PDA

View Full Version : New data from Montenegro and Serbia



Shetop
29-09-10, 09:30
For those interested some data from this study is available in supporting information:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.21235/suppinfo

iapodos
29-09-10, 11:03
Finally, study from Serbia and Montenegro.
It shows expected percents for Serbia, but I must admit that I am quite surprised for the results from Montenegro and high percent of E1b. On the other side it is understandable, because of Montenegro bordering with E1b peak regions: Kosovo and northern Albania.
So, according to this study, difference between Serbia and Montenegro is ratio I2a:E1b.
In Serbia 2:1
In Montenegro 1:1.
Also interesting question would be, who are I1 people in Serbia and Montenegro.
There is, for example 7,82% of I1 , and only 4,5% of R1b in Serbia, making the I1 on the fourth place haplogroup in Serbia after I2a,E1b,R1a.

Shetop
29-09-10, 11:39
Also interesting question would be, who are I1 people in Serbia and Montenegro.

Germanic tribes which invaded Italy conquered Dalmatia also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odoacer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostrogothic_kingdom

The other reason for I1 frequency might be movements of Goths in earlier centuries. They were close or passing by Western Ukraine inhabited by I2a2 Din. So they could have mixed there already, and later came to Balkans together.

PS: When calculating percentages pay attention to first column. It shows number of the same haplotypes, so I1 frequency found by this study in Serbia is actually 7,82%.

iapodos
29-09-10, 12:10
Yes, I've noticed later first column.
And for I1 and Goths, that was also may idea.
But,the other solution could be Normans from south Italy.
Or the Saxon miners in medievial times.

Imperium Romanorum
04-10-10, 12:50
Finally,I2a hawe higher percents for Serbia!

Yorkie
18-10-10, 00:55
Germanic tribes which invaded Italy conquered Dalmatia also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odoacer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostrogothic_kingdom

The other reason for I1 frequency might be movements of Goths in earlier centuries. They were close or passing by Western Ukraine inhabited by I2a2 Din. So they could have mixed there already, and later came to Balkans together.

PS: When calculating percentages pay attention to first column. It shows number of the same haplotypes, so I1 frequency found by this study in Serbia is actually 7,82%.

Good, cogent point about the Goths and I1. I tend to agree with you here, and can't really think of a better source for the haplogroup in this region.

StillSRB
08-12-10, 00:16
I see the test sized used was finally a bit bigger, however its unfortunate that they want you to purchase the article. Also if you have any other links to Balkan y-haplogroups research please post the links here. I've read the one by Pericic, but that was more focused on Croatia

StillSRB
08-12-10, 05:37
Interesting, I was expecting a higher percentage of I2a in Montenegro; also its unfortunate that it doesn't say from what parts of Serbia were the participants. I would like to see the difference between various parts of Serbia, for example between western and eastern Serbia. Here are a couple of other studies I've come across, if anyone knows about any other studies related to the region please post them.
Bosnia
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1529-8817.2005.00190.x/pdf
Balkans
mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/22/10/1964.full.pdf+html
Croatia
cmj.hr/2005/46/4/16100752.pdf
nature.com/ejhg/journal/v11/n7/pdf/5200992a.pdf

StillSRB
08-12-10, 05:38
I took out the http and www because it wouldn't allow me to post urls yet, but I'm sure you can figure it out

Bogdan
15-12-10, 17:18
That is very strange about montenegro considering that I2a is the hg of the slavs who live in the dinaric alps liek for example its at 60% or so in herzegovina and southern croatia... and montenegro lays along that same chain of mountains...

But anyway i cant see this article as it looks like you ahve to buy it which im not sure where you can do that either but would anyone mind posting the exact numbers for all the other haplogroups found here??

iapodos
15-12-10, 18:54
That is very strange about montenegro considering that I2a is the hg of the slavs who live in the dinaric alps liek for example its at 60% or so in herzegovina and southern croatia... and montenegro lays along that same chain of mountains...

But anyway i cant see this article as it looks like you ahve to buy it which im not sure where you can do that either but would anyone mind posting the exact numbers for all the other haplogroups found here??
It is not strange for Montenegro, especially its eastern part bordering with Albania to have lower percent of I2a. It is well known fact that I2a haplogroup fall dramaticaly in Kosovo Albanians and Northern Albania too. I believe that E1b1 dominating in area of Zeta-Sandzak dialect. There are already some Vasojević clan members which tested as E1b1. On the other side, part of Montenegro known as Old Herzegovina is predominantly I2a. It is obvious on following maps:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/Old_Herzegovina.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Shtokavian_subdialects1988.png

Bogdan
17-12-10, 03:31
Ethnic ALBANIANS have high E values, ethnic montengrins are not ethnic albanians. On those mentioned parts the south close to albania are predimontaely albanian areas eg ulcinj. where these ethnic montenegrins from these areas tested or just people who live there albos included??

iapodos
17-12-10, 12:17
Ethnic ALBANIANS have high E values, ethnic montengrins are not ethnic albanians. On those mentioned parts the south close to albania are predimontaely albanian areas eg ulcinj. where these ethnic montenegrins from these areas tested or just people who live there albos included??
Ethnic Montenegrins is very discutable term. Just few years ago they were practicaly Serbs. On the either side some parts of Montenegrin society show great resemblance with Albanians. Some of the Montenegrin clans have legends about common ancestors with some Albanian clans. Vasojevic clan I already mentioned.
The study above has been done probably in one city, Podgorica I suppose. Authors states they selected samples considering their regional origins for at least two generations. Honestly I doubt that high percent of E1b1 haplogroup in Montenegro sample is result of tested Albanians in Montenegro.

Garrick
18-12-10, 00:25
Many Montenegrin tribes were linked with Albanian (line south-west, north-west) and the real situation is that in today's Montenegro I2a2 and E1b1 are in the proportion 1:1.

But one should not interfere a nation that is a political entity with origin.

Some Russian sources call E1b1 this haplogroup: Иллирийцы, хамитский род (Illyrians, Hamitic race).

Although the Romanians, Serbs and Bosnians are mostly I haplogroup, some of them have haplogroup E1b1 and this only showing the connection of the old Balkan population.


For example in Slovenia and Croatia, this haplogroup is a little represented.

Bogdan
18-12-10, 23:02
@Montenegrin is not a disputable term its just that some Montenegrins identify as Montenegrins while others as Serbs. Members of the same family can have different identifcations two brothers even. No ETHNIC Montenegrin identifies as an albanian. To explain Montenegrins are Serbs but we are not exactly the same... there are some i guess you could call cultural differences and the such. But mixing with albanians neevr occured ona large scale they are probably the biggest enemies up until 1913 or so we had been in on and off periods of warfare with them for over half a millenia... same as with the turks. The only semblence with albanian society is what they copied from montenegro notably the clan system. Prior to the turks arriving albos were like nomads they had nothing as far as infrastructure goes. This can also be seen by their last names. Last names in albania range from arabic/turk, to slavic. Whereas almost all serbian and montenegrin and any of the other south slavs last names are south slavic and ending in ic.

@ Garrick
I doubt that haplogroup e is little represented in croatia or slovenia its more than likely they twisted that. In those countries it should be between 10-15% as looking at that area in europe e is at that % for example austrians, slovaks, hungarians, non north germans, north italians etc... are all at around 10% for hg E. doesnt make sense that croats and slovenes lack it that much as all of their neighbors have it. But yes they have it less than serbs or montenegrins do although i do think in the latter it is overly excessive

StillSRB
19-12-10, 02:21
@Montenegrin is not a disputable term its just that some Montenegrins identify as Montenegrins while others as Serbs. Members of the same family can have different identifcations two brothers even. No ETHNIC Montenegrin identifies as an albanian. To explain Montenegrins are Serbs but we are not exactly the same... there are some i guess you could call cultural differences and the such. But mixing with albanians neevr occured ona large scale they are probably the biggest enemies up until 1913 or so we had been in on and off periods of warfare with them for over half a millenia... same as with the turks. The only semblence with albanian society is what they copied from montenegro notably the clan system. Prior to the turks arriving albos were like nomads they had nothing as far as infrastructure goes. This can also be seen by their last names. Last names in albania range from arabic/turk, to slavic. Whereas almost all serbian and montenegrin and any of the other south slavs last names are south slavic and ending in ic.

@ Garrick
I doubt that haplogroup e is little represented in croatia or slovenia its more than likely they twisted that. In those countries it should be between 10-15% as looking at that area in europe e is at that % for example austrians, slovaks, hungarians, non north germans, north italians etc... are all at around 10% for hg E. doesnt make sense that croats and slovenes lack it that much as all of their neighbors have it. But yes they have it less than serbs or montenegrins do although i do think in the latter it is overly excessive

I think you are mixing up modern ethnic groups with very old y-haplogroups, which is never a good idea. In the study about 27% of Montenegrins belong to the E haplogroup, the same haplogroup which reaches its peak in Europe in Kosovar Albanians. This doesn't mean the two mixed in the last 100 years or even last few hundred years. What it does mean is that when the two different haplogroups did first meet there was mixing and assimilation mostly of the E haplogroup in Serbia and even more so in Montenegro. This doesn't make anyone who belongs to the E haplogroup any less of a Serb or Montenegrin.

how yes no 2
19-12-10, 03:29
I think you are mixing up modern ethnic groups with very old y-haplogroups, which is never a good idea. In the study about 27% of Montenegrins belong to the E haplogroup, the same haplogroup which reaches its peak in Europe in Kosovar Albanians. This doesn't mean the two mixed in the last 100 years or even last few hundred years. What it does mean is that when the two different haplogroups did first meet there was mixing and assimilation mostly of the E haplogroup in Serbia and even more so in Montenegro. This doesn't make anyone who belongs to the E haplogroup any less of a Serb or Montenegrin.

exactly, belonging to nation is about cultural identity...
Serbs of today have significant E-V13 component, however proto-Serbs who arrived to balkans were likely I2a2+ R1a

in any case, Y DNA haplogroups are about only very small part of our genes, about part that is passed from father to son, from him to his son and so on... so a person who had single ancestor who was E-V13 1000 years ago, might have had in mean time zillion other male ancestors (e.g. his grandfather on mother's side, father of his grandfather on mother's side... father of his grandmother on father's side...) who were I2a2... he inherits genes from all of them equally as from his E-V13 ancestor, but in this classification into haplogroups their contribution is not visible......

point is that haplogroups tell you almost nothing about genetic makeup of an individual, but they make some sense as an indicator of historical movements of tribes...

Garrick
19-12-10, 04:23
how yes and no

Although there are sources that I2a2 and R1a are treated separately, we must respect the people who watch them together as Slavic.

On the DNA forum Heindale gives very strong arguments for I2a2 Dinaric Clade as Slavic and one can hard to argue differently.

However, one can build theories which can fuse different things, including that belonging to haplogroups I2a2 was originally distinguished from R1a.

how yes no 2
19-12-10, 04:31
how yes and no

Although there are sources that I2a2 and R1a are treated separately, we must respect the people who watch them together as Slavic.

On the DNA forum Heindale gives very strong arguments for I2a2 Dinaric Clade as Slavic and one can hard to argue differently.

However, one can build theories which can fuse different things, including that belonging to haplogroups I2a2 was originally distinguished from R1a.

good point, the joint or separate arrival of R1a and I2a2 is still not clear....
what sources do you talk about? I know that some archeologist in Serbia did make map with separate archeological finds of Serbs, of Croats, and of Slavs...but I do not know how reliable data of that guy is...

StillSRB
19-12-10, 22:24
I also think I2a2 has to be a 'Slavic' marker which came to the Balkans around the 7th century. How else can you explain Croat-Herzegovinians having up to 70% I2a2 and speaking Croatian, a slavic language. There is no way such a large majority would accept the language of an oncoming minority of R1a which is only around 12-15% in that region. Especially in a region with a topography such a Herzegovina, a very karst and mountainous area. The spread and acceptance of a new language would almost be impossible, or if did happen some traces of an ancient Illyrian language would have stayed at least in the most isolated villages. Also I2a2 falls very well in the region of old Serbian and Croatian Kingdoms. Its concentration is almost exactly in the location of medieval Principalities of: Travunia, Zachlumia, Pagania, Dalmatia, Raska, Bosnia, and Doclea. Making the Illyrian origin on the marker unlikely.

how yes no 2
19-12-10, 22:53
I also think I2a2 has to be a 'Slavic' marker which came to the Balkans around the 7th century. How else can you explain Croat-Herzegovinians having up to 70% I2a2 and speaking Croatian, a slavic language. There is no way such a large majority would accept the language of an oncoming minority of R1a which is only around 12-15% in that region. Especially in a region with a topography such a Herzegovina, a very karst and mountainous area. The spread and acceptance of a new language would almost be impossible, or if did happen some traces of an ancient Illyrian language would have stayed at least in the most isolated villages.
what if previous inhabitant did already speak similar languages?

according to Strabo, in his time (1st century AD) most of Illyria (in fact Bosnia, Hercegovina and Croatia) is not settled anymore by Illyrians, but by Pannonians, while Illyrians lived in Albania and Montenegro.

see this post for explanation
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showpost.php?p=362622&postcount=72

I argue that Pannonians were pre-Slavic folk, as the subtribe of theirs living in area of Plitvice lakes was called Oseriates... where as Ozero = lake in Russian and Ukrainian languages and similar in all Slavic languages, while in all non Slavic languages of Europe words for lake are completely different...

see post
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showpost.php?p=361742&postcount=35


Also I2a2 falls very well in the region of old Serbian and Croatian Kingdoms. Its concentration is almost exactly in the location of medieval Principalities of: Travunia, Zachlumia, Pagania, Dalmatia, Raska, Bosnia, and Doclea. Making the Illyrian origin on the marker unlikely.
you make lot of assumptions in that list...
exact geographical spread is not really known...

StillSRB
19-12-10, 23:37
you make lot of assumptions in that list...
exact geographical spread is not really known...
I assume its somewhere around here
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WestBalkans800.png
Also are you trying to explain the 70% of I2a2 in Herzegovina by Oseriates?
I'm sure if more research was done in the area I2a2 would come up in large numbers in many other place around the original home land of Serbs/Croats in the Balkans. Most Serbs living in Serbia proper today can trace their linage back to the areas of Herzegovina, Montenegro, Bosnia, or Raska. Linguistically the most correct form of Serbian and Croatian is spoken in the areas of high I2a2 concentration and from where the standardization of both language was founded upon. It would be interesting if I could show the linguistic differences that existed in the Western Balkans only a hundred years back. They would clearly outline the origin of Serbs/Croats in the Balkans with relation to other Slavs, but unfortunately with the standardization of the language these linguistic gaps have been bridged.

how yes no 2
20-12-10, 00:20
I assume its somewhere around here
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/WestBalkans800.png
when I said you assume, I was talking about exact spread of I2a2 as it is not known...
e.g. you talk about Doclea, and not about Serbia, but Serbia has much more I2a2 than Doclea... also there is no data for Dalmatia except for area of Narentania / Pagania... no data at all for the place where Croats initially settled ( http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/700/entity_1523.html ) ... sampling was not done there..it was done in Dubrovnik, Zagreb, Osijek, Delnice, Zabok, Pazin, on Krk, Hvar, Brac and Korcula in Croatia... now I2a2 is in Croatia over 55% in islands of Hvar, Brac and Korcula

all the 3 islands in south Croatia (Hvar, Korcula , Brac) with over 55% I2a2 were part of Pagania as your map shows as well, while Dubrovnik is even more south Zachlumia on your map (btw, samples from Herzegovina Croats were also mostly from Zachlumia and Pagania)...... now people from Pagania (also called Narentania) are in early history recorded as unbaptized Serbs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagania

I2a2 is also relatively high in Osijek (up to 30%) and in Dubrovnik, and in Zagreb (normal due to big imigration), but is scarce in Istra, Krk, Zagorje...

now what Croats did is came up with 42% by taking around half samples from 3 scarcely populated islands in south Croatia (where all together like 40 thousand people live and where I2a2 is over 55%) together with half of samples from the rest of Croatia (where more than 4 milion people live)...
and they also made diagrams where they interpolated data so that I2a2 looks high in Dalmatia due to Pagania and looks high in Slavonia due to Osijek and Zagreb (while small town just bit north of Zagreb has almost no I2a2 at all) .... but truth is there is no data at all for area that is in your map Dalmatia and is supposed settlement area of Croats... before supposed settlement of Croats there lived Illyrian/Pannonian/Celtic (different sources use different attribute) tribe Dalmatae ...


Also are you trying to explain the 70% of I2a2 in Herzegovina by Oseriates?
No, with Ardiaei, Sardeates, Narentanes... note that Scordisci, Sardeates ... could easiy been proto-Serb related tribal names and I2a2 carriers .... later the (perhaps the same) inhabitants of the area are called Narentanes (due to river Neretva around which they live) and also Pagani because they are unbaptized /pagan Serbs..

Oseriates are just example that previous inhabitants might have spoken Slavic-alike language... and that your argument might not hold..

btw. here are some maps (classification is bad though) from wikipedia

prior to Roman conquest:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/IllyrianTribes.jpg/600px-IllyrianTribes.jpg

year 6 AD (time when Strabo sees there only Pannoni and no Illyrians):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f7/IllyricumAD6RomanConditionofTribes.png/718px-IllyricumAD6RomanConditionofTribes.png


according to Strabo

The Breuci, Andizetii, Ditiones, Peirustæ, Mazæi, Daisitiatæ, whose chief was Baton, and other small obscure communities, which extend to Dalmatia, and almost to the Ardiæi to the south, are Pannonians.
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0239:book=7:chapter= 5&highlight=



I'm sure if more research was done in the area I2a2 would come up in large numbers in many other place around the original home land of Serbs/Croats in the Balkans.
perhaps for Serbs... I am not so sure about Croats...


Most Serbs living in Serbia proper today can trace their linage back to the areas of Herzegovina, Montenegro, Bosnia, or Raska.
ok, but I2a2 is 38.5% % in Serbia and 29.2% in Montenegro...so, how can immigration from Montenegro increase I2a2 in Serbia.. it can only lower it..

btw. Doclea is more east part of Montenegro where I2a2 is likely to be less... while west part is related to Herzegovina


Linguistically the most correct form of Serbian and Croatian is spoken in the areas of high I2a2 concentration and from where the standardization of both language was founded upon.
and what are those areas? Serbia and Croatian part of Hercegovina?


It would be interesting if I could show the linguistic differences that existed in the Western Balkans only a hundred years back. They would clearly outline the origin of Serbs/Croats in the Balkans with relation to other Slavs, but unfortunately with the standardization of the language these linguistic gaps have been bridged.
ok, here's the map... let's hear your explanation (since it is easy)

first, stokavian dialects of serbo-croatian:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/DijalektiStokavskogNarecja.jpg

than 3 different dialects (or languages) of Croatian
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/Croatian_dialects.PNG

if you look at chakavian areas (blue on map), I2a2 is like 55% on south most and like 10% on north most... in kaikavian area is almost no I2a2 except in Zagreb as it is capital and had strong imigration from I2a2 reach areas......

StillSRB
20-12-10, 03:47
I mostly agree with everything you say.:good_job:
I view Croats living in Herzegovina and Dalmatia to be of same origin as Serbs in those areas that are just slightly more eastern. This can be seen in your example of Pagania and how the local population could have potential switch between the two peoples. As for Istra and Zagorje everyone is aware of the different origin of that part of the Croatian population; and also Slavonia before the settlement of Bosnians (Croats) in that area.


you talk about Doclea, and not about Serbia, but Serbia has much more I2a2 than Doclea
I mentioned Raska which was as far as the Serbs went east, therefor there was no Serbia yet, but Raska can be considered modern day Serbia if you wish. Doclea is of course on the eastern edge of the old Serb/Croat kingdoms, and this is why it has less I2a2. The same being northern Dalmatia close to Istra where I2a2 also drops off, that being the western edge of the 7th century kingdoms.


Oseriates are just example that previous inhabitants might have spoken Slavic-alike language
This is interesting, I never gave it much thought. I would need more examples and proof of this being possible to be persuaded.


ok, but I2a2 is 38.5% % in Serbia and 29.2% in Montenegro...so, how can immigration from Montenegro increase I2a2 in Serbia.. it can only lower it..btw. Doclea is more east part of Montenegro where I2a2 is likely to be less... while west part is related to Herzegovina
It doesn't but maybe it does explain the high number of E-v13 in Serbia when compared to other countries. Most of modern day central Serbia and Vovjodina was settled by people from the areas previously mentioned. Where the Serbs originate from in the Balkans.


ok, here's the map... let's hear your explanation (since it is easy)
These maps are of modern day dialects, because of the prior mentioned emigration from old kingdoms into various areas across former Yugoslavia the Shtokavian dialect takes up a larger area then it once did. Croatians standardized their language based on Dubrovnik, even though most of the them spoke with different dialects and a different grammar. The same thing happened in Serbia especially with grammar and pronunciation.
Anyway I consider I2a2 to be the main marker of the first Serbs and Croats to settle the Balkans.

iapodos
20-12-10, 10:34
Anyway I consider I2a2 to be the main marker of the first Serbs and Croats to settle the Balkans.

I also thought so, but not anymore. I2a2 Dinaric South is definetely Serbian marker on Balkan. I believe that Croats were predominantly R1a.

how yes no 2
20-12-10, 22:34
I also thought so, but not anymore. I2a2 Dinaric South is definetely Serbian marker on Balkan. I believe that Croats were predominantly R1a.
I think it is way to early to state this... there is not enough data...

it's hard to say anything about proto-Croats before detailed sampling is done in the area that proto-Croats did originally settle and around it...area they initially settled is likely between Split and Istra... unfortunatelly, that area was not sampled so far...though, Maciamo has hotspot of haplogroup G exactly there on his image concerning G spread (so I wonder where he got data for this)... hotspot of G may indicate that proto-Croats were related to Alans ...but it can as well be due to Liburnians...

R1a is definetly strong for Croats... even in scenario that proto-Croats were mostly I2a2, they did spend lot of time creating white Croatia which was quite big state from what I can see (just look at all counties in Czech republic, Slovakia and south Poland that have chessboard coat of arms)... during that time they are likely to have absorbed lot of R1a...

StillSRB
21-12-10, 00:18
hotspot of G may indicate that proto-Croats were related to Alans
Yes, I read somewhere that there was a some G markers in Slavonia, in particular it was in Osijek about 10-15%.
What about the K* marker in Serbs? It comes at 7.4% in Bosnian Serbs (marjanovic), and 7.08% in Serbs from Belgrade according to Pericic.

Shetop
21-12-10, 00:37
Yes, I read somewhere that there was a some G markers in Slavonia, in particular it was in Osijek about 10-15%.
What about the K* marker in Serbs? It comes at 7.4% in Bosnian Serbs (marjanovic), and 7.08% in Serbs from Belgrade according to Pericic.

Probably some markers were not tested so these percentages should be K descendants. These are primarily N1* found in couple of other studies, but also T and L haplogroups.

Some people think N1* could have Hunnic origin.

Bogdan
26-12-10, 05:00
I think you are mixing up modern ethnic groups with very old y-haplogroups, which is never a good idea. In the study about 27% of Montenegrins belong to the E haplogroup, the same haplogroup which reaches its peak in Europe in Kosovar Albanians. This doesn't mean the two mixed in the last 100 years or even last few hundred years. What it does mean is that when the two different haplogroups did first meet there was mixing and assimilation mostly of the E haplogroup in Serbia and even more so in Montenegro. This doesn't make anyone who belongs to the E haplogroup any less of a Serb or Montenegrin.

I didnt mix anything up you can clearly read what iapodos wrote about albanian mixing. I am simply stating it never happened on a large scale.

All I say for ev13 being unusual in montenegro is that montenegro is a continuation of the dinaric alps where I2a is at like 60%+ especially in herzegovina. Just doesnt make sense that montenegro only has 30% or roughly half of what neighbors to the north herzegovina have. Also living in mountains minimizes mixing and invaders. and there should be continuity over same geographic features and that the ev13 in montenegro is not albanian in origin rather of whoever lived in the balkans prior to the slavs

iapodos
26-12-10, 11:46
I didnt mix anything up you can clearly read what iapodos wrote about albanian mixing. I am simply stating it never happened on a large scale.
All I say for ev13 being unusual in montenegro is that montenegro is a continuation of the dinaric alps where I2a is at like 60%+ especially in herzegovina. Just doesnt make sense that montenegro only has 30% or roughly half of what neighbors to the north herzegovina have. Also living in mountains minimizes mixing and invaders. and there should be continuity over same geographic features and that the ev13 in montenegro is not albanian in origin rather of whoever lived in the balkans prior to the slavs
Few people from Montenegrin clans were tested at Ftdna and there are:
Ozrinici, Piperi, Pivljani, Petrovic Njegosi and they are all I2a. It also appeared that Vasojevic clan is E1b because two individuals from Vasojevic clan with no common ancestor in last 300 years have almost identical E1b haplotype. So, there are Montenegrin clans with E1b. I suppose that those clans most eastward are good candidates for E1b. Kuci, for example and also the clans around Skadar Lake. Peak region of E1b in Europe is Northern Albania and Kosovo and I don't know why are you so surprised with high percent of that haplogroup among Montenegrins which is nearby nation to Albanians. It is also well known fact that some clans have its Albanian and Montenegrin part, like Kuci, not to mention legends about common forefather.
If you are surprised about higher percent of I2a in Serbia than in Montenegro, you should have on mind that not all of I2a in Serbia is from Dinaric Alps which is clasified as Dinaric South. There is also significant amount of Dinaric North in Serbian haplotypes. So the I2a came to Serbia from two directions, from Dinaric Alps as Dinaric South and from Macedonia and northern Greece as Dinaric North. It corespond with migration routes along the river Morava from the south and from Dinaric mountains to Sumadija.

Dalmat
05-01-11, 16:25
This research is bogus ,for couple of reasons.

They kept it "closed" as national research.

The guys who made it corrected the table on Croatian forum,after we pointed them out that sum of of all Y-dna percentages are not equal to 100%.

how yes no 2
06-01-11, 00:39
This research is bogus ,for couple of reasons.

They kept it "closed" as national research.

The guys who made it corrected the table on Croatian forum,after we pointed them out that sum of of all Y-dna percentages are not equal to 100%.

actually, even though text is not available for free to everyone, that research led by American scientists and published in one of top magazines in area is quite open, as it published openly table with all samples, which is not the case with "research" orchestrated by Croatian scientists that e.g. forged 42% of I2a2 for Croatia by taking around half samples from 3 scarcely populated islands (Hvar, Brac and Korcula) in south Croatia (where all together like 40 thousand people live and where I2a2 is over 55%) together with half of samples from the rest of Croatia (where more than 4 milion people live)...

comparable fraud would be e.g. to chose half samples from Sardinia and half samples from rest of Europe, and say that Europe has 25% I2a1...

well, see for yourself:
http://cmj.hr/2005/46/4/16100752.pdf
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v11/n7/full/5200992a.html

btw. all the 3 islands in south Croatia (Hvar, Korcula , Brac) with over 55% I2a2 were part of Pagania, as was the area around Neretva river in Hercegovina from where samples for Bosnian Croats mostly come from...

those people are not native Croats, they were assimilated into Croats when they became catholics...
only historic source that talks of their origin in fact claims that they origin from unbaptized Serbs



Byzantine emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus stresses that "Pagani are descended from the unbaptized Serbs" and that "The Pagani are so called because they did not accept baptism at the time when all the Serbs were baptized." [1]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagania
http://books.google.com/books?id=3al15wpFWiMC&lpg=PP1&hl=de&pg=PA165#v=onepage&q&f=false


I do wonder why are Croatian nationalists so stucked to obsession with I2a2, when based on its extremely uneven spread in Croatia, it is obviously recent admixture in Croatian nation, either from previous inhabitants, or from Serbs, or from both... you know, it's not like I2a2 can make you higher worth or more Germanic (or lol Arian :) or whatever is your trip.... I2a2 is just a set of letters and digits used to name one of many equally worth branches in classification of Y-DNA data....

Dalmat
07-01-11, 16:36
actually, even though text is not available for free to everyone, that research led by American scientists and published in one of top magazines in area is quite open, as it published openly table with all samples, which is not the case with "research" orchestrated by Croatian scientists that e.g. forged 42% of I2a2 for Croatia by taking around half samples from 3 scarcely populated islands (Hvar, Brac and Korcula) in south Croatia (where all together like 40 thousand people live and where I2a2 is over 55%) together with half of samples from the rest of Croatia (where more than 4 milion people live)...

comparable fraud would be e.g. to chose half samples from Sardinia and half samples from rest of Europe, and say that Europe has 25% I2a1...

well, see for yourself:
http://cmj.hr/2005/46/4/16100752.pdf
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v11/n7/full/5200992a.html

btw. all the 3 islands in south Croatia (Hvar, Korcula , Brac) with over 55% I2a2 were part of Pagania, as was the area around Neretva river in Hercegovina from where samples for Bosnian Croats mostly come from...

those people are not native Croats, they were assimilated into Croats when they became catholics...
only historic source that talks of their origin in fact claims that they origin from unbaptized Serbs



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagania
http://books.google.com/books?id=3al15wpFWiMC&lpg=PP1&hl=de&pg=PA165#v=onepage&q&f=false


I do wonder why are Croatian nationalists so stucked to obsession with I2a2, when based on its extremely uneven spread in Croatia, it is obviously recent admixture in Croatian nation, either from previous inhabitants, or from Serbs, or from both... you know, it's not like I2a2 can make you higher worth or more Germanic (or lol Arian :) or whatever is your trip.... I2a2 is just a set of letters and digits used to name one of many equally worth branches in classification of Y-DNA data....


:laughing:
why dont you go there and tell them that.

...and :laughing: to all your posts,you are like stereotype of low self esteemed Great-Serb,a joke.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaOdaF80xxM

For the research i know how it was made by my personal experience with it.

how yes no 2
07-01-11, 20:51
:laughing:
why dont you go there and tell them that.


whatever...
I would not be surprised if Croatian research was faked in order to hide the inconvenient issue that it might be the case that significant part of Croats especially among Hercegovians and Dalmatians like you, actually origin from Serbs.



...and :laughing: to all your posts,you are like stereotype of low self esteemed Great-Serb,a joke.

people always see what they want or need to see... I guess you are not exception in that respect....
nothing I can or want to do to make your viewppoints more realistic...
that's up to you...






(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaOdaF80xxM)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaOdaF80xxM


For the research i know how it was made by my personal experience with it.


seems as interesting movie.... did you watch it? is it good?

Garrick
08-01-11, 01:07
whatever...
I would not be surprised if Croatian research was faked in order to hide the inconvenient issue that it might be the case that significant part of Croats especially among Hercegovians and Dalmatians like you, actually origin from Serbs.

people always see what they want or need to see... I guess you are not exception in that respect....
nothing I can or want to do to make your viewppoints more realistic...
that's up to you...

seems as interesting movie.... did you watch it? is it good?


It's amazing:

how some Croats want to be more I because a majority of them belong haplogroup R1a

on the other hand, some Serbs want to be more R1a but almost 50% of Serbs belong I haplogroup and only about 14% haplogroup R1a, by Mirabal et al (2010).


There is no reason that people like to be I if they are R1a or R1a if they are I, it's just senseless, everyone has his origin of which should not escape or to hide behind what is not.

Imperium Romanorum
09-01-11, 15:33
Garrick

We Serbs are what we are...and theth is I haplogroup..
..we are old europian people..
I haplogrupe is indigenous haplogroup of Europe...

Others can go if they are not pleased :)

Поздрав Браћо Срби!
Христос се роди!

Bosniaco
12-01-11, 00:06
Iapodos,

Where did you get the haplogroup for those Montenegrin clans? How would you know if a last name from FTDNA database is from a specific clan, especially if the last name shows up in 15 different places and in 7 different clans?

I would doubt that Piperi are I2a. I see them a stronger candidate for E1b1b. The same should be true for Bratonozici, Pastrovici, Mrkojevici (alongside Vasojevici and Kuci for which we already have some individual haplotypes).

Cheers.

Bosniaco, E1b1b1

Ivan
12-01-11, 03:28
Maciamo has hotspot of haplogroup G exactly there on his image concerning G spread (so I wonder where he got data for this)... hotspot of G may indicate that proto-Croats were related to Alans ...but it can as well be due to Liburnians...

I believe they were ProtoCroats and protoSerbs. Serboi and Choroatti were iranan speaking Alans. They must have been small in numbers so they lost their original language. You seem to agree that a small group could be proto-something in your case protoCroats. Since you would like to detach yourselves from Croats you do not see that percentage is the same in Serbia almost 0 or up to 2 %.Also in bosnian Serbs there are 2,7% of G, but Bosnian Croats have 0%.There is only 0,9% to 2% of G in Croatia.

These hotspots means much more to me than you can think.

Much of those people from Osijek are my relatives. So, as you are saying my acestors could have been residing in that area for so long, that they even forgot about it. I personaly do not know yet.

Ivan
12-01-11, 14:01
proto Croats and proto Serbs also could have had I2a2 as to go along with G as sarmatian proto group . Numbers of I2a2 are unknown to me:
1. they could be less then G ( if we agree with Ossetians)
2. They could be the same numbers as G (my estimate)
3. Or they could be even higher than G

Even in this 3. case they wouldn`t be noticable enough since they blend so nicely with I2a2 which is, by my opinion, indigenous by far.

So the Key for this sarmatian idea is language (iranian) and my group G (since it could be represented as a nice marker of what happened ).

1. Similar percentages of G in Serbia and Croatia speaks for a connection. Also these people of Balkan share similar culture so it looks like G is of same stock.I believe it crosses the borders of FYROM, but doesn`t enter Greece and does not mix with Greek G which arrived 6000 years ago and maybe 2800 yers ago (if we accept idea of hittites landing and staying in Greece soil).
2. Original language was lost since this group was very small.

So, both proto Serbs and proto Croats were of sarmatian origin, and partly of sarmatian culture but, i believe I2a2 was mostly indigenous to Balkan. THe R1a group that arrived along with Alans could be of White Croatia and White Serbia.

This doesnt mean Serbs and Croats are the same. It just means similar (I2a2,R1a) and with names arriving in the same time. Those G and I2a2(sarmatian) mean nothing to present day numerous groups. People of Croatia and Serbia are in fact different in aspect of Serbia having E3b and Croatia having more R1a and R1b. The whole connecting story is just a story of addoption of names and sarmatian style of fighting.

Both group were known in Bysantine time as good fighters so they were invited to protect borders from invading tribes. Todays mix of people of Balkan is rich in history and blending of warrior cultures.
All other aspects of this stories shoud be taken into account when talking about history of Balkan.

Bogdan
13-01-11, 20:34
:laughing:
why dont you go there and tell them that.

...and :laughing: to all your posts,you are like stereotype of low self esteemed Great-Serb,a joke.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaOdaF80xxM

For the research i know how it was made by my personal experience with it.

your expereince means squat as you croats have a way of say twisting things for example where is the magical 7% T highest frequency in europe in this study ehh???

Also why where all studies of croats done by croats yet american study of serbs is twisted LOL

They can think they're dogshit doesnt mean its true....

Eldritch
19-04-12, 16:22
Seems that Montenegro is a crossroad between Albanians and Balkan Slavs.