Who, genetically, are the least Slavic of the Slavs?

[StonyArabia]

Bulgarians

[Leto]

Dušan hates Lithuanians, he is probably jelly they are closer to early Slavs than he is

Well, what I'm going to say is that he will never celebrate a Croat or Bosniak, even if he scored like a Pole. See his conspicuous silence on the recent Croat results as well as the Bosniak with 37% Baltic that I found.

[Jana]

Well, what I'm going to say is that he will never celebrate a Croat or Bosniak, even if he scored like a Pole. See his conspicuous silence on the recent Croat results as well as the Bosniak with 37% Baltic that I found.

He hate us yes. It seems Bosnian muslims from central-northeast Bosnia are among most Slavic out of all south Slavs, from what I saw.

[Leto]

He hate us yes. It seems Bosnian muslims from central-northeast Bosnia are most Slavic out of all south Slavs, from what I saw.

And that is fascinating considering their religion (let's be honest Islam, albeit not a race, is a largely "brown" thing). Many people assume they are part Turkish or something.

[Token]

Well, Slavs from Moravia, east Germany and Hungary lack such type of input, in fact they shift towards Balticum and as we know no migrations of Balts were ever recorded there. That's interesting at least.

Early Medieval cranial series from Slavic centers of Croatia looked exactly like early Slavic skulls from eastern Poland and the least admixed series of Wendish skulls. I doubt they were admixed to any significant degree, but not sure about the Slavs further south.

[Jana]

Early Medieval cranial series from Slavic centers of Croatia looked exactly like early Slavic skulls from eastern Poland and the least admixed series of Wendish skulls. I doubt they were admixed to any significant degree, but not sure about the Slavs further south.

True.

[vbnetkhio]

I am not sure, just expressing my opinion. Would be interested to her other's opinions too. Perhaps Slavs had diversity too.
But for me it's indicative how Slavs who lived deep into Germany centuries after medieval migrations still menaged be so Baltic like, and there were no Baltic migrations into Germany.

Plus Avar2 from Panonnia was also like that and these Moravian samples too.

To me this indicates early Slavs were highly homogenous and very much northeastern.

And I think Ukrainians and south Russians have something more southern than that (obviously they don't plot between Belarus and Litwa), maybe of Iranic-Caucasus sort (not sure).

Two Krakauer samples with the least Germanic and highest Balto Slavic drift are in fact KRA006 and KRA009. One is more Ukrainian-like and the other more Belarusian.

Some of those you used as Balto-Slavic are in fact Lithuanian-like+ a bit of Germanic.

To me it looks like the tribe which spread R-L260 was Baltic-like, and the other Slavic tribes were Ukrainian-like. The correlation seems pretty strong actually.

Most Slavs have ancestry from both groups, but for example Kashubians look Lithuanian+Scandinavian without any Ukraininian-like, se they are probably the purest descendants of the "R-l260 tribe".

[Jana]

Two Krakauer samples with the least Germanic and highest Balto Slavic drift are in fact KRA006 and KRA009. One is more Ukrainian-like and the other more Belarusian.

Some of those you used as Balto-Slavic are in fact Lithuanian-like+ a bit of Germanic.

To me it looks like the tribe which spread R-L260 was Baltic-like, and the other Slavic tribes were Ukrainian-like. The correlation seems pretty strong actually.

Most Slavs have ancestry from both groups, but for example Kashubians look Lithuanian+Scandinavian without any Ukraininian-like, se they are probably the purest descendants of the "R-l260 tribe".

And what abut pre-Slavic Balkan? Reich paper says Roman admixture was not very relevant in the Balkans (there were Roman, Sarmatian, Germanic soldiers there but their DNA did not spread much apparently). They model south Slavs as Slav proxy + Balkan IA.

[rothaer]

Sungir6 is good sample, not only for some N.Macedonians, but for other too. I cant be modeled without it, to get close distance.

I dont care about fairytales about Lithuanian-like early Slavs.

I know here is now a fight going on so maybe not the best situation for coming with a factual try. But nevertheless:
The question whether one can be modeled with a good fit or not is not descisive for the question whether that modellling is applicable or not. It can therefore also not be of relevance for the question whether Sunghir6 should be used or not for such modelling. I myself considered Sunghir6 suitable, but the only valid point is if Sunghir6 can be considered a good proxy for proto Slavs. On the G25 North Europe PCA it plots perfect, but there might be other differing traits that are not visible on that particular PCA. If Sunghir6 has something that the other unquestionable proto Slav references do not have, that Sunghir6 from the logic can not represent proto Slavs (only).

The paradoxon is: the more you are right that you need Sunghir6 for a good fit modelling, i. e. it makes a difference, the more questionalbe Sunghir6 gets as an applicable reference for proto Slavs. Because for an applicable reference for proto Slavs it should not make a notable difference if you remove it or not.

You could theoretically still be right, but only if you make plausible that all the other proto Slav references are mistaken. I guess this can not be done.

[Dušan]

Well, what I'm going to say is that he will never celebrate a Croat or Bosniak, even if he scored like a Pole. See his conspicuous silence on the recent Croat results as well as the Bosniak with 37% Baltic that I found.

I dont have Nordo-Baltic fetishism at all. You confused me with someone.
In fact, I am proud to my Mediterranean component as same as for proto-Slavic.