Bulgarians 40% Slav on average

[Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić]

This Vlach keeps bitching about Dacian I2-dinaric but never presented any kind of evidence while he was given medieval Slav I2-din sample sand lot of scientific facts like lack of diversity in south slavs. It's getting fucking annyoing already.

[Peterski]

Slavic invasion of the Balkans was brutal by our modern standards, but back in the 500s Slavs were actually known for being kinder to their enemies than most of other barbarians of that time.

Maurice, "Strategikon", 11, 4:

"The Sclavenes and the Antes live in the same way and have the same customs. They are both independent, absolutely refusing to be enslaved or ruled by foreigners, least of all in their own land. They are populous and hardy, bearing readily heat, cold, rain, nakedness, and scarcity of provisions. They are kind and hospitable to travellers in their country and conduct them safely from one place to another, wherever they wish. (...) They, unlike other peoples, do not keep those who are in captivity among them in perpetual slavery, but they set a definite period of time for them, after which they give them the choice: either, when they so desire, to return to their own homes if they purchase their freedom, or to stay among them as free people and friends."

^^^
This explains why Slavs were successful in assimilating native Balkan people. Meanwhile, Germanic barbarians failed to assimilate the locals nearly everywhere, except England.

[Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić]

There is nothing to prove that. We already had this discussion.

There is. there are I2-din medieval Polish and Russian samples who are fully Slav. And the fact that in huge Balkan ydna ancient study no I2- din was found, only I2a2

Get over it already.

the most recent research by O.M. Utevska (2017) found the haplogroups STR haplotypes have the highest diversity in Ukraine, with ancestral STR marker result "DYS448=20" comprising "Dnieper-Carpathian" cluster, while younger derived result "DYS448=19" comprising the "Balkan cluster" which is predominant among the South Slavs. The clusters divergence and gradual expansion from the Carpathians in the direction of the Balkan peninsula happened approximately 2,860 ± 730 years ago, coinciding with the Slavic migration. The lack of diversity of "DYS448=19" haplotypes in the Western Balkan also indicate a founder effect.

[ixulescu]

Slavic colonisation of Balkans was brutal, read Greek and Roman sources and come to terms with reality. I don't care anyway dude, my y dna is Germanic and has nothing to do with Slavs.
For ethnogenesis of Bulgarians I agree.

I don't know about the Balkans but in Romania Slavs were peaceful and migrated with lots of cows. There was no conflict between locals and newly arrived Slavs. They mixed from the beginning.

[Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić]

Procopius:

“(…) In Illyria and Thracia, from the Ionian Gulf to Byzantine surrounding cities, where Hellas and Chersonese regions are situated, (…) the Sclavenes and the Antes, penetrating practically every year since Justinian administering the Roman Empire, were inflicting irreversible damage to their inhabitants. In each invasion I estimate 200,000 Romans were either took as prisoners or killed (…)”

“(…) These people, as we started to say at the beginning of our account or catalogue of nations, though off-shoots from one stock, have now three names, that is, Venedi, Antes and Sclaveni. (…) they now rage in war far and wide, in punishment for our sins (…) Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes. (…)” ~ Jordanes about the three branches of early Slavic peoples.

John of Ephesus:

“(…) In third year after the death of Emperor Justin, during the reign of victorious Tiberius, the damned nation of the Slavs has risen, and marching through entire Hellas, through lands of Thessaly and Thrace, captured many cities and strongholds, plundered, burned and robbed, seized the land and settled there with full ease, without fear, like in their own land. (…) they were plundering the country, burning it and robbing, as far as the Great Walls [of Constantinople], and this is how they captured many thousands of cattle, as well as many other kinds of booty. (…) Until today, that is until year 584, they still continue to live in peace in lands of the Rhomaioi, without fear and concern, plundering, enslaving and burning, getting rich and highjacking gold and silver, capturing horses and plenty of weapons; and they have learned to fight better than the Rhomaioi. (…)”

[Ayetooey]

What happened was that former Yugos still have to come to terms with the fact that only part of I2a Din is Slavic.

All of I2a Din (North and South) is slavic and descends from the Polish/Belarus/Ukrainian triangle region. The only I2a in a Balkan context which isn't Slavic is I2a2 and I2a1a, the former is rare and usually found in south Albania and Greece only, the latter is Sardinian. The TMRCA values have long connected I2a-Din to the slavic migrations, and the direct ancestral clade of I2a has been found in Sweden and Norway. Nothing southern genetically about it as a Y dna. If you want to argue against well established science that's your decision, but don't act like your opinion is anything more than a unfounded conspiracy at this point.

[Ayetooey]

People often forget that while by percent I2a-din is highest in the Balkans, by shear numbers I2a Din in North Slavs dwarfs South Slavs. Anywayz copypasta.

"Nowadays, I2a1 is five to ten times more common than G2a in Southeast Europe, while during the Neolithic period G2a was approximately four times more common. What can explain this complete reversal? At one point in history, I2a1 lineages seem to have benefited from being on the winning side. Apart from a minor boost from (hypothetically) joining Yamna's westward expansion to Europe, the principal determining event that allowed I2a1b-L621 to become a major Eastern European lineage was probably the Slavic migrations from the 6th to the 9th century CE. Most modern Eastern Europeans belonging to I2a1b fit into the L147.2 (aka CTS10228, CTS2180 or Y3111) subclade, which is thought to have arisen 5,600 years ago (just before the Yamna period and the Trypillian expansion into the steppe), but has a TMRCA of only 2,300 years according to Yfull. The minority of I2a1b-L621 individuals negative for L147.2 are all found around eastern Poland, Belarus and western Ukraine, suggesting that this is where this lineage survived since the Chalcolithic. The I2a1b-L147.2 subclade seems to have expanded very fast from 1900 years ago, which is concordant with the timing of the Slavic ethnogenesis, considering that it takes a few centuries before one man can have enough male descendants to start having an impact at the scale of a population. This I2-L147.2 ancestor would have such an impact on the burgeoning Early Slavic population, still small 2,300 years ago, but booming.

After the Germanic tribes living in eastern Germany and Poland, like the Goths, the Vandals and the Burgundians, invaded the Roman Empire, the Slavs living further east filled the vacuum. Following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in 476, the Slavs moved in the Dinaric Alps and the Balkans. By the 9th century, the Slavs occupied all modern Slavic-speaking territories, apart from the eastern Balkans under the control of the Turkic-speaking Bulgars.

Nowadays northern Slavic countries have between 9% (Poland, Czech republic) and 21% (Ukraine) of I2a-L621, while southern Slavs have between 20% (Bulgaria) and 50% (Bosnia). The higher percentage of I2a-Din in the south is probably just due to another founder effect due to the fact that the South Slavs originated in western Ukraine, where the ratio of I2a to R1a was higher. Virtually all Dinaric I2a falls under the L147.2 branch, and the majority to the S17250 ramification, who descend from a common patrilinear ancestor who lived only 1,800 years ago."

[Mingle]

They speak a Germanic language then. No one would say they're Germanic. English is an ethnicity and a language. Slavic may not be an "ethnicity" but at some point it was, one that migrated out of one small area in the Middle-Ages and spread to non-Slavic speaking areas(ie Bulgaria), forcing their language on the locals and intermixing. Are Siberians Slavic then? Chechens?

I understand what you're saying but the whole linguistic family identity thing was just brought up to create semblance of unity in movements like pan-Slavism and pan-Germanicism which were pretty much just power grabs, it's really meaningless. You really think the average person would care more about how close someone's language is than how closely related in ancestry another population is to them(and how similar a population looks to one another)? Spanish speaking Amerindians rightfully identify more with other Amerindians than Latins in Europe.

I just assumed they moved down the Black Sea coast at the same time other Slavic groups moved west, not west first then south. That's the best fit so far so you might be onto something, and yeah Scythian_Moldova has 2 Slavic or Corded Ware-like outliers, the rest are typical exotic Scythians like Scythian_Moldova192 or 197. Using the average vs a typical Scythian decreases the amount of modern Slav/medieval Bohemia.

There was a period where Central-East Europe and Eastern Europe proper were Slavic but the Balkans still spoke Paleo-Balkan languages. Slavs from Central Europe later settled the Balkans with the latest migrants arriving in Thrace.

I don't know why I didn't think of this earlier, but if the Moldova Scythian is heavily Slavic-admixed (even the exotic ones are to a large degree), then I may as well just use another Scythian sample. Also, I used a 15% filter here and it managed to filter out some outliers and improve the fit.

(Reminder that Poles are not pure Slavic)

Fit	0.7754
Balkans IA	26.67
Greek Central Anatolia	20.83
Polish	51.67
Scythian Pazyryk	0.83

---

When trying "Saltovo-Mayaki" instead of "Scythian Pazyryk" then it becomes 0 and the overall fit is 0.8706.

Saltovo-Mayaki is probably the closest we have to an Old Bulgar sample and the Old Bulgars were probably genetically the same as this. A bit of info about Saltovo-Mayaki:

Saltovo-Mayaki or Saltovo-Majaki is the name given by archaeologists to the early medieval culture of the Pontic steppe region roughly between the Don and the Dnieper Rivers, flourishing roughly between the years of 700 and 950.[1]

Their culture was a melting pot of Onogur, Khazar, Pecheneg, Magyar, Alan, and Slavic influences. During the ninth century the Saltovo-Mayaki culture was closely associated with the Khazar Khaganate, and archaeological sites from this period are one way that historians track the geographic scope of Khazar influence.

The Saltovo-Maykaki material culture was "fairly uniform" across the various tribes.[2]

The Old Bulgars were Onogur Turks by the way.

If modern Bulgars get 0 of Saltovo-Mayaki, that means their Old Bulgar genetics are insignificant or non-existent.

Also, I'd like to add that Hungarians get 0 of Saltovo-Mayaki as well.

[Mingle]

Yeah, that's exactly in line with amount of Slavic ydna in Croatia, makes lot of sense.

If Croats are 60% Slavic, then Poles must be 80-90%. I remember you saying before how western Poland was like 40% Germanic

[Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić]

If Croats are 60% Slavic, then Poles must be 80-90%. I remember you saying before how western Poland was like 40% Germanic

Yes but rest of Poland is close to 100% in some parts. That is my guess.