Who were and are the Serbs and their DNA

[Bodin]

Sarmatian information
http://www.davidkfaux.org/CentralAsiaRootsofScandinavia-Y-DNAEvidence.pdf

It is very strange that both the ancient greeks and slavs ( and still the opinion today) isolate the Illyrians as being only from the south with an E marker, while the northern area with its I marker is not really a "pure" illyrian one. very strange.

Thank you for tread I spend some time riding it , and it is very good , this could also be explanation for Serbian K 3-7% , N 3% ( neighbouring populations dont have any except Hungarians ) and Q 2% . That could also explain 11000 tousand years old R1a in Bosnia - came from south Siberia . Thanks again

 

[how yes no 2]

Thank you for tread I spend some time riding it , and it is very good , this could also be explanation for Serbian K 3-7% , N 3% ( neighbouring populations dont have any except Hungarians ) and Q 2% . That could also explain 11000 tousand years old R1a in Bosnia - came from south Siberia . Thanks again

how difficult is it to understand this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_K_(Y-DNA)

there is no T haplogroup in Serbia.... and there is lot of K as K includes R1 and N, but there is no paragroup K subbranch that is typical for Oceania, Timor, Philippines and East India.


there is work of Croat "scientists" that did classify into K* all those haplogroups that they didnot test for (so K* in that work means just it could be S, atypical R1, or R2, or Q, or O, or N or M or L or T )...


in fact, work of Mirabal showed that 7% of K was not T as Maciamo thought, but mostly N with some Q and L...

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.21235/suppinfo
(testing done for 179 individuals from Serbia)


haplogroup____Serbia____Montenegro
I1_____________7.8%_____6.2%
I2b1___________1.67%___1.73%
I2a2 __________38.5% ___29.2%
E1b1b _________ 17.3%___27.0%
R1a____________14.5%____7.4%
R1b____________ 4.5%____9.4%
J1______________0.6% ___0.5%
J2a ____________3.3%____4.7%
J2b ____________1.7% ___4.5%
G2a____________2.2%____2.5%
N ______________3.3% ___1.5%
Q _____________1.7%____2.0%
H______________2.2% ___1.5%
L_______________0.6%____1.2%

Serbia has 48% of haplogroup I which is in fact more than Germany...
if haplogroup I is related to people originating from Gomer (Gomerians / Cimmerians, who are also known as white-Syrians)

South Slavs are in fact genetically more Germanic than Germans.... what was original language of I2a Gomer/cimmerian/white Syrian/ Serian/Zeruiani/Zorjani/Doriani/white Sart/ Scordisci/ Sherdana/ Kurds/ white Serbs/Serbs/ Sarbans/Sirakes/Serres people is hard to say... I would suggest PIE....

 

[Taranis]

they commonly use the term more then the west these days because of political correctness, there is no world war 2 hitler stigma over there so they have no reason to be ashamed of the name of their ancestors.

As I said, this has nothing to do with political correctness. The usage of the term "Aryan" as "Indo-European" already had fallen ousage by the early 20th century in linguistic circles. As I said, in modern linguistic usage, "Aryan" only refers to the Iranic languages.

sarmatians and scythians whom both slavs and germanic peoples have partial descent (among many other groups) were Iranian speakers.

The only ones who historically, ever refered to themselves as "Aryans" were the Persians, in particular the Sassanid Empire refered to itself as the "Aryan Empire".

Ireland's name derives from Eire a word derived directly from the word Aryan, celts in Ireland obviously called themselves Aryans. wish i could remember the source for that but I can't I heard it a long time ago.

Well, I am pretty sure that this is complete nonsense. The modern word "Eire" is related with the ancient names "Ierne" and "Ivernia" which were recorded by the Greeks (the latter which was rendered into Latin as "Hibernia").

 

[Bodin]

how difficult is it to understand this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_K_(Y-DNA)

there is no T haplogroup in Serbia.... and there is lot of K as K includes R1 and N, but there is no paragroup K subbranch that is typical for Oceania, Timor, Philippines and East India.


there is work of Croat "scientists" that did classify into K* all those haplogroups that they didnot test for (so K* in that work means just it could be S, atypical R1, or R2, or Q, or O, or N or M or L or T )...


in fact, work of Mirabal showed that 7% of K was not T as Maciamo thought, but mostly N with some Q and L...

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.21235/suppinfo
(testing done for 179 individuals from Serbia)


haplogroup____Serbia____Montenegro
I1_____________7.8%_____6.2%
I2b1___________1.67%___1.73%
I2a2 __________38.5% ___29.2%
E1b1b _________ 17.3%___27.0%
R1a____________14.5%____7.4%
R1b____________ 4.5%____9.4%
J1______________0.6% ___0.5%
J2a ____________3.3%____4.7%
J2b ____________1.7% ___4.5%
G2a____________2.2%____2.5%
N ______________3.3% ___1.5%
Q _____________1.7%____2.0%
H______________2.2% ___1.5%
L_______________0.6%____1.2%

Serbia has 48% of haplogroup I which is in fact more than Germany...
if haplogroup I is related to people originating from Gomer (Gomerians / Cimmerians, who are also known as white-Syrians)

South Slavs are in fact genetically more Germanic than Germans.... what was original language of I2a Gomer/cimmerian/white Syrian/ Serian/Zeruiani/Zorjani/Doriani/white Sart/ Scordisci/ Sherdana/ Kurds/ white Serbs/Serbs/ Sarbans/Sirakes/Serres people is hard to say... I would suggest PIE....

I believe i read some researches that shows 3% of K2 in Serbia , in some aerias up to 7% , and 1,5% K2 in Macedonia .Maybe its wrong . " South Slavs " could not ever be more Germanic of Germans because specific mix of I1a,I2b , R1b1c9 (S28) , and R1a would make them Germanic and " South Slavs" are mostly I2a2-Din mixed with E1b1b and J2 with very diverse R1a and under 10% of I1a and I2b which is only Germans genes in them - probably from Gots and Saxons- Sasi miners. Also you cant realy conect so manny nations only by simillarity of names . Sora is oftenly used sanskrit word meaning sky , down , wise , guardian , shepard , old ,... Was Zaratustra ( Zoroaster ) Serbian only because his name means " morning/heavenly star " ? But I think you are wright about conection betwen Serbs and Kurds , and Siraci or Serboi are Serbs , only they were Sarmatians not Cimmerians who use to live north of Black see not north of Caucasus were Siraces/ Serboi were recorded.

 

[Goga]

With all due respect but I truly believe that Serbs are genuine native Europeans. They’re even more native to Europe than the most Europeans even more than Scandinavians!

Such sensational stories about Sarmatians and Cimmerians this and that are very exciting. It's like I'm reading a very exciting detective novel of Hammett or Chandler. But it is still all fiction.

Stuff like this I come across only in the extremist anti-Semitic pan-Iranian sites, financed by the Iranian extremist mullahs! This is not an accusation or an insult toward anybody, I'm only a little bit too honest (I'm a little bit drunk now).

Btw, I (as a Kurd) like the idea that Serbs and Kurds are somehow related to each other. It would be great if it was true. I'm a very open-minded person but somehow this hypothesis doesn't make any sense in my mind.

 

[Milovan]

As I said, this has nothing to do with political correctness. The usage of the term "Aryan" as "Indo-European" already had fallen ousage by the early 20th century in linguistic circles. As I said, in modern linguistic usage, "Aryan" only refers to the Iranic languages.



The only ones who historically, ever refered to themselves as "Aryans" were the Persians, in particular the Sassanid Empire refered to itself as the "Aryan Empire".



Well, I am pretty sure that this is complete nonsense. The modern word "Eire" is related with the ancient names "Ierne" and "Ivernia" which were recorded by the Greeks (the latter which was rendered into Latin as "Hibernia").

yes early 20th century the word IE was invented, its a modern word which is the same exact thing as the old word for it, the old word is aryan. are you like the language police trying to tell people how to talk and what words to use? I'm not going to change how I talk to please others.
you are wrong about persians being the only ones to use the word historically, india, afghanistan, kurds, armenians and many others have always used the word aryan and still do to this day. europe used it frequently all the way up until after world war 2 because of political correctness because of hitler stigma attached to it.
I despise poltical correctness and I am not ashamed of my ancestors.

now you're going to tell me ancient greeks were in ireland and named them eire
you didn't put your source for that either by the way
whether you like it or not celts were aryans, you can see aryan symbols like the swastika and triskele everywhere they went, you also see it in ancient rome, greece, anatolia, iran, india and everywhere else aryan people went.

aside from trying to tell me how I should talk to please you, do you have a point you are trying to make here?

 

[Milovan]

With all due respect but I truly believe that Serbs are genuine native Europeans. They’re even more native to Europe than the most Europeans even more than Scandinavians!

Such sensational stories about Sarmatians and Cimmerians this and that are very exciting. It's like I'm reading a very exciting detective novel of Hammett or Chandler. But it is still all fiction.

Stuff like this I come across only in the extremist anti-Semitic pan-Iranian sites, financed by the Iranian extremist mullahs! This is not an accusation or an insult toward anybody, I'm only a little bit too honest (I'm a little bit drunk now).

Btw, I (as a Kurd) like the idea that Serbs and Kurds are somehow related to each other. It would be great if it was true. I'm a very open-minded person but somehow this hypothesis doesn't make any sense in my mind.

I do not think serbs are related to kurds, you may be related to our pre-slavic ancestors scythians, cimmerians etc they were south of the caucasus at one point in time so it is possible.
both serbs and croats have a lot of native balkan ancestry as well, that is why they look so balkan
some of them have a balkan look, some have a slavic look depending on the individual. a lot of serbs look greek as well. I myself am american but i have serbian and brittish blood. I look slavic though.

cimmerians were in the ukrainian steppes before scythians conquered them it is common sense they were made slaves and were absorbed by them. next came the sarmatians who did the same thing to the scythians, does that make sense?
this is the steppe component R1a and possibly R1b (I believe cimmerians were R1b and related to celts) of slavs, the I2a2 component I believe to be of balkan origins that moved to the steppe. this hybrid people (due to mixing) became slavs
you will notice that when all mentions of sarmatians disappeared, slavs appeared in the same region. same time frame
Osprey publishing has books on both Sarmatians and Scythians, you can read about it. Osprey publishes books on military history but these books site historical references, archaeology and linguistic evidence as well. They clearly state serb and croat are Alan tribal names, the polish people have always claimed sarmatian ancestry as well especially their royalty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythians

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatism
polish sarmatism link

you can see someone here agrees with me about slavs being a hybrid R1a + I2a people
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml
I also agree that eastern scythians that did not become slavs, became turks after mixing with altaic peoples adopting altaic language and culture hence the R1a in turks and the fact they are in the exact same regions. kumiss the drink of scythians is still made and drank to this day by turks
the horsemanship of turkish tribes, serbian/polish hussars and cossacks I believe are directly derived from scytho-sarmatian roots

over a period of time the steppes became slavic, you will notice ukraine and southern russia was once scythian territory and later called sarmatia. even after scythians/sarmatians disappeared, the region was still called scythia and sarmatia by the west.

 

[Milovan]

I2a2-din is to young (couple thousand of years ) to be on Balkans since Mezolite . There was heavy anihilation of ProtoBalkans during Hunic and Avar/Slavic raides so they cant influence todays genetics with more than70% ( I2a2, G2a , J1, J2 , E1b1 ,L, T,R1b, some of R1a in Serbia ) . Herzegovina is place where the Serbs and Croatians are first settled its not logical that there is prevailing Illyrian -I2a2 gen , unless its not Illyrian . Mesapi in Italy are cousins of Illyrians , why dont they have I2a2 ?
Only Paleolitic Europe group could be R1b ( some forms of it ) , because only nation that not speak Indoeuropean in Europe are Basqui (Esqudi) and they are more than 90% R1b .There is some older I2 on Balkans and it is I2*B present in Armenia , Asia Minor , Creete(9%) and Balkans especially Greece.
I am not shore there is no any I2a2 in betwen Caspian and Aral sea , I would check it out . But there is heavy % of R1a there and its not Slavic but Turcish from invading Mongolian and Turcic tribes since Hun invasion in IV century to Uzbeki invasion in XVI century and knowing Mongolians they wouldnt left too many indigenous population . There is certain I2a2 in Xingyang ( northwest China ) , and in Tadjikistan ( Pamir aeria ) . Betwen Caspian and Aral sea were Alans and they mostly moved with Vandas , Yazigi in Banat and Roxolani in todays Mordvinia.
Also there is not any prove there was moving of Daco-Thracians or Illyrians or any other Balkans in steppes( there wouldnt be any diference betwean Illyrians , Panonians and Tracians because after rebelion 6-9AD Roman moved and mixed parts of Illyrians , Panonians , Scordisci, and Tracians and formed new artificial tribes ) , but there is tons of proofs of Sarmatian moving to west.

every hear of the cimmerian bosporus (greek bosporus) or the bosporan kingdom?
greeks always had colonies in the steppes, the balkans is not far from ukraine it is not a stretch to say some went east
even if they didn't greek trading colonies on the black sea steppes could have brought them
I don't know how it happened
the fact is I2a2 made its way there somehow it didn't magically appear and why would scythians/sarmatians radically change their culture, language and religion without some outside influence?


it is ridiculous to think huns, avars, magyars etc annihilated the balkans, invasions yes, annihilation no. they didnt absorb the balkans you got it backwards. look at hungarians, they sure look white don't they? the only thing they kept that has any asian roots at all is there language and culture because they have european blood. those invasions had very minor effects on the genepool in the region, same thing with russia, you are going to tell me russians are turks not slavs? that's ridiculous. russians are slavs, turco-mongol hordes were there and had a minor influence on ethnic russians, even more of an influence then the balkans but not nearly as much as you'd think. the turco-mongol horde of russia is still there in the tatars and other turkish groups, there are many turkic minorities in russia that have absolutely nothing to do with ethnic russians.

xinjiang (probably spelled wrong) was the home of tocharians an aryan tribe, they are now turks (uyghur) and have both caucasian and asian autosomal dna. you can see it in dodecad charts.
all turks are a mixed race anyway of scythian/tocharian and altaic peoples.

 

[Bodin]

With all due respect but I truly believe that Serbs are genuine native Europeans. They’re even more native to Europe than the most Europeans even more than Scandinavians!

Such sensational stories about Sarmatians and Cimmerians this and that are very exciting. It's like I'm reading a very exciting detective novel of Hammett or Chandler. But it is still all fiction.

Stuff like this I come across only in the extremist anti-Semitic pan-Iranian sites, financed by the Iranian extremist mullahs! This is not an accusation or an insult toward anybody, I'm only a little bit too honest (I'm a little bit drunk now).

Btw, I (as a Kurd) like the idea that Serbs and Kurds are somehow related to each other. It would be great if it was true. I'm a very open-minded person but somehow this hypothesis doesn't make any sense in my mind.

I trying to be honest even when I am not drunk. -joke .I apreciate you honesty , like I said before I joined this site to question my teories , so everybody is welcomed to chalenge them . Now I would like to hier how do you backing up your theory that Serbs are ancient population of Europe when every historic source say they comed on Balkan during rule of emperor Herakleos ( 610-641) . Maybe you like some think that I2a2 is not Serbian but Illyrian and Serbs are actually not Serbs but Illyrians. Like I said before :It is true that I2a2 is probably not hier since LGM because it would be more equaly disperced like mthDNA haplogroups that are in Europe since LGM . Few strong clusters of I2a2 could sugest and total apsence on other regions showing it is haplogroup that have mooved recently ( compared to LGM ) . Also it is to young to be hier since LGM , and there is not much divercity which should be expected if that is the case .
And about Serbian conections with Kurds if Serbs are Sarmatians , and Kurds are Medes , and Sarmatians are descendants of Medes ( Diodorus write that like I said before) logicaly there is conection betwen Kurds and Serbs , and that explain why Serbs have 38% of I2a2 , Croats 42%, Macedonians 29% , BIH 50% and Kurds 25% and nobody else in whole world had any near % of I2a2-Din to that . Please explain me what counter-evidence do not alow this idea to have sence in your mind , I came hier in search for such counter- evidence. Even if some of that wouldnt be true there would yet be strong genetic conections betwen Serbs and Kurds by I2a2.
These theory cant be PanIranic in any case because there is only 3% of I in Iran .

 

[Milovan]

There are linguistic people who claim there is a Q-illyrian group from Dalmatia northwards and a P-Illyrian group from Montenegro southwards. While I am unsure about this. Greek Historians say that the Q group was a celtic-illyrian mix, while the P group was dardanian-thracian mix.
Knowing that Northern Italy was gallic-ligurian up to the Carni and Taurisci tribes in Noricum, it would seem reasonable that I2a2 was present in northern Illyrcium 1000 years before any sarmatians ( or sarmatian mix ) arrived.

I2a2 could be a mix of gothic and baltic people as this is what happened over centuries of Gothic migration from Scandza/gotland into pommerain, estonian lands

yes celts and germanic settlements in the balkans at one point in time, thats a fact. they have been absorbed into the balkans. i think some celts were in greece too for a short period. thracian definitely has its impact too, serbs absorbed a thracian/celtic tribe called the triballi.I think greeks were in the balkan too especially serbia and probably brought J2 and E-v13 with them

 

[Bodin]

every hear of the cimmerian bosporus (greek bosporus) or the bosporan kingdom?
greeks always had colonies in the steppes, the balkans is not far from ukraine it is not a stretch to say some went east
even if they didn't greek trading colonies on the black sea steppes could have brought them
I don't know how it happened
the fact is I2a2 made its way there somehow it didn't magically appear and why would scythians/sarmatians radically change their culture, language and religion without some outside influence?


it is ridiculous to think huns, avars, magyars etc annihilated the balkans, invasions yes, annihilation no. they didnt absorb the balkans you got it backwards. look at hungarians, they sure look white don't they? the only thing they kept that has any asian roots at all is there language and culture because they have european blood. those invasions had very minor effects on the genepool in the region, same thing with russia, you are going to tell me russians are turks not slavs? that's ridiculous. russians are slavs, turco-mongol hordes were there and had a minor influence on ethnic russians, even more of an influence then the balkans but not nearly as much as you'd think. the turco-mongol horde of russia is still there in the tatars and other turkish groups, there are many turkic minorities in russia that have absolutely nothing to do with ethnic russians.

xinjiang (probably spelled wrong) was the home of tocharians an aryan tribe, they are now turks (uyghur) and have both caucasian and asian autosomal dna. you can see it in dodecad charts.
all turks are a mixed race anyway of scythian/tocharian and altaic peoples.

I2a2 cant be old Balcanic , and yes I going to repeat it again :It is true that I2a2 is probably not hier since LGM because it would be more equaly disperced like mthDNA haplogroups that are in Europe since LGM . Few strong clusters of I2a2 could sugest and total apsence on other regions showing it is haplogroup that have mooved recently ( compared to LGM ) . Also it is to young to be hier since LGM , and there is not much divercity which should be expected if that is the case . Also there is more I2a2 in newcomers : Serbs , Croats ,... than in old populations : Albanians , Greeks , Vlachs ,...
About Hungarians they were mostly R1a when they moved toward Panonia , like all Turk tribes including Huns . Also some of Russian R1a is Slavic , but some is Turkic to , or you think they just lived next Turks without any mixing ? In PseudoFroedegard is recorded that Avars use to spend every winter with Slavic womans in they khaganate and that is the reason why Slavs rebeled under Samo .When you allready mentioned Hungaria it has been populated by Panonians who were tribe of Illyrians ( Illyrians who lived north of Sava river were called Panonians ) , so if Illyrians were I2a2 then Panonians have to be the same ,and there is only 15% I2a2 in Hungary.
Yes I have heard for Bosphorus kingdom , most of his population was Scythian and Meotian , and kings ( Spartokids) were from Thrace, are you trying to say that Greek colonist bring I2a2 in stepes more then they bring haplogroups that are prevailing in they lands -J2 and E1b1b ? That dont sound logical . Again any movement of Balkanic populations toward stepes is not recorded archeologically or any other way .
I havent realy understood question about changing Scythian and Sarmathian languague , religion , culture ,... Serbian culture shows a lot of Sarmatian influence , everybody changed religion in christianity so they wouldnt die in crusades against them , It is proven that Slavic language was spoken by a small group around river Pripyat , and later has spread like lingua Franca in Hunic empire .
I didnt say they totaly anihilated them , there is plenty of E1b1 , J2 , G2a J1 , L and T on Balkan , and they couldnt be brought by newcomers , because there is small procentage of it in they own lands , but what you trying to say is that there was no murdering by Barbarians , there was no taking in to slavery , and there was no any settling of Barbarian tribes , or they were of small scale , oldo all sources speacking about large scale moving of populations - not thousands but millions . You claiming that more of 80% of today population was hier before Huns , can you please tell me which haplogroups were brought by newcomers, so I can see what is your oppinion? I need diferent point of view on this theory , I would appreciate your help .

 

[Milovan]

I mean change of scythian/sarmatian religion to slavic paganism, not the same. sorry for the confusion there and change of their languages to slavic language.
On the genetics page on the main site it states hap I originated in the balkans, I2a2 originated in balkans, highest diversity of I subclades in balkans, highest percentage of I2a2 in balkans. do see what makes me think it is indigenous to the region?

of course turcs have some R1a they descend from scythians too. of course there could some turkic R1a in russia, never said there wasn't I'm saying theres very little turkish contribution to the gene pool and you are acting like they are 90% turkic blood, I'm saying turkic contribution is no more then %5 if that. think of this nomadic tribes take slave wives, the children are raised up as the children of those conquerers there language and culture, religfion, identity etc is that of their father not their slave mother. they become turks.
same with ottoman empire, the halfbreed children are not left in the slave gene pool, they are absorbed by the conquering gene pool, especially with islam as they were trying to spread their religion. with nomadic tengriists armies are predominantly men, theres no need to bring women with them, in fact bringing women with a horse riding army would slow it down. turks followed their scythian roots, their armies were built for speed. there is no need to bring women on campaign because you can easily take wives of those you conquer

I'm saying smaller scale then you implyed
the conquerors were vastly outnumbered by the locals but kept them in place by fear
their modern day descendants are the turc minorities of russia, they still speak turkic languages

have you ever read about the kievan-rus? and the migration to moscow forest region out of the steppes by many russians? this was to get away from turkic dominance
sviatoslav that expelled the khazars from ukraine did it by slavic revolt as slavs vastly outnumbered them

also when you as a conqueror take an area and are outnumbered by locals, immediately after conquest there is going to be rape and pillage by victorious soldiers thats common sense but you cannot do that for years on end or you will have a massive revolt overnight. foreign occupations are always cruel but it is mostly slave labor, unfair taxes/tribute and kidnapping a few women here and there not all out raping the entire population, if you did that you would cause a massive revolt instantly.
]

the huns same thing, they were a ruling class. most of their armies were germans, even sarmatians (jaszones of hungary) and vastly outnumbered by pannonians, same with avars massively outnumbered by slavs

 

[zanipolo]

I2a2 cant be old Balcanic , and yes I going to repeat it again :It is true that I2a2 is probably not hier since LGM because it would be more equaly disperced like mthDNA haplogroups that are in Europe since LGM . Few strong clusters of I2a2 could sugest and total apsence on other regions showing it is haplogroup that have mooved recently ( compared to LGM ) . Also it is to young to be hier since LGM , and there is not much divercity which should be expected if that is the case . Also there is more I2a2 in newcomers : Serbs , Croats ,... than in old populations : Albanians , Greeks , Vlachs ,...
About Hungarians they were mostly R1a when they moved toward Panonia , like all Turk tribes including Huns . Also some of Russian R1a is Slavic , but some is Turkic to , or you think they just lived next Turks without any mixing ? In PseudoFroedegard is recorded that Avars use to spend every winter with Slavic womans in they khaganate and that is the reason why Slavs rebeled under Samo .When you allready mentioned Hungaria it has been populated by Panonians who were tribe of Illyrians ( Illyrians who lived north of Sava river were called Panonians ) , so if Illyrians were I2a2 then Panonians have to be the same ,and there is only 15% I2a2 in Hungary.
Yes I have heard for Bosphorus kingdom , most of his population was Scythian and Meotian , and kings ( Spartokids) were from Thrace, are you trying to say that Greek colonist bring I2a2 in stepes more then they bring haplogroups that are prevailing in they lands -J2 and E1b1b ? That dont sound logical . Again any movement of Balkanic populations toward stepes is not recorded archeologically or any other way .
I havent realy understood question about changing Scythian and Sarmathian languague , religion , culture ,... Serbian culture shows a lot of Sarmatian influence , everybody changed religion in christianity so they wouldnt die in crusades against them , It is proven that Slavic language was spoken by a small group around river Pripyat , and later has spread like lingua Franca in Hunic empire .
I didnt say they totaly anihilated them , there is plenty of E1b1 , J2 , G2a J1 , L and T on Balkan , and they couldnt be brought by newcomers , because there is small procentage of it in they own lands , but what you trying to say is that there was no murdering by Barbarians , there was no taking in to slavery , and there was no any settling of Barbarian tribes , or they were of small scale , oldo all sources speacking about large scale moving of populations - not thousands but millions . You claiming that more of 80% of today population was hier before Huns , can you please tell me which haplogroups were brought by newcomers, so I can see what is your oppinion? I need diferent point of view on this theory , I would appreciate your help .

So, If I understand you correctly, you say, that I2a2 was broughrt into the illyrian areas by the sarmatians and slavs. If this is the case and there is very little Haplo E1b1 in illyrian areas north of Montenegro, then are you saying that that R1a was there in northern illyria in the bronze and iron age ?
It cannot be G2a as it is small in number plus it is in the alps.

With noricum having R1b due to the gallic tribes and north of the danube I1 because of east germanic tribes, then what could pannonia be ?

it seems strange that the slavs brought I2a , when east germanic tribes passed first

 

[Taranis]

yes early 20th century the word IE was invented, its a modern word which is the same exact thing as the old word for it, the old word is aryan. are you like the language police trying to tell people how to talk and what words to use? I'm not going to change how I talk to please others.

Actually, you are totally wrong. The term "Indo-European" is from the 19th century, and actually older than the term "Aryan". In the German, speaking context, the term "Indo-Germanic" ("Indo-Germanisch") was actually used, which continues to be actually used in German and is interchangably with "Indo-European". Read up on the history of Indo-European linguistics. That's all I can say here.

you are wrong about persians being the only ones to use the word historically, india, afghanistan, kurds, armenians and many others have always used the word aryan and still do to this day. europe used it frequently all the way up until after world war 2 because of political correctness because of hitler stigma attached to it.

Yes, cognates of the word "Aryan" exist both other Iranic languages and in the Indic languages, but the self-designation as "Aryans" only exists amongst the Persians.

Regarding uses of "Aryan" outside of the Indo-Iranic linguistic area, that simply did not exist. It was a fabrication of the late 19th century which only emerged after linguistics established the existence of the Indo-European language family. If you believe anything else then you're very wrong.

The fact that Hitler made use of this late 19t century "Aryan romanticism" makes it only an inch worse.

I despise poltical correctness and I am not ashamed of my ancestors.

How do you know that they are your ancestors? Did you make a gene test? Besides, it is by no means clear which one was the "original" Indo-European Y-Haplogroup, or if there even originally was just one to begin with (entirely possible it was not). Of course you might argue that R1a is the best candidate for the original Haplogroup, but the fact that R1a is relatively in Western Europe shows how difficult that is.

now you're going to tell me ancient greeks were in ireland and named them eire
you didn't put your source for that either by the way

I did not claim that the ancient Greeks named them "Eire". However, the ancient Greeks recorded the ancient names for Ireland ("Ierne", "Iwernia"), and it is clear that the modern Irish name "Eire" is derived from this.

Also in the 4th century BC, Pytheas of Massilia (a Greek city state, modern-day Marseilles) visited the British Isles and the north Sea. He was the first to mention the existence of Ireland. Otherwise, I suggest you reading the geographies of Strabo and Ptolemy.

whether you like it or not celts were aryans, you can see aryan symbols like the swastika and triskele everywhere they went, you also see it in ancient rome, greece, anatolia, iran, india and everywhere else aryan people went.

First off, the Celtic-speaking peoples never were a homogenous ethnic group, and they certainly didn't consider themselves "Aryans", and they did not all consider themselves "Celts" either. Also, as I said most of western Europe is R1b, and if R1a is the original Indo-European marker then it's very clear that the Celtic peoples are not descended from the original Indo-Europeans.

Also, the idea that the swastika was an "Aryan" symbol is complete nonsense because it appears in various different cultures, many of which are non-Indo-European, including Native Americans and Etruscans.

aside from trying to tell me how I should talk to please you, do you have a point you are trying to make here?

No, you're not supposed to "please" me in any way. But I'm trying to point out all along that your view is completely ignorant of a lot of facts and problems, and I am off the impression that you intentially want to get a number of issues very wrong because they do not fit into your own world view.

 

[Goga]

Now I would like to hear how do you backing up your theory that Serbs are ancient population of Europe when every historic source say they comed on Balkan during rule of emperor Herakleos ( 610-641) . Maybe you like some think that I2a2 is not Serbian but Illyrian and Serbs are actually not Serbs but Illyrians. Like I said before :It is true that I2a2 is probably not hier since LGM because it would be more equaly disperced like mthDNA haplogroups that are in Europe since LGM . Few strong clusters of I2a2 could sugest and total apsence on other regions showing it is haplogroup that have mooved recently ( compared to LGM ) . Also it is to young to be hier since LGM , and there is not much divercity which should be expected if that is the case.

I've no idea. You know much more about the Serbs than I do. I thought that I2a was native to the Balkans (and Kurdistan), because they found some very old DNA of Neolithic farmers and they were mostly I2a (with a little bit of G2a) folks.

 

[Taranis]

I've no idea. You know much more about the Serbs than I do. I thought that I2a was native to the Balkans, because they found some very old DNA of Neolithic farmers and they were mostly I2a (with a little bit of G2a) folks.

Haplogroup I as a whole is currently the best candidate for being "aboriginal", however as we know from Haplogroup I1 they were subject to a severe bottleneck in the late neolithic / early chalcolithic and then were dispersed by subsequent migrations. Haplogroup I2 as a whole fared better than Haplogroup I1, but it probably expirienced a similar phenomenon, hence it is to be expected that they are subject to similar patterns and the modern high concentrations may not necessarily be representative of the situation in the past.

Regarding the Neolithic farmers, it was actually the other way round: they were G2a with some I2a.

 

[Goga]

Ok, thanks.

 

[Goga]

Regarding the Neolithic farmers, it was actually the other way round: they were G2a with some I2a.

You're right. More G2a than I2a. But there was still some I2a in the Neolthic farmers. So it must be very old and already part of the native Serbians. There was no E...

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/05/y-chromosome-mtdna-and-autosomal-dna.html

 

[Dorianfinder]

If you cannot agree what constitutes a Serbian marker then it is because the Serbian population is similar to the Bosniacs and the Croats with all having elevated I2 but different amounts of Slavic R1a, J2 and R1b.

Croats having nearly 30% R1a, and Bosniacs and Serbs have around 15% R1a.
Bosnians and Serbs have about twice as much J2 than the Croat population.
Croats and Serbs have about twice as much R1b than the Bosnian population.

In summation (besides elevated I2):
- Serbians have more J2 and R1b but less Slavic R1a.
- Croats have more R1a and R1b but less J2.
- Bosnians have more J2 and less R1a and R1b.

 

[Taranis]

You're right. More G2a than I2a. But there was still some I2a in the Neolthic farmers. So it must be very old and already part of the native Serbians.

Yes, and as I said, Haplogroup I as a whole is the best candidate thus far for an "aboriginal" European Haplogroup. That we find both G2a and I2a in the Neolithic site in France should not be surprising since we can expect the Neolithic farmers and the Mesolithic hunter-gatherers to have intermingled with each other. What also should be added, at least if I remember correctly, is that I2a in that site is actually I2a1 (the "Basque-Sardinian" if you will Haplogroup, and not the I2a2 found on the Balkans.

Also, given it's age, I would refrain from making any connections with the Serbians, even if today they have the Haplogroup in sizable quantities. It's very clear that I2a predates the ethnogenesis of the Serbians, it's also clear that I2a predates the emergence of the Proto-Slavs, and it's likely that it also predates the arrival of Indo-Europeans in Europe (at least in that area) in the first place.

There was no E...

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/05/y-chromosome-mtdna-and-autosomal-dna.html

Yes, the absence of Haplogroup E in Neolithic sites was quite a surprise and there is no satifying explanation for this yet.