Polish DNA? Poles have the most genes in a group includes Balts, Macedonians and Greeks.

Poland DNA

I've heard many Greek guys described as brudasy here. Brits tend to go for the swarthy look more than Polish women.

Brudasy is the ass hair of Germanics.We are white.Maybe a bit opalone but not much.In regions with little sun people look pale.I just don't know if Polki find us still eksotyczny since we look so much like south Slavs etc.

Really Greeks seem so dark?I am happy my skin is white enough to differentiate me from those gypsies.But we also make fun of the dark looking ones calling them negroes etc though some women prefer the chocolate,who knows?

But really Bulgarians,Serbs and northern Greeks look very close,you cannot tell them apart in some regions.

So dark no but noticeably darker than Europeans like Nordic folk and Scots, yes. Maybe compare yourselves to Spaniards and see what conclusion you draw.

Dunno if this belogns in genealogy or cultrue, but I wonder what others think of this genetic chart. Poles have the most genes in a group that incldues Balts, Macedonians and Greeks. eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

not really that Greek as the same haplogroup R1a constitutes only12% in Greece.
E1b1b1 and J2 are characteristic for Greece, in Poland they make up only 4.5% .

I don't think, it is significant at all, but then I could be wrong.

damn right I did:))

Crow won't be pleased to read that Poles are more German than Serbian :D

ha, that and the fact that Serbia has only 15% of that slavic haplogroup, lol.
(!Bastardos Balcanos!)

Poland is the most slavic country with R1a 60%.(only.Sorbs have more 65%).Serbia has 35% and Greece 12%(20% in the north). These are also my estimations on slavic proportion made by observation.(Poles look completely Slavs,Czechs less so,Serbs even less etc but sometimes you may confuse them.For example you will comfuse a Pole for an ukrainian but seldom an ukrainian for czech.

"R1a: Balto-Slavic, Mycenaean Greek, Macedonian" :)

Poland: 56.5 %
Ukraine: 50 %
Belarus: 49 %
Russia: 46 %
Slovakia: 40 %
Latvia: 40 %
Lithuania: 38 %
Czech Republic: 34 %
Hungary: 32.5 %
Estonia: 32 %
Croatia: 29 %
Norway: 28 %
Austria: 26 %
etc.

And Serbia... only 15 %. Interesting ;)

You're not even looking at the same figures!

Too embarrased to mention that 27% African DNA, are we? lol :D

I'm intrigued by the "Macedonian" bit. Now, what is the criteria for "Macedonian"?
Is it the region or ethnicity. Does it cover all Greek/Bulgarian/Skopje/Albania/Serbian areas?

Considering many people in the Balkans dispute a "Macedonian" ethnicity, saying the "macedonians" are "really" Serbs/Bulgarians etc (not to mention Gypsy/Vlach etc) I'd be interested to know the criteria.

He will need consolation!!! :)

But very interesting chart otherwise...

East Germany has the highest percent of I1 (pre-germanic/Nordic) but the lowest percent of R1b (...germanic)

Hmmm.....

Oh dear, it seems that the Serbs will have to be left out of the future Slavic union(:

I hope Crow does not find it too hard to cope with. lol.

Serbia is out of the Slavic union, Germany is in. Not a happy day in Serbia.

Well, at least there is no more place for dispute where future capital of Slavic union should be placed ;-)

From link down:

First many stupid questions to professionals:
"....acording to eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

Serbs have 7% of haplogroup K+T (which both I assume is about K2), however in your statistics it is not mentioned.
Does it mean it didnot appear in your samples? How large sample you do have for Serbia?"

"......According to link above K2 is very rare in other european countries. So I wonder if geographic trajectory of people carrying this group in europe can be decoded from samples?

Of course Serbs having K2 doesnot mean that haplogroup came with them, but could be interesting to research..."

Now, answer from ppl who did reaserches:

"Post from iGENEA to 06.11.2008
Again, it is very important to DIFFER betweenn Haplogroup and Primitive Tribe. We have persons with germanic tribes, who belong to I2a and also persons with illyrian or slavian origins from the same haplogroup. Both groups represent different times and a causal conclusion is impossible.

So please, stop posting the same question in 5 forums at the same time. I will answer your question. Please, be careful with these sources, and use genetic studies to get reliable information. Wikipedia is a wonderful instrument, but sources are not always verified.

Remark: Haplogroups cannot give you an informations about the primitive tribes of a country or about the origins composition of a region!! This is really important. You will find a lot of theories in the internet about connections between haplogroups and tribes or betwenn haplogroups and "races", but this connection is incorrect."

Different data there.

Personally, I don't care about it. Genetic biologists would tell you that this DOESN'T MEAN a sh1t (who said that this is slav and this german DNA, how they know that? those samples had to be mixed, what date in time is used to determine when REAL slavs and REAL germans lived before they started mixing, it's not that simple to interpretate this results so, careful!!).

I asked.

Always phenotype before genotype, what comes out of X possibilities is more important than the DNA code itself (on this "racial" level at least).

Oh, and they told me also that mixing more different genomes is improving human race, sth called genetic reprogramming, look for it, I didn't.

I think this interest in DNA?? goes hand in hand with significant political inclination to the right in Europe.

Natasa, I have no idea about phenotypes, genotypes, haplogroups and genetics in general :) I must say that your post didn't help me with understanding why the data in eupedia don't mean anything.

I don't care about genes either, but it was interesting to study this data.
For example, the second biggest haplogroup in Poland is R1b: Italic, Celtic, Germanic; Hittite, Armenian. So, given the proximity of Germany it's probably "Germanic".

Also, the biggest percentage of R1b is in Wales (82 %!). Does this mean that Wales are the most Celtic? Wales are followed by Ireland (79 %), Scotland (72.5 %) and England (67 %). Very high percentage. It seems quite logical as Welsh, Irish, Scottish and English people live on islands and therefore there was little mixing.


True. That's why family members shouldn't have children with each other - it would produce a greater risk of flawed DNA.
Mongrels, for example, are less prone to heridatary diseases than single breed dogs, as far as I know.


I have an impression that it's rather Serbs who like to stress how Slavic they are. Look at Crow LOL
Poles don't care that much about being Slavs or not - Pan-Slavism wasn't very popular in Poland.
And Poles consider Serbs as Slavs ;) I think the same is with the rest of Slavs.

Paulina are they mistaking here then?


Serbia is part of Europe. Inclining to the right exists in Serbia too. You are mixing political with geographical concepts.

I don't think you are right there. As far as I've noticed even this forum is clearly showing polarization between two wider groups , those who feel closer to Germans (pragmatic ones), and the other group, aware of their origins (Slavic in historical, not biological sense).

Pan Slavic ideas exist to a certain degree everywhere Slavic people live.

These dogs of war should have sth closer to K9.Just kidding.
Anyway to understand haplotypes etc you need some knowledge from biology.This R1a distribution probably shows sth and I am sure it is connected to certain Slavic phenotypic features.

I don't know. Did they explain why it's incorrect? It would have to be explained to me in a relatively simple, non-scientific language ;)

And if it's incorrect then why Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Slovakia, etc. have such a high percentage of R1a? Doesn't this mean those nations are related to each other?


I don't understand...


True, but Pan-Slavism movement wasn't very popular in Poland and isn't popular to this day.


And what does mean "Slavic in historical sense"?


True, but in Poland it isn't a big degree, I would say quite small, it's much bigger in Russia, and apparently in Serbia.

As I wrote before, Pan-Slavism wasn't very popular in Poland. The reason for this was the fact that it was used as a political tool by both the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union to dominate and govern other Slavic nations:

"Pan-Slavism in Poland

Although early Pan-Slavism had found interest among some Poles, it soon lost its appeal as the movement became dominated by Russia, and while Russian Pan-Slavists spoke of liberation of other Slavs through Russian actions, parts of Poland had been ruled by the Russian Empire since the Partitions of Poland. Historically, Poland often saw itself in partnership with non-Slavic nations most of the time, such as Hungary, or Lithuania under the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth from 1569 to 1795. The influence of 19th century Pan-Slavism had little impact in Poland except for creating sympathy towards the other oppressed Slavic nations to regaining independence. At the same time while Pan-Slavism worked against Austro-Hungary with South Slavs, Poles enjoyed a wide autonomy within the state and assumed a loyalist position as they were able to develop their national culture and preserve Polish language, something under threat in both German and Russian Empires. A Pan-Slavic federation was proposed, but on the condition that the Russian Empire would be excluded from such an entity. After Poland regained its independence (from Germany, Austria and Russia) in 1918 no major or minor force considered Pan-Slavism as a serious alternative, viewing Pan-Slavism as little more than a code word for Russification. During Poland's communist era the USSR used Pan-Slavism as propaganda tool to justify its control over the country. The issue of the Pan-Slavism was not part of the mainstream political agenda, and is widely seen as an ideology of Russian imperialism."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Slavism#Pan-Slavism_in_Poland

Paulina, they are really angry about this way of reasoning.

Typical question, has to do with this topic:
"Post from Bojan to 07.11.2008
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 euratlas.com/history_europe/europe_map_0300.htm

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..."

"Post from iGENEA to 07.11.2008
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.

That's not true, J2 only constitutes 21% of Greece. And E1b1b1 comes from small fragments of the Ottoman Empire...


Again those genes originated in the Middle East, not Africa. And fyi I am Greek and have tested my genes with iGenea and don't have any African genes, maybe you should pull some money out of your pocket to do the same since you like bragging about your genetic "superiority" so much. Put the facts out on the table for us.

You guys are missing the point, it says HAVE THE MOST GENES IN A GROUP. The topic isn't that Poland is related to the Balkans, it's that these are the countries which have the most haplogroups in them (not that they're related).... in other words these countries are the most mixed genetically in Europe. The topic is about who has the most mixed genes, not relatedness.

R1a Slavic,R1b Germanic,probably E1B1 is the mediteranean.Also important are the dominating genes.For example Bulgarians genotypically are more Mongols than Slavic however Slavic genes prevailed as more dominant.Slavic prevail over mediteranean but are less strong than Germanic that is the mix of Germanic and Slavic produces a rather Germanic looking offspring while mix of mediteranean and Slavic produces more Slavic looking individual.

Merged thread:
How much of the Polish population has at least some German heritage?

I'm part German and interestingly enough I know a lot of Poles who have had at least one German ancestor.

Do you think it's sort of like how many Brits are part Irish?

Must be pretty common in Poland because almost anyone I've met there was partly a German too.

i know some too. but despite wroclaw being a former german city the chances are that folks here have ukrainian rellies.
the german connection, which might be strong in some areas (i guess poznan) may be weaker in others.

It won't be easy to answer this as there is probably no certitude.
I myself may have German ancestors. I will probably never know tho ;)

More than previously thought, that's for sure!

I really had for the longest time the impression that the Germans left during and after the war but instead even after the second big emigration wave during the 80's (Klose, Podolski) there still seem Germans left who are now openly admitting their heritage.

Really astounding!

But anything german was for so long shunned and a taboo that we will never really know how many of the true Poles are actually polonized Germans.