Arrow Downward Arrow Downward Close Close Done Done Cart Cart clock clock
Personal guidance

We are always happy to help you! Contact us via e-mail or Whatsapp.

If you would like us to call you back, please provide your phone number and how you can be reached. We will be happy to call you for a personal consultation. WhatsApp

Slavic genetics

Home » Primitive Tribes / Nations » Slavic genetics

Post from Andrey (Andrew) to 04.07.2011 21:07:33

Good night iGENEA! I think it would be very interesting to know the opinion of iGENEA's scientists on the following subjects:
1. Is there any relation or connection between a blood type (for example Rh system) and the haplogroups, tribes or modern nations?
2. Do modern slavs (Eastern, Western and Southern) have common roots with Germanic and Baltick nations or this statement may be applied only to Eastern and Western Slavs. For example can we say that Poles or Ukrainians have common roots with Germans or Dutch?
3. Is it true to say that modern population of Europe originate from a few couples of men and women?
Thank for your answer beforehand!

Post from Jozef to 05.08.2010 18:08:15

the name Slavs could sound in modern English as slaves, but you cannot mix this modern English word with the ancient slavic (slavonic) language. Even the English "Slaves" is derived from the latine "sclavus", which is far from the word Slav. From the word Slaves we, the Slaves, have many modern national names: Slovaks, Sloveniens, Slovania, Slovieni. And all this has a common root, which is of slavic origin of course, not of English. And the root is: Slovo (Word), connected with Slava (Glory, Praise). As dejan has correctly pointed out, it has connection with the distinction between those who can speak, utter a word (Slovo) (or be understandable): Slavs, and those who cannot utter an understandable word, who are therefore "mute" (nemec). The word "Nemec" is in most slavic languages until now used for Germans. Of course, the sounding of "Slavs" could produce a popular but incorrect etymology in the English proveninece. But it must be remembered, that the correct original old slavic word designating the member of the nation is not Slav, but Sloven (Slovien, Slovan). Slav is a derivation. For example Yugo-slavia means South - Slavia (the land of the southern Slavs, Slovans). (Personally, I am a Slovak)

Post from iGENEA to 22.06.2010 09:06:02

dejan probably is right, there are some other theories but it has nothing to do with "slaves".

Roman C. Scholz

Post from dejan to 21.06.2010 10:06:09

this is not true,
name slavs origins from slavic word for letter (means one who knows letters, who can speak). slavic word for german is NEMAC meaning (one who is mute).
stop posting lies

Post from L.C to 27.04.2010 02:04:25

SLAVS people were the first slaves in the world that were their name comes from and those people that speak a slavic language are decendent from those slaves.

Post from iGENEA to 21.12.2009 07:12:08

No problem bojan, we are here to answer questions.

Roman C. Scholz

Post from bojan to 20.12.2009 18:12:59

ok, thank you. i apologize for being somewhat rude in previous post

Post from iGENEA to 20.12.2009 17:12:18

Dear bojan,

iGenea offers DNA testing for the purpose of genetic genealogy.
That includes the origin of someones lineage during several ages.
The profiles of ancient tribes are researched not only by data of archeological excavations but also by the comparison of the profiles of modern people.

iGenea does not publish any articels but you can find (part of) the data that is used for the research of ancient tribes profiles here:

Roman C. Scholz

Post from bojan to 19.12.2009 21:12:51

I think your methods are not enough scientific... how large is your sample of proto-tribes genetics? how can you be sure they were of tribe that archeologist assume they are?
it is a bit as if in 2000 years someone dig out from grave north Korean kid that is now living in exile in USA and conclude that Americans are proto-tribe that carried haplogroup of that North Korean kid... Yes, you might tell people were not mixing so much back than, that freedoms of movement were limited... but I bet you would be wrong.. besides silent side of history is constant assimilation of weak tribes into stronger ones... My question is how do you dare to state numbers about origins of nations of today based on scarce data you have? Are you aware that such data are easily misused in nationalistic claims on land? Or you just carry about taking lot of money to sell personal history to people who are eager to have it so that they can feel special? From what I see, what you do is business and not science... please prove otherwise by listing scientific papers you published in international journals about your research of genetic origin of nations...

Post from iGENEA to 15.04.2009 12:04:17

They are two different tribes. You must differ between the genetic definition of tribe and the historical or ethnological one. Each person has only ONE origin in EACH Line. you can be slav in the paternal line and jew in the maternal line, for example, but you cannot be jew and slav in the maternal line. Each line has only one origin.

Inma Pazos

Post from Damn;)² to 14.04.2009 20:04:07

Are there traces of Slavic ancestry with ashkenazi Jews?

Post from iGENEA to 07.11.2008 15:11:41

Again, again and again: A connection between haplogroups and primitive tribes doesn't exist!!!! So please, stop to distribue here wrong informations, these would only disturb other forums and conduct to missunderstanding.

I already explained you the reason because haplogroups don't depend from the primitive tribe. Of course you will find a lot of such connections (R1b1c1c is only for Vikings f.ex.), but they don't come from scientists. All these connection are not correct and you must be careful, when you diffuse informations, which are just speculations and not reliable informations.

You told me, you already know, that primitive tribes don't depend from haplogroups, but as I see here, you didn't tell me the true. Your theories about slavs are a mixture from R1a and I2a will be correct in the majority of cases, but the causal connection is totally wrong. Because a slav has haplogroup R1a and another slav haplogroup I2a, you cannot say: Slavs are a mixture of these haplogroup is a WRONG CONCLUSION AND NOT SCIENTIFICAL.

Inma Pazos

Post from Bojan to 07.11.2008 03:11:11

Dominant haplogroup among Slavic populations is R1a. Second most important haplogroup present among all Slavic countries is I2A (former I1b).

Interesting is that R1a (see fig. 5) has maximal frequency in north in Poland, while its variation is maximal in south in Balkans.

Significantly higher variation does pinpoint to groups that are origin of groups with lower variation.

If R1a has arrived on Balkan with Slavs, then genetically, according to variations given in this study, those Balkan Slavs must have been the parental group of all other Slavs.

Another logical explanation would be that R2a did in fact spread from Balkan to north-east all the way to Scandinavia. (Czech and Slovak and Poland seems to have lower variations then Ukraina, Russia, or Denmark and Skandinavia). The higher variation zone is in fact in correlation with position of Venedae tribe on maps of Europe (

I2A variation indicates dwelling for a long time in Panonia, Czechia, Slovakia and south Poland before going southwards to Balkan.

Slavic is thus mixture of two primal tribes: R1a going at some point in time northwards from Balkan and I2A going southwards from
Panonian plane, Czech/Slovak and South Poland.

Riddle is when those migrations took place...
They could took tens thousands of years, or they could have been done in much much less time....
Were carriers of I2A to Balkan pre-Illyric tribes, Illyrians, or Serb/Croat tribes?
Answer is in genetics of Balkan archeological sites.... or in genetic study of present populations on much finer level then one of haplogroups...

Your origin analysis