Sarmatians, Serbs, Croats and I2a2

But the Croats at that time were dwelling beyond Bavaria, where the Belocroats are now. From them split off a family of five brothers, Kloukas and Lobelos and Kosentzis and Mouchlo and Chrobatos, and two sisters, Touga and Bouga, who came with their folk to Dalmatia and found the Avars in possession of that land. After they had fought one another for some vears, the Croats prevailed and killed some of the Avars and the remainder they compelled to be subject to them. And so from that time this land was possessed by the Croats, and there are still in Croatia some who are of Avar descent and are recognized as Avars.
And since what is now Serbia and Pagania and the so-called country of the Zachlumi and Terbounia and the country of the Kanalites were under the dominion of the emperor of the Romans, and since these countries had been made desolate by the Avars (for they had expelled from those parts the Romani who now live in Dalmatia and Dyrrachium), therefore the emperor settled these same Serbs in these countries, and they were subject to the emperor of the Romans;
De Administrando Imperio

I have a question for all those who are saying I2a2a-Dinaric was present in the Balkans before migration period.
How do you explain that regions settled by Croats and Serbs fully coincide with the maximum frequency of I2a2a-Dinaric?

Pay attention to a fact that this is the case for not one but two tribes. Those familiar with probability theories know that this kind of coincidence is almost impossible.
 
this is not correct reasoning.... learn more on topic...

What exactly is not right? That 95% of our genes speak some not so much human story.

I believe Y chromosome changes a little for a reason. I believe it gives overall tone of ones character. It is, for me only, a matter of believe, that I came upon by surprise of how similar (by my own standards) people of my Y group were.
As I said it is something what I firmly believe, based upon my own experiences with people. I really don't need proof for my believes, so I could be wrong, but my instinct tells me different. I will reserve my right to believe in that.

yes, but I do not find it good comparison with my posts on this forum....

Believe it or not, I actually wanted to cool down this topic.
It was not originally aimed at you, but this conversation and other in general when people forget it is just a theory...
 
De Administrando Imperio
I have a question for all those who are saying I2a2a-Dinaric was present in the Balkans before migration period.
How do you explain that regions settled by Croats and Serbs fully coincide with the maximum frequency of I2a2a-Dinaric?
Pay attention to a fact that this is the case for not one but two tribes. Those familiar with probability theories know that this kind of coincidence is almost impossible.
although I agree that most of I2a2 is related to proto-Serb and proto-Croats (though it may in addition be related to previous inhabitants who might have been related or same people)

I need to notice that you cannot claim that spread of I2a2 fully coincides with spread of Serbs and Croats....as regions of Serbia are not sampled, and as in Croatia sampling of the regions was done on very small sample (except of 3 south most islands and one north island) and sampling seems to have skipped the are that was settled by proto-Croats, and that maps provided seems to show that north most Kaikavian speaking Croats are not I2a2 related.....
 
I need to notice that you cannot claim that spread of I2a2 fully coincides with spread of Serbs and Croats....as regions of Serbia are not sampled, and as in Croatia sampling of the regions was done on very small sample (except of 3 south most islands and one north island) and sampling seems to have skipped the are that was settled by proto-Croats, and that maps provided seems to show that north most Kaikavian speaking Croats are not I2a2 related.....

Are you saying that I2a2a-Dinaric doesn't have maximum frequency in Dalmatia and Herzegovina? If that is what you are saying please tell us where is the maximum frequency for I2a2a-Dinaric?
 
What exactly is not right? That 95% of our genes speak some not so much human story.
you say 95% is about being human and the rest 5% is practically split between direct male line and direct female line..

I am not an expert either, but I am sure it's not like that as there is recombination of genes...and one does in fact inherit a lot from indirect lines...

I believe Y chromosome changes a little for a reason. I believe it gives overall tone of ones character. It is, for me only, a matter of believe, that I came upon by surprise of how similar (by my own standards) people of my Y group were.
As I said it is something what I firmly believe, based upon my own experiences with people. I really don't need proof for my believes, so I could be wrong, but my instinct tells me different. I will reserve my right to believe in that.

interesting theory....
but for how many people you know haplogroups...
I do not know haplogroup of anyone from real (not internet) life

Believe it or not, I actually wanted to cool down this topic.
It was not originally aimed at you, but this conversation and other in general when people forget it is just a theory...
It's not that I was offended or something...

true, those are just theories...
 
although I agree that most of I2a2 is related to proto-Serb and proto-Croats (though it may in addition be related to previous inhabitants who might have been related or same people)

Until now no significant difference in haplotypes have been found among I2a2a-Dinaric in western Balkans, that is there is no such difference which would indicate two distant populations.
These people either came all together or maybe one group came several decades before the other.
 
Are you saying that I2a2a-Dinaric doesn't have maximum frequency in Dalmatia and Herzegovina? If that is what you are saying please tell us where is the maximum frequency for I2a2a-Dinaric?
there is maximum frequency of E-V13 is Kosovo, but that doesnot tell us that spread of E-V13 in Europe coincides with Albanians... in fact, maximum in Albanians of Kosovo may as well be due to their recent common origin due to enormous population rate

I didnot pay attention when reading your post... I saw it as attempt to say that I2a2 matches exactly spread of Serbs and Croats which is hard to claim as sampling should be much better for such a claim.... maximum frequency indeed matches Serbs and Croat settlement, but that may be misleading...

btw. I also think that proto-Serbs and proto-Croats were mostly I2a2, but I think previous inhabitants might have been as well, as I think that it might as well be the case that Serbs and Croats didnot settle the areas in 7th century, but that some of Serb and Croats tribes settled among some related or same people ... you remmeber my argument about Pannonian Illyrian Oseriates being pre-Slavic tribe as their name has a meaning (lake people) only in Slavic languages and that meaning matches their location (Plitvice system of lakes)...similarly I think that tribal names Scordisci and Serdi are identical people, and that it is very likely that both are related to proto-Serbs

Until now no significant difference in haplotypes have been found among I2a2a-Dinaric in western Balkans, that is there is no such difference which would indicate two distant populations.
These people either came all together or maybe one group came several decades before the other.
I believe that previous inhabitants were related or same people as Serbs and Croats... most people are conditioned to think one tribe = one location in one point of time and one single tribal name recorded by historians.... but I am pretty sure it was not like that...

e.g. look at Alani in year 500 AD
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/entity_6193.html
 
there is maximum frequency of E-V13 is Kosovo, but that doesnot tell us that spread of E-V13 in Europe coincides with Albanians... in fact, maximum in Albanians of Kosovo may as well be due to their recent common origin due to enormous population rate
I2a2 has maximum frequency in south most Dalmatia (Dubrovnik, Hvar, Brac, Krk)..central and north Dalmatia are not really sampled....
I also think that proto-Serbs and proto-Croats were mostly I2a2
but there is big difference between saying I think, and claiming that spread of I2a2 fully coincides with Serbs and Croats, as that cannot be claimed based on sampling done so far...

Your E-V13 example has nothing to do with this issue. It can't be used to explain something about most important historical document for South Slavs pointing to exact region with particular dominant Y-DNA.

And regarding you repeating that nothing is for sure, I will say that now we have enough facts and knowledge from history and genetics to make conclusions. We don't need to assume anything any more and think different theories or wait for more genetic data (which will I believe say nothing special in the near future).

We have all we need to explain I2a2a-Dinaric. It came from Ukraine in the early middle ages.
 
I believe that previous inhabitants were related or same people as Serbs and Croats... most people are conditioned to think one tribe = one location in one point of time and one single tribal name recorded by historians.... but I am pretty sure it was not like that...
e.g. look at Alani in year 500 AD
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/entity_6193.html

But from geneticists such as Ken Nordtvedt or Vadim Verenich we have the knowledge that I2a2a-Dinaric is of such structure indicating that these people lived in the same territory at least until Common Era. Dinaric haplotypes are so close that it wasn’t possible some I2a2a-Dinaric tribes were in Balkans and another were somewhere else.
I2a2a-Dinaric had its common territory before Common Era and it was not western Balkans.
 
Your E-V13 example has nothing to do with this issue. It can't be used to explain something about most important historical document for South Slavs pointing to exact region with particular dominant Y-DNA.
And regarding you repeating that nothing is for sure, I will say that now we have enough facts and knowledge from history and genetics to make conclusions. We don't need to assume anything any more and think different theories or wait for more genetic data (which will I believe say nothing special in the near future).

read again...I have extended post to express better my viewpoint...

We have all we need to explain I2a2a-Dinaric. It came from Ukraine in the early middle ages.
no, there is absolutely not enough data for such a conclusion... and I am sure it is not correct...
don't make religion of your beliefs..

I believe I2a2 is related to tribes that origin from Paplagonia Eneti (who were kicked out of Asia minor somewhat after Trojan war) ...and those are Adriatic Veneti, Vistula Veneti and Sarmatian Veneti whom I think are Antes....

early Slavs match spread of I2a2 and are by Jordanes mentioned as populous race of Veneti...
 
no, there is not enough data for such a conclusion...
don't make religion of your beliefs..

I see nothing wrong in being absolutely sure about an issue such as this.
Also I'm not the only one, serious researchers are beginning to understand that high frequency of I2a2a-Dinaric in the western Balkans doesn't mean it was its place of origin, but completely opposite - the place of the most recent arrival.
 
I see nothing wrong in being absolutely sure about an issue such as this.
Also I'm not the only one, serious researchers are beginning to understand that high frequency of I2a2a-Dinaric in the western Balkans doesn't mean it was its place of origin, but completely opposite - the place of the most recent arrival.

again, I agree it is related to recent arrival...
I claim it was also there before that arrival...

I claim that both most of previous people and later Slavic settlers are from same populous race of Veneti...
 
I believe I2a2 is related to tribes that origin from Paplagonia Eneti (who were kicked out of Asia minor somewhat after Trojan war) ...and those are Adriatic Veneti, Vistula Veneti and Sarmatian Veneti whom I think are Antes....
early Slavs match spread of I2a2 and are by Jordanes mentioned as populous race of Veneti...

Read my previous posts. It is not possible I2a2a-Dinaric was that scattered as were these tribes, there are genetic researches explaining this.
 
I claim that both most of previous people and later Slavic settlers are from same populous race of Veneti...

And again genetic science provided knowledge that this is not possible. Read previous posts or read Ken Nordvedt or Vadim Verenich.
 
And again genetic science provided knowledge that this is not possible. Read previous posts or read Ken Nordvedt or Vadim Verenich.
you mentioned before Ken Nodrvedt... I see no reason why his theories claimed on some mailing list should be taken for granted... show me his published article about I2a2-Dinaric if you want to claim him as authority ... publishing ideas of course doesnot mean they are correct... but it does give a grain of credibility...

who the ... is Vadim Verenich and why should he be credible source or undeniable authority regarding this topic...
 
you mentioned before Ken Nodrvedt... I see no reason why his theories claimed on some mailing list should be taken for granted... show me his published article about I2a2-Dinaric if you want to claim him as authority ... publishing ideas of course doesnot mean they are correct... but it does give a grain of credibility...
who the ... is Vadim Verenich and why should he be credible source or undeniable authority regarding this topic...

These two people know much more about genetics than all which have ever written in this forum. If that is not enough for someone I don't know what is.
 
interesting theory....
but for how many people you know haplogroups...
I do not know haplogroup of anyone from real (not internet) life
It is not a theory since it is not scientificaly provable. You just can believe, if you want, that I experienced what I said I did.
 
These two people know much more about genetics than all which have ever written in this forum. If that is not enough for someone I don't know what is.
so?

it is not really possible to determine when mutation in a haplogroup happened...
they as everybody else just use some supposed models based on ad-hoc parameters... there is no way to verify such models and assumptions about parameters...

mutations are random...what they try to do is to claim there is definite law that determines this randomness.... but even if there is such a law, they still do not have history data that would allow them to decipher it, as there are no genetic samples (adorned with dates of birth) of people related via father-son relation stretching for tens of thousands of years in distant past ....

basically, all data about oldness of haplogroups is based on guessing parameters of the model while there is no way to verify neither the model nor the parameters used... it is laughable to give credibility to such approximations...
 
How Yes No,

If your theory was right,

-What do you think, what % were Serians compared to local population on arrival?
 
Last edited:
ok pals i cant write any more in that forum,
exept that
voij-votina = duke area or
boii-vodena the waters of boii
only personal messages,,

i simply post that moesians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysians
greek ilias iljias
hettit ilazza

city milazza

and that
κιλικια kilikia or cilicia ->>> cicily? calikia->carikia or just likia
lycaonia
caria
lydia
mysia ???? naaa just pass or unite? hmm
the north to geta-dacia

Mossynoeci
Moschoi (mosxoi = small bulls) small tauri
Mingrelian what a coisidence people of there are Mega elian
as greek people of pontus are trant -elian big elian
but that has to with byzantines or the 8 % greeks in ossetia? and 12% in georgia?
or the 13 big colonies miletus sinopean, hmm

corinth carinth
lellekes
illyria
carniola carnius apollo sparta
Liburnia libua libas in greek the south west wind ???? bor the north wind

Liburnia libu(sni)a or li-bur-nia
the 2nd way to tosk-albania
also cimmerians
chimmerians himmera (greek colonie) chimara greek city
chamerians (south albanian tribe)

Βελλεροφόντης from ΤΥΡΙΝΘΑ Tyrinth (Bellerofonte)
Hercules was from argus argean

must find him to tell us about solumae and chimera

besides sea people maybe never had a word about sea !!!!!!! no words in lingua

messara (messachora) crete
messenia peloponese
messapic apulia italy
also
mane is peloponese and
mannae ??? hmmmm

besides
Achaemenians or agamemnians or agamemnon no way

and
The Lycaonians appear to have retained a distinct nationality in the time of Strabo, but their ethnical affinities are unknown. The mention of the Lycaonian language in the Acts of the Apostles (14:11) shows that the native language was spoken by the common people at Lystra about 50; and probably it was only later and under Christian influence that Greek took its place. It is notable though that in the Acts of the Apostles Barnabas was called Zeus, and Paul was said to be very short and covered with pustules by Lycaonians, and this makes some other researchers to believe that Lycaonian language was actually a Greek dialect, the remnant of which can still be found in the Cappadocian Greek language which is classified as a distinct Greek dialect.
There is a theory that the name "Lycaonia" is a Greek-adapted version (influenced by the Greek man's name Lycaon) of an original Lukkawanna, which would mean "the land of the Lukka people" in an old Anatolian language related to Hittite.


so the myceneans? they came from rusia or were they hettit?
if in not of hettit

is the myceneans also the THRACIANS?????????
i mean carries of R1a?
or they came from celt?


the fact is though ages words


before homer stone
gr la- lavris latipa
latin lapis

the word has only similarity with latin

weapons

the axe
gr aksis and xifei
to all PIE

but tsekouri?????? hmmmm

besides tribali ->sribali ok

1) according to thoukidides atheneans old language was Tyrrshenian
2) and the godess of fertility before dimeter was SIRRIS
 

This thread has been viewed 437940 times.

Back
Top