No, nothing... except R1a in India.Quote:
Originally Posted by ButlerKing
Printable View
No, nothing... except R1a in India.Quote:
Originally Posted by ButlerKing
Most importantly, royalty was R1a.Quote:
Originally Posted by Harkonnen
Around 1% is more punctual. The spread of the N between the conquest age Magyars were also not neccesary significant! Some rich burial is not a statistically relevant population sample! Especially, since the noblemes were much more metised between the Magyars! And the Magyar conquerors were a very mixed population from the steppe, look at the I2a guardsmens besides the presumably Sargat origin R1b aristocrats! Who were these guys?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlatko Vukovic
Anyway, proto-Magyars from the Cherkaskul/Mezhovka culture:
YDNA: 50/50% R1a1a1(Z283)/R1b1a2
mtDNA: 33/33/33% I5/J2/M1
source: Population genomics of Bronze Age Eurasia
Slavs! They were dinaric I2a types (one south, one north) :)Quote:
Originally Posted by blogen
InterestingQuote:
Anyway, proto-Magyars from the Cherkaskul/Mezhovka culture:
YDNA: 50/50% R1a1a1(Z283)/R1b1a2
mtDNA: 33/33/33% I5/J2/M1
source: Population genomics of Bronze Age Eurasia
Slavic warriors (sic!) in the elite horse guards of the Hungarian grand princes/princes? Not so likely explanation!Quote:
Originally Posted by Stearsolina
Anyway, all of the burials were culturally Magyars in Karos-Eperjesszög. But maybe some of them had different origin with some generation before!
Why not ? some people think I2-dinaric east germanic marker, but....(I not think so)Quote:
Originally Posted by blogen
PS Horthy Miklos was I2a dinaric -north :P
R1a being royalty is not important what's important is the racial type they belong to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
No that's not important. For example a lot of African-Americans are R1, but their R1 is not from Africa.Quote:
Originally Posted by ButlerKing
There are even Australoids with R1b and with I1:
http://i.imgur.com/vOYzhJl.png
how that possible ? :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski