|Das Forum befindet sich neu unter www.igenea.com/forum|
|Home » Allgemeine Fragen und Antworten » about the Bulgarians,,,|
the statistics you mentioned where based on old data, have not been updated and checked for flaws and therefore have been removed from the website.
We have not checked all sources Eupedia uses but usually this data is quite reliable.
Roman C. Scholz
I am quite sure that the Eupedia data on Bulgaria are quite screwed up, as Eastara claims.
Still, the essential haplogroup ingredients: E1b1b, R1b, R1a, I2a(new), J2 are realistic and also being found in surrounding neighbor counries as expected.
Now, IGenea\'s Table by nations has persistently stayed with a different from any other data samples composition for Bulgaria => https://www.igenea.com/index.php?content=49&id=7, i.e.
R1b - 41%
E1b1b - 31%
R1a - 28%;
Whatever the clades, this is a qualitative shift in the overall structure. E1b1b is most probably Thracian, R1a - old or slavic would make sense, but 41% of R1b implies an overwhelming Celtic background.
And as others have said, this differs from all neighbors. Taken at face value, nowadays Bulgarians are mixture of Thracians, Slavs, and Celts, hence the Bulgarian component should have been R1b Celtic.
A similar major difference from other samples in your Table of nations can be seen for the Danish haplogroups, where the Viking I1 has \'transformed\' in R1b and/or R1a.
I do not think, Bulgarian and Danish data have been simply mistyped/mistaken. I can not imagine you would not care fixing typos on your site.
Could it be that you guys know more than you admit? And how high is the probability of mixing I2a with R1b(Bulgaria), and I1 with R1b(Denmark)?
Our tests do not show asian genes or determine races like asian or caucasian.
We only analyze haplogroups which clearly show the movement you mentioned. Although the movement of the ancestors of todays europeans with haplogroup R1 from central Asia started about 25.000 years ago.
Roman C. Scholz
I have a question about central Asia.
Why you surch Asian genes in the tribes that came from Central Asia.
As I know the population in Central Asia before 1500 years were not Asians (Asian race) but from Europian (Caucassus race). The people in central Asia who are Asian race are actualy mongols who setteled there after the Huns and Protobulgarians and others.
So my question is why you surch Asian genes in Protobulgarians and Huns as they were not from Asian race, they were geograficly Asians, but from Caucassus race?
Or I'm wrong.
Sorry for my English.
Some clues indicate momgolian origin while others iranic.Nothing is totally proven yet.
And I agree with IGENEA. Even if the ProtoBulgars were mongolian this doesn't mean that the asian haplogroups found in these nations come from the Protobulgars, lots of asian tribes and nations had settled down in Eastern europe, and now as I have read the above texts some of them have even been here (in Europe) before the arrival of the Indoeuropeans.
Yes u are right eastara that that the core of the medieval BG empire were the lands north of the Balkan mountains, but the lands below the Balkan mountains were not so rare included into the BG kingdom as u may think, take for instance tzrar Samuil's kingdom which had Ohrid as its capital, The Bolyarin Momchil who rulled the Rhodope mountain,Tsar Ivan Asen's Bulgarian kingdom, tsar Simeon's BG kingdom and so on...
For this purpose, YDNA and mtDNA usually are the better choice.
The asian admixture in Europe was probably mainly caused by Finno-Ugrians, Huns, Mongolians and similar tribes that made their way west.
The scandinavian "asian" DNA is not indogermanic, but the people who carry these asian haplogroups lived in northern Europe long before Indoeuropeans arrived.
Im not sure but i also think these people are not very relevant for the discussed autosomal figures because they probably are based on chinese and japanese people.
Roman C. Scholz
It is now obvious from autosomal testing Asian influence radiates from Southern Ukraine, and understandably Romanians and Hungarians have the highest pecentage of Asian genes, although < 1%. However this shows only the recent admixture. More indicative is the percentage Central Asian, Siberian and East Asian genes and here Southern Balanians have it even less than the West Europeans. I suppose Westerners got it through the Scandinavian connection, people there also show a noticable amount of Asian genes.
unfortunatly i have not found any other statistics about Bulgaria.
But please be aware, that our Projects are just based on costumers, and therefore these percentages maybe are not representative.
It is also possible that the real percentage is just somewhere in between.
The link shows percentages for Asian between 0 an 1% for every country except Turkey. Therefore i guess no european country has a measurable higher asian percetage than the others.
Roman C. Scholz
Anyway thank u for your information too. I will check out these links too
Haplgroup E1b1b1 is dominating in Bulgaria with up to 30%, second I2a2, but R1a, yes is about 15%.
Look into the Bulgarian DNA project:
Speaking of Asian blood, which Serbs, Macedonians, etc. imply Bulgarians should have more than them, it is largely disproved by autosomal testing.
It turns out Bulgarians, Macedonians and Greeks have the least amount of Asian genes on the Balkans and as a result are maybe the most autochthonous.
You can se the data collected among Balkan people tested with 23amdMe (second sheet AVG is by country).
the big haplogroups are to old to serve as a strong indication of ancient tribes like Celts or Slavs.
It is correct that R1b is more frequent in western Europa and R1a in the east. But all of these subgroups exist nearly everywhere in Europa sinc a long time.
The R1b in Bulgaria maybe came there with Indoeuropeans befor they split up into celtic, slavic and germanic tribes.
Therefore these haplogroups can not show the ethnic origin.
Maybe the bulgarian R1a is not slavic R1a - which is possible as not every R1a is slavic.
Slavs also had other haplogroups, but it is very common that modern ethnic groups or peoples do not consist of only one ancient tribe that lived 2.000 years ago. Todays Slavs are not totally the same as the Slavs that spread over eastern Europe 1.500 years ago.
The numbers you mentioned are mot recent and accurate, the other ones are outdated and therefore have been removed from the website.
Roman C. Scholz
R1b 41 %
E1b1b 31 %
R1a 28 %
could u pls tell me which are more accurate and more recent?(these one or the above mentioned?) and pls explain me the results
As, I have understood, the R1b indicates celtic origin while the R1a indicates Slavic origin. Could you please explain to me what origin the other haplogroups show? And finaly how is it possible for the Bulgarians to have more(18%) slavic blood than the Serbs(15%)? Since Serbs are thought to be from pure Slavic origin while Bulgarians are considered to have originated from the mixture of both Protobulgars and Slavs?