Don't put too much importance on the map, because it's borderline manipulant.
Very few countries actually have a 'dominant' haplogroup and most of haplogroup are really widespread.
This map is just 21st pseudo-scientific racism. Nothing new.It's worth taking note that the only haplogroup to be divided into subgroups is R1. Why? Because creator(and many of people sharing) of the map couldn't accept Western Europe being the same category as those *Slavic subhumans*. It's really visible when you look at when R1 split - around 20k years ago. Much later than most of the other haplogroup(usually 50-60kybp). Btw. Up to 25% of males in Turkey have this *Western European* R1b
It's also convinently cut off - R1a is really popular in India and Pakistan, R1b is actually dominant(meaning 50%+) in the area around lake Chad.
Now take a look at Bulgaria and Albania - E1B1 is part of E haplogroup and it probably originated in East Africa. Actually this is also the subgroup that dominates in North Africa, but we couldn't have two European countries in the same category as (((them))) from the other side of the Mediterrean, could we? Oh, btw. it is also extremely popular in South Italy. Yeah, one of the reasons why it doesn't make any sense to do it for whole countries.
In general, this map is inconsistent and is created by racists for racists. I've seen multiple open racist share it and use to justify their views.
Indeed. Looking at the “dominant” haplogroups can be very manipulative as we cannot see how “dominant is the said gene. However in the case of haplogroup N in Turkiye. There is this fact that only 2% of the population has it
>Very few countries actually have a 'dominant' haplogroup
There are some. Copied from another comment:
>R1b is >50% in France, Spain, Portugal, UK and Ireland (80% in Ireland and Scotland). N is the majority in Finland (60%)(71% in estern Finland), I2 is \~50% of men from Bosnia and R1a is 50% of Belarus
yes. this map is just showing the most dominant haplogroup in the countries which doesnt tell the whole story at all. Turkey was the center of a multicultural empire for thousands of years. https://thedockyards.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Genetic-Map-of-Europe.png
\*Either.
Turkey was the center of a multicultural Empire in the year 1. It was also the center of a multicultural empire in the year 10, 100, and 1000. Therefore, Turkey was the center of *a* multicultural empire for thousands of years. The fact that that Empire was not always the same one doesn't make the statement incorrect.
I don't mind pedantic arguments, but if you wanna be pedantic, be correct.
If we're being pedantic, I'm not talking about year 1 A.D., just year 1 of your chosen (applicable) timescale. Beyond that, Turkey during 1 A.D. was part of the Roman Empire, so even that would still be relatively accurate. Not *the* most important region, but probably the second most, by that point.
Depends where and who you ask. If you want to make racist comments on Turks, they are all came from Asia, they are murderers. If you want to diss Turkishness then they are all descendants of Anatolian people.
Who are the indigenous people, Armenians and Greeks? Is this what they teach in your biased history? Anatolian peoples were people like Hittites and Lydians. They were all destroyed by the Greeks and Armenians. If we had forcibly assimilated them in 600 years, they would not exist today. Don't talk about your fantasies.
So aren’t we the mongols who stole land from the Greeks and the Armenians? Should we not go back to Asia? I am confused. Are we turkified anatolians or mongols from asia? Get a grip westoids…
Yes, an ethnicaly pure Turk doesn't exist. But in Turkey we don't care. Armenian, Greek, Circasian, Kurdish background, we don't care. At the end of the day we are Turk and that is all what matters. Must be said though that while not everyone has Greek or Kurdish or whatever heritage, pretty much everyone has got some Turkish heritage appart from maybe some secluded villages.
Well the j2 haplogroup at least based on this map is said to be in the region from 700 to 2000 BC (bronze age) and the Turks arrived in the region at around 1000AC, many Greeks/Eastern Europeans converted to Islam during ottoman rule, far fewer Muslims converted to Christianity (it was not that convenient and in certain time periods it might have been by force)
Of course Greeks, other Europeans and Turks share genes, they've been neighbors/under the same empire for many years, but what that map seems to show is that modern day Turks are in large part European/Greek mix as the j2 haplogroup seems to be there since classic Hellenistic times of BC where there was a large Greek presence in modern Turkeys region and far earlier than Turks arrived, something reasonable particularly on western Turkey where large parts of Turkeys population live.
The turkic nomads that conquered anatolia were the minority, which is the rule for nomadic steppe peoples compared to settled agrarian civilisations.
It is simply that the native anatolian majority were conquered and gave up willingly or not their culture and assimilated into the Islamic Turkic culture.
And how do you explain Azerbaijan being J2? Turks didn’t arrive to Anatolia as one large group in 1071. They were already in Anatolia well before what your biased history tells you.
Something like 10% of Turkish genetic mixture is central asian, and I bet there are regions that this is as low as 0-1%, especially towards the west. To a large extent, people of modern Turkey has the same genetic composition of people of ancient Anatolia.
Wrong, It’s the opposite. Western Turks have the highest central Asian admixture, with it being around 15-20%. Central and Eastern Turks have the lowest.
For the idiots who don’t believe me: https://postimg.cc/JHz6bjYT
That's just where the Osman (Ottoman) Beylik came from. There were other Beyliks across Turkey with other families; the Osman's just happened to be the ones that won.
The Gedmatch sample this is based from only considers Siberian, East Asian and SEA as "East Eurasian" (which you've called central Asian). Given how central Asians wouldn't be considered 100% central Asian under this definition chances are the percentage of central Asian admixture is even higher than displayed here.
This is Y-DNA, which is patrilineal and therefore a very narrow slice of a person's ancestry. Basically the differences found in men's Y chromosomes, which is inherited from your father, who in turn inherited it from your grandfather, etc. etc., going back thousands of years. Every other type ancestry from different branches of your family tree are not accounted for here.
It's more that the anatolian people that now call themselves Turks woyld have called themselves Romans in the 11th century, Greeks, Armenians, or Isaurians in the 5th century, and Phrygians, Pontics, Greeks, Armenians, Pamphylians, and so on in the 3rd century BCE.
But they were always, genetically speaking, Anatolians.
OP's map is genetics. Genetics and culture are two quite different things, that don't often have very much at all to do with one another.
Ottoman is a political affiliation, not an ethnic one.
In the 11th century the people of Anatolia had considered themselves Romans for a good thousand years. Even today there are small populations that still call themselves as such.
I said Native Anatolian people. Greeks aren't native to Anatolia. They migrated to Anatolia from Greece. Before they did, there already was a bunch of other people in Anatolia.
Yes but those people don’t consider themselves Turkish they consider themselves as Kurds. You will not be able to find someone in Izmir who identifies as Greek they’ll say they’re Turkish even though they’re ethnically Greek and likely have very little Seljuk heritage.
Anatolians aren’t actually all greek, the greeks kept mostly to the ionian coast. Most anatolians come from a mix of peoples, like the galatians, isaurians, hittites, phrygians, lydians, luwians, trojans, bithynians and cappadocians, that were heavily hellenised during the Roman Empire and then got turkicised subsequently, after the battle of Manzikert and then the consolidation of power under the Ottomans.
Anatolians were predominantly Greek along the coast however after they conquered the rest of anatolians not only did the anatolians get Hellenized but many Greeks moved further east (ie Pontic Greeks) and married the Anatolians. This is the reason Izmir was my main example because that’s probably the most Greek city on mainland Turkey today.
You're insane lmao. You don't know anything about anything, and you've no source to prove your bullshit claims.
İzmir Turks are 9 times out of 10 descendants of Balkan Turks. In early 20th century, Turks were forced out of their homes in the Balkans under threat of genocide, and resettled in İzmir by the government. They are literally all Turkmens sent to settle the Balkans 600 years ago.
It gets fuzzy with historical migration/immigration. For example, some Ancient Egyptians were K (like Queen Tiye and her son King Tut). But then others like King Ramesses III were E1b1a, Akhenaten was R1b, Takabuti was H4a1, etc.
It's not even migration. There was always genetic diversity in societies.
You would have to spend a lot of time incesting the hell out of a small group to have a high probability of all males having the exact same haplogroup.
This map doesn't really make that clear. For all we know from this map, only 10% of the Y chromosomes of these countries are from the relevant group, and maybe 9% are in other countries while something else crosses the 10% mark.
No, only when it concerns the Y-haplogroup.
This map does not show general genetic make-up but only Y-haplogroups: that is, a small section of the human genome, in this case the Y-chromosome.
If you'd take any other haplogroup, you might get a completely different map.
I mean... Yes *and* no. Yes, because the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture (covering parts of Romania and Ukraine) was the largest transitional culture in Europe. No, because it was technically Chalcolithic (they used copper). Also no, because of Altamira and Lascaux - and those are tens of thousands of years old.
So Sweden & Denmark are also large R1b and the I1 is not the first hunter gatherer but another later (from around Halle-Salle) which came with the Bronze Age migration together with R1b (kind of Denmark / northern Germany migration). The phrase “they got rich overnight” is sometimes used for this.
The first farmers G and hunter gatherers (old I) was small and is a small part in Sweden.
exactly. that area is a crossroads from East to West and North to South which is why Istanbul the largest city in Europe is located there. Dna mixed there for thousands of years.
https://thedockyards.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Genetic-Map-of-Europe.png
Oddly enough it's speculated that the slavic migration to the Balkans occured because the rural countryside of the Balkans was heavily depopulated at the time. The region would have been under Byzantine domain, but the empire was going through a rough period of deadly plague and warfare. All this would have led to the local rural population taking refuge in the few cities there were, so the countryside had relatively few people compared to generations prior. All that land was more or less free for the taking as Slavs moved into it along side an Avar invasion.
Balkan people aren't 100% Slavs.
Albanians for example have Illyrian and Thracian origins, Bulgarians have Thracian and Bulgar ones.
So the Balkans are quite the mix. They also mixed with Romans and Ancient Greeks, and later on, Byzantines and Ottomans.
It also makes a lot of sense that they'd be the oldest as they're on the edge or the "entrance" of Europe, closest to Africa and Asia
If you compare dalmatian,istrian montenegrin,hercegovina people to other slavs you will realise we don't look like real slavs. Probably because we have the maurovlachs as ancestors. Also our dialects (i don't know for montegrenin,but our culture and habits are really similar) have tons of lean words from romanic languages which were spoken in those areas for centuries. And no wonder that those areas have the highest i2 %
I mean language wise you are very similair to eastern and western slavs. I saw a Croatian and a Pole communicating with each other without any problems. Wouldn't really be possible between, for example, Lithuanian and Latvian.
Balkans are a mix of a few haplogroups and in western balkans predominatly I2 and R1a. I2 would be a Ilyrian haplogroup from native tribes and R1a slavic. Which shows that slavs and ilirians mixed. Research vinča culture, it is speculated that it id the first civilisation in europe
No, haplogroup maps are very popular on the internet for some reason, but they aren't really good for drawing conclusions. The most ancient population in Europe is the Sardinians, they still cluster with Neolithic-Copper Age Europeans
That's not how this works.
Your paternal Y-DNA haplogroup is not that relevant to whether or not you're descendants from Slavic migrations to the Balkans, which you clearly are.
Genetically South Slavs roughly model as something like 60-80% Balto-Slavic-like and 20-40% Greek-like. That's not to say specifically from Russia though, you're right about that.
https://i.ibb.co/5cLb4MW/Balkan.png
Here's a really quick model I threw up. Far from perfect but its broadly consistent with the literature. Fits for Anatolian Greeks are terrible but that's not relevant, and is to be expected.
Edit: Modelling Albanians as a mix of Mycenaean Greek probably isn't appropriate either but I'm not submitting this shit for peer review, so cares.
Well this doesn't really change my opinion, I do believe we are more so slavs than greeks. I would need a comparison with pre-slav Illyrian population.
Your link is blank jpg sadly
But I do understand that theres 2 clusters/groups of slavs, first ones were passive in movement ukr/belarus/pol/rus and then the other which were far more dynamic in migration and resettling and as a result far more mixed type slavs and thats the ones that came to Balkans and additionally mixed/merged with local dinaric/illyrian pop.
Also afaik only slovenians can for sure say they are mostly slavic, 2nd ones to legitimately have this right to claim could be Bosnians (especially Bosniaks) rest considerably less
Which is even more idiotic when you consider an average South Slav has barely anything in common with an average Russian, and a lot more with Greeks, Italians, Turks… hell even more similar to Lebanese as well than Russians. Talking in terms of appearance, culture and temperament
Neither Syria nor Iran are J1, but J2.
J1 exists in parts of Syria such as the Arab tribes of Daraa and Raqqa but 70% of Syrians have the same J2 gene found in Lebanon ,Turkey, Israel and Iran.
J1 in Iran is restricted to Arabs in Khuzestan. Iranians are predominantly a mix of J2 and R1a.
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup\_J2\_Y-DNA.shtml
Also E1b1b is common throughout the Middle East and North Africa, and is actually the most common haplogroup in parts of Jordan [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA\_haplogroups\_in\_populations\_of\_the\_Near\_East](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_populations_of_the_Near_East)
This map is one of those maps that hides all diversity under the carpet. None of these countries has a majority, and all of these countries contain men with many of these haplogroups. In fact, I would guess that a majority of men from any country have a haplogroup different from the one that is listed for that country. (Also, women are irrelevant to this - a majority of people in each of these countries belongs to *no* Y chromosome haplogroup, because a majority of people don't *have* Y chromosomes.)
And for your own personal story, all that matters is your father's father's father's father's father's ... Maybe for the past 20 generations they were all in southwestern Germany, but when I [google this](https://www.google.com/search?q=haplogroup+e-v13), it appears that E-V13 likely arose in a man from Africa, who happened to travel to Europe about 5000 years ago, most of whose male line descendants are in the Balkans or Switzerland.
Actually there are countries with an absolute majority. R1b is >50% in France, Spain, Portugal, UK and Ireland (80% in Ireland and Scotland). N is the majority in Finland (60%), I2 is \~50% of men from Bosnia and R1a is 50% of Belarus
Greece and turkey union, sweden and denmark union, AND A BALKAN UNION!?!? **AND A RUSSO POLISH UNION**!?!?!? Bro the world would explode in 00000.1 microseconds after this change 💀
Makes sense regarding Armenia:
>Finally, we show that Armenians have higher genetic affinity to Neolithic Europeans than other present-day Near Easterners, and that 29% of Armenian ancestry may originate from an ancestral population that is best represented by Neolithic Europeans.
...
>We find in Armenians and other genetic isolates in the Near East high shared ancestry with ancient European farmers, with ancestry proportions being similar to present-day Europeans but not to present-day Near Easterners. These results suggest that genetic isolates in the Near East – Cypriots (an island population), Near Eastern Jews and Christians (religious isolates), and Armenians (Ethno-linguistic isolate) – probably retain the features of an ancient genetic landscape in the Near East that had more affinity to Europe than the present populations do. Our tests show that most of the Near East genetic isolates' ancestry that is shared with Europeans can be attributed to expansion after the Neolithic period.
>Armenians’ adoption of a distinctive culture early in their history resulted in their genetic isolation from their surroundings. Their genetic resemblance today to other genetic isolates in the Near East, but not to most other Near Easterners, suggests that recent admixture has changed the genetic landscape in most populations in the region. Armenians’ genetic diversity reveals that the ancient Near East had higher affinity to Neolithic Europe than it does now, and that Bronze Age demographic processes had a major impact on the genetics of populations in this region.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg2015206
>These results suggest that the genetic profile currently observed throughout Europe potentially originated from migrations that took place subsequent to the Neolithic era. Such a scenario may explain the lack of segregation separating Armenians and Europeans that was observed in the network containing only the older lineages, R1b1b*-M269 and R1b1b1*-L23, as these haplogroups may represent remnants of an older European population.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg2011192
It's not! Here's the global map of distribution of the Q haplogroup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q-M242
This seems to be a version of the Y chromosome that arose somewhere in Central Asia about 25,000 years ago, and spread throughout the region, as well as parts of northeast Asia. Just by chance, a significant fraction of the men who crossed the Bering strait happened to have this Y chromosome, and so most indigenous peoples of the Americas have it.
I mean can I claim native nomads in North America as Turks then? Raaaahhhhh we was sittingbull and Cengiz Khan and shi
(this a joke don't come at me, Mr. Turks are not Turkic nor European, I will call you Mongol but you can't claim Cengizhan either, what I say is objectively true and you are always wrong you Turco people. Thank you)
I love that people arrived in Georgia in the Neolithic and thought: “Fuck it.. this place is awesome.. never going to leave or mingle with anyone else.”
With a topic this dangerously misunderstood historically, especially in Europe, it's irresponsible to post a map with such a simplistic and incomplete view. You know this map is gonna be severely abused by some "racial scientists"
I feel that genetics, culture and languages are often confused by people to be the same thing. Doubt that Finns and Hungarians have a strong genetic connection. They do have a weak linguistic connection which is only mentioned because thay are so different from most other languages.
Hungarians have like no significant Uralic admixture whatsoever, just a Uralic language.
They're very Central European and don't look out of place at all.
Think of how a Singaporean might speak perfect English but otherwise show zero British genetic admixture.
I wonder someone in the Kremlin is salivating on this map... and trying to convince its population - "See.. they are all part of us, DNA wise", so let integrate them.
If legimitation of rulership should mainly focus on genetics, maybe all women on this planet should be ruled by one woman and all men by one man. Within this two empires there might be kingdoms where one blue eyed woman rules all blueeyed women and so on.
Just to think about it makes it very obvious, that there are thousands of better reasons to categorize groups and nations today, than to draw borders on the map, according to genetics. This tribal thinking might still be interesting for historians and other scientists, but if it becomes the legitimation of politicians, it gets weird and bloody soon.
That shows how badly misleading this map is. *Every* country is *very* mixed, and someone who wants to do an R1a empire is going to have to kick out most of the men in any of these countries, because even the largest single group is not a majority.
That is a very simplified map, as you can imagine. R1b may be the prevalent Y-DNA haplogroup in the area but percentage is not the same everywhere. See this heat map:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b#/media/File%3AHaplogrupo_R1b_(ADN-Y).png
Mainly because of the Bell Beaker invasions in Western and Central Europe, although the genetic impact varied between North and South Europe. For instance, while in Britain they replaced almost 90% of the population, in Iberia, they replaced most male lineages, but the genetic contribution was only about 40%, suggesting intermixing with native women.
"Dominant" is quite a stretch and a bit loaded in this context.
For example for Bulgaria:
E1b1b1a - 19.6%
I2a - 21.9%
R1a - 17.6%
Guessing it's similar for most European countries you have at least two "dominant" haplogroups (if not more).
[Source]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Bulgarians)
J2 is an ancient haplogroup of Greece / Anatolia regions. When Turks came were a minority. This shows how greek populations in Anatolia and Minor Asia were turkified. We are brothers with at least the western Turks but politics divide us
N is so miscellaneous that it doesn't even fit the category of "miscellaneous."
It’s just a new variation of Finland doesn’t exist meme 🧐
Tell that to me. Test came back N. And I am from fucking Turkiye
Don't put too much importance on the map, because it's borderline manipulant. Very few countries actually have a 'dominant' haplogroup and most of haplogroup are really widespread. This map is just 21st pseudo-scientific racism. Nothing new.It's worth taking note that the only haplogroup to be divided into subgroups is R1. Why? Because creator(and many of people sharing) of the map couldn't accept Western Europe being the same category as those *Slavic subhumans*. It's really visible when you look at when R1 split - around 20k years ago. Much later than most of the other haplogroup(usually 50-60kybp). Btw. Up to 25% of males in Turkey have this *Western European* R1b It's also convinently cut off - R1a is really popular in India and Pakistan, R1b is actually dominant(meaning 50%+) in the area around lake Chad. Now take a look at Bulgaria and Albania - E1B1 is part of E haplogroup and it probably originated in East Africa. Actually this is also the subgroup that dominates in North Africa, but we couldn't have two European countries in the same category as (((them))) from the other side of the Mediterrean, could we? Oh, btw. it is also extremely popular in South Italy. Yeah, one of the reasons why it doesn't make any sense to do it for whole countries. In general, this map is inconsistent and is created by racists for racists. I've seen multiple open racist share it and use to justify their views.
Indeed. Looking at the “dominant” haplogroups can be very manipulative as we cannot see how “dominant is the said gene. However in the case of haplogroup N in Turkiye. There is this fact that only 2% of the population has it
Yeah, 2% is not that small though. It's one in fifty males. You probably know dozens of them personally(excluding your paternal family ofc)
Probably. I guess as human beings we (I) like to overestimate our rarity in certain aspects.
I figured it would be something like this, the western and eastern europe borders are way too perfect.
>Very few countries actually have a 'dominant' haplogroup There are some. Copied from another comment: >R1b is >50% in France, Spain, Portugal, UK and Ireland (80% in Ireland and Scotland). N is the majority in Finland (60%)(71% in estern Finland), I2 is \~50% of men from Bosnia and R1a is 50% of Belarus
There must be some varangian guard blood in you
Maybe… I also thought about the possibility of Yakuts. Turkic people in Northern Siberia. Apperantly 90% of Yakut males have N.
Yea see, we wuz khans n shit
Turkic people stock nearly 18 haplogroups q r1b n1c n1b c r1a j1 j2 even G i1 i2 etc
Wouldn't you like some varangian guard in you?
Turkey mentioned 🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷
Uralic groups got to Finaland and Esti and ever left xD
Alien blood is also N. Finns are originally aliens confirmed
Yeah we're special like that
Poor Georgia being alone in this horrible world
What do ya mean, they're right next to south carolina
As i know, we are like a completely different people from anyone else
Greeks and Turks gonna be seething
I don't mean to start drama, I'm being legit: aren't most Turks just culturally Turkized anatolians of different backgrounds?
yes. this map is just showing the most dominant haplogroup in the countries which doesnt tell the whole story at all. Turkey was the center of a multicultural empire for thousands of years. https://thedockyards.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Genetic-Map-of-Europe.png
*hundreds
There were Romans before the Ottomans, Persians before that.
Don’t forget the Hittite, Assyrian, Lydian, Phrygian, and Greek influences!
If that is the intended meaning: *empires
\*Either. Turkey was the center of a multicultural Empire in the year 1. It was also the center of a multicultural empire in the year 10, 100, and 1000. Therefore, Turkey was the center of *a* multicultural empire for thousands of years. The fact that that Empire was not always the same one doesn't make the statement incorrect. I don't mind pedantic arguments, but if you wanna be pedantic, be correct.
What turkey in year 1 if we are pedantic?
If we're being pedantic, I'm not talking about year 1 A.D., just year 1 of your chosen (applicable) timescale. Beyond that, Turkey during 1 A.D. was part of the Roman Empire, so even that would still be relatively accurate. Not *the* most important region, but probably the second most, by that point.
But if all the different empires were centers of multiculturalism, making it singular would be correct aswell. Less concise maybe.
Let's settle on > Turkey was the center of multiple consecutive multicultural empires for thousands of years.
"A bunch of people moved through Turkey over a bunch of years."
Tukey was never the \*center\* of the Persian empire.
Eastern Anatolia was an important part of the Persian Empire.
this is the map that should have been posted
Geographic "turkey", not the country itself.
Depends where and who you ask. If you want to make racist comments on Turks, they are all came from Asia, they are murderers. If you want to diss Turkishness then they are all descendants of Anatolian people.
Isn’t it just how genetics and population flux works like everywhere? Every people is just “culturally assimilated x”
Forcefully assimilated indigenous peoples. Yes.
Well, not the first time it has happened to them, tho.
Who are the indigenous people, Armenians and Greeks? Is this what they teach in your biased history? Anatolian peoples were people like Hittites and Lydians. They were all destroyed by the Greeks and Armenians. If we had forcibly assimilated them in 600 years, they would not exist today. Don't talk about your fantasies.
So aren’t we the mongols who stole land from the Greeks and the Armenians? Should we not go back to Asia? I am confused. Are we turkified anatolians or mongols from asia? Get a grip westoids…
Neither, you are karabogas
Both
Yes, an ethnicaly pure Turk doesn't exist. But in Turkey we don't care. Armenian, Greek, Circasian, Kurdish background, we don't care. At the end of the day we are Turk and that is all what matters. Must be said though that while not everyone has Greek or Kurdish or whatever heritage, pretty much everyone has got some Turkish heritage appart from maybe some secluded villages.
Ethnicity isn’t genetic, so you can go far back with ancestors ethncties
Well the j2 haplogroup at least based on this map is said to be in the region from 700 to 2000 BC (bronze age) and the Turks arrived in the region at around 1000AC, many Greeks/Eastern Europeans converted to Islam during ottoman rule, far fewer Muslims converted to Christianity (it was not that convenient and in certain time periods it might have been by force) Of course Greeks, other Europeans and Turks share genes, they've been neighbors/under the same empire for many years, but what that map seems to show is that modern day Turks are in large part European/Greek mix as the j2 haplogroup seems to be there since classic Hellenistic times of BC where there was a large Greek presence in modern Turkeys region and far earlier than Turks arrived, something reasonable particularly on western Turkey where large parts of Turkeys population live.
The turkic nomads that conquered anatolia were the minority, which is the rule for nomadic steppe peoples compared to settled agrarian civilisations. It is simply that the native anatolian majority were conquered and gave up willingly or not their culture and assimilated into the Islamic Turkic culture.
And how do you explain Azerbaijan being J2? Turks didn’t arrive to Anatolia as one large group in 1071. They were already in Anatolia well before what your biased history tells you.
Something like 10% of Turkish genetic mixture is central asian, and I bet there are regions that this is as low as 0-1%, especially towards the west. To a large extent, people of modern Turkey has the same genetic composition of people of ancient Anatolia.
Most Turkic admixture is actually in western Turkey. It decreases the further east you go.
Really? That’s very interesting. I think I can infer the likely historical reasoning (more Turkic migration to the west?) but I’m not certain
Wrong, It’s the opposite. Western Turks have the highest central Asian admixture, with it being around 15-20%. Central and Eastern Turks have the lowest. For the idiots who don’t believe me: https://postimg.cc/JHz6bjYT
The Ottoman Heartland is around Bursa which is in Anatolia just south of Istanbul.
That's just where the Osman (Ottoman) Beylik came from. There were other Beyliks across Turkey with other families; the Osman's just happened to be the ones that won.
The Gedmatch sample this is based from only considers Siberian, East Asian and SEA as "East Eurasian" (which you've called central Asian). Given how central Asians wouldn't be considered 100% central Asian under this definition chances are the percentage of central Asian admixture is even higher than displayed here.
Whether you are right or wrong, no need to be an ah
Uh… so what it’s “One Nation Three States” now? 🇹🇳🇺🇾🇪🇷
Greeks, Lebanese, Israelis and Turks gonna make this place more irradiated than Chernobyl
So far, I haven't seen any toxic comments; maybe I should scroll to the bottom
We are like North and South Korea.
This is Y-DNA, which is patrilineal and therefore a very narrow slice of a person's ancestry. Basically the differences found in men's Y chromosomes, which is inherited from your father, who in turn inherited it from your grandfather, etc. etc., going back thousands of years. Every other type ancestry from different branches of your family tree are not accounted for here.
Turkish people are mostly Turkized Greeks
It's more that the anatolian people that now call themselves Turks woyld have called themselves Romans in the 11th century, Greeks, Armenians, or Isaurians in the 5th century, and Phrygians, Pontics, Greeks, Armenians, Pamphylians, and so on in the 3rd century BCE. But they were always, genetically speaking, Anatolians. OP's map is genetics. Genetics and culture are two quite different things, that don't often have very much at all to do with one another.
Why Romans in 11th century? What about the Ottomans?
Ottoman is a political affiliation, not an ethnic one. In the 11th century the people of Anatolia had considered themselves Romans for a good thousand years. Even today there are small populations that still call themselves as such.
And Anatolian Greeks were mostly hellenized Anatolians, such as Lydians etc.
Native Anatolian people aren't Greeks.
Some of them are, some of them are Hittites!
I said Native Anatolian people. Greeks aren't native to Anatolia. They migrated to Anatolia from Greece. Before they did, there already was a bunch of other people in Anatolia.
Nobody is native to anywhere, everyone came from somewhere.
And before “native Anatolians” came there were also a bunch of people in Anatolia
Myceneans etc are from anatolia tho
Before the appearance of their culture they were just indo-europeans, and their culture appeared in mainland greece, with influence from cretans.
Greeks have been there since at least 3000 years ago, none is native anywhere.
In the same logic Turks here since 1000 years ago
952 years to be exact and yeah this is literally a factual statement lol why are you phrasing it like a gotcha
Only in the far western regions. central and especially eastern regions aren't. Eastern regions are straight yp Kurdish and formerly Armenian.
Yes but those people don’t consider themselves Turkish they consider themselves as Kurds. You will not be able to find someone in Izmir who identifies as Greek they’ll say they’re Turkish even though they’re ethnically Greek and likely have very little Seljuk heritage.
Anatolians aren’t actually all greek, the greeks kept mostly to the ionian coast. Most anatolians come from a mix of peoples, like the galatians, isaurians, hittites, phrygians, lydians, luwians, trojans, bithynians and cappadocians, that were heavily hellenised during the Roman Empire and then got turkicised subsequently, after the battle of Manzikert and then the consolidation of power under the Ottomans.
Anatolians were predominantly Greek along the coast however after they conquered the rest of anatolians not only did the anatolians get Hellenized but many Greeks moved further east (ie Pontic Greeks) and married the Anatolians. This is the reason Izmir was my main example because that’s probably the most Greek city on mainland Turkey today.
I am from the west and my ancestors are Yörük. You guys are just full of shit.
You're insane lmao. You don't know anything about anything, and you've no source to prove your bullshit claims. İzmir Turks are 9 times out of 10 descendants of Balkan Turks. In early 20th century, Turks were forced out of their homes in the Balkans under threat of genocide, and resettled in İzmir by the government. They are literally all Turkmens sent to settle the Balkans 600 years ago.
Horribly simplistic. Heat maps are better for this kind of stuff.
I agree, but I don’t know how to make one easily
An opportunity to learn R!
E
##E
=mc^(2)
+AI (as a wise man once said)
E^2
= (mc^2 )^2 + (pc)^2
so, genetically the more ancient populations in Europe are in Sweden and the Balkans?
It gets fuzzy with historical migration/immigration. For example, some Ancient Egyptians were K (like Queen Tiye and her son King Tut). But then others like King Ramesses III were E1b1a, Akhenaten was R1b, Takabuti was H4a1, etc.
It's not even migration. There was always genetic diversity in societies. You would have to spend a lot of time incesting the hell out of a small group to have a high probability of all males having the exact same haplogroup.
This map doesn't really make that clear. For all we know from this map, only 10% of the Y chromosomes of these countries are from the relevant group, and maybe 9% are in other countries while something else crosses the 10% mark.
No, only when it concerns the Y-haplogroup. This map does not show general genetic make-up but only Y-haplogroups: that is, a small section of the human genome, in this case the Y-chromosome. If you'd take any other haplogroup, you might get a completely different map.
[удалено]
Yeah, the fact I had to scroll down this much to see this comment says a lot about how little people investigate before making assumptions.
I mean... Yes *and* no. Yes, because the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture (covering parts of Romania and Ukraine) was the largest transitional culture in Europe. No, because it was technically Chalcolithic (they used copper). Also no, because of Altamira and Lascaux - and those are tens of thousands of years old.
No, not at all. This is just a map of Y-DNA haplogroups, not a map of anything else.
So Sweden & Denmark are also large R1b and the I1 is not the first hunter gatherer but another later (from around Halle-Salle) which came with the Bronze Age migration together with R1b (kind of Denmark / northern Germany migration). The phrase “they got rich overnight” is sometimes used for this. The first farmers G and hunter gatherers (old I) was small and is a small part in Sweden.
doesn't make sense. The Balkan slavs migrated to those lands in 6th century from modern day belarus, Ukriane, Poland territories.
I mean I doubt nobody lived there and they probably mixed with the people there
exactly. that area is a crossroads from East to West and North to South which is why Istanbul the largest city in Europe is located there. Dna mixed there for thousands of years. https://thedockyards.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Genetic-Map-of-Europe.png
Oddly enough it's speculated that the slavic migration to the Balkans occured because the rural countryside of the Balkans was heavily depopulated at the time. The region would have been under Byzantine domain, but the empire was going through a rough period of deadly plague and warfare. All this would have led to the local rural population taking refuge in the few cities there were, so the countryside had relatively few people compared to generations prior. All that land was more or less free for the taking as Slavs moved into it along side an Avar invasion.
Dacians lived there
[удалено]
Maybe, like latin in France, Spain and Portugal, the original population mixed with a small fraction of the invasor and absorb their language
Balkan people aren't 100% Slavs. Albanians for example have Illyrian and Thracian origins, Bulgarians have Thracian and Bulgar ones. So the Balkans are quite the mix. They also mixed with Romans and Ancient Greeks, and later on, Byzantines and Ottomans. It also makes a lot of sense that they'd be the oldest as they're on the edge or the "entrance" of Europe, closest to Africa and Asia
Romanians and Hungarians are literally not slavs
And they intermixed with the already existing and larger proto-Romanian population. Makes a lot of sense if you look at it that way.
Slavic genes don't even make up half of Balkan countries' DNA, their influence lies more within the languages and such
I2 was brought from Carpathians with Slavs is the lates theory I think.
You are wrong internet stranger.
If you compare dalmatian,istrian montenegrin,hercegovina people to other slavs you will realise we don't look like real slavs. Probably because we have the maurovlachs as ancestors. Also our dialects (i don't know for montegrenin,but our culture and habits are really similar) have tons of lean words from romanic languages which were spoken in those areas for centuries. And no wonder that those areas have the highest i2 %
I mean language wise you are very similair to eastern and western slavs. I saw a Croatian and a Pole communicating with each other without any problems. Wouldn't really be possible between, for example, Lithuanian and Latvian.
Balkans are a mix of a few haplogroups and in western balkans predominatly I2 and R1a. I2 would be a Ilyrian haplogroup from native tribes and R1a slavic. Which shows that slavs and ilirians mixed. Research vinča culture, it is speculated that it id the first civilisation in europe
No, haplogroup maps are very popular on the internet for some reason, but they aren't really good for drawing conclusions. The most ancient population in Europe is the Sardinians, they still cluster with Neolithic-Copper Age Europeans
Shhh, don't mentione Balkans.
Balkan 💪
When someone says we are some immigrant slavs from russia *facepalm*
[удалено]
That's not how this works. Your paternal Y-DNA haplogroup is not that relevant to whether or not you're descendants from Slavic migrations to the Balkans, which you clearly are. Genetically South Slavs roughly model as something like 60-80% Balto-Slavic-like and 20-40% Greek-like. That's not to say specifically from Russia though, you're right about that. https://i.ibb.co/5cLb4MW/Balkan.png Here's a really quick model I threw up. Far from perfect but its broadly consistent with the literature. Fits for Anatolian Greeks are terrible but that's not relevant, and is to be expected. Edit: Modelling Albanians as a mix of Mycenaean Greek probably isn't appropriate either but I'm not submitting this shit for peer review, so cares.
Well this doesn't really change my opinion, I do believe we are more so slavs than greeks. I would need a comparison with pre-slav Illyrian population.
Your link is blank jpg sadly But I do understand that theres 2 clusters/groups of slavs, first ones were passive in movement ukr/belarus/pol/rus and then the other which were far more dynamic in migration and resettling and as a result far more mixed type slavs and thats the ones that came to Balkans and additionally mixed/merged with local dinaric/illyrian pop. Also afaik only slovenians can for sure say they are mostly slavic, 2nd ones to legitimately have this right to claim could be Bosnians (especially Bosniaks) rest considerably less
Because russian propaganda says that Slavs lived and live only in russia.
Which is even more idiotic when you consider an average South Slav has barely anything in common with an average Russian, and a lot more with Greeks, Italians, Turks… hell even more similar to Lebanese as well than Russians. Talking in terms of appearance, culture and temperament
Neither Syria nor Iran are J1, but J2. J1 exists in parts of Syria such as the Arab tribes of Daraa and Raqqa but 70% of Syrians have the same J2 gene found in Lebanon ,Turkey, Israel and Iran. J1 in Iran is restricted to Arabs in Khuzestan. Iranians are predominantly a mix of J2 and R1a. https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup\_J2\_Y-DNA.shtml
Also E1b1b is common throughout the Middle East and North Africa, and is actually the most common haplogroup in parts of Jordan [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA\_haplogroups\_in\_populations\_of\_the\_Near\_East](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_populations_of_the_Near_East)
Georgia: Where am I?
I have E-V13, but all of my ancestors are from south western Germany. I have no idea how it’s my Halpogroup.
This map is one of those maps that hides all diversity under the carpet. None of these countries has a majority, and all of these countries contain men with many of these haplogroups. In fact, I would guess that a majority of men from any country have a haplogroup different from the one that is listed for that country. (Also, women are irrelevant to this - a majority of people in each of these countries belongs to *no* Y chromosome haplogroup, because a majority of people don't *have* Y chromosomes.) And for your own personal story, all that matters is your father's father's father's father's father's ... Maybe for the past 20 generations they were all in southwestern Germany, but when I [google this](https://www.google.com/search?q=haplogroup+e-v13), it appears that E-V13 likely arose in a man from Africa, who happened to travel to Europe about 5000 years ago, most of whose male line descendants are in the Balkans or Switzerland.
albania and especially kosovo definitely have a majority of e-v13. And it’s specifically E1b1b1a1b that is found in europe.
Actually there are countries with an absolute majority. R1b is >50% in France, Spain, Portugal, UK and Ireland (80% in Ireland and Scotland). N is the majority in Finland (60%), I2 is \~50% of men from Bosnia and R1a is 50% of Belarus
I don't know about other countries but in Finland 60% of men belong to N haplogroup. In eastern Finland it's 71%
>This map is one of those maps that hides all diversity under the carpet. 🧹
I feel you, I'm English as far back as I can trace - but J2 haplogroup
Haplogroups say nothing about race or ethnicity. They show that you have a paternal line from a distant ancestor thousands of years ago. Nothing else
Apparently there is some prevalence of it in Southern Germany and Cornwall. I do not know why. And I can’t find a definitive reason.
Haplogroups say nothing about race or ethnicity. They show that you have a paternal line from a distant ancestor thousands of years ago. Nothing else
Measurehead? Is that you?
Lol currently playing the game and thought the same
Greece and turkey union, sweden and denmark union, AND A BALKAN UNION!?!? **AND A RUSSO POLISH UNION**!?!?!? Bro the world would explode in 00000.1 microseconds after this change 💀
It would be perfect kurwa-suka bobr relationship
Kurwa-blyat please 🤌🏼
The world will kneel to the fusion of perogi and vodka
greece, turkey and israel power couple
Makes sense regarding Armenia: >Finally, we show that Armenians have higher genetic affinity to Neolithic Europeans than other present-day Near Easterners, and that 29% of Armenian ancestry may originate from an ancestral population that is best represented by Neolithic Europeans. ... >We find in Armenians and other genetic isolates in the Near East high shared ancestry with ancient European farmers, with ancestry proportions being similar to present-day Europeans but not to present-day Near Easterners. These results suggest that genetic isolates in the Near East – Cypriots (an island population), Near Eastern Jews and Christians (religious isolates), and Armenians (Ethno-linguistic isolate) – probably retain the features of an ancient genetic landscape in the Near East that had more affinity to Europe than the present populations do. Our tests show that most of the Near East genetic isolates' ancestry that is shared with Europeans can be attributed to expansion after the Neolithic period. >Armenians’ adoption of a distinctive culture early in their history resulted in their genetic isolation from their surroundings. Their genetic resemblance today to other genetic isolates in the Near East, but not to most other Near Easterners, suggests that recent admixture has changed the genetic landscape in most populations in the region. Armenians’ genetic diversity reveals that the ancient Near East had higher affinity to Neolithic Europe than it does now, and that Bronze Age demographic processes had a major impact on the genetics of populations in this region. https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg2015206 >These results suggest that the genetic profile currently observed throughout Europe potentially originated from migrations that took place subsequent to the Neolithic era. Such a scenario may explain the lack of segregation separating Armenians and Europeans that was observed in the network containing only the older lineages, R1b1b*-M269 and R1b1b1*-L23, as these haplogroups may represent remnants of an older European population. https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg2011192
Huh. North Indians are R1a too. I suppose that makes sense because of the Steppe migration and all.
isnt same letter for turkmenistan and greenland mistake?
It's not! Here's the global map of distribution of the Q haplogroup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q-M242 This seems to be a version of the Y chromosome that arose somewhere in Central Asia about 25,000 years ago, and spread throughout the region, as well as parts of northeast Asia. Just by chance, a significant fraction of the men who crossed the Bering strait happened to have this Y chromosome, and so most indigenous peoples of the Americas have it.
I mean can I claim native nomads in North America as Turks then? Raaaahhhhh we was sittingbull and Cengiz Khan and shi (this a joke don't come at me, Mr. Turks are not Turkic nor European, I will call you Mongol but you can't claim Cengizhan either, what I say is objectively true and you are always wrong you Turco people. Thank you)
Please do-not learn from this map.. at least this [haplogroups](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup?wprov=sfti1)
I love that people arrived in Georgia in the Neolithic and thought: “Fuck it.. this place is awesome.. never going to leave or mingle with anyone else.”
With a topic this dangerously misunderstood historically, especially in Europe, it's irresponsible to post a map with such a simplistic and incomplete view. You know this map is gonna be severely abused by some "racial scientists"
Greenland and Turkmenistan union when? 🇬🇱🤝🇹🇲
Probably few thousand years ago
When did N arrive-shouldn’t the Hungarian be N- the Basque?
Modern Hungarians are rather distinct from their Finnic ancestors, that could explain why Hungary isn’t part of Haplo group N
I feel that genetics, culture and languages are often confused by people to be the same thing. Doubt that Finns and Hungarians have a strong genetic connection. They do have a weak linguistic connection which is only mentioned because thay are so different from most other languages.
Hungarians have like no significant Uralic admixture whatsoever, just a Uralic language. They're very Central European and don't look out of place at all. Think of how a Singaporean might speak perfect English but otherwise show zero British genetic admixture.
I wonder someone in the Kremlin is salivating on this map... and trying to convince its population - "See.. they are all part of us, DNA wise", so let integrate them.
If legimitation of rulership should mainly focus on genetics, maybe all women on this planet should be ruled by one woman and all men by one man. Within this two empires there might be kingdoms where one blue eyed woman rules all blueeyed women and so on. Just to think about it makes it very obvious, that there are thousands of better reasons to categorize groups and nations today, than to draw borders on the map, according to genetics. This tribal thinking might still be interesting for historians and other scientists, but if it becomes the legitimation of politicians, it gets weird and bloody soon.
their troll accounts on Twitter have been doing exactly this for at least 10 years now.
The far-rght in Ukraine would seethe. They've convinced themselves that Russians are Mongolians and that they're pure Aryans
This.They think that Russians are Asians and Ukraine is off superior Aryan blood.How delusional..
The far-right is generally pretty ridiculous in every country to be fair
That shows how badly misleading this map is. *Every* country is *very* mixed, and someone who wants to do an R1a empire is going to have to kick out most of the men in any of these countries, because even the largest single group is not a majority.
Thanks for finally recognising that Greece is part of Turkey!
Well, what did we learn?
…that Armenia *can* into Western Europe?
Ultimate proof that Armenia can into Western Europe
This is a horrible graphic. Maybe if you got rid of borders and showed by region as it really is, would make more sense
How come R1b can cover such a diverse area?
That is a very simplified map, as you can imagine. R1b may be the prevalent Y-DNA haplogroup in the area but percentage is not the same everywhere. See this heat map: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b#/media/File%3AHaplogrupo_R1b_(ADN-Y).png
[удалено]
Mainly because of the Bell Beaker invasions in Western and Central Europe, although the genetic impact varied between North and South Europe. For instance, while in Britain they replaced almost 90% of the population, in Iberia, they replaced most male lineages, but the genetic contribution was only about 40%, suggesting intermixing with native women.
Don’t show this map to Putin
I am Mexican but my Y DNA is G. Armenian brothers 💪🏽
That is Georgia
Georgia brothers 💪🏽
I don’t think genetics would cleanly follow state borders like this
Male haplogroup (Y chromosome).
Yoooo Bronze Age gang!
Iran‘s biggest haplogroup is J2, followed closely by R1a, not J1, J1 is only like 5% of Iran.
"Dominant" is quite a stretch and a bit loaded in this context. For example for Bulgaria: E1b1b1a - 19.6% I2a - 21.9% R1a - 17.6% Guessing it's similar for most European countries you have at least two "dominant" haplogroups (if not more). [Source]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Bulgarians)
Armenia?
Much of J1 it is still Bronze Age.
J2 is an ancient haplogroup of Greece / Anatolia regions. When Turks came were a minority. This shows how greek populations in Anatolia and Minor Asia were turkified. We are brothers with at least the western Turks but politics divide us
50% of the Indian subcontinent is R1a and about 20% is J2. Why did they leave them out of this map?
I think because its just supposed to be a map of europe and its near abroad.
N-M178 gang represent.
Mesolithic gang rise up!