Nearly all Europeans are in fact Russians...

Generally, the movie is IMO too metaphorical and difficult to understand by non-specialist - I feel I don't understand about half of allegories there.

Maybe knowing this Bashkir epic story on which it is based would help.

West Babylon part probably refers to prehistoric early migration from Siberia to the Middle East - since the oldest found so far ancestor of R1 as well as R2 haplogroups is the 24,000 years old Mal'ta boy (link: http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-25020958), buried near Mal'ta in south-central Siberia. But that is not the main part of the story, because those very ancient migrants rather had not been ancestors of vast majority of modern R1a (and R1b probably too), unless they later migrated back towards the north (see below).

Later the video mentions a bottleneck of R1a, and it refers to the fact that although R1a is much older than the 4th millennium BC, almost all of modern people belonging to R1a haplogroup - 99% (2893 out of a sample of 2923 from Eurasia) - belong to R1a1a1 M417 branch, all of which is descended (paternally) from one single male ancestor, who lived in the 4th millennium BC. Let's add that descendants of that single male who lived in the 4th millennium BC quickly increased in numbers and expanded territorially, because already at the turns of the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC (around year 2000 BC) they could be found from eastern Germany (Corded Ware culture) to western China (Tarim Basin).

So during just a dozen or so centuries descendants of that M417 person dispersed across entire Eurasia.

More about this here:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=13704808&postcount=7

As for Bashkirs, around 73% - 74% of them carry R1 haplogroup - including both R1b and R1a.

Bashkirs are a Turkic-speaking ethnic groups, but with mostly Indo-European Bronze Age and Iron Age paternal ancestors, who underwent Turkification later. Bashkirs in terms of Y-DNA are 47% haplogroup R1b (which is a higher percent of R1b than, for example, among Germans) and 26% haplogroup R1a (in a sample of 471 individuals). They also have a substantial amount of N1 haplogroup - over 17%. This last haplogroup, N1, is most common among Turkic-speaking Yakuts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakuts), among whom frequency of N1 is between 75% and 100%, depending on region from which samples are collected and study.

They speak Turkic languages today, but have mostly Ancient Indo-European ancestors:

"(...) The Bashkirs physically and genetically have a mixture of European and Asiatic traits (...) Fedorova's team found them to be 60.7% Caucasian and 39.3% Mongoloid. (...) Bashkirs cannot be labelled either as typical Mongoloids or as Caucasoids. Thus, Bashkirs possess some alleles and haplotypes frequent in Mongoloids, which supports the Turkic impact on Bashkir ethnogenesis, but also possess the AH 8.1 haplotype, which could evidence an ancient Caucasoid population that took part in their ethnic formation. (...)"

Indo_European_languages.png
 
Holy cow, I need to update my map (link) again! Yet more newly found ancient R1a samples have showed up.

Younger than Karelian hunter (5500-5000 BCE), but older than Corded Ware samples from Germany (2600-2400 BCE).

These are dated 4000-3000 BCE and come from Serteya site, Smolensk Oblast near Russia-Belarus border, close to Velizh:

Serteya.8.gif


Table 3. from page 294/295 of publication in the link below:

https://www.academia.edu/9452168/Ar...azurkevich_A._Polkovnikova_M._Dolbunova_E._ed


a19103cc4d67.png


Description:

image.png


image.png
 
More info in Russian:

https://translate.google.pl/#ru/en/...его Подвинья. С. 287-294. Таблица на с. 294."

"R1a1-M17 (М417 не тестировалась, но весьма вероятна) найдена у охотника-собирателя в верховьях Западной Двины возрастом 6000 - 5000 лет назад. Сведения об этом факте опубликованы (точнее сказать -похоронены) в региональном археологическом сборнике, который ни поп-, ни прочие генетики без специальной наводки в жизни искать не станут: Археология озерных поселений IV—II тыс. до н. э.: хронология культур и природно- климатические ритмы. — СПб.: ООО «Периферия», 2014. Статья: Чекунова Е.М., Ярцева Н.В., Чекунов М.К., Мазуркевич А.Н. Первые результаты генотипирования коренных жителей и человеческих костных останков из археологических памятников Верхнего Подвинья. С. 287-294. Таблица на с. 294."
 
Google translation is a bit confusing.

"...The information about this fact was published (or rather, buried) in regional archaeological publishing, that neither pop- nor other geneticist would look up without special guidance..."
(that's probably more understandable)
 
Thanks.

This probably explains why this information became known a few days ago (probably yesterday), even though the publication is from 2014.

BTW - Sample A4 in Table 3. above, was R1a1 from Anashkino Hill-Fort dating to 8th - 5th centuries BC:

http://www.mas.ncl.ac.uk/~nas13/AS/2009BAR_Int_Ser1964_Dolukhanov_etal.pdf

Anashkino was an Iron Age settlement (see the link above, page 181/189 onwards).

Anaszkino_1.png


Anashkino_2.png
 
Two people with exactly the same Y-DNA as that R1a Karelian hunter who lived 7500 - 7000 years ago (most likely his direct paternal descendants), have just been found in Belarus (judging by surnames, they are probably ethnic Poles from Belarus - since both of them have surname Szpakowski) and one person in Tunisia (certain guy named Ibrahim Mehrez), maybe also one in Russia and one in Italy (but I couldn't find their surnames). Here more information:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3787-Persian-Corsicans/page2

Coincidentally, a Tunisian R1a-YP1272 (the former R1a-SRY10831.2*) was just asking me how in the world his rare clade got to Tunisia. (The R1a-YP1272 entry already on YFull's haplotree is from Belarus).

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-story-of-69-ancient-europeans.html

in R1a1a and Subclades Y-DNA Project there's five men belonged at the same subclade of Karelian man, an Italian, a Tunisian, two belarusian and a Rusian, they are all R-M459, R1a1 * -M17- M198-, this branche is now called YP1272 sister of M198 subclade

Szpakowski (x2) and Mehrez:

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1a/default.aspx?vgroup=R1a&section=yresults

Here sample from Belarus (BLR) and one "new" sample (no country specified) are listed:

http://yfull.com/tree/R-YP1272/
 
You know something's off when you can't see 5/6 posts in a page...
 
Heil Putin. Death to Ukraine.
 
There's no escape, but I can give you an R1a exam for 30% less! Just today, find out if you're a closet Slav!

Or - for example - a closet Balt, since Balts also have a lot of R1a.

There are several theories concerning the Balto-Slavic past, including this one:

Today a popular theory is that there was never a Common Baltic language (which later diversified into West and East branches - as was thought in the past), but that West Baltic and East Baltic split directly from Balto-Slavic, and independently from each other.

This model was first suggested by Kromer in 2003 - as the graph below illustrates:

Balto-Slavic_theories_Kromer.svg


The graph illustrates several models of Balto-Slavic interactions, trying to explain similarities between the two groups (Schleicher - common ancestral language separating into Baltic and Slavic; Endzelins - two separate languages which came under influence of each other at some point; Rozwadowski - common ancestry, then separation, followed by becoming close neighbours again; Meillet - prolonged close influences despite lack of common ancestry; Kromer - common ancestry with Baltia never constituting a linguistic unity, but East Baltic and West Baltic groups separating directly from Balto-Slavic).

All models before Kromer assumed that Baltic group was a unity at some point, and only later separated into East and West groups.

Here the theories of Schleicher and Endzelins are outlined:

The close relationship of the Baltic and Slavic languages is indicated by a series of common innovations not shared with other Indo-European languages, and by the fact that the relative chronology of these innovations can be established. Furthermore, there are also many correspondences in vocabulary: the Baltic and Slavic languages share many inherited words. These are either not found at all in other Indo-European languages (except when borrowed) or are inherited from Proto-Indo-European but have undergone identical changes in meaning when compared to other Indo-European languages.

Baltic and Slavic share many close phonological, lexical, morphosyntactic and accentological similarities. The notable early Indo-Europeanist August Schleicher (1861) proposed a simple solution: From Proto-Indo-European descended Proto-Balto-Slavic, out of which Proto-Baltic and Proto-Slavic emerged. The Latvian linguist Jānis Endzelīns thought, however, that any similarities among Baltic and Slavic languages were a result of an intensive language contact.

There is also no perfect agreement on when did the separation of Slavic and Baltic (or both Baltic groups) take place.

Proposed dates range from ca. 1500 BCE to ca. 500 BCE (3500 - 2500 years ago):

Atkinson - 1400 BCE
Novotná & Blažek - 1400–1340 BCE
Sergei Starostin - 1210 BCE
Chang et. al. - 600 BCE (http://www.linguisticsociety.org/files/news/ChangEtAlPreprint.pdf)

Before that separation it is assumed that a Balto-Slavic linguistic community existed, or both groups lived together.

There is also no agreement as to where were proto-homelands of speakers of those languages.
 
Oh I'm sorry.

Heil Stalin.
 
Among Slavic and Baltic populations, when it comes to people with haplogroup R1a, two major clades dominate - Z280 and M458.

The age of these two clades is:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1a/

Z280:

Time when mutation emerged (in one male) - ca. 5000 years ago (95% probability that in period 5600 - 4400 y.a.).
Time of the most recent common ancestor - ca. 4800 years ago (95% probability that in period 5400 - 4200 y.a.).

M458:

Time when mutation emerged (in one male) - ca. 5000 lat temu (95% probability that in period 5600 - 4400 y.a.).
Time of the most recent common ancestor - ok. 4500 lat temu (95% probability that in period 5400 - 4200 y.a.).

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

Distribution of percentage shares of these clades within all of R1a forms an interesting continuum (but also a clinal distribution in some areas).

If individuals with R1a haplogroup in each population = 100%, then respective shares of Z280 and M458 within that R1a are:

Population (R1a Z280 / R1a M458 / other clades of R1a) - according to Underhill 2014 (+ Ukrainians from Lviv & Lithuanians from another source):

WeS = Western Slavs
SoS = Southern Slavs
EaS = Eastern Slavs
Balt = Balts


[WeS] Czechs-----------------------------(20,2 / 79,8 / 0,0)
[WeS] Czechs Utah------------------------(19,9 / 70,0 / 10,1)
[SoS] Croatia interior-----------------------(32,0 / 68,0 / 0,0)
[WeS] Poland------------------------------(42,0 / 58,0 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Cherkassy-----------------(46,9 / 53,1 / 0,0)
[WeS] Poland (another source)--------------(51,7 / 48,3 / 0,0)
[WeS] Slovakia-----------------------------(52,1 / 46,2 / 1,7)
[WeS] Poles Wroclaw-----------------------(56,8 / 43,2 / 0,0)
[SoS] Bulgaria------------------------------(51,2 / 42,0 / 6,8)
[EaS] Ukrainians Lviv------------------------(58,2 / 41,8 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Ivano-Frankivsk-------------(60,0 / 40,0 / 0,0)
[EaS] Belarusians Brest----------------------(61,4 / 38,6 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Kostroma--------------------(62,6 / 37,4 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Donetsk--------------------(67,4 / 30,4 / 2,2)
[EaS] Belarusians (another source)-----------(69,7 / 30,3 / 0,0)
[SoS] Macedonians--------------------------(72,7 / 27,3 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Pskov------------------------(72,6 / 25,8 / 1,6)
[EaS] Russians Oryol-------------------------(76,4 / 23,6 / 0,0)
[SoS] Serbia--------------------------------(64,9 / 23,2 / 11,9)
[EaS] Belarusians (Underhill)------------------(76,8 / 23,2 / 0,0)
[SoS] Bosnia--------------------------------(80,2 / 19,8 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians (another source)--------------(80,8 / 19,2 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Belgorod----------------------(81,2 / 18,8 / 0,0)
[Balt] Lithuanians----------------------------(81,8 / 18,2 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Khmilnyk---------------------(84,3 / 15,7 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Akkerman--------------------(88,4 / 11,6 / 0,0)
[SoS] Slovenia-------------------------------(83,9 / 10,7 / 5,4)
[SoS] Herzegovina----------------------------(93,8 / 6,2 / 0,0)

Chart:

R1a_chart.png


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

And here a map showing the percentage share of M458 among total R1a (based on data from Underhill, data from the other source not included):

Boundaries of frequency areas are approximate / conventional (since Underhill collected samples mostly from specific cities or groups of locations):

M458.png
 
Is there absolutely anyone else on this forum who is even passingly interested in all this extremely detailed genetic stuff?
 
It's also meaningless. I could prepare a chart of the relative strength and prevalence of divine bloodlines in south-western Anuire in the Birthright setting, but it's of no real use, even to other Birthright players, and nobody else would care in the slightest.

None of this stuff is engaging in communication, as in a meaningful exchange of information between two or more people.
 
Is there absolutely anyone else on this forum who is even passingly interested in all this extremely detailed genetic stuff?

I don't mind it. I wouldn't say I study it all. But I find the occasional chart and map hypnotically relaxing.

Kind of: "Oh look there's another one of those genetic maps!"
 
When I studied genetics at uni it was nowhere close to Domen's style of genetics.

It was more fun, involved less graphs and was much harder.
 
Back
Top Bottom