iGenea DNA test confirms Macedonians

[Onur]

I still don't fully understand this.
Dose it mean every Macedonian has got these ethnicities in there DNA?

AFAIK, every individual person got only one type of haplogroup in his own chromosome but these haplogroups doesn't effect people`s appearance like eye color, hair color. For example, a blue eyed German and a black haired Greek can have same type of haplogroup.




Typical European haplogroups;



All of these ethnicity names given to the haplogroups are based on the ethnic group where you can find certain haplogroup as most common.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

Estimated sources of the haplogroups commonly found in Europe.

[TrueMacedonian]

The Germanic tribes swept through 2 or 3 times chasing the Romans so it is not surprising at all. Later you would recall the crusades which also meant 4 passes by. Not trying to be a wet blanket on this but this data is more than a year old and on other sites I have read people discrediting the findings. The bits they looked at supposedly were to few to be conclusive. Also igenea quickly shut their mouths very quickly about this time. By their protests that they are a scientific study and not political suggests political pressure was applied to shut them up not only for the Macedonian question but also it spoils the uns multicultural policy where we are all equal and should not consider our roots beyond mum and dad.

By germanic tribes do you mean the Goths?

Goths not only had independent kingdoms in Macedonia but they even lived, literally, with Macedonians.
Sarmatians also settled in Macedonia. How can we determine the Sarmatian elements? This is why I am asking if iGENEA has ever been in a peer reviewed scientific journal before. $159 bucks for some mouth swabs and you get a nice piece of paper telling you your a bunch of things in one sounds nice, but is it accurate?

[Coolski]

one question. What is the "slav" genetic group?

[osiris]

german tribes swept trough and left more dna in our gene pool than the slavs who supposedly migrated en masse and changed the language and culture of macedonia.

i dont think it is logical, there must be another explanation .

[Daniel the Great]

No it doesn't. This probably obtained from a round about figure of people from Macedonia or who are Macedonian. I notice there is no Thracian element. I really find that hard to believe. This is why I personally would like to find out how accurate iGENEA's info is. All modern "greek" bs to the side has iGENEA been reviewed in any scientific journal? Anytime I do a search for iGENEA it seems topics about Macedonia and Macedonian haplogroups pop up. Here's exactly what I mean - http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=...63d824c6065267

Nope, every individual person got only one type of haplogroup in his own chromosome but these haplogroups doesn't effect people`s appearance like eye color, hair color. For example, a blue eyed German and a black haired Greek can have same type of haplogroup.




Typical European haplogroups;



All of these ethnicity names given to the haplogroups are based on the ethnic group where you can find certain haplogroup as most common.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

Estimated sources of the haplogroups commonly found in Europe.

Thanks for the information TrueMacedonian and Onur.

[Onur]

Thanks for the information TrueMacedonian and Onur.

Thanks to you.


I can add these as well;

R1A: It`s believed to be the predominant haplogroup of very first Slavic language speaking groups.

R1B: It`s the most common haplogroup of European men, especially at western European countries(Up to %80+ at Ireland and Wales). It`s believed to be the haplogroup of very first indo-european language speaking people. It`s spread through to the Europe about 11.000 years ago from Anatolia.

I1, I2A, I2B: These haplogroups was probably already present in Europe even before the arrival of first man with "R1B" genome. "I1" believed to be the predominant haplogroup of Goths and Vandals aka Nordic people. Same valid for "I2A and I2B" as Illyrians predominant genome.

G2A, J2, Q, N1C1: These are believed to be the predominant haplogroups of very first Uralic and Altaic aka agglutinative language speaking groups(excluding Mongols and other Asiatic people) at Caucasus/Eurasia section. "N1C1" is most common among Finns and Estonians. G2A, J2 are most common among Turks, Southern Italians(Etruscans?), Cyprus.




P. S: All these info above are just estimations of the scholars. None of these are %100 facts, maybe except the info about "R1B".

[Sovius]

I believe both the iGenea and Eupedia sites have based their analysis on oversimplified assumptions that were inherent in revisionist interpretative models that were developed at the height of the Western and Eastern European nationalist movements during the 19th Century. These anachronistically applied ethnic and anthropological classifications only serve to obscure the significance of the genetic evidence we now have access to. As it largely represented the continuation of Medieval and Ancient Period scholarship and observations, the Renaissance Period Model is a better platform on which to base interpretations ofthis kind of evidence. The Romans would likely interpret the M458 marker, a marker that evolved out of R1a1a bearing populations indigenous to the region of Central Europe as a Sarmatian marker, providing contemporary researchers with what could be taken as evidence of how existensive Sarmatian settlement in Macedonia was during its period under Roman occupation, because that is how Romans classified populations from this area. If we use it as evidence of some kind of Slavic (Northern Thracian) intrusion, we must remember that Northern Thracians were anthropologically very similar to Southern Thracians who were Anthropologically very similar to the populations who would go down in history as the Macedonians and that the term Sclavene, which the modern term Slav is purportedly based on, was simply and originally a slang word for Northern Thracian insurgents, at least from what we are able to gather from historical texts. If we are going to use this term as a universal classification for a set of distinct yet remarkably similar languages, then we must be careful not to apply the term in an ethnic sense, if we wish to avoid ethnocentricism. If we are to use archeological evidence in relation to the source region of the M458 marker as it is currently defined in studies, then we can responsibly incorporate it into an argument favoring it as evidence of the Lusatian migrations into the region, given that Central European bronze slashing swords are still being dug up all over the place.

A Phoenician marker? Why not Assyrian? If I were Assyrian, I would be very pissed off at these sites and their primitive depictions of the past. Which definition of Germanic are these people using, anyway? The Romans or the 19thcenturyians? It’s a pity and amusing at the same time that information and disinformation can be wrapped in the same package in the same instance; not so amusing when we continue to slosh along with so much perceptual pollution swirling about in our heads, because our school systems haven’t caught up yet.

[Onur]

I believe both the iGenea and Eupedia sites have based their analysis on oversimplified assumptions that were inherent in revisionist interpretative models that were developed at the height of the Western and Eastern European nationalist movements during the 19th Century.

Yes, i believe that as well. The problem is, igenea test gives you a little bit of information about your ancestors of ~10.000 to ~25.000 ago and we only know the historical events and migration roots for the last ~1500 years. If you also consider that humans are very mobile for 5500 years(domestication of horses), its actually not possible to draw a conclusion about the ethnicity with only igenea test result.

[Sovius]

What we can be certain of is that the populations of regions that show a high frequency of a certain marker and a high level of diversity in regard to that marker (variations within a variation/STR Diversity) demonstrate longer periods of habitation than regions that feature the same marker, but less variation within populations carrying that same marker. This law of nature holds true for plants, animals and sentient animals. With that being said, a relative chronology can be rationally acheived that is as accurate as the data used to construct the timeline. This gives us a point A and, at least, a point B. This information can then be used to frame the archeological evidence that each separate area has yielded to limit the number of possible scenarios which could have taken place during prehistory or early history to explain either the similarities or dissimilarities between the contemporary cultures that either continue to or came to inhabit the two areas in question in relation to previous periods of habitation for these same regions. If we have the ability to add linguistic evidence to these possible scenarios, we can further limit what was plausible and what couldn’t have likely happened. Some regions were greatly impacted by the shuffle of people and some hardly at all.

When I think of R1a among the Greeks and P37.2 among Albanians, I see indigenous populations who came to adopt non-indigenous languages during different periods in time as a result of an influx of other people into the region. To say that R1a among the Modern Greeks is Mycanaean, while, possibly true, it would be more rational to regard it as Modern Macedonian in order to not exclude recent historical events, though it could also have come from Russian migrants whose ancestors migrated to Russia from Macedonia or Serbia, who then moved to Greece after a number of centuries of residing in Russia.

In my opinion, Eliza Dushku, the American actress, may think she is Albanian, but clearly she is Slavic, because she looks Slavic, even though Slavs don’t exist, except in the minds of those programmed to see Slavs. She exhibits many of the same facial features found among Croatian and Bosnian women of the Eastern Adriatic region that I’ve met. It doesn’t mean she’s not Albanian. It just means she’s not Albanian. She’s from a region with a high incidence of P37.2 and Mtdna markers associated with this Y-Marker, if that makes any sense. So, in this sense, some Albanians must be, in fact, related to the ancient Illyrians, because they come from Slavic families who adopted the Albanian language at some point in time.

[Prolet]

It doesn’t mean she’s not Albanian. It just means she’s not Albanian.

So then she's not Albanian

[Risto the Great]

So then she's not Albanian

I am willing to conduct an in depth assessment.
I will need a very close inspection to make my assessment. Perhaps even some snuggling might be required. In the interest of science naturally.

[Sovius]

So then she's not Albanian

Exactly and no, not really.

[Sovius]

I am willing to conduct an in depth assessment.
I will need a very close inspection to make my assessment. Perhaps even some snuggling might be required. In the interest of science naturally.

It's imperitive that she be re-assimilated in order to avoid further delusion, I mean dilution, of the Slavic race.