The ancient god is for us.
Here are our open spaces
And our firmament.
(Kolovrat)
It is believed that Grandfather considered only the Nordic race (Norwegians, Swedes, Danes and Germans) to be Aryans; he considered all other Europeans to be second-class citizens, except the Slavs, Jews and Gypsies. The Jews and gypsies had to be completely destroyed - well, fuck them, we are not talking about them. But 2/3 of the Slavs were to be destroyed; he considered the Slavs to be subhuman, Der Untermenschen. Let's see what genetics tells us about who is Aryan and who is Untermenschen.
And we will return to the issue of race later. And here Grandfather turned out to be wrong: the center of origin and area of distribution of the Nordic race is an exact copy of the center of origin and area of distribution of the R1a haplogroup. And, in general, it is a very common misconception to consider blue-eyed blonds to be a Nordic race. Blondeness (white albinism) is a characteristic of the Cromanids, an ancient pre-Aryan population of Northern Europe. But the Aryans were fair-haired, and their albinism was not white, but yellow (golden) - just like this Russian child.
And we will return to the issue of race later.
The Y chromosome is passed from father to son almost unchanged and is not “mixed” or “diluted” by maternal heredity. This allows it to be used as a mathematically accurate tool for determining paternal ancestry. If the term “dynasty” has any biological meaning, it is precisely the inheritance of the Y chromosome. But from time to time neutral mutations occur in it, ignored by natural selection. Some of these mutations have proven to be useful markers for identifying ancient ancestral populations that spread across the Earth. This marker is called the “Y-chromosomal haplogroup” and it defines a set of men united by the presence of such a marker, i.e., descended from a common ancestor. There are 18 such haplogroups in total, they are named by codes consisting of Latin letters from A to R. At the moment, there is not a single nation consisting of only one haplogroup. Every modern nation consists of at least 2 haplogroups. The Russian gene pool consists of 7 main haplogroups, the leading place (on average, half) in which belongs to the R1a-haplogroup, called “Aryan”.
R1a, Aryan haplogroup.
The first common ancestor of modern Aryans lived in the southern Russian steppes several thousand years ago. Russians have an average percentage of this haplogroup - 47, the further north - the less (due to the admixture of Finno-Ugric genes), the further south - the more, in small ancient cities and rural outbacks, according to the scientist Klyosov, max. the percentage of the Aryan haplogroup reaches 85%, but we will take only average figures applicable to central Russia, or central Russia.according to different data (different scientists, different years, different parts of the country, different sample sizes)
Indo-European peoples of Europe by language:
Lusatians 63
Poles 49-63
Belarusians 39-60
Russians 47-59
Ukrainians 42-54
Slovaks 47
Lithuanians 36-45
Latvians 38-41
Czechs 29-41
Norwegians 18-31
Germans 6-31
Greeks 5-25
Romanians 6-20
Swedes 9-19
Serbs 14-16
Bulgarians 15
Italians 0-10
English 3-9
Spaniards 1-2
French 0
So Grandpa turned out to be a pussy! As we see, true Aryans- these are the Slavs (western and eastern) and the Balts. That's all! The Germans and Scandinavians smoke, but I won’t say anything at all about the Anglics, pasta makers and frogmen. And the southern Slavs are Slavs only in language and history. There was a story, but there was little left of the Aryan genes.
Non-Indo-European peoples of Europe:
Mordva 22-39
Estonians 27-37
Tatars 24-34
Hungarians 20-30 (in one source I even saw 60 - which is hard to believe)
Finns 2-19
And we will return to the Mordovians and Tatars.
Indo-European peoples of Asia:
Ishkashimi (Pamir Tajiks) 68
Tajiks Khujand 64
Pashtuns 45
also a very high percentage among Brahmins (but only Brahmins!) of the Indo-Aryan peoples of India
That the Tajiks are Indo-European (Aryan people) by race, genes and language, this is true, but not all. A high percentage of Aryan genes is only among the Khujand and mountain Pamir Tajik peoples; among other Tajiks in general it is in the range of 19-25%. But what’s bad: the Tajiks have become smoky under the southern sun, mixed with the surrounding non-Aryan peoples, including the Mongoloids, and what’s worst and most decisive: they are Muslims. Therefore, even though we are related by blood, they are no longer our brothers.
Non-Indo-European peoples of Asia:
Kyrgyz 64
Altaians 38-53
as well as Uzbeks, Uighurs and some peoples of Western China (! how can we not mention the Yuezhi)
And this is absolutely crazy! I'll try to explain. The ancient Aryans lived throughout the steppe from the Black Sea in the west to the Altai Mountains in the east. In the east they neighbored ancient Turkic tribes. It turns out that part of the Aryan tribes went east and mixed with them, since every two out of three Kirghiz had an ancestor ancient Aryan. In addition to genetic data, archeology also confirms this: Aryan burials on the steppe expanses of Asia, and long after the Aryans, the ancient Kirghiz and Altaians built mounds in the same way as they learned from the Aryans. Why did the descendants of Aryans and Kyrgyz women become dumb? Further, the descendants of the Aryans constantly married moon-faced oriental beauties - so from generation to generation all subsequent descendants became dumb, plus a constant supply of cross-eyed Asian hordes from the vastness of Central Asia and Siberia. Maybe that's true, though, I don't know. It’s strange, of course, to realize that every two out of three Kyrgyz people had an ancient Aryan as an ancestor, and these slanting, insidious Asians are our relatives by genes...
Russian gene pool
(average values in relation to the Center of Russia)1) R1a, Aryan haplogroup
Percentage: 47
Where the ancestor lived: South Russian steppes
Ancient speakers: Aryans
Modern speakers: Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Poles, Lusatians, Slovaks, Lithuanians, Latvians, etc.
How did it get into the gene pool of the Slavs: we, Russians, are the direct descendants of the ancient Aryans-Proto-Slavs + ancient Iranian peoples assimilated by the Slavs (Scythians, Sarmatians, Roxolans) and ancient Baltic tribes.
Distribution: everywhere. Decreases to the north (Astrakhan, Vologda, Kostroma regions - drops to 35%), increases to the southwest (Black Earth Region, Rostov region - more than 60%).
2) N1, Finno-Ugric haplogroup
Percentage: 17
Where the ancestor lived: initially - Siberia, later - north, northeast of the East European Plain
Ancient carriers: Chud, Ves, Merya, Meshchera, Muroma, etc.
Modern speakers: Finns, Estonians, Mordovians, Maris, etc.
How the Slavs got into the gene pool: the assimilation of the Finno-Ugric population during the expansion of the territory of Rus' to the north and east.
Distribution: increases to the north (in the northern regions of Russia up to 36%), sharply decreases to the south (4-6%).
I, prehistoric pre-Aryan population of Europe, descendants of the Cro-Magnons - the first people of Europe after the departure of the glacier
3) I2, Balkan haplogroup
Percentage: 11
Where the ancestor lived: Adriatic coast of the Balkans
Ancient carriers: unknown. In historical times these are the Thracians, Illyrians, etc.
Modern speakers: South Slavs (Bosnians, Croats, Slovenes, Serbs, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Bulgarians), Sardis
How did the Slavs get into the gene pool: assimilation of the ancient population of the Balkans in the process of ethnogenesis of ancient Slavic tribes, migration from the Balkans in ancient times, expansion of the Slavs to the Balkan Peninsula in historical times (VI-X centuries), contacts with the Bulgarians, some of the Balkan peoples probably joined to the army of the Slavs in the fight against Byzantium and went with them to Rus', migrating from the Balkans at a later time.
Distribution: decreases to the north (~5%), increases to the south, southwest (up to 16-18%).
5) I1, Scandinavian haplogroup
Percentage: 5.5
Where the ancestor lived: the south of the Scandinavian Peninsula
Ancient carriers: unknown. In historical times, these are the Normans (Vikings)
Modern speakers: Swedes, Norwegians, Icelanders, Danes, Germans, etc.
How the Slavs got into the gene pool: assimilation of the ancient population of Northern Europe, contacts with ancient Germanic tribes.
Distribution: slightly increases to the north (~6%, and in some areas reaches 18%), decreases to the south (~4%).
4) R1b, Celtic haplogroup. The related Aryan Celtic branch of peoples early split off from the Proto-Indo-Europeans (Proto-Aryans) and developed in its own way.
Percentage: 7.7
Where did the ancestor live: Iberia Peninsula
Ancient speakers: Celts
Modern speakers: Portuguese, Spanish, French, English, Scots, Welsh, Irish, Bretons, Germans, Danes, Dutch, Basques (Basques are Celtic in genes, but non-Indo-European in language - they are probably the most ancient people in Europe), Italians, population of Switzerland, etc.
How it got into the Slavic gene pool: contacts with the Celtic and ancient Germanic tribes of Central Europe (on the western borders of the Slavic settlement), assimilation of the Ostrogoths.
Distribution: increases to the south.
6) E1b1b, Mediterranean haplogroup
Percentage: 5.2
Where the ancestor lived: initially - East Africa or Western Asia (the “Golden Crescent” region), later - the Mediterranean region, the Balkans
Ancient speakers: ancient Egyptians, Phoenicians, ancient Greeks
Modern speakers: Berbers, Arabs of the countries North Africa, Greeks, Portuguese, Italians, Albanians, Serbs, etc.
Distribution: uneven. This is not at all typical for the North of Russia. More common in the Center.
7) J2, Eastern Mediterranean haplogroup
Percentage: 3.3
Where the ancestor lived: initially - Western Asia, later - the Aegean Sea basin, the Balkans, Asia Minor
Ancient speakers: Minoans (inhabitants of Ancient Crete), Phoenicians, ancient Greeks
Modern speakers: Arabs, Kurds, Georgians, Azerbaijanis, Greeks, Italians, Turks, Ossetians, Armenians, Albanians, Romanians, Bulgarians
How it got into the gene pool of the Slavs: assimilation of the ancient agricultural tribes that moved to the Balkans from the Golden Crescent region, migrations from the Balkans, contacts with Byzantium.
Distribution: uneven, almost never found in many regions of Russia, and isolated outbreaks with centers in Vologda (7.5%), Smolensk (7%), Belgorod (4%) and Kuban (4%).
Other haplogroups(with a negligible amount of impurities).
G, Caucasian haplogroup. Found among half of the Terek Cossacks. It is also found here and there in very small quantities among Russians in the south of Russia (in Kuban - 1%).
Mongoloid haplogroups. WITH, Mongolian haplogroup, and Q, East Siberian, one might say, are not found among Russians (they are found only here and there and in microscopic quantities: 0.2% -0.3%). Only among the Cossacks is observed about 1% of haplogroup Q - traces of the Turkic-speaking peoples assimilated in the early stages of the ethnogenesis of the Cossacks (Torks, Berendeys, Black Klobuks). Therefore, the saying “Scratch a Russian and you will find a Tatar” is incorrect. The Tatar-Mongol yoke had no effect on the Russian gene pool. But Russians still have 1.5% of Mongoloid genes - on the maternal line (via mitochondrial DNA), while the rest of the maternal lines are purely European.
Of course, the Russian gene pool is not a “hodgepodge”, but a synthesis with the formation of a new unity. The genetic sets of the original groups are completely mixed, with the exception of those traits that are transmitted through the Y chromosome and indicate who your ancestor was on the direct paternal line.
It is also worth noting that Russians are a homogeneous (uniform, internally pure) nation. For example, Russians from Moscow, from Stavropol and from the Far East have the same, identical structure of the set of haplogroups. The same cannot be said about other peoples of Europe - for example, a German from Mecklenburg and a German from Bavaria, or an Englishman from Essex and an Englishman from Sussex, or an Italian from the north of Italy and an Italian from the south - these will be very different people in the structure of the set of haplogroups.
Mordovian layout:
E1b1b=0; N2=2.4; N1=16.9; R1a=26.5 (erzya R1a =39.1, moksha R1a =21.7); R1b=13.3; I1a=12; I1b=2.4; J2=0
N2 is also a Finno-Ugric haplogroup ( Western Siberia), I did not find data on Mongoloid haplogroups C and Q. A significant percentage of the Aryan haplogroup is explained by the influence of Aryan blood, nothing else. And the fact that Erzya has always put itself above Moksha, considering Moksha a second-class Mordovian, is now confirmed :)
Russians of Mordovia - R1a = from 50 to 60%.
Photo identikit of a typical Russian person,
created by the artists of "Power" on
based on typical images
representatives of the population
different regions of Russia
Russian gene pool
Russian scientists have completed and are preparing for publication the first large-scale study of the gene pool of the Russian people. Vlast correspondents Daria Laane and Sergei Petukhov got acquainted with the results of this study and realized that their publication could have unpredictable consequences for Russia and the world order.
The self-identification of the Russian people has long been hampered by the Soviet state ideology of internationalism. An additional obstacle was the defeat of genetics as a science in the Soviet Union and its replacement with Michurin's pseudoscience, according to which heredity did not exist in nature at all. The situation began to change only in the late 1960s, when American scientists published sensational results of a study of the genotype of a typical American. The result of genetic screening of the US population really went beyond academic science and caused a real shock among American citizens. It turned out that in less than 200 years of American statehood, its standard citizen - white, of Anglo-Saxon origin and Protestant religion - became genetically 30% black. The results of the Americans interested Soviet officials, so the first laboratories on human population genetics were created in the USSR. They were exclusively engaged in the study of the heredity of small nations, and most of the results obtained were immediately classified as “for official use.” Research on the titular nation could only be carried out using anthropological methods.
Entertaining anthropology
Typical representatives
Vologda-Vyatka zone
Over several decades of intense research, anthropologists have been able to identify the appearance of a typical Russian person. To do this, they had to convert to a single scale all the photographs from the photo library of the Museum of Anthropology with full-face and profile images of typical representatives of the population of the Russian regions of the country and, combining them by the pupils of the eyes, superimpose them on each other. The final photographic portraits turned out, naturally, blurry, but they gave an idea of the appearance of the standard Russian people. This was the first truly sensational discovery. After all, similar attempts by French scientists led to a result that they had to hide from the citizens of their country: after thousands of combinations from the resulting photographs of the reference Jacques and Marianne, gray faceless ovals of faces were seen. Such a picture, even among the most distant Frenchmen from anthropology, could raise an unnecessary question: is there a French nation at all?
Unfortunately, anthropologists did not go beyond creating photographic portraits of typical representatives of the Russian population in different regions of the country and did not superimpose them on each other in order to obtain the appearance of an absolute Russian person. They explained this to the “authorities” by the supposed scientific lack of information in such work, but in the end they were forced to admit that such a photograph could get them into trouble at work. By the way, “regional” sketches of Russian people were published in the general press only in 2002, and before that they were published in small editions only in scientific publications for specialists. Only in this issue “Vlast” fills this gap in Russian anthropology and for the first time publishes photographic portraits of absolutely Russian people, obtained by us by superimposing the faces of “regional” Russian people on top of each other. Now you can judge for yourself how similar they are to the typical cinematic Ivanushka and Marya.
Unfortunately, mostly black and white old ones archival photos The faces of Russian people do not allow us to convey the height, physique, color of skin, hair and eyes of a Russian person. However, anthropologists have created verbal portrait Russian men and women. They are of average build and average height, light brown-haired with light eyes - gray or blue. By the way, during the research a verbal portrait of a typical Ukrainian was also obtained. The standard Ukrainian differs from a Russian only in the color of his skin, hair and eyes - he is a dark brunette with regular facial features and brown eyes. Snub nose turned out to be completely uncharacteristic of an Eastern Slav (found in only 7% of Russians and Ukrainians); this sign is more typical for Germans (25%).
However, anthropological measurements of the proportions of the human body are not even the last, but the century before last, of science, which has long ago received at its disposal the most accurate methods of molecular biology, which make it possible to read all human genes. And the most advanced methods of DNA analysis today are considered to be sequencing (reading the genetic code) of mitochondrial DNA and DNA of the human Y chromosome. Mitochondrial DNA has been passed down through the female line from generation to generation, virtually unchanged since the time when the ancestor of mankind, Eve, climbed down from a tree in East Africa. And the Y chromosome is present only in men and therefore is also passed on to male offspring almost unchanged, while all other chromosomes, when transmitted from father and mother to their children, are shuffled by nature, like a deck of cards before being dealt. Thus, unlike indirect signs ( appearance, body proportions), sequencing of mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome DNA indisputably and directly indicate the degree of relatedness of people.
Entertaining genogeography
In the West, human population geneticists have been successfully using these methods for two decades. In Russia they were used only once, in the mid-1990s, when identifying royal remains. A turning point in the situation with the use of the most modern methods to study the titular nation of our country occurred only in 2000. Russian Foundation basic research allocated approximately half a million rubles from state budget funds for research into the gene pool of the Russian people. It is impossible to implement a serious program with such funding. But this was more of a landmark decision than just a financial decision, indicating a change in the country’s scientific priorities. Scientists from the Laboratory of Human Population Genetics of the Medical Genetic Center of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, who received a grant from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, national history were able to completely concentrate for three years on studying the gene pool of the Russian people, and not small nations. And limited funding only spurred their ingenuity. They supplemented their molecular genetic research analysis of the frequency distribution of Russian surnames in the country. This method was very cheap, but its information content exceeded all expectations: comparison of the geography of surnames with the geography of genetic DNA markers showed their almost complete coincidence.
Unfortunately, the interpretations of the family analysis that appeared in the media this summer (after the first publication of the data in a specialized scientific journal) could create a false impression about the goals and results of the scientists’ enormous work. As the head of the project, Doctor of Science Elena Balanovskaya, explained to “Power”, the main thing was not that the surname Smirnov turned out to be more common among Russian people than Ivanov, but that it was compiled for the first time full list true Russian surnames by region of the country. At the same time, scientists had to spend a lot of time collecting Russian surnames on their own. The Central Election Commission and local election commissions flatly refused to cooperate with scientists, citing the fact that only if voter lists are kept secret can they guarantee the objectivity and integrity of elections to federal and local authorities. The criterion for inclusion of a surname in the list was very lenient: it was included if at least five bearers of this surname lived in the region for three generations. First, lists were compiled for five conditional regions - Northern, Central, Central-Western, Central-Eastern and Southern. In total, across all regions there were about 15 thousand Russian surnames, most of which were found only in one of the regions and were absent in others. When superimposing regional lists on top of each other, scientists identified a total of 257 so-called “all-Russian surnames.” It is interesting that at the final stage of the study they decided to add surnames of residents of the Krasnodar Territory to the list of the Southern region, expecting that the predominance of Ukrainian surnames of the descendants of the Zaporozhye Cossacks evicted here by Catherine II would significantly reduce the all-Russian list. But this additional restriction reduced the list of all-Russian surnames by only 7 units - to 250 (see list). From which followed the obvious and not pleasant conclusion that Kuban is populated mainly by Russian people. Where did the Ukrainians go and were they even here at all is a big question.
Over three years, project participants
“Russian gene pool” (in the photo - his
manager Elena Balanovskaya)
walked around with a syringe and a test tube a little
isn't it all European territory RF
and made a very representative
Russian blood sample
The analysis of Russian surnames generally gives food for thought. Even the simplest action that “Vlast” performed—searching for the names of all the country’s leaders—yielded an unexpected result. Only one of them was included in the list of bearers of the top 250 all-Russian surnames - Mikhail Gorbachev (158th place). The surname Brezhnev occupies 3767th place in the general list (found only in the Belgorod region of the Southern region). The surname Khrushchev is in 4248th place (found only in the Northern region, Arkhangelsk region). Chernenko took 4749th place (only South Region). Andropov is in 8939th place (Southern region only). Putin took 14,250th place (Southern region only). And Yeltsin was not included in the general list at all. Stalin's last name, Dzhugashvili, was not considered for obvious reasons. But the pseudonym Lenin was included in the regional lists at number 1421, second only to the first president of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev.
The result amazed even the scientists themselves, who believed that the main difference between the bearers of southern Russian surnames was not the ability to lead a huge power, but the increased sensitivity of the skin of their fingers and palms. A scientific analysis of dermatoglyphics (papillary patterns on the skin of the palms and fingers) of Russian people showed that the complexity of the pattern (from simple arcs to the loops) and the accompanying sensitivity of the skin increases from north to south. "The man with simple patterns on the skin of his hands he can hold a glass of hot tea in his hands without pain,” Dr. Balanovskaya clearly explained the essence of the differences. “And if there are a lot of loops, then such people make unsurpassed pickpockets.” However, “Vlast”, in an interview with the country’s chief geneticist, academician Sergei Inge-Vechtomov (see #24 for 2004), has already warned that underestimating a person’s genetics in his career guidance has brought and continues to bring huge losses to the country. And again he draws attention to this: it is absolutely clear that from the point of view of increasing labor productivity, it is more profitable to locate thin, high-tech assembly production in the south of Russia, where the fingers of the population are most suitable for assembling microprocessors, and hot industries that do not require fine motor skills of the hands (steel foundries and similar type) - in the north.
The Elusive Gene Pool
However, cheap indirect methods of studying the genetics of the Russian people (by surnames and dermatoglyphics) were only auxiliary for the first study in Russia of the gene pool of the titular nationality. His main molecular genetic results are now being prepared for publication in the form of a monograph “Russian Gene Pool”, which will be published at the end of the year by the Luch publishing house. Unfortunately, due to a lack of government funding, scientists had to carry out part of the research together with foreign colleagues, who a moratorium was imposed on many results until joint publications were published in the scientific press. The reason is valid, and “Vlast”, unfortunately, cannot provide original graphs and flowcharts of DNA analysis of Russian people and their neighbors in the Russian Federation, CIS countries and some European countries. But nothing prevents us from describing these data (which are at the disposal of “Power”) in words. Thus, according to the Y chromosome, the genetic distance between Russians and Finns is 30 conventional units. And the genetic distance between Russian people and the so-called Finno-Ugric peoples (Mari, Vepsians, etc.) living on the territory of the Russian Federation is 2-3 units. Simply put , genetically they are almost identical. And the harsh statement by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Estonia on September 1 at the Council of the EU in Brussels (after the denunciation by the Russian side of the treaty on the state border with Estonia) about discrimination against the Finno-Ugric peoples allegedly related to the Finns in the Russian Federation loses its substantive meaning. But due to the moratorium of Western scientists, the Russian Foreign Ministry was unable to reasonably accuse Estonia of interfering in our internal, one might even say closely related, affairs. The results of mitochondrial DNA analysis also fall under the same moratorium, according to which Russians from Tatars are at the same genetic distance of 30 conventional units that separates us from Finns, but between Ukrainians from Lvov and Tatars the genetic distance is only 10 units. And at the same time Ukrainians from the left bank of Ukraine are genetically as close to Russians as Komi-Zyrians, Mordovians and Mari. You can react to these strictly in any way you like. scientific facts, showing the natural essence of the reference electorates of Viktor Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych. But it will not be possible to accuse Russian scientists of falsifying these data: then the accusation will automatically extend to their Western colleagues, who have been delaying the publication of these results for more than a year, each time extending the moratorium period.
The only thing “Vlast” can do today for the Russian people is to publish a map indicating the area where truly Russian genes are still preserved. Geographically, this territory coincides with Russia during the time of Ivan the Terrible and clearly shows the conventionality of some state borders.
In conclusion, Russian scientists asked to publish their appeal to President Vladimir Putin, Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov and the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. “Huge megacities are, in fact, black holes that suck in the gene pool of the Russian people and destroy them without a trace,” says Dr. Balanovskaya. “The boundaries within which native Russian genes are still preserved in villages and small towns have now become known. But even there, due to lack of money, mothers are giving birth to fewer and fewer children. Meanwhile, against the backdrop of huge state spending on other needs, targeted financial assistance for children to these women can save the Russian gene pool from further degradation.”
250 most Russian surnames
1 Smirnov
2 Ivanov
3 Kuznetsov
4 Popov
5 Sokolov
6 Lebedev
7 Kozlov
8 Novikov
9 Morozov
10 Petrov
11 Volkov
12 Soloviev
13 Vasiliev
14 Zaitsev
15 Pavlov
16 Semenov
17 pigeons
18 Vinogradov
19 Bogdanov
20 Vorobyov
21 Fedorov
22 Mikhailov
23 Belyaev
24 Tarasov
25 Belov
26 Komarov
27 Orlov
28 Kiselev
29 Makarov
30 Andreev
31 Kovalev
32 Ilyin
33 Gusev
34 Titov
35 Kuzmin
36 Kudryavtsev
37 Rams
38 Kulikov
39 Alekseev
40 Stepanov
41 Yakovlev
42 Sorokin
43 Sergeev
44 Romanov
45 Zakharov
46 Borisov
47 Queens
48 Gerasimov
49 Ponomarev
50 Grigoriev
51 Lazarev
52 Medvedev
53 Ershov
54 Nikitin
55 Sobolev
56 Ryabov
57 Polyakov
58 Flowers
59 Danilov
60 Zhukov
61 Frolov
62 Zhuravlev
63 Nikolaev
64 Krylov
65 Maksimov
66 Sidorov
67 Osipov
68 Belousov
69 Fedotov
70 Dorofeev
71 Egorov
72 Matveev
73 Bobrov
74 Dmitriev
75 Kalinin
76 Anisimov
77 Petukhov
78 Antonov
79 Timofeev
80 Nikiforov
81 Veselov
82 Filippov
83 Markov
84 Bolshakov
85 Sukhanov
86 Mironov
87 Shiryaev
88 Alexandrov
89 Konovalov
90 Shestakov
91 Kazakov
92 Efimov
93 Denisov
94 thunders
95 Fomin
96 Davydov
97 Melnikov
98 Shcherbakov
99 Pancakes
100 Kolesnikov
101 Karpov
102 Afanasiev
103 Vlasov
104 Maslov
105 Isakov
106 Tikhonov
107 Aksenov
108 Gavrilov
109 Rodionov
110 Cats
111 hunchbacks
112 Kudryashov
113 Bulls
114 Zuev
115 Tretyakov
116 Savelyev
117 Panov
118 Rybakov
119 Suvorov
120 Abramov
121 Voronov
122 Mukhin
123 Arkhipov
124 Trofimov
125 Martynov
126 Emelyanov
127 pots
128 Chernov
129 Ovchinnikov
130 Seleznev
131 Panfilov
132 Kopylov
133 Mikheev
134 galkin
135 Nazarov
136 Lobanov
137 Lukin
138 Belyakov
139 Potapov
140 Nekrasov
141 Khokhlov
142 Zhdanov
143 Naumov
144 Shilov
145 Vorontsov
146 Ermakov
147 Drozdov
148 Ignatiev
149 Savin
150 Logins
151 Safonov
152 Kapustin
153 Kirillov
154 Moiseev
155 Eliseev
156 Koshelev
157 Kostin
158 Gorbachev
159 Nuts
160 Efremov
161 Isaev
162 Evdokimov
163 Kalashnikov
164 Kabanov
165 Socks
166 Yudin
167 Kulagin
168 Lapin
169 Prokhorov
170 Nesterov
171 Kharitonov
172 Agafonov
173 Muravyov
174 Larionov
175 Fedoseev
176 Zimin
177 Pakhomov
178 Shubin
179 Ignatov
180 Filatov
181 Kryukov
182 Rogov
183 Kulakov
184 Terentyev
185 Molchanov
186 Vladimirov
187 Artemyev
188 Guryev
189 Zinoviev
190 Grishin
191 Kononov
192 Dementyev
193 Sitnikov
194 Simonov
195 Mishin
196 Fadeev
197 Commissioners
198 Mammoths
199 Nosov
200 gulai
201 Sharov
202 Ustinov
203 Vishnyakov
204 Evseev
205 Lavrentiev
206 Bragin
207 Konstantinov
208 Kornilov
209 Avdeev
210 Zykov
211 Biryukov
212 Sharapov
213 Nikonov
214 Shchukin
215 Dyachkov
216 Odintsov
217 Sazonov
218 Yakushev
219 Krasilnikov
220 gordeev
221 Samoilov
222 Knyazev
223 Bespalov
224 Uvarov
225 Shashkov
226 Bobylev
227 Doronin
228 Belozerov
229 Rozhkov
230 Samsonov
231 Myasnikov
232 Likhachev
233 Burov
234 Sysoev
235 Fomichev
236 Rusakov
237 Strelkov
238 gushchin
239 Teterin
240 Kolobov
241 Subbotin
242 Fokin
243 Blokhin
244 Seliverstov
245 Pestov
246 Kondratyev
247 Silin
248 Merkushev
249 Lytkin
250 Tours
Kommersant magazine “POWER” No. 38 (641) dated September 26, 2005: PERSON OF RUSSIAN NATIONALITY: http://www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=611986
Reconstruction of the genetic and linguistic history of Balto-Slavic populations
This most complete work on the gene pool of the Slavic and Baltic peoples sums up the results of many years of research. An interdisciplinary approach was used to reconstruct the long history of peoples speaking related languages. Geneticists and linguists have traced the formation of the gene pool of all groups of Slavs and Balts simultaneously according to three genetic systems: the Y chromosome (paternal lines of inheritance), mitochondrial DNA (maternal lines of inheritance) and broad genome data on autosomal markers (where paternal and maternal lines are represented equally). It was traced which local populations absorbed the gene pool of the Slavs during their settlement across Europe: it was this deep substrate that formed the main differences in the gene pools of different branches of the Slavs. The correlation of genetic diversity with linguistic diversity turned out to be high, but even greater with the geographic proximity of populations. The result of the study was the clarification of the tree of the Balto-Slavic languages.
Responses to the study in the media and on popular science sites - at the end of the text
The formation of the gene pool of Balto-Slavic populations was studied by a large international group of geneticists and linguists. An article with the results of their work was published in the journal PLoS ONE. The study was conducted under the guidance of Dr. Biol. Sciences O.P. Balanovsky (Institute of General Genetics and Medical Genetic Research Center) and academician Richard Willems (Estonian Biocenter and University of Tartu). It involved researchers from many countries in which Slavic and Baltic peoples make up the majority of the population - Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as scientists from Estonia, Great Britain and the consortium of the international Genographic project. This is the most complete work on the gene pool of the Slavic and Baltic peoples, sums up many years of research by numerous authors of the article and takes into account the data of other scientific teams.
Balto-Slavic languages are spoken by approximately a third of the modern population of Europe, and in terms of area, the Baltic and Slavic peoples occupy about half of Europe. Linguists agree that the Baltic and Slavic languages are not only related, but also have a common root in the family of Indo-European languages. They estimate that Proto-Balto-Slavic separated from other Indo-European languages between 7,000 and 4,500 years ago, most likely in Central Europe. The divergence of the Baltic and Slavic language branches dates back to 3500-2500 years ago. The further division of the Slavic languages occurred relatively recently - 1700-1300 years ago. The so-called “Slavicization of Europe” is associated with the early Middle Ages (approximately 1400-1000 years ago) - a period of rapid spread of Slavic languages over vast territories. In Eastern Europe, the Slavs spread to the territories where Baltic, Finno-Ugric and Turkic populations lived, in Western Europe - to the territories of speakers of Germanic languages, in the Balkans - to the territories of local multilingual populations.
But how did these changes in European culture, reflected by the spread of Slavic languages, affect the gene pool of Europe? This was precisely the main question of the study. After all, the genetic history of the Balto-Slavic populations and their interaction with the gene pools of populations that spoke other languages - Finno-Ugric, Germanic, Turkic - have remained insufficiently studied until now.
What did you study?
To study the Balto-Slavic populations as completely as possible, scientists used all three genetic systems, which are currently the most informative for studying the gene pool.
1) Y chromosome, which is inherited paternally: 6078 samples from 62 populations were studied;
2) Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), which is inherited through the maternal line: 6876 mtDNA samples from 48 populations were studied;
3) Genome-wide (genome-wide) markers: 1,297 samples from 16 populations. These are points of genetic diversity (single nucleotide polymorphisms, SNPs) that are scattered throughout the genome and are located on autosomes - non-sex chromosomes.
For the ADMIXTURE analysis, 200 thousand SNP markers were used, which are common to the three Illumina panels used (610K, 650K and 660K) and are not linked to each other; for the analysis of common fragments, all 500 thousand markers that are common to the three Illumina panels used (including markers linked to each other) were used; To analyze the principal components and calculate genetic distances, 57 thousand markers were used, which are common to the Illumina and Affimetrix panels, and are not linked to each other.
A significant part of these impressive data sets were obtained by the authors for the first time - 1254 samples for the Y chromosome, 917 samples for mtDNA, 70 samples for genome-wide markers. The rest of the data is taken from previously published works. For comparison, all data accumulated to date on other gene pools in Europe were used.
Using all three genetic systems, almost all modern peoples speaking languages of the Balto-Slavic group were studied - sixteen peoples using a single extensive panel of markers:
Baltic peoples - Latvians and Lithuanians;
Eastern Slavs - Belarusians, Russians, Ukrainians;
Western Slavs - Kashubians, Poles, Slovaks, Sorbs, Czechs;
Southern Slavs - Bulgarians, Bosnians, Macedonians, Serbs, Slovenes, Croats.
Such detailed and versatile data on any group of peoples (covering all ethnic groups, and even all major genetic systems) are very rare in population studies. Therefore, they make it possible to solve not only a specific, but also a more general methodological problem. The specific task is to describe the gene pool of the Slavs and Balts themselves, and the general task is to study, using their example, how different characteristics by which populations are usually characterized are related to each other: Y-chromosomal diversity, mitochondrial diversity, genome-wide diversity, linguistic relatedness, geographic location of populations .
The genetic landscape of the Slavs through three prisms
The genetic relationships of all studied populations with each other, established as a result of the study, are shown in the figures.
Rice. A presents results for genome-wide (autosomal) SNP markers. These markers are called autosomal because they are found on non-sex chromosomes (autosomes). And they are called genome-wide because they are evenly scattered throughout the genome.
Rice. B presents results for the Y chromosome based on its haplogroup frequencies.
Rice. C reflects results obtained from mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroup frequencies.
To show the relative proximity and distance of different populations on a two-dimensional graph, population genetics uses two methods borrowed from multivariate statistics: principal component analysis and multivariate scaling. In essence, they are close, but their advantages and disadvantages are opposite. The principal component method shows the position of populations mathematically accurately, but sometimes loses a significant part of the genetic information contained in the original data. The multidimensional scaling method, on the contrary, uses all genetic information, but the geometric distances between point populations on the graph may be somewhat distorted relative to the calculated genetic distances between them. In this case, the principal component method was used for autosomal data, and the genetic distance method was used for Y-chromosomal and mitochondrial data.
As can be seen, both according to genome-wide markers and the Y chromosome (A and B), the majority of Balto-Slavic populations are aligned along the north-south axis.
East Slavs- Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians - are clearly grouped. They form their own cluster, although within it the Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians do not completely overlap with each other. The exception is the Northern Russians, who are genetically distant from the rest of the Eastern Slavs and gravitate towards the neighboring Finno-Ugric populations.
From the Western Slavs Czechs and to a lesser extent Slovaks are distinct from the Eastern Slavs and are biased towards Germans and other Western European populations. But the Poles are closest to the Eastern Slavs. In fact, in the graphs, Poles, Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians form a common cluster, while Slovaks and especially Czechs are somewhat distant from it.
Southern Slavs form a dispersed group on the graph, which is internally divided into western (Slovenians, Croats and Bosnians) and eastern (Macedonians and Bulgarians) regions with the Serbs in the middle. At the same time, the Slovenes are genetically close to the Hungarians (a geographically close, but not Slavic people), and the eastern branch of the southern Slavs is also grouped with the non-Slavic, but geographically close Romanians and to some extent with the Greeks.
Baltic peoples- Latvians and Lithuanians - show genetic closeness to Estonians who speak the Finnish language Ugric group, and to some Eastern Slavs (Belarusians). It also turned out that the Baltic populations are close to the Volga group of Finno-Ugric peoples (especially the Mordovians). The authors clarify that this may reflect historical events - in ancient times, the area of Baltic-speaking populations extended far to the east and almost reached the current area of the Mordovians.
It is important that all of the listed patterns were identified in independent and seemingly completely different genetic systems - the Y chromosome and genome-wide autosomal markers.
For mtDNA (Figure C), as usual, the degree of structure in the gene pool is much less pronounced, which is associated with lower phylogenetic resolution in the available mtDNA data. But, although not as clearly expressed, the same patterns are visible in the mtDNA results. For example, in the mtDNA graph, most East Slavic populations overlap with each other, Northern Russians are separated from them, and Southern Slavs are genetically similar to their non-Slavic-speaking neighbors in the Balkans.
Comparing the degree of expression of the same patterns in the results for different genetic systems, the authors emphasize that the Y chromosome often reveals patterns in more detail than not only mtDNA, but also more fashionable genome-wide markers.
Search for deep ancestors
To compare populations based on the composition of their ancestral components, the program ADMIXTURE (“mixture” or “composition”) is often used. It contains genome-wide data on a large number populations and set the number of hypothetical ancestral populations from which all these modern populations were formed. The program calculates what the genetic composition of these ancestral populations (ancestral components) should be, and draws for each modern population a colored spectrum indicating the proportions of these ancestors in its gene pool. It is clear that such a model is rather arbitrary - in reality, it is unlikely that modern gene pools were formed as a result of the mixing of a fixed given number of ancestral populations. But such a simplifying model is often useful, and the ancestral components identified usually make real sense. For example, when analyzing data on a global scale, the African component is always the first to be identified, which makes up almost 100% in sub-Saharan African populations, and its share in other populations of the world corresponds well to the degree of their direct or indirect admixture with African populations.
In this work, the ADMIXTURE method was also used - the authors asked different number ancestral populations and published all the corresponding graphs, but a special test showed that the statistically most valid results were obtained in the case when the number of ancestral components was set to six (K = 6). In this case, the authors got this picture.
In Balto-Slavic populations, almost the entire spectrum is represented by two colors: blue (ancestral component k3) and light blue (ancestral component k2), although in different proportions. Looking at Europe as a whole, k3 (blue) is a large contributor to all European populations and decreases from the northeast to the south. This ancestral component is maximum in Baltic populations, prevails in the Eastern Slavs (80-95%) and decreases in the Southern Slavs (55-70%). In contrast, k2 (blue) is more characteristic of Mediterranean and Caucasian regions and decreases towards northern Europe. Among the Southern Slavs it accounts for approximately 30%, among the Western Slavs it decreases to 20%, and among the northern Russian and Baltic populations to 5%.
It can be seen that the Slavs also have a lemon-yellow color in the ancestral spectrum; this is the k5 component, which is represented to any significant extent only among the Eastern Slavs, and of these, it is more pronounced among the Northern Russians. This component is Siberian in origin, since, as can be seen in the graph, it makes up the main part of the spectrum for Siberian populations. But the k6 component (dark yellow), which dominates in China, Mongolia and Altai, is almost zero among Russians. This means that the eastern trace in the gene pool of northern Russians is associated more with ancient migrations from the forests and tundras of Siberia than from the steppes of Central Asia (a new refutation of the popular idea that the Russian gene pool was greatly influenced by the Tatar-Mongol yoke). The dark green k4 component characterizes the populations of South Asia and is also common in the Middle East and the Mediterranean. Therefore, it is not surprising that it, albeit with a small frequency, is found among the southern Slavs and other peoples of the Balkan Peninsula, but almost disappears among the Western and Eastern Slavs.
From an examination of the composition of ancestral components, the conclusion follows that there is significant genetic similarity between the majority of Western and Eastern Slavs over a large territory - from Poland in the west to the European part of Russia in the east. And the southern Slavs, geographically limited to a small Balkan Peninsula, differ significantly from Western and Eastern ones.
But how did these differences arise?
Common fragments of the genomes of the Slavs and their neighbors
To answer this question, the authors conducted a subtle analysis of the gene pool for two groups of Slavs: the first included the Western and Eastern Slavs (after all, they turned out to be very similar genetically), and the second included the Southern Slavs. Comparisons were made based on the presence of identical chromosome fragments in people originating from these population groups. This method is called IBD analysis - its name comes from the classical concept of population genetics “identical by descent”, that is, the search for genetic fragments that are identical in origin. These fragments were inherited by different people, representatives of different populations, from the same common ancestor. It is clear that in almost any population in the world there can be at least one descendant of a representative of the Western and Eastern Slavs, and, conversely, among the Eastern Slavs there can be at least one descendant of almost any people in the world. But these are isolated coincidences - that’s why population genetics studies populations, and not its individual representatives. Those populations in which many such matches are found are indeed significantly related to each other, or rather, they have a significant number of common ancestors. These common fragments, in fact, are haplotypes, similar to the haplotypes of mtDNA and the Y chromosome in that they also have one ancestor, but different in that over time they are broken up by recombination - the exchange of sections between chromosomes that came from the father and from the mother, with cell division. And haplotypes make it possible to date using autosomal markers - knowing the rate of recombination, one can estimate from the length of the surviving common haplotypes how much time has passed from common ancestors, that is, how long has the common gene pool existed.
The number of common haplotypes between the “West-Eastern” Slavs (the authors had to use this awkward term for lack of a better one) and eight other groups of European peoples was calculated:
1) South Slavs (Bulgarians, Bosnians, Macedonians, Slovenes, Croats);
2) populations of Western Europe (Italians, Germans, French);
3) Baltic populations (Latvians, Lithuanians);
4) populations of northeastern Europe (Western Finnish peoples - Vepsians, Karelians, Finns, Estonians);
5) populations of central Europe, whose range is located between the West-Eastern and South Slavs - their authors conventionally call them “inter-Slavic populations”; these are surprisingly multilingual populations: the Gagauz speak the language of the Turkic group of the Altai language family, the Hungarians speak the language of the Ugric group of the Uralic language family, and the Romanians speak the language of the Romance group);
6) Greeks;
7) populations of the Volga region and the Urals (Bashkirs, Komi, Mordovians, Tatars, Udmurts, Chuvash);
8) North Caucasian populations (Adygs, Balkars, Nogais).
If we take the number of common haplotypes between the West-Eastern and Southern Slavs as a standard, then some of the surrounding non-Slavic populations will (in terms of the number of common haplotypes) be higher than this standard, some lower, and some equal to it. Below the standard (that is, they have less kinship with the West-Eastern Slavs than the South Slavs) were the peoples of the Volga region, Western Europe, the Caucasus, as well as the Greeks.
It would seem that we can talk about a greater relationship of Slavic gene pools with each other than with the surrounding non-Slavic peoples. This is partly true, but everything is not so simple - the relationship between the gene pools of the Balts and the populations of northeastern Europe (Vepsians, Karelians, Finns, Latvians, Lithuanians, Northern Russians, Estonians) turned out to be twice as high as the standard. One can go to the opposite extreme and consider that the “West-Eastern” Slavs are genetically related not to the South Slavs, but only to their geographical neighbors, probably due to the assimilation of related peoples. But the picture is further complicated by the fact that with the peoples now living in the territories in the middle between the “West-Eastern” and Southern Slavs - that is, with the Hungarians, Romanians and Gagauzians - the West-Eastern Slavs have the same number of genome fragments in common as with the southern Slavs (these “inter-Slavic” populations are at the standard level).
Therefore, the authors conducted another similar analysis, but now placing the southern Slavs at the center of consideration. The number of common genetic fragments between them and surrounding population groups was compared. It turned out that the number of common fragments among the Southern Slavs with the “West-Eastern” Slavs is approximately the same as the number of their common fragments with the “inter-Slavic” populations (Gagauz, Hungarians, Romanians). But the number of common fragments with geographically neighboring Greeks is much smaller. Let us take into account that the West-Eastern Slavs are geographically farther from the South Slavs than the “inter-Slavic” ones, therefore, from a geographical point of view, the number of common fragments with the “West-Eastern” Slavs should be smaller. And since this is not the case, it means that the linguistic kinship of the “West-Eastern” and Southern Slavs is partly manifested in this analysis of common genome fragments. Moreover, although the common genome fragments found between the two groups of Slavs vary in length, there are slightly more fragments about 2-3 centimeters long than others, and it is precisely this length that fragments should have been preserved since the Slavic expansion of the second half of the 1st millennium AD
These results for Slavs, from which no firm conclusions can be drawn, should be compared with a recent similar study on Turkic-speaking populations (Yunusbaev et al., 2015). It would seem that in both cases there is a rapid spread of native speakers (Turkic or Slavic, respectively) over vast territories, which cannot but be accompanied by the assimilation of the local (pre-Turkic or pre-Slavic) population. But in the case of the Turks, the method of analyzing common fragments revealed - albeit a very small - component of the genome that the Turks brought with them from their probable Altai ancestral home. But in the case of the Slavs, the picture turned out to be much more complex. This may be due to the fact that the Turks, during their resettlement, often assimilated populations that were genetically very different from them and from each other, and the Slavs spread across the territory of Europe with its relatively homogeneous gene pool, and part of the populations they assimilated were related to at least the Baltic groups.
Overall, two conclusions can be drawn from this analysis of common fragments. First of all, the results of mixing the gene pool of the West-Eastern Slavs with other populations of the northern part of Eastern Europe are clearly visible. Secondly - albeit not so expressively - a somewhat greater degree of kinship between the West-Eastern and South Slavs with each other is also visible than could be expected based simply on the geographical distance between them.
Scheme and results of analysis of common genome fragments (IBD)
Reconstruction of the language tree.
The team of authors included not only geneticists, but also leading Russian linguists. This made it possible to use in this work a refined kinship tree of the Balto-Slavic languages due to the updating and re-checking of the lexicostatistical data array. Lexicostatistics deals with identifying the rate of linguistic change and determining the time of separation of related languages and the degree of relatedness between them. The source material was the lexical lists (Swadesh lists) of 20 modern Balto-Slavic languages and dialects.
After the separation of the Baltic and Slavic branches, the very first fork in the Slavic branch turned out to be threefold - the division of the Slavs into western, eastern and southern branches - and dated about 1900 years ago. Further division of the Slavic languages began in the 5th-6th centuries (about 1300-1500 years ago): the eastern branch was divided into Russian and Ukrainian/Belarusian, the western branch into Czech/Slovak, Proto-Sorbian Sorbian and Polish/Kashubian, the southern branch into Serbo-Croatian , Bulgarian, Macedonian. The emergence of modern languages occurred 1000-500 years ago. This dating of the tree corresponds to historical and archaeological data, which indicate the rapid spread of the Slavs across Europe in the second half of the 1st millennium AD.
Genetic diversity at different levels of the linguistic tree
Since the linguistic tree of the Slavic languages is so accurately constructed, it became possible to analyze how the genetic diversity of Slavic populations, estimated from the frequencies of Y-chromosome haplogroups, is distributed along this tree. This analysis was performed using the standard AMOVA test procedure.
It turned out that genetic differences between populations speaking the same language, although varying from almost zero values (for speakers of Czech or Macedonian) to a value of 0.05 (for speakers of northern dialects of Russian), averaged only 0.01.
Next, the frequencies in all these populations of one people were averaged and the average ethnic frequencies of haplogroups were obtained. And then the genetic differences between these average ethnic characteristics of peoples within each branch of the Slavic languages were calculated. These differences turned out to be not exactly the same for different branches: for example, for the Western Slavs the differences are greater than for the Eastern Slavs, but this could be expected by looking at the graphs of their genetic relationships. However, on average, the differences between ethnic groups turned out to be greater – 0.03.
Finally, the average frequencies of haplogroups were calculated for the three branches of Slavic languages - Western, Eastern and Southern - and the differences between them doubled - about 0.06.
According to the principle of equidistance, developed by the domestic school of genogeography, if a population system develops on its own, without major external influences, then the gradual separation of populations leads to a linear accumulation of both linguistic and genetic diversity. As a result, genetic diversity is approximately the same at all levels - between populations of the same people, between ethnic groups of the same branch, and between different branches (their average characteristics). Indeed, the ancestors of different groups of Slavs were once only populations of one people close to each other, and their languages differed no more than dialects of the same language differ now. And by averaging frequencies over all modern populations of a branch, we find its center of gravity, its point of origin, and reconstruct the gene pool of this ancestral population.
But all this, as stated above, only works when populations are left to their own devices and have little interaction with their neighbors. However, for the Slavs, the values of genetic diversity at different hierarchical levels are not the same: with equidistance they should be 0.01, 0.01, 0.01, but they differ sharply - 0.06, 0.03, 0.01. This suggests that the Slavic populations were actively mixing with surrounding peoples. And the fact that the greatest variability occurs at the most ancient level (differences between the three branches of Slavic languages) indicates that these interactions were especially strong in the early stages of the history of Slavic populations.
Kinship or neighborhood?
The roles played by geography and languages in shaping the genetic diversity of Balto-Slavic populations can be compared using the Mantel test. Geography plays a dual role. Of course, this is a factor of geographical proximity, which brings gene pools closer together through mixed marriages between neighbors. But on the other hand, geography can also reflect origins, when related peoples do not move far from each other, but settle into neighboring territories. Languages are a factor in the original kinship of gene pools or parts of gene pools inherited from common ancestors along with common language(or not inherited, if the language was changed, but the gene pool remained almost the same).
The test was independently performed for three genetic systems: Y chromosome, mtDNA and autosomal markers. All three versions of the test showed an extremely high correlation between genetics and geographic location of populations (0.80-0.95). But a very high correlation was also found between genetics and linguistics (0.74-0.78). Because linguistic measures themselves are highly correlated with geography, the authors examined partial correlations to distinguish between the direct and indirect effects of geography on the other two systems. When excluding the geographical factor, the partial correlation with linguistics became much lower (0.3 for mtDNA and 0.2 for the other two systems), while for all three genetic systems the correlation with geography when excluding the linguistic factor remained large (0. 5 for mtDNA and 0.8 for the other two systems). This indicates that the connection with the geographical factor is the main one, and a high connection with linguistics is often determined by the fact that peoples speaking related languages are also geographical neighbors.
Two substrates in Slavic gene pools
Geneticists believe that, spreading across Europe, the Slavs assimilated local populations that lived in these territories in pre-Slavic times. This is the genetic substrate that they have absorbed, and this substrate differs in different territories. The results of the work made it possible to identify two main substrates. The “Central-Eastern European substrate” was adopted by the Western and Eastern Slavs (on the spectrum of ancestral components it is expressed in blue, and in the Y-chromosome data these populations carry high frequencies of haplogroup R1a). The other, “South-Eastern European substrate”, was absorbed by the Southern Slavs (this is the blue color in the spectrum of ancestral components, and a feature of the Y-chromosomal gene pool is the high frequencies of haplogroup I2a).
Three arguments support this conclusion about the importance of the substrate in the formation of the Slavic gene pool.
First, the fact that the combined group of Western and Eastern Slavs shares fewer genome fragments with the Southern Slavs than with the populations of northeastern Europe, including the Baltic and Finno-Ugric peoples. The special genetic closeness of the Finno-Ugric peoples to the Balts is visible both in the principal component plots and in the multidimensional scaling graphs. And it was precisely the peoples of the Baltic and Finno-Ugric language groups that were settled in that part of the East European Plain, which later became part of the area of the Slavs.
Secondly, the AMOVA test also indicates the important role of substrate, since the genetic diversity between different Slavic branches far exceeds the diversity within branches; such a picture should have formed if the eastern and southern branches of the Slavs assimilated genetically different populations.
Thirdly, the predominant role of geography in the formation of the gene pool of the Slavs speaks of the same thing. After all, if there had been no inclusion of the substrate, then the common origin fixed in the language could not but affect the similarity of the gene pools, even when some groups of Slavs migrated long distances from their relatives. But no such role for linguistic relatedness has been identified. And on the contrary: the genetic similarity between the pre-Slavic populations living on the territory of half of Europe should have been approximately proportional to the geographical distances between them, but in no way related to the linguistic kinship between the Slavic groups that later came to these lands. Then, if the substrate predominates in modern Slavic gene pools, then the similarity of these gene pools should follow geographical distances. Which is what was revealed.
Synthesis of data on different genetic and non-genetic systems.
In genetic work, the word “analysis” appears at every step, and very rarely – “synthesis”. Here, “synthesis” is even included in the title of the work. What does it mean?
It has already been said that this study is unique in that almost for the first time for a large group of related peoples, each people was studied, and studied according to all three modern genetic systems, and in addition, the linguistic relationship between them was quantitatively assessed. And this makes it possible, using the example of the Slavs, to see how three different genetic systems, linguistics and geography are interconnected - and to synthesize these heterogeneous data into general conclusions. This is all the more important because comparing genetic and linguistic reconstructions with geography has a long tradition in population genetics.
The correlations of all five systems (three genetic, linguistic and geographical) with each other are shown in the figure. The very high similarity of all five systems is striking: none of the correlation coefficients falls below 0.68 - that is, in fact, 0.7, which is considered a very high correlation in population genetics. And the most high odds reach the maximum possible ceiling (correlation 0.95). Particular correspondence is noted for Y-chromosomal and autosomal markers and geographic location. We can say that these three characteristics of the Balto-Slavic populations form an interconnected triad (correlation coefficients above 0.9, dark red color in the figure).
The consistency of the results for different feature systems confirms the reliability of such results. It also points to the promise of the so-called multisystem approach. This approach consists, firstly, of parallel analysis of different systems of features; secondly, in unconditional trust only in those patterns that are revealed not by any one system, but by the majority of systems; thirdly, in a careful consideration of cases when some system stands out from the general pattern. In this article, the authors made extensive use of a multisystem approach. When formulating statements about the genetic similarity or difference of certain peoples, the authors each time checked whether they were confirmed by the majority of systems used. And the fact that linguistics stands out from the general pattern served as one of the arguments in favor of the hypothesis of the predominance of the substrate.
This pattern of almost complete coincidence of the three genetic systems with each other, their coincidence with geography, but only partial similarity with linguistics can serve as a beacon for future studies of the gene pools of other regions of the world. At the same time, this pattern is not universal for the whole world: for populations with contrasting origins of the male and female parts of the population, data on the Y chromosome and mtDNA can vary greatly (as shown, for example, in the article by Quintano-Murci et al., 2008), and for populations in which the processes of gradual growth and fragmentation prevailed over crossbreeding, genetics may be more correlated with linguistics than with geography (as shown, for example, in the article by Balanovsky et al., 2011).
History of Slavic gene pools: research results
First of all, this is the predominance in Slavic populations of the pre-Slavic substrate - two genetic components assimilated by them - Eastern European for the Western and Eastern Slavs and South European for the Southern Slavs. (The names “Central-Eastern European” and “South-Eastern European” are too long; for brevity it is more convenient to call Eastern European and Southern European, remembering that Western Europe they do not extend, but are located in its eastern half in the dichotomous division of Europe).
But, despite the fact that in the gene pool of the Western and Eastern Slavs there is a large assimilated component of their neighbors on the East European Plain, these Slavic populations form a genetically quite integral group, differing both from their western neighbors (German-speaking populations) and from their eastern and northern (Finno-Ugric peoples). Of course, a couple of exceptions can be found to this rule, but they are concentrated on the periphery of the range of the Western and Eastern Slavs. For example, the distinctive gene pool of the Czechs has some genetic similarities with their German neighbors to the west, but other West Slavic populations (Poles and Sorbs) are genetically clearly separated from their German neighbors. Likewise, at the other end of the Slavic range, the Northern Russians have clear similarities with the Finno-Ugric and Baltic populations, but no such clear similarities are observed for the Central or Southern Russians, let alone other Slavic peoples.
Therefore, it can be assumed that after the main stage of the spread of Slavic languages and the assimilation of the pre-Slavic substrate passed, the formation of local characteristics of the gene pool began. It proceeded differently for different parts of the vast area of the Western and Eastern Slavs, but the initial kinship (common substrate plus a common Slavic superstrate) and, probably, the intense subsequent exchange of genes within the Slavic area, cemented the Western and Eastern Slavs into a single genetic community.
The work makes a cautious assumption that the assimilated substrate could be represented predominantly by Baltic-speaking populations. Indeed, archaeological evidence indicates a very wide distribution of Baltic groups before the start of Slavic settlement. The Baltic substratum among the Slavs (albeit, along with the Finno-Ugric one) was also identified by anthropologists. The genetic data obtained in this work - both in graphs of genetic relationships and in the proportion of common genome fragments - indicate that modern Baltic peoples are the closest genetic neighbors of the Eastern Slavs. At the same time, the Balts are also linguistically the closest relatives of the Slavs. And we can assume that by the time of assimilation, their gene pool was not so different from the gene pool of the Slavs who began their widespread settlement. Therefore, if we assume that the Slavs settling to the east assimilated mainly the Balts, this can explain both the similarity of modern Slavic and Baltic peoples with each other, and their differences from the surrounding non-Balto-Slavic groups of Europe.
As for the southern Slavs, the history of their gene pool could have proceeded in a similar way, although independently from the Western and Eastern Slavs. The South Slavs assimilated a significant part of the pre-Slavic population of the Balkans, which had a different gene pool than the population of the East European Plain assimilated by the Eastern and Western Slavs. Therefore, the South Slavic populations show greater similarity with the non-Slavic populations of the Balkans (Romanians and Hungarians) than with other Slavic peoples.
Source:
Genetic heritage of the Balto-Slavic speaking populations: a synthesis of autosomal, mitochondrial and Y-chromosomal data
Alena Kushniarevich, Olga Utevska, Marina Chuhryaeva, Anastasia Agdzhoyan, Khadizhat Dibirova, Ingrida Uktverite, Märt Möls, Lejla Kovačević, Andrey Pshenichnov, Svetlana Frolova, Andrey Shanko, Ene Metspalu, Maere Reidla, Kristiina Tambets, Erika Tamm, y Koshel, Valery Zaporozhchenko , Lubov Atramentova, Vaidutis Kučinskas, Oleg Davydenko, Lidya Tegako, Irina Evseeva, Michail Churnosov, Elvira Pocheshchova, Bayazit Yunusbaev, Elza Khusnutdinova, Damir Marjanović, Pavao Rudan, Siiri Rootsi, Nick Yankovsky, Phillip Endicott, Alexei Kassian, Anna Dy bo, The Genographic Consortium, Chris Tyler-Smith, Elena Balanovska, Mait Metspalu, Toomas Kivisild, Richard Villems and Oleg Balanovsky
http://lenta.ru/articles/2015/09/15/balto/
Radio broadcasts:
Oleg Balanovsky in the program “Homeland of Elephants” (radio station “Moscow Speaks”)
http://xn--c1acc6aafa1c.xn--p1ai/wp-content/uploads/2015_09_15_Rodina_slonov.mp3Oleg Balanovsky in the program “Science in Focus” (radio station “Echo of Moscow”)
http://1.cdn.echo.msk.ru/snd/2015-09-18-naukafokus-1605.mp3Oleg Balanovsky at the Sputnik radio station (formerly Voice of Russia), Rossiya Segodnya agency
http://xn--c1acc6aafa1c.xn--p1ai/wp-content/uploads/151008_interview_balanovsky_genofond_researches.mp3TV programs:
Oleg Balanovsky in the program “Hamburg Account”, Public Television of Russia (OTR)
Double exploration of a double continentTwo articles, published almost simultaneously in Nature and Science, are devoted to the genetic reconstruction of the peopling of America using the analysis of complete genomes. Their conclusions are similar. In an article by David Reich's team (Nature), in addition to the main migration from Siberia, which gave rise to all indigenous populations of America, a still mysterious “Australo-Melanesian trace” was discovered in some populations of South American Indians. An article by Eske Willerslev's team (Science) found the same trace, although its source could include, in addition to Austro-Melanesia, also East Asia. | Origin of the Slavs, biochemical versionWe are publishing a review by archaeologist and philologist, Doctor of Historical Sciences L.S. Klein on the book by A.A. Klyosov “The Origin of the Slavs”, published in the journal “Russian Archaeological Yearbook”. |
How to build trees? Checking in Lezgin languagesFor the first time, a full-fledged test of modern phylogenetic methods was carried out on the lexical material of the Lezgin language group. | UK genetic map opens window to pastResearchers have created a detailed map of the genetic structure of UK populations for the first time. In the gene pool of the modern population we were able to see a reflection major events in the history of the settlement of the British Isles. |
For the first time in history, Russian scientists conducted an unprecedented study of the Russian gene pool - and were shocked by its results. In particular, this study fully confirmed the idea expressed in our articles “Country of Moksel” (No. 14) and “Non-Russian Russian Language” (No. 12) that Russians are not Slavs, but only Russian-speaking Finns.
“Russian scientists have completed and are preparing for publication the first large-scale study of the gene pool of the Russian people. The publication of the results could have unpredictable consequences for Russia and the world order,” this is how the publication on this topic in the Russian publication Vlast sensationally begins. And the sensation really turned out to be incredible - many myths about Russian nationality turned out to be false. Among other things, it turned out that genetically Russians are not “Eastern Slavs” at all, but Finns.
THE RUSSIANS TURNED OUT TO BE FINNS
Over several decades of intense research, anthropologists have been able to identify the appearance of a typical Russian person. They are of average build and average height, light brown-haired with light eyes - gray or blue. By the way, during the research a verbal portrait of a typical Ukrainian was also obtained. The standard Ukrainian differs from the Russian in the color of his skin, hair and eyes - he is a dark brunette with regular facial features and brown eyes. However, anthropological measurements of the proportions of the human body are not even the last, but the century before last, of science, which has long ago received at its disposal the most accurate methods of molecular biology, which make it possible to read all human genes. And the most advanced methods of DNA analysis today are considered to be sequencing (reading the genetic code) of mitochondrial DNA and DNA of the human Y chromosome. Mitochondrial DNA has been passed down through the female line from generation to generation, virtually unchanged since the time when the ancestor of mankind, Eve, climbed down from a tree in East Africa. And the Y chromosome is present only in men and therefore is also passed on to male offspring almost unchanged, while all other chromosomes, when transmitted from father and mother to their children, are shuffled by nature, like a deck of cards before being dealt. Thus, in contrast to indirect signs (appearance, body proportions), sequencing of mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome DNA indisputably and directly indicate the degree of kinship between people, writes the magazine “Power”.
In the West, human population geneticists have been successfully using these methods for two decades. In Russia, they were used only once, in the mid-1990s, when identifying royal remains. The turning point in the situation with the use of the most modern methods to study the titular nation of Russia occurred only in 2000. The Russian Foundation for Basic Research has awarded a grant to scientists from the Laboratory of Human Population Genetics of the Medical Genetics Center of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences. For the first time in Russian history, scientists were able to fully concentrate on studying the gene pool of the Russian people for several years. They supplemented their molecular genetic research with an analysis of the frequency distribution of Russian surnames in the country. This method was very cheap, but its information content exceeded all expectations: a comparison of the geography of surnames with the geography of genetic DNA markers showed their almost complete coincidence.
The molecular genetic results of Russia's first study of the gene pool of the titular nationality are now being prepared for publication in the form of a monograph “Russian Gene Pool”, which will be published at the end of the year by the Luch publishing house. The magazine “Vlast” provides some research data. So, it turned out that the Russians are not “Eastern Slavs” at all, but Finns. By the way, these studies completely destroyed the notorious myth about the “Eastern Slavs” - that supposedly Belarusians, Ukrainians and Russians “make up a group of Eastern Slavs.” The only Slavs of these three peoples turned out to be only Belarusians, but it turned out that Belarusians are not “Eastern Slavs” at all, but Western ones - because they are genetically practically no different from the Poles. So the myth about the “kinship blood of Belarusians and Russians” was completely destroyed: Belarusians turned out to be virtually identical to the Poles, Belarusians are genetically very far from Russians, but very close to Czechs and Slovaks. But the Finns of Finland turned out to be much closer genetically to the Russians than the Belarusians. Thus, according to the Y chromosome, the genetic distance between Russians and Finns in Finland is only 30 conventional units (close relationship). And the genetic distance between a Russian person and the so-called Finno-Ugric peoples (Mari, Vepsians, Mordovians, etc.) living on the territory of the Russian Federation is 2-3 units. Simply put, genetically they are IDENTICAL. In this regard, the magazine “Vlast” notes: “And the harsh statement of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Estonia on September 1 at the Council of the EU in Brussels (after the denunciation by the Russian side of the treaty on the state border with Estonia) about discrimination against the Finno-Ugric peoples allegedly related to the Finns in the Russian Federation loses its substantive meaning . But due to the moratorium of Western scientists, the Russian Foreign Ministry was unable to reasonably accuse Estonia of interfering in our internal, one might even say closely related, affairs.” This philippic is only one facet of the mass of contradictions that have arisen. Since the closest relatives for Russians are Finno-Ugrians and Estonians (in fact, these are the same people, since a difference of 2-3 units is inherent in only one people), then Russian jokes about “inhibited Estonians” are strange, when Russians themselves are these Estonians. A huge problem arises for Russia in self-identification as supposedly “Slavs,” because genetically the Russian people have nothing to do with the Slavs. In the myth about the “Slavic roots of the Russians,” Russian scientists have put an end to it: there is nothing of the Slavs in the Russians. There is only the near-Slavic Russian language, but it also contains 60-70% non-Slavic vocabulary, so a Russian person is not able to understand the languages of the Slavs, although a real Slav understands any Slavic languages (except Russian) due to the similarity. The results of mitochondrial DNA analysis showed that another closest relative of Russians, besides the Finns of Finland, are the Tatars: Russians from the Tatars are at the same genetic distance of 30 conventional units that separates them from the Finns. The data for Ukraine turned out to be no less sensational. It turned out that genetically the population of Eastern Ukraine is Finno-Ugrians: Eastern Ukrainians are practically no different from Russians, Komi, Mordvins, and Mari. This is one Finnish people, who once had their own common Finnish language. But with the Ukrainians of Western Ukraine, everything turned out to be even more unexpected. These are not Slavs at all, just as they are not the “Russo-Finns” of Russia and Eastern Ukraine, but a completely different ethnic group: between the Ukrainians from Lvov and the Tatars the genetic distance is only 10 units.
This close relationship between Western Ukrainians and Tatars may be explained by the Sarmatian roots of the ancient inhabitants of Kievan Rus. Of course, there is a certain Slavic component in the blood of Western Ukrainians (they are more genetically close to the Slavs than the Russians), but these are still not Slavs, but Sarmatians. Anthropologically, they are characterized by wide cheekbones, dark hair and brown eyes, dark (and not pink, like Caucasians) nipples. The magazine writes: “You can react as you like to these strictly scientific facts that show the natural essence of the standard electorates of Viktor Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych. But it will not be possible to accuse Russian scientists of falsifying these data: then the accusation will automatically extend to their Western colleagues, who have been delaying the publication of these results for more than a year, each time extending the moratorium period.” The magazine is right: these data clearly explain the deep and permanent split in Ukrainian society, where two completely different ethnic groups actually live under the name “Ukrainians.” Moreover, Russian imperialism will take this scientific data into its arsenal - as another (already weighty and scientific) argument to “increase” the territory of Russia with Eastern Ukraine. But what about the myth about the “Slavic-Russians”?
Recognizing these data and trying to use them, Russian strategists are faced with what is popularly called a “double-edged sword”: in this case, they will have to reconsider the entire national self-identification of the Russian people as “Slavic” and abandon the concept of “kinship” with Belarusians and the entire Slavic World - no longer at the level of scientific research, but at the political level. The magazine also publishes a map indicating the area where “truly Russian genes” (that is, Finnish) are still preserved. Geographically, this territory “coincides with Russia during the time of Ivan the Terrible” and “clearly shows the conventionality of some state borders,” the magazine writes. Namely: the population of Bryansk, Kursk and Smolensk is not a Russian population at all (that is, Finnish), but a Belarusian-Polish one - identical to the genes of Belarusians and Poles. An interesting fact is that in the Middle Ages the border between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Muscovy was precisely the ethnic border between the Slavs and Finns (by the way, the eastern border of Europe then passed along it). The further imperialism of Muscovy-Russia, which annexed neighboring territories, went beyond the boundaries of ethnic Muscovites and captured foreign ethnic groups.
WHAT IS Rus'?
These new discoveries by Russian scientists allow us to take a fresh look at the entire politics of medieval Muscovy, including its concept of “Rus”. It turns out that Moscow’s “pulling of the Russian blanket over itself” is explained purely ethnically and genetically. The so-called “Holy Rus'” in the concept of the Russian Orthodox Church of Moscow and Russian historians was formed due to the rise of Moscow in the Horde, and, as Lev Gumilyov wrote, for example, in the book “From Rus' to Russia”, due to the same fact, Ukrainians and Belarusians ceased to be Rusyns, ceased to be Russia. It is clear that there were two completely different Russias. One, the Western one, lived its own life as a Slav and united into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia. Another Rus' - Eastern Rus' (more precisely Muscovy - because it was not considered Russia at that time) - entered the ethnically close Horde for 300 years, in which it then seized power and made it “Russia” even before the conquest of Novgorod and Pskov into the Horde-Russia. It is this second Rus' – the Rus' of the Finnish ethnic group – that the Russian Orthodox Church of Moscow and Russian historians call “Holy Russia”, while depriving Western Rus' of the right to something “Russian” (forcing even the entire people of Kievan Rus to call themselves not Rusyns, but “outskirts” ). The meaning is clear: this Finnish Russian had little in common with the original Slavic Russian.
The very centuries-old confrontation between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Muscovy (who seemed to have something in common in Rurikovich Russia and in the Kievan faith, and the princes of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania Vitovt-Yurii and Jagiello-Yakov were Orthodox from birth, were Rurikovichs and Grand Dukes of Russia, did not speak any other language except Russian knew) - this is a confrontation between countries of different ethnic groups: the Grand Duchy of Lithuania gathered the Slavs, and Muscovy gathered the Finns. As a result, for many centuries two Russias opposed each other - the Slavic Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Finnish Muscovy. This also explains the glaring fact that Muscovy NEVER during its stay in the Horde expressed a desire to return to Rus', gain freedom from the Tatars, and become part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. And its capture of Novgorod was caused precisely by the negotiations of Novgorod on joining the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This Russophobia of Moscow and its “masochism” (“the Horde yoke is better than the Grand Duchy of Lithuania”) can only be explained by ethnic differences with primordial Russia and ethnic closeness to the peoples of the Horde. It is this genetic difference with the Slavs that explains Muscovy’s rejection European image life, hatred of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Poles (that is, the Slavs in general), a great love for the East and Asian traditions. These studies of Russian scientists must necessarily be reflected in the revision of their concepts by historians. In particular, it has long been necessary to introduce into historical science the fact that there was not one Rus', but two completely different ones: Slavic Rus' and Finnish Rus'. This clarification makes it possible to understand and explain many processes in our medieval history, which in the current interpretation still seem devoid of any meaning.
RUSSIAN SURNAMES
Attempts by Russian scientists to study the statistics of Russian surnames initially encountered a lot of difficulties. The Central Election Commission and local election commissions flatly refused to cooperate with scientists, citing the fact that only if voter lists are kept secret can they guarantee the objectivity and integrity of elections to federal and local authorities. The criterion for inclusion of a surname in the list was very lenient: it was included if at least five bearers of this surname lived in the region for three generations. First, lists were compiled for five conditional regions - Northern, Central, Central-Western, Central-Eastern and Southern. In total, across all regions of Russia there were about 15 thousand Russian surnames, most of which were found only in one of the regions and were absent in others.
When superimposing regional lists on top of each other, scientists identified a total of 257 so-called “all-Russian surnames.” The magazine writes: “It is interesting that at the final stage of the study they decided to add surnames of residents of the Krasnodar Territory to the list of the Southern region, expecting that the predominance of Ukrainian surnames of the descendants of the Zaporozhye Cossacks evicted here by Catherine II would significantly reduce the all-Russian list. But this additional restriction reduced the list of all-Russian surnames by only 7 units - to 250. From which followed the obvious and not pleasant conclusion that Kuban was populated mainly by Russian people. Where did the Ukrainians go and were they even here at all is a big question.” And further: “The analysis of Russian surnames generally gives food for thought. Even the simplest action - searching for the names of all the country's leaders - gave an unexpected result. Only one of them was included in the list of bearers of the top 250 all-Russian surnames - Mikhail Gorbachev (158th place). The surname Brezhnev occupies 3767th place in the general list (found only in the Belgorod region of the Southern region). The surname Khrushchev is in 4248th place (found only in the Northern region, Arkhangelsk region). Chernenko took 4749th place (Southern region only). Andropov is in 8939th place (Southern region only). Putin took 14,250th place (Southern region only). And Yeltsin was not included in the general list at all. Stalin's last name, Dzhugashvili, was not considered for obvious reasons. But the pseudonym Lenin was included in the regional lists at number 1421, second only to the first president of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev.” The magazine writes that the result amazed even the scientists themselves, who believed that the main difference between bearers of southern Russian surnames was not the ability to lead a huge power, but the increased sensitivity of the skin of their fingers and palms. A scientific analysis of dermatoglyphics (papillary patterns on the skin of the palms and fingers) of Russian people showed that the complexity of the pattern (from simple arches to loops) and the accompanying sensitivity of the skin increases from north to south. “A person with simple patterns on the skin of his hands can hold a glass of hot tea in his hands without pain,” Dr. Balanovskaya clearly explained the essence of the differences. “And if there are a lot of loops, then such people make unsurpassed pickpockets.” Scientists publish a list of the 250 most common Russian surnames. What was unexpected was the fact that the most common Russian surname is not Ivanov, but Smirnov. This whole list is incorrect, it’s not worth giving, here are just the 20 most common Russian surnames: 1. Smirnov; 2. Ivanov; 3. Kuznetsov; 4. Popov; 5. Sokolov; 6. Lebedev; 7. Kozlov; 8. Novikov; 9. Morozov; 10. Petrov; 11. Volkov; 12. Soloviev; 13. Vasiliev; 14. Zaitsev; 15. Pavlov; 16. Semenov; 17. Golubev; 18. Vinogradov; 19. Bogdanov; 20. Vorobyov. All top all-Russian surnames have Bulgarian endings with -ov (-ev), plus several surnames with –in (Ilyin, Kuzmin, etc.). And among the top 250 there is not a single surname of “Eastern Slavs” (Belarusians and Ukrainians) starting with -iy, -ich, -ko. Although in Belarus the most common surnames are -iy and -ich, and in Ukraine - -ko. This also shows deep differences between the “Eastern Slavs”, for Belarusian surnames with –i and –ich are equally the most common in Poland – and not at all in Russia. The Bulgarian endings of the 250 most common Russian surnames indicate that the surnames were given by the priests of Kievan Rus, who spread Orthodoxy among its Finns in Muscovy, therefore these surnames are Bulgarian, from holy books, and not from the living Slavic language, which the Finns of Muscovy do not have was. Otherwise, it is impossible to understand why Russians do not have surnames of Belarusians living nearby (in -iy and -ich), but Bulgarian surnames - although the Bulgarians are not at all bordering Moscow, but live thousands of kilometers away from it. The widespread use of surnames with animal names is explained by Lev Uspensky in his book “Riddles of Toponymy” (Moscow, 1973) by the fact that in the Middle Ages people had two names - from their parents and from baptism, and “from their parents” it was then “fashionable” to give names animals. As he writes, then in the family the children had the names Hare, Wolf, Bear, etc. This pagan tradition was embodied in the widespread use of “animal” surnames.
ABOUT BELARUSIANS
A special topic in this study is the genetic identity of Belarusians and Poles. This did not become the subject of attention of Russian scientists, because it is outside Russia. But it is very interesting for us. The very fact of genetic identity of Poles and Belarusians is not unexpected. The very history of our countries is confirmation of this - the main part of the ethnic group of Belarusians and Poles is not the Slavs, but the Slavicized Western Balts, but their genetic “passport” is so close to the Slavic that in the genes it would be practically difficult to find differences between the Slavs and the Prussians, Masurians, Dainova , Yatvingians, etc. This is what unites the Poles and Belarusians, the descendants of the Slavicized Western Balts. This ethnic community also explains the creation of the Union State of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The famous Belarusian historian V.U. Lastovsky in " Brief history Belarus" (Vilno, 1910) writes that negotiations on the creation of the Union State of Belarusians and Poles began ten times: in 1401, 1413, 1438, 1451, 1499, 1501, 1563, 1564, 1566, 1567. - and ended for the eleventh time with the creation of the Union in 1569. Where does such persistence come from? Obviously, only out of awareness of ethnic community, for the ethnic group of Poles and Belarusians was created by dissolving the Western Balts into themselves. But the Czechs and Slovaks, who were also part of the first in the history of the Slavic Union of Peoples of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, no longer felt this degree of closeness, because they did not have a “Baltic component” in themselves. And there was even greater alienation among the Ukrainians, who saw little ethnic kinship in this and over time entered into complete confrontation with the Poles. The research of Russian geneticists allows us to take a completely different look at our entire history, since many political events and political preferences of the peoples of Europe are largely explained precisely by the genetics of their ethnic group - which until now has remained hidden from historians. It was genetics and the genetic kinship of ethnic groups that were the most important forces in the political processes of medieval Europe. The genetic map of peoples created by Russian scientists allows us to look at the wars and alliances of the Middle Ages from a completely different angle.
The results of research by Russian scientists about the gene pool of the Russian people will be absorbed in society for a long time, because they completely refute all our existing ideas, reducing them to the level of unscientific myths. This new knowledge must not only be understood, but rather one must get used to it. Now the concept of “Eastern Slavs” has become absolutely unscientific, the congresses of the Slavs in Minsk are unscientific, where it is not Slavs from Russia who gather, but Russian-speaking Finns from Russia, who are not genetically Slavs and have nothing to do with the Slavs. The very status of these “congresses of the Slavs” is completely discredited by Russian scientists. Based on the results of these studies, Russian scientists called the Russian people not Slavs, but Finns. The population of Eastern Ukraine is also called Finns, and the population of Western Ukraine is genetically Sarmatian. That is, the Ukrainian people are not Slavs either. The only Slavs from the “Eastern Slavs” are the Belarusians, but they are genetically identical to the Poles - which means they are not “Eastern Slavs” at all, but genetically Western Slavs. In fact, this means the geopolitical collapse of the Slavic Triangle of the “Eastern Slavs,” because the Belarusians turned out to be genetically Poles, the Russians were Finns, and the Ukrainians were Finns and Sarmatians. Of course, propaganda will continue to try to hide this fact from the population, but you can’t hide an sew in a bag. Just as you can’t shut the mouth of scientists, you can’t hide their latest genetic research. Scientific progress cannot be stopped. Therefore, the discoveries of Russian scientists are not just a scientific sensation, but a BOMB capable of undermining all currently existing foundations in the ideas of peoples. That is why the Russian magazine “Vlast” gave this fact an extremely concerned assessment: “Russian scientists have completed and are preparing for publication the first large-scale study of the gene pool of the Russian people. The publication of the results could have unpredictable consequences for Russia and the world order.” The magazine did not exaggerate.
E. Balanovskaya, O. Balanovsky
RUSSIAN GENE POOL: evidence from “eyewitnesses”
What are the origins of the Russian gene pool? What tribes and peoples formed its basis?
What invasions passed like a wave overhead, leaving no trace? What migrations - often almost unrecorded in chronicle memory - determined many of its modern features?
Population genetics, which studies the variability of the gene pool in space and time, seeks answers to these questions.
PAINTS FOR PORTRAITS
The history of the formation of any nation is often more complex than the intrigue of an adventure novel. To solve it, you need to involve many sources, each of which speaks about one side or another of events. And now big hopes are assigned to genetics - after all, genes convey to us information about our ancestors. However, the reliability of the evidence depends on the reliability of the original information. The spectrum and number of populations is of decisive importance (A population is in this context a relatively isolated group of the population, historically established in a certain territory and reproducing itself within these boundaries from generation to generation (ed.), based on the study of which geneticists draw conclusions. For many Decades of careful work by anthropologists, linguists, ethnographers have collected detailed information about almost all the peoples of the world. A huge amount has been accumulated by biological disciplines - somatology (Somatology is a branch of human morphology that studies variations in the sizes and shapes of the body and its parts - editor's note), dermatoglyphics, dermatoglyphics. — study of the details of the skin relief (papillary lines) of the fingers and toes. It is used in racial studies, criminology (ed.), paleoanthropology.
(based on data on the frequencies of Y chromosome haplogroups)
The first main component of the variability of the Russian gene pool
(based on classical markers)
The histogram shows the boundary values that separate the variability scale
sign into intervals. The zone of high values of the characteristic is colored red-brown,
medium - in green colors, low - in blue colors
Until recently, gene pool research proceeded in parallel streams. The merger was hampered by the lack of technology for a generalized analysis of various traits, which were also studied in different populations.
Genogeography was able to play a unifying role and synthesize various data on the Russian gene pool. The term itself, the concept of “gene pool”, and the idea of linking the processes of formation of peoples with the spatial distribution of genes belong to Alexander Serebrovsky (corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences since 1933), in the 20s of the 20th century. who wrote in one of his works: “...Modern geography of genes is the result of a long historical process, and when we learn to read what is recorded in the images of modern gene distribution, we will be able to read the detailed history... of humanity.”
The gene pool is a real object. Not visible with any instruments, it has certain physical parameters, structure, and occupies a clearly limited space - an area. Mapping is the only way to visually represent this object. Therefore, the creation of computer maps and their analysis is not a fad, but a necessity and condition for large-scale research. Outside of cartographic technology, it is impossible to describe the geography of hundreds of genes, much less obtain a generalized “portrait” of the gene pool (namely, the creation of such portraits is considered by the authors of this article to be one of the main achievements of the laboratory they represent). In short, genogeography does not simply increase the amount of relevant scientific information, but organizes and transforms it, making it easily readable and accessible to all specialists.
True, today it is not so much scientists who talk about the gene pool, its destruction and degeneration, and means of salvation, but rather public figures and publicists. Because researchers can only do this if they have reliable knowledge. And the first step to predicting the future is to look to the past.
METHODS OF GENOGEOGRAPHY
We are studying the modern population, but the analysis itself is aimed at distinguishing the features of the history of its composition in the currently existing gene pool. That is why in our field of interest is not the urbanized population or the population formed as a result of recent migrations (then we would be probing only the recent past), but the indigenous rural population (the least changed since previous centuries). That is why we limit our consideration to the “primordial”, historical area of the Russian people, which makes up only part of the modern one. The Russian people were formed in the territory covering the center of Eastern Europe and its North. And the definition of “original” is not put in quotation marks by chance: the local history of the pre-Slavic population is an order of magnitude longer than the Slavic one.
At the same time, we are not talking about specifically Russian gene pool and genes. For any linking of a biological carrier of heredity to an ethnic group is essentially incorrect - we are talking about different coordinate systems: belonging to a people is determined by a person’s self-awareness, while the gene pool is determined by the concentration of genes in a certain area. Like chips in a stream, genes, through their carriers - members of the population - are involved in the historical process, making it possible to follow its progress for centuries and millennia. A special—historical—connection between the gene pool and ethnic group arises.
But the life of a researcher is too short compared to the life of a population. Therefore, genogeography replaces observation in time with observation in space, and the tools used for this - computer maps - make it possible to simultaneously track the microevolutionary trajectories of many genes. The more statistical data included in such a map, the more detailed the geography of the historical process in the area of the gene pool will be restored. Of course, the boundaries of a population are not blind fences—gene flows pass through them, but at the boundaries these flows are not as intense as within the population’s own range. And these boundaries themselves are mobile, fluid, although absolutely real: they can be detected and recorded, for example, by sharp changes in the frequencies of occurring genes, or by studying the structure of migrations associated with marriages and the creation of new families.
Even gene pools with a common origin, under the influence of natural or demographic factors, move away from each other from generation to generation, which sooner or later manifests itself in the anthropological and genetic uniqueness of the population. If you reflect the studied characteristics on maps, it turns out that they are not randomly distributed in space. The increase and decrease in the frequency of occurrence of genes occurs more or less smoothly, as a result of which they have similar values not in individual geographical locations, but in entire territories.
Along with cartographic technology, data banks occupy an important place in gene geography. The fact is that the amount of information used even in a not very large-scale study of this kind is enormous, and the initial indicators themselves are usually scattered across many articles. Thanks to its structural organization and programmed functions, such a repository also becomes a tool for checking, systematizing and analyzing accumulated facts. Therefore, before creating map atlases, it was necessary to create data banks “Russian Gene Pool”, “Paleolithic of Northern Eurasia”, “Russian Surnames” and a number of others.
We used the listed methods when studying the Circassians, Bashkirs, Belarusians, Mari, Mongols, Ossetians, Russians and representatives of other peoples. Our comparative analysis showed: in the gene pool of the population of Northern Eurasia (including the territory of the former USSR - the European part of Russia, the Caucasus, the Urals, Central Asia, Kazakhstan, Siberia and Far East) retains the largest portion of the world's genetic diversity. What forces support it? The leading factor, according to our estimates, was the numerous ethnic groups that gradually (“quantized”) emerged within these spatial boundaries over the past millennia.
FROM GENES TO THE GENE POOL
A “portrait” of the gene pool can only be “drawn” by examining individual genes. This work is labor-intensive and requires much more time and money than, for example, analyzing the anthropological composition of the population. To study DNA markers (namely, they are currently attracting the attention of population geneticists), you need to go on an expedition and conduct a survey of the population during it. Venous blood samples are taken from those who agreed to participate. Moreover, only for individuals who are not related to each other by blood, and moreover, their ancestors for two generations must belong to both a given people and a given population. Such samples are usually taken exclusively from men - all markers of both paternal and maternal lines of inheritance in this case are represented in one sample. Blood samples stored in the cold are urgently delivered to the molecular genetic center for DNA extraction, which is then stored in freezers. Then the next, most interesting, but lengthy and expensive stage of the study begins: identifying in each individual those gene variants (more precisely, DNA variants) in which some populations differ from others. As a result, their DNA polymorphism is revealed. Moreover, you cannot limit yourself to one or a few genes - to see the whole picture, their palette must be large and varied.
Heterogeneity of the Russian people in comparison with the typical heterogeneity of the peoples of the regions of Eurasia
Let us explain in more detail. From each of our parents we receive one “set” of genes: one comes from the father, the other from the mother. They are called autosomal, and they are the absolute majority in any person. However, there are also small, but important exceptions for studying the history of Homo sapiens: we are talking about genes transmitted from one of the parents and therefore called “uniparental”. Only men and only from their father receive Uchromosome. Women don't have it. But from our mother, we all - both men and women - receive special DNA from the egg, which is contained outside the nucleus - in the mitochondria - and is passed on through generations regardless of the nucleus. Human genes can be thought of as words in the universal language of heredity. Then the genome (or genotype) of each of us, including both autosomal and uniparental genes, will be comparable to a unique “text” compiled in this language. And the gene pool of a population, containing the entire “vocabulary,” is a collection of many individual, diverse “texts.”
Population genetics deals with polymorphic genes, i.e. those that are found not in one, but in different variants (alleles) - “words” that differ only in a few letters. Each of the variant alleles is the result of mutations (errors in the spelling of “words”) that occurred in the distant past, but are transmitted in a chain of generations to the present day. To study a population, it is important that variants are not very rare, but occur in it with a frequency of at least 1-5%. However, no matter how large the family of alleles, an individual cannot contain more than two variants of the “word” (two alleles of one gene): one from the mother and one from the father. If the alleles obtained are the same, the person is homozygous for this gene; if they differ, the person is heterozygous.
Autosomal genes are recombined (“shuffled”) during transmission. So, if you received the complete works of Fyodor Dostoevsky from your father, and Agatha Christie from your mother, then you will leave your child randomly shuffled volumes - for example, Dostoevsky's 1, 2, 5, 8, 10 and 3, 4, 6, 7 , 9th Christie. With single-parent markers, recombination does not occur (since they are received only from one of the parents) - they are inherited as a single block and allow one to trace the history of the maternal and paternal lines. Such a “complete collection of works”, completely transmitted over a number of generations, is called haplotypes of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and the Y chromosome.
The essence of all genetic markers (physiological, immunological, biochemical, autosomal DNA markers or uniparental) is the same: based on the test result (whether we show the examination participant a book with color pictures to detect color blindness, or we carry out DNA sequencing, specifying the nucleotide sequence), we clearly identify the presence or absence of specific alleles of a specific gene in a person.
The situation is similar with quasi-genetic markers: surnames, genus names. Although they are not “dictated” by genes (the surname is a phenomenon of language and culture, not biology), they sometimes behave like them and, even thanks to history, sometimes find themselves in the same bundle with genes.
LATITUDE VARIABILITY
To identify the structure of the Russian gene pool, we analyzed six data sets: two anthropological (somatology and dermatoglyphics), two DNA polymorphisms (mtDNA and Y chromosomes), another one composed of classical genetic markers (for example, blood groups, genes for a number of enzymes), and the last one - geography surnames It was important to find out whether the data from different sciences agreed or contradicted each other, whether they would help create a single, holistic portrait? Each type of trait is an “eyewitness” telling about the gene pool. And comparison of evidence helps to create the most truthful image of him.
The anthropological data on which we relied were collected during two large-scale expeditions conducted under the auspices of the USSR Academy of Sciences in the 50s of the 20th century. This largest study of its kind describes the physical appearance of the Russian population. A total of 181 populations were studied for 18 characteristics (body length, eye and hair color, shape of the back of the nose, beard growth, etc.). The geography of most of these characteristics is quite complex. Simple patterns were found only for a few traits (say, for beard growth: the further south the population, the more intense the average beard growth). In general, the anthropological appearance, as follows from the generalized map of the so-called canonical variable (Maps of canonical variables and principal components reveal “leading scenarios” of gene pool variability - that common thing that is present in most maps of individual characteristics, but is hidden by the veil of the private history of each characteristic (note . ed.), changes mainly in the direction from north to south or vice versa (linguists also know the same pattern, distinguishing northern, southern and mixed Central Russian dialects, but changes occur very gradually - there can be no border between north and south). This is rather the main axis along which the greatest variability is visible: moving from north to south we will find much greater differences than from west to east. Analysis of dermatoglyphics also pointed to latitudinal variability as the main pattern in the second array. data.
The array of so-called classical genetic markers is perhaps the most important: after all, unlike anthropological data and surnames, these are “real genes”, and in comparison with the recently appeared DNA markers, they have long been studied in many Russian populations. The map of the main component of classical markers turned out to be very similar to the map of the main anthropological pattern: again gradual changes in the gene pool from north to south. However, DNA markers have not lagged behind their classical predecessors.
Of the many genetic markers, the Y chromosome is the newest and, according to many scientists, the most promising. The literary information is so fragmentary that we had to undertake our own research - collect data on 14 Russian populations from the entire “original” Russian area and determine for them the frequencies of Y chromosome haplogroups (this work, as with mtDNA, we carried out on the basis of the Estonian Biocenter, headed by President of the Estonian Academy of Sciences Richard Willems). The degree of differences between populations (heterogeneity) in the Y chromosome turned out to be much higher than in classical markers and mtDNA. This means that Y chromosome markers are the most powerful tool for studying the Russian gene pool. Therefore, for the Y chromosome haplogroups, we created an atlas of maps of their distribution in the Russian area. It turned out that this tool elegantly reveals the clear and smooth latitudinal variability of the Russian gene pool: the main vector, like a compass needle, again points in the same direction - north-south.
The agreement between all the “eyewitnesses” leaves no doubt: a real, objective leading pattern in the structure of the Russian gene pool has been identified - latitudinal variability.
The first main component of the variability of material culture Upper Paleolithic on the territory of Northern Eurasia
SLAVS AND THEIR PRECEDIENTS
This pattern was revealed by principal component maps. But a generalized map of another type—genetic distances—shows how different each of the Russian populations is from the statistical average in its anthropological appearance. Similar to the average one are found everywhere and mainly in the center of the Russian range. One would expect the “most different” to be located in the south and north. However, populations that significantly deviate from the average characteristics form clusters, nuclei along a different axis: one group in the west, the other in the east of the “original” range.
To explain the picture, let us remember how the modern Russian population was formed. Slavic tribes moved east over several centuries, colonizing the East European Plain and assimilating local Finno-Ugric tribes. At the beginning of the process, the Slavs numerically predominated in the western regions, and this dominance is noticeable in the appearance of the population of the “western” cores. In the middle of the process, mixing intensified, especially in the territories that are now the middle part of the Russian range. As a result, an “average” Russian appearance was formed here, composed of Slavic and Finno-Ugric components. At the end of colonization in the eastern regions of the “original” Russian area, the local population numerically prevailed over the newcomer Slavic, which inevitably reflected in the appearance: in the “eastern” cores, the features of the pre-Slavic population predominated. All this is evidenced by our hypothesis, confirmed by the fact that the zone of the “average” Russian population corresponds to the advance of the borders of the Russian state to the east in the 9th-11th centuries, i.e. is located where the greatest mixing of Slavs with Finno-Ugric populations took place. In addition, the western “cores” on the anthropological map coincide with the areas of the chronicle Slavic tribes on the archaeological map: each of the cores registered in the west is comparable to the tribe mentioned in the Russian chronicles (Krivichi, Vyatichi, Severyans).
FEATURES OF "EYEWITNESS"
Having identified the “main scenario” for the composition of the gene pool, at the second stage of the analysis it is necessary to look closely at the uniqueness of each trait used - be it DNA sequences or features of external appearance, blood type or surname. Perhaps the characteristics of one “eyewitness” will tell us something about the gene pool that others, due to their characteristics, will not discover?
Thus, among the dermatoglyphic features, the distribution of the Caucasoid-Mongoloid complex is especially interesting - a special combination of skin patterns that well differentiates the populations of the west and east of Eurasia. The expectation that Mongoloidity among the Russian population increases to the east or southeast was not confirmed - within the “original” area this complex is distributed chaotically.
It would seem that classical gene markers should not have “special features”. But it is precisely their “traditionality”, the fact that they have been studied for a long time, that gives them a property that is extremely important for researchers: so much data has accumulated on them that it is possible to carry out types of analysis that are especially demanding on the quality and quantity of initial information. For example, to evaluate such a parameter of the gene pool as the degree of its internal heterogeneity (structure, differentiation), i.e. find out how different Russian populations differ from each other.
To answer this question, we assessed the heterogeneity indicator not only of the Russian people. We carried out the same analysis for other ethnic groups. It turned out that all Western European peoples are generally homogeneous (populations, for example, of the French are genetically similar to each other), while Siberian peoples, on the contrary, are heterogeneous (populations of, say, the Yakuts are very different from each other). The peoples of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and the Urals occupied an intermediate position (moderate heterogeneity). Against the Eastern European background, the differences in the Russian genotype are very large. They are much higher than the average genetic variation within each people of Western Europe.
Mitochondrial DNA as a type of genetic marker is now the most popular among researchers around the world. But data on Russian populations began to accumulate only a few years ago. Therefore, we currently have reliable information on only seven of them, and limited information does not allow for mapping. And statistical methods reveal that in terms of mitochondrial DNA, as well as in classical markers, different Russian populations are very different. A special feature of mitochondrial DNA is its great variety of variants (haplotypes), which make it possible to compare populations according to their “spectrum”. And by the degree of overlap of the spectra of two populations, one can judge their relationship. We identified haplotypes in Russian populations and compared them with the spectrum of their “neighbors” in Europe. It turned out that Russians are most similar to other East Slavic populations (30% of “Russian” haplotypes are also found among Belarusians and Ukrainians). In second place in terms of similarity are the Eastern Finno-Ugric peoples (Komi, Udmurts, Mari, Mordovians), in third place are the Western Finno-Ugric peoples (Estonians, Karelians, Finns, Sami), then come the Western Slavs (Poles, Czechs, Slovaks) and South Slavs (Serbs, Croats, Bulgarians, Bosnians, Slovenes). So, in terms of mtDNA haplotypes, the Russian gene pool is closer to the Finno-Ugric than to the “proto-Slavic”. But the most important thing is that, as previously based on anthropological signs, classical genetic markers and haplogroups of the Y chromosome, we again discovered using mtDNA: the main vector of variability in the Russian gene pool follows the “north-south” direction.
The most unusual markers on which we have high hopes are surnames. Using them, it is possible to predict the characteristics of the gene pool where there is not enough time and money to study it directly, by genes. Over the course of several years, we collected data on the surnames of about a million people representing the rural population within the “original” Russian area. Five regions - Northern, Southern, Western, Eastern, Central - became the framework of the study. Unfortunately, we do not yet have enough information on the “junctions” between them. Therefore, mapping was carried out only for 75 surnames - for them there was data for the entire area. And the patterns of the remaining tens of thousands of surnames were studied using statistical methods in the “core” regions.
What did it turn out to be? Almost each of the 75 surnames has its own geographical area, outside of which it is absent or extremely rare. Even such seemingly ubiquitous surnames - Ivanov, Vasiliev, Smirnov - turned out to be not ubiquitous: there are very few Ivanovs in the south, the Vasilievs are concentrated in the northwestern regions, and the Smirnovs are concentrated in the eastern and central regions. However, the prevalence of surnames, as follows from our generalized maps, is subject to the same latitudinal variability as the signs of anthropology and genetics, but this pattern is obscured - the mapped list does not sufficiently represent the many thousands of Russian surnames.
Therefore, statistical analysis was carried out across the entire spectrum of surnames, and we found 65,000 of them.
According to established practice, in order to study the indigenous population, only villages and small towns were taken into account. To filter out alien, “stray” surnames, those found in less than 5 people in the regional population were excluded. The remaining 14,000 were considered conditionally indigenous and further worked only with them. Of these, 250 turned out to be ubiquitous: they are found in each of the five regions mentioned, although with different frequencies. The rest paint a unique portrait of each region. In the West, “calendar” surnames predominate, i.e. derived from names mentioned in the Orthodox calendar. In the Central, the most characteristic are those formed from the names of animals, birds, plants, in the East - noticeable ones (Smirnov, Rumyantsev...). In the South, professional ones are most often found (Popov, Goncharov), and in the North, although calendar ones are common, there are a lot of dialect ones (Bulygin, Leshukov...). Based on the frequencies of all 14,000 surnames, the regions of the middle zone (Western, Eastern, Central) turned out to be similar. And Northern and Southern differ from it and from each other, again recalling the latitudinal variability of the gene pool and the north-south compass needle.
So, having examined the main results on the types of traits characterizing the Russian gene pool, we state: they have a single structure - the latitudinal direction of variability.
WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS
The discovery of such a vector is all the more surprising because one could have expected exactly the opposite—the direction of variability along longitude. Indeed, for the gene pool of Eastern Europe (which includes Russian as a huge component), our research has shown: the main pattern is variability in longitude.
As you know, the Russian people were formed on the basis of the East Slavic, Baltic and Finno-Ugric tribes, possibly also Turkic-speaking, Iranian-speaking - in a word, almost all the ethnic groups inhabiting this territory. This means that it was the longitudinal variability that should have been reflected in it if it really took shape, just like Russian state, “growth”, mechanical inclusion of more and more new population groups. The fact that a different - latitudinal - vector has been identified points to the fundamental fact of the uniqueness of the Russian gene pool. It manifests itself in the fact that the main direction of its variability is not reducible to the original one, characteristic of the tribes and peoples on the basis of which it was formed. Apparently, latitudinal variability arose or intensified in the course of the Russian gene pool’s own history.
Note: the longitudinal trend (a gradual change in values in the “west-east” direction) is not limited to Eastern Europe. This is a basic, ancient pattern of the gene pool of all of Eurasia. Our cartographic analysis of the archaeological cultures of the Upper Paleolithic showed: 26-16 thousand years ago there were already sharp differences between the populations of Europe and Siberia. However, in the Russian area, which occupies the vast central part of Eastern Europe, it is not this background variability that comes to the fore, but its own, latitudinal variability. However, it is reliably known: on the scale of Eurasia, divided to a first approximation into western, eastern and intermediate regions, the Russian gene pool belongs to the western trunk.
In this regard, let's try to figure out what consequences the Mongol-Tatar yoke - the conquest of Rus' in the 13th century - had for him. and subsequent dependence on the khans of the Golden Horde. More specifically: what is the contribution of the steppe conquerors of this and several subsequent centuries to our gene pool? It is natural to assume that they left their descendants in the local population, there were mixed marriages and migrations of individual groups - probably no one doubts that with the political subordination of one people to another, a mixture of their gene pools occurs. But to what extent?
The Mongol conquerors came from the steppes of Central Asia. Therefore, we need to determine how similar the Russian gene pool has become to the gene pool of the Mongols and their neighbors (Central Asian). If, say, the gene pool of Poles ( Slavic people, which was only partially affected by the Mongol conquests, and was not affected by the three-hundred-year yoke at all) will not be similar to the Central Asian one, and the Russian one is to some extent close to it, then this closeness may indicate the real influence of the yoke. More precisely, the presence of such similarities may be a consequence of more ancient migrations, but if there is no similarity, then this will clearly indicate the absence of a Mongol “trace of the conquerors.” However, we are talking about a plausible model; the areality, of course, is more complicated. But population genetics uses modeling to get a clear quantitative answer.
According to this type of markers, mtDNA, the peoples of Central Asia and Europe clearly differ: in the first, almost the entire population (more than 90%) has East Eurasian haplogroups, while in Europe an even larger part (over 95%) has other, West Eurasian haplogroups . This means that the percentage of East Eurasian mtDNA haplo-groups in the Russian gene pool will directly indicate the contribution of the Central Asian population. In fact, this share was 2%, i.e. a value almost as small as in the gene pool of the Poles (1.5%) or the French (0.5%).
Have we made a mistake? All data used, i.e. mtDNA haplogroup frequencies were obtained from large samples by different researchers and are therefore quite reliable. Perhaps the troops of Genghis Khan and Batu consisted not so much of the population of Central Asia, but of the steppe peoples of Southern Siberia? But even there, the East Eurasian haplogroups now constitute, perhaps not 100%, but only 60-80%, which is incomparably more than 2%.
Another objection: mtDNA is inherited on the maternal side, and the “genetic contribution of the conquerors” could be more likely on the paternal side. The results of studying the haplogroups of the Y chromosome (“male” line of inheritance) also do not show a significant proportion of “steppe” genes in the Russian gene pool.
Interesting data on the epicanthus (Epicanthus is a fold at the inner corner of the human eye, formed by the skin of the upper eyelid and covering the lacrimal tubercle. Characteristic of the Mongoloid and some groups of the Negroid race (ed.) - the most typical feature of the Mongoloid race, especially characteristic of the steppe population of Central Asia. An anthropological study conducted on a huge sample of Russians (several tens of thousands of people) revealed virtually no cases of pronounced epicanthus.
So, no matter what sign we take, we see: Russians are typical Europeans, and the Asian conquest left a mark on their history, but not on the gene pool.
We do not undertake to talk about Russia and Russians in a cultural, historical, humanitarian sense. However, biologically their gene pool is not intermediate between European and Asian, it is typical European. Let us clarify: the easternmost of this series, standing “at the forefront.” Certain Asian influences can be seen in it more than in its Western neighbors. But the basic, main conclusion that follows from the study is the almost complete absence of Mongoloid contribution in the Russian gene pool. It seems to us that the consequences of the yoke in relation to the problem under consideration are not in the consolidation of the genes of the conquerors, but in the outflow of the Russian population, changing the directions of its migrations, as a result of gene flows, which, in turn, affected the gene pool, to some extent rebuilding it. Perhaps the influence of the yoke was felt only to a small extent and only in the eastern part of the range. But it is not noticeable that the intensity of mixing of the Russian population with those who came from the east exceeded the usual level in the contact zone of the two peoples.
Doctor of Biological Sciences Elena BALANOVSKAYA,
Candidate of Biological Sciences Oleg BALANOVSKY,
Laboratory of Human Population Genetics, Medical Genetic Research Center of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences
"SCIENCE IN RUSSIA" No. 2 (158) 2007