Genetic structure of the Balkan nations.

It seems that research by Igenea (genealogy research institute from Switzerland) is slap in the face to many nationalists in the Balkans. Many racial theories, held dear by some nationalists were proved wrong. For example, Albanians are definitely not descendants of the Illyrians, at least not more than some other Balkan nations. Reawakened descendants of Megas Alexandros (Macedonians, population of FYROM) have reasons to be pleased :laugh4:, they were actually proven to draw their roots from Ancient Macedonians. Igenea is supposedly one of the top European genealogy research institutes...

Serbia

Slavs 30%
Illyrians 21%
Teutons (Germanic) 18%
Celts 14%
Phoenicians (Semitic) 9%
Hellenes 6%
Vikings! 2% (COOL!)

FYROM

Ancient Macedonians 30%
Teutons 20%
Hellenes 15%
Slavs 15%
Illyrians 10%
Huns 5%
Phoenicians 5%

Croatia

Illyrians 34%
Slavs 20%
Celts 18%
Teutons 12%
Phoenicians 8%
Hellenes 8%

Bulgaria

Thracians 49%
Hellenes 15%
Slavs 15%
Antic Macedonians 11%
Phoenician 8%

Bosnia & Herzegovina

Illyrians 40%
Teutons 20%
Celts 15%
Slavs 15%
Huns 6%
Thracians 4%

Albanians

Illyrians 30%
Slavs 20%
Thracians 18%
Phoenicians 16%
Hellenes 14%
Vikings 2%

According to Igenea, the most mixed "Balkan" nation are Turks. Beside Turkish, they have Arabic, Slavic, Hellenic, Teutonic, Berber and various other genes... The most Slavic nation in terms of genes are Russians. Population of Germany, to my great surprise is not very much Teutonic, most of the genes are Celtic (45%), Teutonic (25%), Slavic (20%) and Jewish (10%)...

I'm not really trying to make any point with this. I just found the research interesting and though I'd share and discuss it here with you guys...

Interesting stuff, I'm surprised at the noticable percentages of Celtic and Phoenician blood, how did that get there?

Maybe this will make some people consider the nasty ethnic nationalism that goes on there. Then again, these things seems best left to die natural deaths.

Wow, science proved ethnic nationalists wrong, eh?

:2thumbsup:

Oddly my country's haplogroups are as it follows.
E1B1B 38 %
R1A 29 %
R1B 25 %
I2A 8 %

And the Indigenous people are:
Slav 29 %
Finno-Ugrer 21 %
Teuton 20 %
Celtic 18 %
Illyrian 12 %

That means I'm 21% hungarian, 20% German and 20% Albanian?

Unfortunately, iGENEA doesn't provide info regarding the way data was gathered on their front-page so I assume these are not correct statistics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

Interesting stuff, I'm surprised at the noticable percentages of Celtic and Phoenician blood, how did that get there?

Maybe this will make some people consider the nasty ethnic nationalism that goes on there. Then again, these things seems best left to die natural deaths.

---

I'm not surprised by Celtic, Celts penetrated relatively deep in the Balkans before they were driven out by Romans. Modern day Belgrade was actually founded by the Celts and named Sindidun and renamed Singidunum by the Romans later...

Phoenicians, I don't know, I guess as a seafaring nation they got to spread their genes around. Just a note, research for Serbia includes Montenegro, since samples were taken when Serbia and Montenegro were still one country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KarlXII

Wow, science proved ethnic nationalists wrong, eh?

:2thumbsup:

---

Yeah. So what's the DYS-marker for nationalists? We could use it to isolate all of the world's nationalists and put them in a reservation. :idea2:

No wait, that would be ethnic cleansing. :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

Yeah. So what's the DYS-marker for nationalists? We could use it to isolate all of the world's nationalists and put them in a reservation. :idea2:

No wait, that would be ethnic cleansing. :inquisitive:

---

Off topic, but why did you remove that offensive piece of Mohammed? Have at you! :duel:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KarlXII

Off topic, but why did you remove that offensive piece of Mohammed? Have at you! :duel:

---

Because I found something much more offensive in Herod: the truth.

And dontcha tell me it doesn't hurt. Ouch! Ow! :chucks:

By Phoenicians do they mean Jews :inquisitive::clown:??

Well, they are Semites, and there is no way that there is a lack of a significant Jewish population in the Balkans. After all, there is a bit of Jews in every European country, whether pure-blooded or mixed.

HAH!

Another two countries on our list of countries we've raped!!

Genetic structure of the people of the Balkan nations:
100% Human


I never would have suspected anything different.

I'd be interested to know how they came up with the ancient Macedonian stuff...

Yep, me too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Default the Magyar

I'd be interested to know how they came up with the ancient Macedonian stuff...

---

My guess would be that is a different haplogroup comprised of people who lived in that area in ancient times which was arbitrarily named ancient Macedonians...



It's interesting how genes and culture are often two completely unrelated things. Take Croatians and Albanians - both have dominant Illyrian genes (Croatians even more than Albanians) and 20% of the Slavic genes, yet Croatia is considered Slavic while Albanians claim Illyrian roots... Germans 45% Celtic genes and only slightly more Teuton than Slavic. I wouldn't be surprised if there's more Teuton gene in population of England or France than in German population...

Although I don't defend the theory of modern Macedonians being anything close to related to ancient Macedonians, I neither defend that ancient Macedonians were ethnic Greeks. As such, I find it extremely strange how is it that the Macedonians, which are for all purposes ethnically Bulgars (e.g. Slavs), have more "ancient Macedonian" blood than Slav.

My first thought was "This...is...impossible..."

Where on the site did you get this data?

“I wouldn't be surprised if there's more Teuton gene in population of England or France than in German population”:
That would be normal in both cases. The Saxons and the Franks were German Tribes.:beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jolt

Although I don't defend the theory of modern Macedonians being anything close to related to ancient Macedonians, I neither defend that ancient Macedonians were ethnic Greeks. As such, I find it extremely strange how is it that the Macedonians, which are for all purposes ethnically Bulgars (e.g. Slavs), have more "ancient Macedonian" blood than Slav.

My first thought was "This...is...impossible..."

---

Yes and they had greek names, greek language, Greek toponyms and the Greek bloody Pantheon (mount Olympus is in Macedonia) because the Octosquids altered our timeline in an effort to reincarnate the great lizzard king Qu'Emacha...do some research before offending people will you?


On the other hand please look at the website people...please notice the many 'order now' and 'payment options' and $$$ signs and currency selectors etc etc. This is one of those silly websites that reportedly tell you your nationality based on 'research' that has only been published in their creator's own head. :thumbsdown:

If you really wanna know the genetic origins of the Balkans:

We have been :daisy:ing eachother for 4.000 years and then newcomers (Slavs,Turks,Bulgarians etc) joined our big international orgy and so we are mixed. Percentage doesn't matter. Get on with it. :2thumbsup:

This
E1B1B 38 %
R1A 29 %
R1B 25 %
I2A 8 %
Doesn't compare with the ethnic population results. I mean for Bulgaria E1B1B is Thraco-Hellenic but for Romania its Illiryan? That's a weird conclusion. And what is with the Phoenician-Jewish distinction, I mean both populations are Semitic and both ware conquered by Rome but....I would guess it has something to do with Manases.

Quote:

---

The Saxons and the Franks were German Tribes.

---

I didn't say they wasn't

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Where on the site did you get this data?

---

The numbers were in the article in one respected Serbian magazine that deals with political and social issues.

I'm not claiming results were 100% scientifically accurate, even if the process was described, genealogy is definitely not my field and that's why is posted it here instead of the monastery or science subforum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rasoforos

We have been :daisy:ing eachother for 4.000 years and then newcomers (Slavs,Turks,Bulgarians etc) joined our big international orgy and so we are mixed. Percentage doesn't matter. Get on with it. :2thumbsup:

---

Which proves we're more of a "make love, not war" type of people... :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rasoforos

We have been :daisy:ing eachother for 4.000 years and then newcomers (Slavs,Turks,Bulgarians etc) joined our big international orgy and so we are mixed. Percentage doesn't matter. Get on with it. :2thumbsup:

---

My sentiment entirely. After the bungled humanitarian invasions of the ninetees, we should envisage erotic invasions to search and destroy the last pockets of genetic resistance in this world.

Where did I last park that old Volkswagen? We could pimp it up for the purpose. :hippie:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rasoforos

Yes and they had greek names, greek language, Greek toponyms and the Greek bloody Pantheon (mount Olympus is in Macedonia) because the Octosquids altered our timeline in an effort to reincarnate the great lizzard king Qu'Emacha...do some research before offending people will you?

---

True, but then Iranian Pontus is also Greek under those terms. First I don't know why Greek people get so pissed. Obviously I wasn't trying to offend anybody because I defend my own side. Spain calls itself Spain, which is the Roman name for the entire Iberian Peninsula and you don't see us gigantically offended for them having a name which includes our territory. (Though there is a funny story about our Portuguese King, Afonso V, who disputed the union of Aragon and Castille and their conversion into Spain, per se. When anyone mentioned something about the Kings of Spain, Afonso would rise up very angry and say "Well, not of the whole Spain!" Meaning they weren't Kings of the entire Spain and yet called themselves such) As such, I can't really apologize for not having the same opinion as yourself. For all is worth (To appease your unquenshed anger), I think that the Greeks (Obviously) have far more connections and bonds to the ancient Macedonians then the modern Macedonians. The truth is that there i so little information that both sides can argue ad infinitum that noone will ever convince the other side because: a) They do not have sufficient evidence to accurately refute the other side's arguments; b) The other side is so polarized by the discussion that they refuse to concede that one argument is true, even when it is undisputed. But I have no intention of starting a "Monkeydonians vs Hell-Eunuchs" discussion for I find such discussions abhorrent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rasoforos

We have been :daisy:ing eachother for 4.000 years and then newcomers (Slavs,Turks,Bulgarians etc) joined our big international orgy and so we are mixed. Percentage doesn't matter. Get on with it. :2thumbsup:

---

Yeah. The Iberian Peninsula is something of the sort. Celts, Iberians, Romans, Visigoths, Suebis, Arabs and so on.

I don't even know what some of those ethnic groups were. God the Balkans are pointless.

I never thought that the hate sprang from being slavic/non-slavic but that each people sees itself as a unique part of the Slavic "race". Is that not so?

That website looks a bit too commercial for my liking. 'Germanic Tribes', 'Phoenician', 'Viking' and similar terms are not scientifically useful. They appeal to people's broad concepts of history. They are not genetic distinctions, but simplifications. Spectacular and appealing.

One of the best books I've read on the subject is from the Italian Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, 'Geni, Popoli e Lingue', to needlessly pedantically quote the Italian title. Available in English as 'Genes, peoples and Language'. Well worth checking out for those interested in the subject.

He describes genetic diffusion by the analogy of a rock that is thrown in a pond. Outward reaching concentric circles that fade away. For example, the spread of agriculture from the Middle East has left a genetic trace, with the epicentre in Turkey and gradually extending (fading away) into European peoples.
A similar effect can be found for the Greek expansion in the first millenium b.c. And many other phenomena.

The result is not just a single genetic map, but many genetic maps, each tracing the spread of different groups. Cavalli-Sforza combines this genetic research with linguistics. And tests both against one another. The results are some great insights into human history and kinship.

~~-~~-~~<o0o>~~-~~-~~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

I didn't say they wasn't

---

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::lau gh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Population of Germany, to my great surprise is not very much Teutonic, most of the genes are Celtic (45%), Teutonic (25%), Slavic (20%) and Jewish (10%)...

---

'Frnakly, what surprises is the extent to which many countries think they are, and want to be, Nordic. Lingering nineteenth century racial thought. Three wrong conceptions are at work: There is a racial hierarchy. Whites are superior. The most white are the Scandinavians.

Hence the thought that 'the more Scandinavian, the better'.

It did have the result that peoples vastly overrated and overrate their Germanic component. Peculiarly, one needs only a quick glance at the English or the Germans to see that they are only passingly reminiscent of the Nordics. :wall:

(not though that physical resemblence is the final word in genetic kinship)

The English resemble the Basques more closely than they do the Danes. The Germans are clearly a central European mishmash.


I won't even mention the blistering stupidity of Austrian 'Magyar-Jewish-Slavic-Celtic' loudmouths starting a racial campaign against the 'inferior' Baltics - who, being Baltic, really are closely related to Scandinavians. :wall:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

My sentiment entirely. After the bungled humanitarian invasions of the ninetees, we should envisage erotic invasions to search and destroy the last pockets of genetic resistance in this world.

Where did I last park that old Volkswagen? We could pimp it up for the purpose. :hippie:

---

Join us! The motto of the glouisbalisation movement is 'Think Locally, #### Globally.

On this side of the pond, the usual answer to the genetic background thing is pretty simple: mutt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

On this side of the pond, the usual answer to the genetic background thing is pretty simple: mutt.

---

And proud of it.

I watch/listen to these heritage conversations with interest, mostly because the intense attention paid to them is so foreign to my own experience.

Now, if some smart science-type guy could convincingly trace me back to Olduvai Lucy, that would be interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

On this side of the pond, the usual answer to the genetic background thing is pretty simple: mutt.

---

'Mutt-American' is one of the least named hyphenated-American. Only in the Appalachians do Americans overwhelmingly name 'American' as their etnicity.

I say Americans are obsessed with genetic and cultural heritage. The difference is, that Americans overwhelmingly do not build hysterical hyper-nationalistic ideologies around it. It is more personal, more positive. From a sense of personally belonging to instead of excluding others of.

Hey Seamus. I think Louis just called us 'Hillbillies'. :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

'Mutt-American' is one of the least named hyphenated-American. Only in the Appalachians do Americans overwhelmingly name 'American' as their etnicity.

I say Americans are obsessed with genetic and cultural heritage. The difference is, that Americans overwhelmingly do not build hysterical hyper-nationalistic ideologies around it. It is more personal, more positive. From a sense of personally belonging to instead of excluding others of.

---

Well that's pretty obvious, if they were to build some "hysterical hyper-nationalistic ideology" from it, they would have to move back to Europe, wouldn't they?:clown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

'Mutt-American' is one of the least named hyphenated-American. Only in the Appalachians do Americans overwhelmingly name 'American' as their etnicity.

I say Americans are obsessed with genetic and cultural heritage. The difference is, that Americans overwhelmingly do not build hysterical hyper-nationalistic ideologies around it. It is more personal, more positive. From a sense of personally belonging to instead of excluding others of.

---

Ethnic nationalism is hard to put on Americans since American is neither an ethnicity nor a race. We're barely Americans, we're African America, Irish American, Hispanic American. I believe the metling pot is why we've never fallen for complete hyper-nationalistic groups as European countries have. Though, nationalism has occured in periods like the Spanish-American War.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KarlXII

Ethnic nationalism is hard to put on Americans since American is neither an ethnicity nor a race. We're barely Americans, we're African America, Irish American, Hispanic American. I believe the metling pot is why we've never fallen for complete hyper-nationalistic groups as European countries have. Though, nationalism has occured in periods like the Spanish-American War.

---

You ever been to the south? It might suprise you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

You ever been to the south? It might suprise you.

---

Indeed. Antarctica is much colder than people think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

On this side of the pond, the usual answer to the genetic background thing is pretty simple: mutt.

---

That is not true, or at least, that is not true in Canada.

People there are always bragging about their ancestors, their 'cultural heritage' and what not.

I've met people whose family had been living in Canada for a century, who still claim to be Italians. They don't speak italian, don't have a clue about italian culture or history, but for the sake of looking cool and different, they'll tell everybody that they're 'italian'.
I remember some guy getting mad because a canadian of chinese origins said she was Canadian: he got all angry and said "you're not canadian, you're chinese, just like I'm italian and not canadian". :inquisitive:
The same applies to 'Ukrainians', 'Poles', 'Finish', 'Chinese' and to a lesser extant IMO, 'Germans', 'South-Africans' and 'British'.

I'm not even speaking about the numerous China Towns, Little Italies and Little Odessas found in pretty much any decently-sized city in North America. If people trully didn't care about their ethnic origins, they wouldn't stay and live only with people who supposedly share the same 'origins'.

As for the topic itself, I don't really care. I don't really care either if French are mostly of germanic/nordic or latin origins. I don't care if people from Fyrom/Macedonia actually have any link with ancient Macedonians or not, and I'm fairly sure people living in the Balkans don't care aswell and will still hate eachothers for no reasons.

Did they say that "phoenicians" were "Semitic"? I understand that their language was, but supposedly the people were from the Dalmatian costal areas originally. Maybe there was an inverse relationship - Phoenician culture and people moved to the Levant with the "sea peoples", not vica versa. They may have brought the culture and the language may not have stuck. I'm not a geneologist, so I'm not sure if they saw african lineage or simply phoenician markers.

I'm a Bitza

Bit's of this and bits of that. Essentially Celtic-Scandinavian.

I got the Welsh dark hair and hazel eyes, but fair skin, my brother the sky-blue eyes, blond hair and tans... the other brother is a red head.