,0%
======================
Italo-Celtic IE -------- 21,2%
Balto-Slavic IE ------- 16,4%
Neolithic farmers ----- 16,0%
Hunter-gatherers ----- 6,0%
Baltic Finnic ---------- 1,0%
Iranic & Turkic -------- 0,3%
Jewish Levite --------- 0,3%
various other --------- 1,0%

Total ---------------- 100,0%

But let's not forget about:

Maternal lineages: much more mixed.

*Here I included R1b-U106 and its downstream subcaldes, plus R1a-Z284 and its downstream subclades.
**TRB (Funnelbeaker) farmers with I1, were the so-called Pre-Germanic substrate in Scandianvia, check:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...sbandry-in-Sweden-4000-BC?p=465311#post465311

But those farmers lived not just in Scandinavia, and in other places they were absorbed by other IE groups.

So what exactly is "Germanic?" I always thought they were roughly 30% I1 and I2, 35-40% R1b, and 20% R1a (the rest Eb1, G, and J1 and J2). What exactly is the "Germanic" marker?

 

[Tomenable]

It has nothing to do with race or phenotype. It's a linguistic construct.

So the same case as Germanic or Celtic.

I have been to all Slavic countries many times and have seen a wide variation of phenotypes.

I've seen a wide variation in Germany too.

because they mixed with Skythians

How Scythians looked is known from their art:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkeWai9hzog

 

[Tomenable]

What exactly is the "Germanic" marker?

Allentoft 2015, "Population genomics of Bronze Age Eurasia", has ancient samples which show Germanic markers.

Here are Germanic markers (from the Nordic Bronze Age - i.e. the culture from which Germanic people emerged):

Individual RISE61 who lived around 2650-2300 BC - R1a1a1b1a3 (Z284 branch of R1a)
Individual RISE98 who lived around 2275-2032 BC - R1b1a2a1a1 (U106 branch of R1b)

Those guys belonged to that branch of Proto-Indo-Europeans, which spoke the most ancestral form of Germanic.

Additionally, in Scandinavia they absorbed the northern group of TRB farmers which was apparently very rich in I1 haplogroup due to some founder effect. Those TRB farmers of I1 haplogroup were originally Non-Indo-European but contributed some 30% of vocabulary to Proto-Germanic, and caused the first sound shift of Grimm's Law, according to the Pre-Germanic substrate hypothesis:

The non-Indo-European substrate hypothesis attempts to explain the anomalous features of proto-Germanic as a result of creolization between an Indo-European and a non-Indo-European language. Germanicist John A. Hawkins sets forth the arguments for a Germanic substrate. Hawkins argues that the proto-Germans encountered a non-Indo-European speaking people and borrowed many features from their language. He hypothesizes that the first sound shift of Grimm's Law was the result of non-native speakers attempting to pronounce Indo-European sounds, and that they resorted to the closest sounds in their own language in their attempt to pronounce them.

 

[arvistro]

30% of non-IE lexicon in Germanics..
I was fascinated by the idea initially (I.e. a way to find language my pre-IE ancestors spoke), but after reading more it does not look so strong since most of allegedly non-IE terms could be explained from IE.

 

[Ike]

Why do 80% of SW United States towns, cities and counties have Spanish names? The Spanish colonists never reached more than 5-10% of the total population in the SW. The majority were mestizos and Indians. Also why do many cities and states in Mexico have Indian names??? The point is that people who conquer or take over other territories do not like to give new names to cities or geographical locations (they do in some cases but retain the majority of original ones). It's easier for them.

Yes, but they didn't conquer it in Conan Barbarian way. They assimilated them. You can read more about history of those areas here:
http://de-construct.net/e-zine/?p=5447

You have a good point. He does not look slavic at all to me. But this is what I asked Tomenable before: What exactly is a Slav? The word "slav" means "glory" or "pure" or "holy". It has nothing to do with race or phenotype. It's a linguistic construct. I have been to all Slavic countries and Ukraine many times and have seen a wide variation of phenotypes. I always thought that ancient Slavs must have looked exactly like Germans or Scandinavians. But they eventually looked "different" because they mixed with Skythians and Turkic-speaking nomads for hundreds of years.

Well he looks very Yugoslavic to me

By now it looks like it is a linguistic construct, but before people had motorized transportation, it was a time when language, ethnicity, blood, cultural phenomena, etc, were highly related.

Well, they probably did mix, just like most of other people (except for the isolates). Mixing helps refresh the DNA, and it's even desirable in a small amounts. Considering phenotype, do we have studies that confirm how does latitude makes impact on the same people after many generations?

 

[Piro Ilir]

So, why do half of Eastern German cities still have Slavic names?




I'm not sure about that. Though, you could get a group of Serbs, Albanians, Romanians, Gerek, Russians and Ukraininas together, and see how they feel.


Well that's a tricky matter - how does someone look like. Does Vladimir Klitschko look Slavic to you?

If they don't know their ethnic origins of each other, you see that all the balkanics people could feel comfortable with each other. If they talking in English. Slavs become disappear before 1000 years. What has in common a Russian with a Serb? They are quite strangers to each other.

 

[Johannes]

So the same case as Germanic or Celtic.

I've seen a wide variation in Germany too.

How Scythians looked is known from their art:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkeWai9hzog

Yes I've seen this video. Skythians looked very "Nordic" according to their art and also ancient sources. For example, Herodotus stated that they all had "fair hair" or "red hair" and "blue eyes." The Corded Ware (I am not sure about Unitice and Sintashta) people might have been the ones who lightened the Germanics and Celts. Who knows? But you need to remember that Skythians changed dramatically after 3rd century BCE. They expanded all the way to China and Mongolia. After they reached the borders of China and Mongolia they mixed with Mongoloid peoples. This created the Saka or Eastern Skythians who eventually adopted Turkish language and became "Tatars", Pechenegs", "Cumans", "Huns", Alans, Khazars, etc. So I think the reason why Russians and Ukrainians (and maybe Poles and Slovaks) have an "exotic" look is because of their mixture with these Asiatic nomads. Also R1a was carried back to eastern Europe by the Turkish-speaking nomads.

 

[Johannes]

Allentoft 2015, "Population genomics of Bronze Age Eurasia", has ancient samples which show Germanic markers.

Here are Germanic markers (from the Nordic Bronze Age - i.e. the culture from which Germanic people emerged):

Individual RISE61 who lived around 2650-2300 BC - R1a1a1b1a3 (Z284 branch of R1a)
Individual RISE98 who lived around 2275-2032 BC - R1b1a2a1a1 (U106 branch of R1b)

Those guys belonged to that branch of Proto-Indo-Europeans, which spoke the most ancestral form of Germanic.

Additionally, in Scandinavia they absorbed the northern group of TRB farmers which was apparently very rich in I1 haplogroup due to some founder effect. Those TRB farmers of I1 haplogroup were originally Non-Indo-European but contributed some 30% of vocabulary to Proto-Germanic, and caused the first sound shift of Grimm's Law, according to the Pre-Germanic substrate hypothesis:

So it means that modern Germans are 50-60% "Germanic" due to their R1a (Z284) and R1b (U106)?? Is R1a (Z284) a "Slavic" marker that was absorbed by proto-Germanics??? Where the original Germanics R1b or R1a??? Or if we take into account the "Slavic" marker, it would reduce it to 30-40%??

 

[Tomenable]

Scythians did not expand to the east into Mongolia. They actually CAME from the east, expanding west into Ukraine:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...a-surprising-pattern-unlike-modern-day-clines

According to what FireHaired / Krefter posted, 90% of R1b Yamnaya people had brown eyes, vast majority also had dark brown and black hair. But pigmentation of R1a in the Eastern Steppe (to the east of Yamnaya people) was much lighter - mostly fair hair and light eyes.

Scythians lived there much earlier than the 3rd century BC - here are all the dates (all of them in BC, unless stated that in AD):

 

[Johannes]

Yes, but they didn't conquer it in Conan Barbarian way. They assimilated them. You can read more about history of those areas here:
http://de-construct.net/e-zine/?p=5447

Wrong: in the beginning the Spanish Conquistadors wanted to exterminate (sorry -- ethnically cleanse) the Indians but the Church and HRE stopped them. In fact The Spanish destroyed the whole culture of the Indians. ONLY after that did the Spanish start to assimilate the Indians (using mestizos as agents). BUT it was a slow and very difficult process which took 500 years to resolve. You think that conquerors and conquered are so easily assimilated? It's a romantic notion of history.

 

[Tomenable]

So it means that modern Germans are 50-60% "Germanic" due to their R1a (Z284) and R1b (U106)

Only 20,9% of all Germans have R1b-U106 and only 0,9% have R1a-Z284 - in total 21,8% - slightly more than 1/5.