It is like we didn't already know that Uralic speakers in the Russian heartland were Slavicized and replaced by Slavic people. The study found that this happened a few hundreds kilometers from Moscow in the western Oka river area. This is one thing we have known at least 150 years. But what we don't yet know and is more interesting. Why are Baltic Finns, Estonians and Finns, genetically much more western than those people in the supposed Oka river urheimat of Baltic Finnic speakers, and we have been more western back at least 2000 years from now. I can see an explanation in Estonia due to the high Slavic-like R1a concentration, but in Finland we have not such explanation. We have the highest N1c level in Northern Europe and our I1 differs remarkable from all Scandinavian I1 lineages. Common lineages for Finnish and Scaninavian I1 lived 3000 years ago. Yet, we have lived 2000 years in the neighborhood of Saami people, who are in a way semi-Siberians and own 20% Siberian admixture. Without Saami admixture in Finns we would likely be genetically more western than Estonians, regardless our y-dna haplogroups. Estonians got the minuscule Siberian admixture from Finns, especially during the time the Swedish realm reached the Baltic area. How do I know this? Because I have studied genealogy, read Finnish, Estonian and Scandinavian history and migrations between these countries. So what is the problem? It is lack of research of our own genetic background. Looking at the lack of enthusiasm we have in investigating our own history I suggest that we need foreign help in this matter.
A PCA plot from the study with my comment, "Estonian", "Finnish" and "supposed Balt. Finnic urheimat".
No comments:
Post a Comment
English preferred, because readers are international.
No more Anonymous posts.