Eupedia Map of Slavic Y-DNA

[Jana]

Lol oops. Does yfull upload ancient samples they have full data to? would be nice to see how we all branch from them in our respective lineages.

I don't know that :)

[Fieraru]

in the times he talks about Romanians were actually there in Aromanian territory, where they came from to the future territory of Romania. Balkanic Vlachs came to Romania about 12th-14th century AD and then gradually assimilated the local Slavs, Magyars, Cumans, Germanics etc to this day

Are you fucking kidding me???! In addition to what you said earlier, it is clear you have an agenda to make our history and identity into a joke. Idiot. Now you bring this Hungarian propaganda migration nonsense! Magyars there first??? What a lie and a joke. You have no right to live there and your people have probably contributed nothing to our country. Most of you Ukrainians or Hungarians or whatever you are have no personality and as are as cold as dead fish, and are at odds with the rest of us. Why is your name eskimo because you look like a blond eskimo with a upturned short nose and round high cheek face or something hahaha

If you say we came from down there then why don't you go back to the Urals or Siberia or Pripyat swamps or whatever

We have been there since prehistoric times asshole; the core of Romanians are a very ancient population, even if a little weird stuff was added later. Hai sictir, si du-te dracu!

We know what we are and don't need foreigners making up theories about us.

[Dibran]

Are you fucking kidding me???! In addition to what you said earlier, it is clear you have an agenda to make our history and identity into a joke. Idiot. Now you bring this Hungarian propaganda migration nonsense! Magyars there first??? What a lie and a joke. You have no right to live there and your people have probably contributed nothing to our country. Most of you Ukrainians or Hungarians or whatever you are have no personality and as are as cold as dead fish, and are at odds with the rest of us. Why is your name eskimo because you look like a blond eskimo with a upturned short nose and round high cheek face or something hahaha

If you say we came from down there then why don't you go back to the Urals or Siberia or Pripyat swamps or whatever

We have been there since prehistoric times asshole; the core of Romanians are a very ancient population, even if a little weird stuff was added later. Hai sictir, si du-te dracu!

We know what we are and don't need foreigners making up theories about us.

I never heard of Romanians originating from Aromanians. Rather Aromanians originate from Romania migrating to the Southern Balkans in the 12th-14th Century. Don't pay him any mind.

[Dick]

Lol oops. Does yfull upload ancient samples they have full data to? would be nice to see how we all branch from them in our respective lineages.

No but you should emaIl them. I think it’s a Russian that owns yfull. I wonder if that would change subclades and find new snps

[Pubiczar]

I never heard of Romanians originating from Aromanians. Rather Aromanians originate from Romania migrating to the Southern Balkans in the 12th-14th Century. Don't pay him any mind.

You are wrong mate...
The Aromanians were first attested in the 10th century as witnessed by a Byzantine account in which some Aromanians living around Prespa lake, have killed David, Samuel's brother, czar of the First Bulgarian Empire.
In fact, there was a migration from South Balkan to present day Valachia in Romania in late Medieval.

[Dibran]

No but you should emaIl them. I think it’s a Russian that owns yfull. I wonder if that would change subclades and find new snps

Yes it is a Russian guy. I have emailed him in the past with no response. I imagine hes super busy. There was a new I2a1b branch discovered in a Greek that splits CTS10228 it appears that Greek cluster A2512 actually descends from the new branch. But yfull doesn't reflect this. Not yet anyway. It was a Big Y test https://i2aproject.blogspot.com/2018/06/a-second-i-s20602-sample-and-greek.html

[Nurzat]

Are you fucking kidding me???! In addition to what you said earlier, it is clear you have an agenda to make our history and identity into a joke. Idiot. Now you bring this Hungarian propaganda migration nonsense! Magyars there first??? What a lie and a joke. You have no right to live there and your people have probably contributed nothing to our country. Most of you Ukrainians or Hungarians or whatever you are have no personality and as are as cold as dead fish, and are at odds with the rest of us. Why is your name eskimo because you look like a blond eskimo with a upturned short nose and round high cheek face or something hahaha

If you say we came from down there then why don't you go back to the Urals or Siberia or Pripyat swamps or whatever

We have been there since prehistoric times asshole; the core of Romanians are a very ancient population, even if a little weird stuff was added later. Hai sictir, si du-te dracu!

We know what we are and don't need foreigners making up theories about us.

Banat - Vlachs, Romanianized Serbs, Roma
Oltenia - true Vlachs/Romanians and Roma
Wallachia - Vlachs, Romanianized Cumans/Pechenegs, Roma
Dobrudja - Tatars, Russian Lipovans, Ukrainian Hohols (Romanians were brought after the Balkanic wars when Romania stole it from Turkey/Bulgaria to replace the native Bulgarians especially)
Moldova - Hungarian Csangos, Romanianized Cumans, Ruthenian Ukrainians, Lipovans, Vlachized East Slavs and Vlachized Goths
Bucovina - native are only the Ukrainians, Poles and Germans (the Romanians were brought after WW1 and especially during communism, from Moldova and Transylvania especially)
Maramureș - Ruthenian Ukrainians, Hungarians and Vlachs
Szekely Land (Székelyföld) - Szekler Hungarians
Transylvania - Vlachs, Germans, Roma and Hungarians

as you can see Romanians are very recent, a matter of decades, in most of the country (except the southwest, which is Vlach since the Middle Ages, I agree).

see Politics on my profile:

PRO immigration & LGBT rights
ANTI nationalism, religion & tradition

[Tommie]

So much nonsense in this thread...



it's also the way of life, Romanians and Russians resemble a lot in drunkard contemporary customs / housing / how they interact / violence / cityscapes etc

and there are a lot of native Slavs (Rusyns, Hutsuls, Hohols and Lipovans) with their compact zones in Romania (like me)

I think Romanians are much closer to Russians than to Croats for example from a lot of points of view, then a Russian and a Bulgarian don't understand each other anyway, so Slavicness of the language is only a face of the cubicle


in the times he talks about Romanians were actually there in Aromanian territory, where they came from to the future territory of Romania. Balkanic Vlachs came to Romania about 12th-14th century AD and then gradually assimilated the local Slavs, Magyars, Cumans, Germanics etc to this day
I can't believe what am I reading :picard2:
Bro, are you for real?

[Nurzat]

So much nonsense in this thread...

I can't believe what am I reading :picard2:
Bro, are you for real?

genetics concur with historical facts - Moldovans and northern Transylvanians cluster away from southern Romanians. we all have Vlach ancestry, but it gets weaker and weaker as you go North and East, because the Vlach invasion came through southwest Romania. another fact is Romania denationalized various native populations only recently, in the past century

[Sandman]

https://i.imgur.com/EoaYHtI.png

This map clearly shows that the Slavs are the most territorially expansive linguistic group in Europe. Probably more than 60 percent of Europe is populated by Slavic speaking people.

[ovidiu]

Banat - Vlachs, Romanianized Serbs, Roma
Oltenia - true Vlachs/Romanians and Roma
Wallachia - Vlachs, Romanianized Cumans/Pechenegs, Roma
Dobrudja - Tatars, Russian Lipovans, Ukrainian Hohols (Romanians were brought after the Balkanic wars when Romania stole it from Turkey/Bulgaria to replace the native Bulgarians especially)
Moldova - Hungarian Csangos, Romanianized Cumans, Ruthenian Ukrainians, Lipovans, Vlachized East Slavs and Vlachized Goths
Bucovina - native are only the Ukrainians, Poles and Germans (the Romanians were brought after WW1 and especially during communism, from Moldova and Transylvania especially)
Maramureș - Ruthenian Ukrainians, Hungarians and Vlachs
Szekely Land (Székelyföld) - Szekler Hungarians
Transylvania - Vlachs, Germans, Roma and Hungarians

as you can see Romanians are very recent, a matter of decades, in most of the country (except the southwest, which is Vlach since the Middle Ages, I agree).

see Politics on my profile:

PRO immigration & LGBT rights
ANTI nationalism, religion & tradition

Honestly, people may get mad for me saying this, but I don't think that's the worst assessment I've seen. Some things are a bit exaggerated and some are glossed over, but that did involve more detail than most usually care to give when describing the country and its population (most just say 'Romanians' as a whole and make broad blanket statements about the entire population as if it is not diverse lol- as in they meet a few people and think they represent everyone). I won't go as far as giving it a thumbs up though...

I always thought Bucovinans and most Moldovans had a more unique, eastern-leaning look. Maramures on the other hand does have a little of more actual core "Romanian"/Vlach input I think, among other things there, even as a whole they tend to look rather northern leaning or Central Euro. Szekely Land as you said was mostly historically occupied by that group. Moldova surely has some Vlach input but yeah not as much as Wallachia of course. It was only colonized by Romanian speakers in the 13th century or so (the legend of prince Dragos and his hound).

Maybe a bit too much emphasis on the Roma in each region. I mean okay, they're certainly present, but until the last half century or so they largely kept to themselves and rarely mixed in with or affected the larger population around them. Only especially after the fall of Communism did they really seem to come out and start becoming more prominent in the country as a whole. I won't go as far as saying "integrated", but many have done so in recent decades, far more than say back in the 1930s or 40s. There is also the unfortunate manele subculture that arose as a result.

Regarding the Cumans/Pechenegs, yeah some likely did get assimilated and absorbed into the population in the Middle Ages, but they obviously didn't make that much of an impact; maybe around 5% of people show noticeable Turanid influenced traits, and those in certain regions, mostly outside of Transylvania. When you look at historical maps of the region in the past, which focus on the political divisions, you could mistakenly get the impression that these countries should turn out looking like the Central Asian -stan countries lol, based on the elite/political dominance of tribes like Cumans, Avars, Bulgars, etc. But in reality these were just the ones in charge of the lands at those times, and didn't represent the majority of the population at all. They never seem to put Vlach labels on historical maps until they were definitively attested in historical chronicles around the 12th century or so, even though many were surely there under the dominance of these eastern folk. The Turanid influence is kind of like how some white Americans have Native American from way back.

I tend to disagree regarding Dobrogea, unless I misunderstood what you said. Today the population is certainly not only Tatars, Russian Lipovans, and Ukrainian Hohols, and these are minorities, at least today. Otherwise it would look quite different. Most people in that region are strongly Pontic Med and among the most brunet/swarthy, or at least often have a distinct southeast Euro appearance, and can overlap with even western Anatolians. I don't know if this is because of migration from Wallachia/Muntenia, or leftover Greek influence from ancient times when they had colonies there, or something else. There were also in the past Turks there as a minority (the only place they really settled in the country), some Bulgarians, some Aromanians and Greeks also settled in the port cities and were involved as merchants.

I guess to make a rough analogy, Vlachs are in a way like the Anglo element in what eventually became the American melting pot. The core group that formed the basis for the population, culture, and language of the country after assimilating other groups. Although of course Vlachs would make up a much higher percentage of the population than what English-Americans represent today (I think they're only around 11-12% or something; maybe comparison to America in 1850 would be a better one); I'd say at least half the population overall, with a strong majority in some regions. And the countries evolved quite differently of course.

[Dibran]

You are wrong mate...
The Aromanians were first attested in the 10th century as witnessed by a Byzantine account in which some Aromanians living around Prespa lake, have killed David, Samuel's brother, czar of the First Bulgarian Empire.
In fact, there was a migration from South Balkan to present day Valachia in Romania in late Medieval.

You seem to forget how wide spread Vlachs were and the numerous back and forth migrations. Some historical records contradict your claims such as the Gesta Hungarorum.

The Gesta Hungarorum from around 1150 or 1200 is the first chronicle to write of Vlachs in the intra-Carpathian regions. Its anonymous author stated that the Hungarians encountered "Slavs, Bulgarians, Vlachs, and the shepherds of the Romans" when invading the Carpathian Basin around 895. He also wrote of Gelou, "a certain Vlach" ruling Transylvania, a land inhabited by "Vlachs and Slavs".

Theres also accounts suggesting Vlachs joined the moving Baiounitai in their raids that sacked Greece.

Vlachs were already scattered in the Balkans with some accounts mentioning some groups migrating to what is today Romania, where other Vlachs along with Slavs were.

Also the migration of Romanians to their present location was posited by Hungary and is not given much credence or support. Still remains a theory.

[Pribislav]

Migration of Vlachs from Epirus, Thessaly, Macedonia and Bulgaria to present day Romania in the late middle age was happened.
There was no any Latin speaking population in the present day Romania before 12th century. Some Vlach groups from the south arrived to Carpathians before 12th century, but they arrived as sheperds because of the cattle grazing, and returned to Pindus and Rhodope. Vlach colonozation of present day Romania started in 12th century.
Latin speaking ancestors of Romanians were not romanized in Dacia, they were romanized south of Danube river.
Vlachs which settle to present day romania in the late middle age mixed with Slavs, Cumans and Pechenegs and on that way Romanian nation was born.
Vlachs which arrived to modern Romania from south in late middle age were something like Aromanians (before mixing with Slavs and Turkic people).

[Jana]

I am currently in Transylvania, passed all of it by car and staying for few more days.

Romanians don't look Slavic at all. Tiny minority that does resemble East Slavs.

[Hudayar]

Maciamo made a new map, what do you think about it?:

https://www.eupedia.com/europe/maps_Y-DNA_haplogroups.shtml#Slavic

https://i.imgur.com/EoaYHtI.png

There's no study about Turks in Turkish Thrace. Maciamo's source is again his ass i guess.

[Pribislav]

I am currently in Transylvania, passed all of it by car and staying for few more days.

Romanians don't look Slavic at all. Tiny minority that does resemble East Slavs.

I2a1b and vast majority of R1a are Slavic influence among Romanians. I2a1b and R1a are 2 strongest Romanian haplogroups.
I2a1b and R1a as strongest among Romanians are probably results of hot spot. Romanians realy don't look Slavic on average, you are right about that. I have seen a lot of Romanians (from Romania) in Pančevo where they arrived as merchants. I also know how look Vlachs from eastern Serbia (they arrived from Romania in 18th century). Only few of them look Slavic. Most of them have unike look which is different than any other population.

[Tommie]

Honestly, people may get mad for me saying this, but I don't think that's the worst assessment I've seen. Some things are a bit exaggerated and some are glossed over, but that did involve more detail than most usually care to give when describing the country and its population (most just say 'Romanians' as a whole and make broad blanket statements about the entire population as if it is not diverse lol- as in they meet a few people and think they represent everyone). I won't go as far as giving it a thumbs up though...

I always thought Bucovinans and most Moldovans had a more unique, eastern-leaning look. Maramures on the other hand does have a little of more actual core "Romanian"/Vlach input I think, among other things there, even as a whole they tend to look rather northern leaning or Central Euro. Szekely Land as you said was mostly historically occupied by that group. Moldova surely has some Vlach input but yeah not as much as Wallachia of course. It was only colonized by Romanian speakers in the 13th century or so (the legend of prince Dragos and his hound).

Maybe a bit too much emphasis on the Roma in each region. I mean okay, they're certainly present, but until the last half century or so they largely kept to themselves and rarely mixed in with or affected the larger population around them. Only especially after the fall of Communism did they really seem to come out and start becoming more prominent in the country as a whole. I won't go as far as saying "integrated", but many have done so in recent decades, far more than say back in the 1930s or 40s. There is also the unfortunate manele subculture that arose as a result.

Regarding the Cumans/Pechenegs, yeah some likely did get assimilated and absorbed into the population in the Middle Ages, but they obviously didn't make that much of an impact; maybe around 5% of people show noticeable Turanid influenced traits, and those in certain regions, mostly outside of Transylvania. When you look at historical maps of the region in the past, which focus on the political divisions, you could mistakenly get the impression that these countries should turn out looking like the Central Asian -stan countries lol, based on the elite/political dominance of tribes like Cumans, Avars, Bulgars, etc. But in reality these were just the ones in charge of the lands at those times, and didn't represent the majority of the population at all. They never seem to put Vlach labels on historical maps until they were definitively attested in historical chronicles around the 12th century or so, even though many were surely there under the dominance of these eastern folk. The Turanid influence is kind of like how some white Americans have Native American from way back.

I tend to disagree regarding Dobrogea, unless I misunderstood what you said. Today the population is certainly not only Tatars, Russian Lipovans, and Ukrainian Hohols, and these are minorities, at least today. Otherwise it would look quite different. Most people in that region are strongly Pontic Med and among the most brunet/swarthy, or at least often have a distinct southeast Euro appearance, and can overlap with even western Anatolians. I don't know if this is because of migration from Wallachia/Muntenia, or leftover Greek influence from ancient times when they had colonies there, or something else. There were also in the past Turks there as a minority (the only place they really settled in the country), some Bulgarians, some Aromanians and Greeks also settled in the port cities and were involved as merchants.

I guess to make a rough analogy, Vlachs are in a way like the Anglo element in what eventually became the American melting pot. The core group that formed the basis for the population, culture, and language of the country after assimilating other groups. Although of course Vlachs would make up a much higher percentage of the population than what English-Americans represent today (I think they're only around 11-12% or something; maybe comparison to America in 1850 would be a better one); I'd say at least half the population overall, with a strong majority in some regions. And the countries evolved quite differently of course.

I have agreed with many of Eskimo's posts in the past, but not this time. I have a feeling that he was just trolling and I personally wouldn't have given attention to this post. People, unfortunately, are always trying to manipulate our history and identity, and they probably won't stop too soon. And I am far from being a nationalist. An example of a nonsense that he wrote there was that Romanians are very recent in most of the country :lol:




Migration of Vlachs from Epirus, Thessaly, Macedonia and Bulgaria to present day Romania in the late middle age was happened.
There was no any Latin speaking population in the present day Romania before 12th century. Some Vlach groups from the south arrived to Carpathians before 12th century, but they arrived as sheperds because of the cattle grazing, and returned to Pindus and Rhodope. Vlach colonozation of present day Romania started in 12th century.
Latin speaking ancestors of Romanians were not romanized in Dacia, they were romanized south of Danube river.
Vlachs which settle to present day romania in the late middle age mixed with Slavs, Cumans and Pechenegs and on that way Romanian nation was born.
Vlachs which arrived to modern Romania from south in late middle age were something like Aromanians (before mixing with Slavs and Turkic people).


The core ethnogenesis of Romanians took place North of Danube, in Transylvania, not South of Danube. I invite you and anyone else to google for evidences that support this, there are MULTIPLE of them.




I2a1b and vast majority of R1a are Slavic influence among Romanians. I2a1b and R1a are 2 strongest Romanian haplogroups.
I2a1b and R1a as strongest among Romanians are probably results of hot spot. Romanians realy don't look Slavic on average, you are right about that. I have seen a lot of Romanians (from Romania) in Pančevo where they arrived as merchants. I also know how look Vlachs from eastern Serbia (they arrived from Romania in 18th century). Only few of them look Slavic. Most of them have unike look which is different than any other population.

Yeah, sure, they look like Martians :rolleyes2:

[Parapoliticos]

the idea that all east European , which am guessing he means having one of the R1A haplotypes, influences in Europe nations came from Slavs in the last 1500 years is simply silly.

[Peterski]

the idea that all east European , which am guessing he means having one of the R1A haplotypes, influences in Europe nations came from Slavs in the last 1500 years is simply silly.

Slavs are more ancient than 1500 years of course, just nobody (among literate civilizations) heard about them before that.

[Parapoliticos]

Slavs are more ancient than 1500 years of course, just nobody (among literate civilizations) heard about them before that.
yes but slavic migrations started at that time.
R1A isnt slavic, I2 isn't Slavic either.
Both predate Slavs, as a cultural ethnic linguistic communities, by more than 20 000 years. Furthermore by the time of their ethnogenesis the population of most European nations( if not all) was already massively diverse. These kind of equations are plainly stupid. R1a was carried in the four corners of the world, from china to India to the Balkans and Iran /Anatolia, before even the protoindoeuropean language was formalized.

[Gallop]

As for Spain, it seems strange to me that it is found only in the Cantabrian area if it was recently known about the North-South gene flow during the reconquest and repopulation.

And likewise to the arrival of the Almorávides 500,000 natives of the south. Hispano-Romans, Hispano-Goths, e.T.C. they had moved to the north of Spain creating an overpopulation and remaining in the north of Spain for 800 years. If there have been these comings and goings I find the map strange in Spain.

https://i.imgur.com/EoaYHtI.png

https://www.elcorreogallego.es/img/noticias/20190201/fotonoticia201902011259311920_883153_manual.jpg