PDA

View Full Version : How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?



Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

hrvat22
30-12-14, 08:08
Wait in that link there are only 2 Croats with known R1a subclade.


The point is that Croats belong R1a Z280...these are only the initial research...Lusatian Sorbs have R1a M458 type.

sparkey
30-12-14, 08:19
However, that would also mean that we should have fairly similar genetic makeup with Slavs who remained there, that is with Sorbs. Then why do they have about 65 percent of R1a, while we have under 10 percent of R1a?

I think there are a few factors that are potentially at play, but above all, it's important to keep in mind that relative haplogroup percentages do not tend to stay the same over long periods of time, especially when we're talking about an expanding population. I mean, the same argument could be made against the Goths, asking where all the R1b-U106 and I1 went. But either way it's not as strong of an argument as one based on the phylogenetic patterns of the clade in question.


Are you actually aware about how Goths migrated? They migrated from what is today northern Poland (Gothic homeland pretty much) to Black Sea coast of Ukraine. After that when Huns pushed them they moved to areas south of river Danube in 370's- read part from book of Jordanes about it and you will find that they settled mostly in what is today Bosnia and surrounding states. And doesn't spread of I2a Din represent it?

Not quite, it's backwards--the diversity pattern of I2a-Din looks more like Ukraine>Poland>Balkans, not Poland>Ukraine>Balkans. You might be able to argue for Poland>Ukraine>Poland>Balkans if we include the outlier I2a-"Dinaric cousin" (Wojtowicz) subclade, but that's some thousands of years earlier in the picture.


Nordtvedt located start of I2a Din and its splitting from I2a "Isles" and "Disles" in northern Poland 2500 years ago-

...I'll stop you right there, that's not what he has at all. 2.5k YBP is close to the I2a-Din TMRCA, but the split from I2a-Disles is about 6k YBP, and the split with I2a-Isles is about 11k YBP. The precise locations of these splits are too far in the past to say much about, although the ancient Loschbour and Motala samples may indicate somewhere in Northern Europe. Not that it makes a big difference to this topic's question.


And about former Visigothic territories, we see that I1 (which you think is Gothic) and I2a Din are pretty much equal, or maybe I think I2a Din is even more numerous.

That's not true. Spain, for example, has single digits of I1 and effectively 0% I2a-Din. Portugal is similar. Where are you finding I2a-Din in Iberia?


And let's go by logic- if all other I groups are Germanic (for example I1, I2b, I2a "Isles" and "Disles" which are closest to Dinaric), then how I2a Din is not?

Haplogroup I is ~22k years old. It is much older than anything "Germanic" and spans several European linguistic groups. There are plenty of subclades that aren't Germanic. I2-L38 looks more Celtic to me, for example. I'd place my own subclade (I2c-PF3881) as more Celtic. I2-M26 may be one of the earliest subclades of the Basques, even.


I don't know for northern parts of Yugoslavia, but in southern Bosnia, Herzegovina and Montenegro most of people that are I1 are I1 p109 with STR481=0. It is also called "Drobnjak clan cluster" because it was first found among 7 men from that clan. Other I1 can also be results from any other Germanic tribes, or from large number of German miners that settled here in medieval times, not just from Goths, which I already explained. Anyways our medieval sources mostly tell us of Gothic origin of people of this area.

I'd agree that different I1 subclades could represent different Germanic input, which is why I was arguing that I1-Z63 in particular looks like it could have come largely from the Goths. I'd be interested in a breakdown of which I1 subclades are most common in the Balkans if you know of one.

LeBrok
30-12-14, 08:33
Yes, many words are only present in Croatian (by that I mean also in Bosnia, Montenegro and most of Serbia). Many actually look like Slavic but they are not- for example our word "vrijedan": in Russian -vredniy means harmful, while in our language vrijedan means worthy, which is same as Gothic wairthan. MOST of the words mentioned above are not common Slavic and are present ONLY in our language. I should add that some other words which are now "common Slavic" are actually spread to Slavic languages because of Old Church Slavonic and spread of Christianity, because it spread from south Slavic (linguistically speaking) lands to other Slavic ones.
How do you explain same slavic vocabulary in Polish, though we never have learned Old Church Slavonic, and took christianity from Holy Roman Empire instead?

clintCG
30-12-14, 13:21
First I want to reply to obvious BS stating that "R1a might be Turkmen/Scythian/whatever" and not Slavic, while I2a Din is true proto-Slavic. It is FAR, FAR from thruth.
Since 19th century Russian and Polish historians argue that Scythians were in fact Slavs. German elites back in then tried to prove that Scythians are in fact ancestors of modern day Ossetians and classified Scythian language as "Iranian". First problem with this is that proto-Slavic kurgan culture Scythians were R1a1 people while Ossetians are mainly J2, G, K and R1a1 is practically ABSENT in them. In recent research conducted in 6 Ossetian groups only 1 percent of them were R1a.
How, therefore, is it possible that the Scythian language was classified as Iranian dialect, close to the Ossetian one? What exactly do we know about the language of Scythians? In fact, we know nothing, or very little.
There are no written Scythian texts left. We know nothing about the Scythian grammar. The only source are the inscriptions with toponyms and names, and a few names from Herodot. This is what the so called ‘’linguistic analysis’’ which connected Scythians with Iranians was based upon.
Let’s put the linguistic speculations aside, though. What is truly important is that Iranians and Ossetians are NOT people of light skin complexion. We know from Herodot that Royal Scyths who lived North of the Black Sea were characterized by fair skin complexion. This is confirmed by genetic research of Indo-European tribes , including the Scythians, which invaded Asia.
Quote from one recent genetic study:
"To help unravel some of the early Eurasian steppe migration movements, we determined the Y-chromosomal and mitochondrial haplotypes and haplogroups of 26 ancient human specimens from the Krasnoyarsk area dated from between the middle of the second millennium BC. to the fourth century AD. In order to go further in the search of the geographic origin and physical traits of these south Siberian specimens, we also typed phenotype-informative single nucleotide polymorphisms. Our autosomal, Y-chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA analyses reveal that whereas few specimens seem to be related matrilineally or patrilineally, nearly all subjects belong to haplogroup R1a1-M17 which is thought to mark the eastward migration of the early Indo-Europeans. Our results also confirm that at the Bronze and Iron Ages, south Siberia was a region of overwhelmingly predominant European settlement, suggesting an eastward migration of Kurgan people across the Russo-Kazakh steppe. Finally, our data indicate that at the Bronze and Iron Age timeframe, south Siberians were blue (or green)-eyed, fair-skinned and light-haired people and that they might have played a role in the early development of the Tarim Basin civilization. To the best of our knowledge, no equivalent molecular analysis has been undertaken so far. "


Migration of people originating from the Slavic kurgan culture, that is light-skinned people carrying the R1a1 gene is considered proven by the modern science. May I add that this particular kind of science is based not upon linguistic speculations but entirely on genetic research, then it cannot be distorted, adjusted or manipulated like the linguistic analysis.


Another quote related to the research on the ancient Scytho-Siberian DNA and skeletons:
"The assignment method was performed from only the allelic frequencies of the seven STR loci considered in the consensus genotype. The probability of observing an individual with the Kizil skeleton STR profile was the highest in the two eastern European populations (Russia and Poland). Indeed, the likelihood that the Kizil skeleton STR profile occurred in these two populations was 10 times higher than in other European populations, 100 times higher than in eastern Asian populations, and about 100,000 times higher than in Indian populations."


This study hence entirely excludes the similarity of Scythians and Asians. At the same time, it points out the similarity of Scythian and Slavic skeletons.
The skull studies prove the same conclusion. Those of modern "Caucasoids" from Eastern Europe cluster very closely with crania from the Karasuk culture. They're also pretty close to all the other purported Indo-Iranians.
As for the R1a1 gene, it is most concentrated among the Slavs- mostly the Poles, the Russians and the Lusatians. All genetic research conducted so far show that Indo-European people migrating into Asia in Bronze and Iron Age, including the Scythians, share R1a1 haplogroup, have fair skin complexion and are genetically closest to the Slavs. Hence, we know that Scythians and other tribes which originated from the kurgan culture did not come from Asia but migrated into Asia. We know that their fatherland was situated North from the Black Sea and was geographically inter-related with the Slavic land. Moreover, the description of the Scythians matches that of the Slavs.
According to the fourth book of Herodot’s Histories, North from the so called Royal Scyths – the principal Scythian tribe- lived the Scythian farmers and Scythian ‘’ploughmen’’. If those two tribes were also considered Scythian, it means that they most likely looked like the Royal Scyths, had similar behavioural patterns to the Royal Scyths and spoke a similar language to that of the Royal Scyths. The only languages that ever existed in this particular geographical area, and exist until this day, are Slavic languages.




The Scythians did not thus speak the Iranian languages. The other way round- the Iranian languages and other languages of central Asia were developed from the Scythian, that is Slavic, languages and hence the linguistic similarities.


May I add that this seems to confirm Indian legends about a noble fair-skinned tribe which migrated into their land in the past. Interestingly, the Indian Brahmini caste- that is the highest one, the caste of rulers and priests, are said to share the R1a1 gene.
Quote from a medical journal:
"Many major rival models of the origin of the Hindu caste system co-exist despite extensive studies, each with associated genetic evidences. One of the major factors that has still kept the origin of the Indian caste system obscure is the unresolved question of the origin of Y-haplogroup R1a1*, at times associated with a male-mediated major genetic influx from Central Asia or Eurasia, which has contributed to the higher castes in India. Y-haplogroup R1a1* has a widespread distribution and high frequency across Eurasia, Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent, with scanty reports of its ancestral (R*, R1* and R1a*) and derived lineages (R1a1a, R1a1b and R1a1c). To resolve these issues, we screened 621 Y-chromosomes (of Brahmins occupying the upper-most caste position and schedule castes/tribals occupying the lower-most positions) with 55 Y-chromosomal binary markers and seven Y-microsatellite markers and compiled an extensive dataset of 2809 Y-chromosomes (681 Brahmins, and 2128 tribals and schedule castes) for conclusions. A peculiar observation of the highest frequency (up to 72.22%) of Y-haplogroup R1a1* in Brahmins hinted at its presence as a founder lineage for this caste group. "

Proto-Slavs ARE carriers of R1a1 and are descendants of Scythians, that migrated from Europe to Asia- not the other way around. Unfortunately I could not post sources of those studies because I'm not allowed to post link since I have less than 10 posts but you will find sources fast with Google.

clintCG
30-12-14, 16:59
I think there are a few factors that are potentially at play, but above all, it's important to keep in mind that relative haplogroup percentages do not tend to stay the same over long periods of time, especially when we're talking about an expanding population. I mean, the same argument could be made against the Goths, asking where all the R1b-U106 and I1 went. But either way it's not as strong of an argument as one based on the phylogenetic patterns of the clade in question.
Can you please explain to me how are Goths and R1b-U106 connected? It's maximum concentrations are far from lands Goths inhabited.




Not quite, it's backwards--the diversity pattern of I2a-Din looks more like Ukraine>Poland>Balkans, not Poland>Ukraine>Balkans. You might be able to argue for Poland>Ukraine>Poland>Balkans if we include the outlier I2a-"Dinaric cousin" (Wojtowicz) subclade, but that's some thousands of years earlier in the picture.
I wasn't talking about diversity pattern, what I meant was concentration. You can perfectly see how concentration steadily increases when we follow their migrations from oldest to most recent homeland, and it is pretty logical IMO.
Now diversity pattern is a little tricky, AFAIK ancestors of many people who today live in southern Poland actually lived in western Ukraine in some point of time.
First division of Dinaric was by STR448=20 (North) and STR448=19 (South) by Nordtvedt. Afterwards new SNP's CTS34002, CTS10936, CTS11768 were found that clearly separate Disles from Dinaric, and after that comes Polish "Dinaric cousin", but since it is negative on two SNP's (CTS5966 and CTS10228) while Din is positive, and also on STR565=11 while other Dinaric have STR565=9, it is obvious that Dinaric cousin is separated from Dinaric by few thousand years and therefore he's not relevant to our discussion.
Only a few months ago SNP S12750 was found and it was positive on all of Dinaric South, and also in most of North while smaller part of North had it negative, which confirms thesis that South is just a younger branch of North and that both came relatively recently from north.
As I already said diversity part is messy. So if we have in mind that many of southern Poland residents came from Ukraine it is safe to assume that DS and DN actually were not geographically separated so much, and also in ex-Yugoslavia we can find both DN and DS although DS has prevalence.
BTW many Montenegrins have STR448=18 so I wonder if it could mean new branch of DS.
But if we follow concentration pattern and also have in mind regional distribution of I2a Din and R1a in Yugoslavia we will see that it corresponds very well to Gothic migrations.




...I'll stop you right there, that's not what he has at all. 2.5k YBP is close to the I2a-Din TMRCA, but the split from I2a-Disles is about 6k YBP, and the split with I2a-Isles is about 11k YBP. The precise locations of these splits are too far in the past to say much about, although the ancient Loschbour and Motala samples may indicate somewhere in Northern Europe. Not that it makes a big difference to this topic's question.
Yeah, my mistake. But again it is not really relevant to our discussion. What I wanted to point out is that I2a Din TMRCA lived in Gothic homeland 2500 years ago...




That's not true. Spain, for example, has single digits of I1 and effectively 0% I2a-Din. Portugal is similar. Where are you finding I2a-Din in Iberia?
I must have mixed I2a Din with general I2a (which is Basque I think). But then again I1 has like 1 percent in whole Spain and it is actually more common on south then on north where Visigoth core was, actually it is practically absent. I2a Din may be absent but there are some individuals from New Mexico of Spanish ancestry with I2a Din, what is also interesting is that all of them are North and none South.




Haplogroup I is ~22k years old. It is much older than anything "Germanic" and spans several European linguistic groups. There are plenty of subclades that aren't Germanic. I2-L38 looks more Celtic to me, for example. I'd place my own subclade (I2c-PF3881) as more Celtic. I2-M26 may be one of the earliest subclades of the Basques, even.
Well yes, but I didn't say it was Germanic in time of its formation, I actually meant it is Germanic now and many close clades to I2a Din are Germanic now. And BTW Celtic (especially if it stand for Celts BC) is more cultural than ethnic mark.



I'd agree that different I1 subclades could represent different Germanic input, which is why I was arguing that I1-Z63 in particular looks like it could have come largely from the Goths. I'd be interested in a breakdown of which I1 subclades are most common in the Balkans if you know of one.
I took this data from Serb DNA project (which includes results from whole Yugoslavia): I1 p109 STR481=0: 17 surnames, I1 Z58: 4 surnames, I1 Z63: 9 surnames (8 of them from single Macura clan).
Now, it doesn't make sense that descendants of Robert Guiscard's Normans (I1 P109 STR481=0, seafarers and warriors that came in boats) are more numerous than descendants of what you think of as Goths (I1 Z63, very large people that inhabited west Balkan for at least 200 years), does it? And keep in mind that all except one of I1 Z63 found are from one single clan.


How do you explain same slavic vocabulary in Polish, though we never have learned Old Church Slavonic, and took christianity from Holy Roman Empire instead?

Well of course most of our vocabulary is same because we speak Slavic, but most of words of Gothic origin here are not common in other Slavic lands, and if they are, it is most likely that they have another word for it while we only have one. Someone above also mentioned that about 1000 words of Gothic origin are present in Chakavian dialect, which was nowhere as much influenced by language standardization because it is not official and therefore it is only spoken among locals.

sparkey
30-12-14, 22:30
Can you please explain to me how are Goths and R1b-U106 connected? It's maximum concentrations are far from lands Goths inhabited.

Well, every modern Germanic population has large amounts of R1b-U106, I1, and R1a, although the relative percentages vary. East Germanic peoples may have had lower percentages of R1b-U106, sure. I think I've even argued before that they likely had lower R1b-U106 than other Germanic peoples. But I don't see a reason to believe that they had none.


I wasn't talking about diversity pattern, what I meant was concentration. You can perfectly see how concentration steadily increases when we follow their migrations from oldest to most recent homeland, and it is pretty logical IMO.

I don't think that an argument from concentration means much, though. If a population keeps splitting, migrating, and expanding, then (at least if we're talking pre-modern population movement) the general pattern is for places closest to the points of origin to have the highest diversity of lineages. Concentrations, meanwhile, can fluctuate independently in every location.

Good summary of what we know of the diversity, by the way, not much else to address there.


Yeah, my mistake. But again it is not really relevant to our discussion. What I wanted to point out is that I2a Din TMRCA lived in Gothic homeland 2500 years ago...

2500 YBP is close to the I2a-Din TMRCA, so I suppose in that case we're looking for the place where the I2a-Din TMRCA most likely lived. Last I checked (admittedly I haven't been keeping up with developments the past year or so, so correct me if I'm wrong), the highest diversity was around Ukraine and Romania. Poland is a hot spot for I2a-Din-S diversity in particular, but that's younger than 2500 years ago, and raises the question of what population would be transmitting lineages from the direction of Ukraine to Poland.


Well yes, but I didn't say it was Germanic in time of its formation, I actually meant it is Germanic now and many close clades to I2a Din are Germanic now.

Do Disles and Isles look Germanic to you? I see evidence of some possible Celtic/Germanic split within Isles, but Disles looks pretty Celtic. It's tough to say with continental samples so sparse, of course. Anyway, the split between I2a-Din and Disles is older than most estimates I've seen for the Germanic ethnogenesis by quite a bit, so it doesn't inform us much here either way. It could be that each branch is simply derived from an ancient northern European population, some of which would later contribute to Germanic peoples, but also some to northern Celtic peoples in the west, some to Slavic peoples in the east, etc.


And BTW Celtic (especially if it stand for Celts BC) is more cultural than ethnic mark.

I would call it an ethno-linguistic group, like Germanic and Slavic. If you mean that Celtic peoples were more genetically diverse than Germanic and (proto?-)Slavic peoples in the late BC period, I would agree. I'm just saying that some subclades look like they fall into the big Celtic bucket more than into the Germanic bucket.


I took this data from Serb DNA project (which includes results from whole Yugoslavia): I1 p109 STR481=0: 17 surnames, I1 Z58: 4 surnames, I1 Z63: 9 surnames (8 of them from single Macura clan).
Now, it doesn't make sense that descendants of Robert Guiscard's Normans (I1 P109 STR481=0, seafarers and warriors that came in boats) are more numerous than descendants of what you think of as Goths (I1 Z63, very large people that inhabited west Balkan for at least 200 years), does it? And keep in mind that all except one of I1 Z63 found are from one single clan.

If your numbers are accurate, then it's certainly remarkable that there seems to be a large founder effect from a possibly Norman source. I1-Z63 is still a good place to look for Gothic contribution, although I'm not saying that we will get an accurate measure by looking at just the I1-Z63 percentage. In fact, it may be difficult to get an accurate measure from modern Y-DNA at all.

Still, I'm not satisfied with this sample. I'd like to look at the I1 Project, but it's currently giving me errors, so maybe later.

clintCG
30-12-14, 23:31
I don't think that an argument from concentration means much, though. If a population keeps splitting, migrating, and expanding, then (at least if we're talking pre-modern population movement) the general pattern is for places closest to the points of origin to have the highest diversity of lineages. Concentrations, meanwhile, can fluctuate independently in every location.

Good summary of what we know of the diversity, by the way, not much else to address there.
I think concentrations are more important than you think, and concentrations can not fluctuate independently on every location. Why? Because it is not the way Germanic peoples migrated. Germanic tribes migrated en-masse, taking all of tribe members with them, so what we got after they left were only small leftovers. "Expanding" was certainly not what they did. On other hand Slavic tribes did that, they migrated by conquering piece by piece of new lands, while they never abandoned their old homeland. Not until the 6/7th century did they start with massive migrations too. I believe we were taught that in elementary school as main difference between their migrations.
So if we fit that in our story, it means that main mass of Gothic tribes left Poland so the leftovers were assimilated by next people that came there. Similar thing happened to Ukraine sea coast, BUT part was enslaved by Huns so they did not migrate with rest.
It seems pretty logical to me, but I could be wrong.


2500 YBP is close to the I2a-Din TMRCA, so I suppose in that case we're looking for the place where the I2a-Din TMRCA most likely lived. Last I checked (admittedly I haven't been keeping up with developments the past year or so, so correct me if I'm wrong), the highest diversity was around Ukraine and Romania. Poland is a hot spot for I2a-Din-S diversity in particular, but that's younger than 2500 years ago, and raises the question of what population would be transmitting lineages from the direction of Ukraine to Poland.
IIRC it was Nordtvedt himself who located I2a Din TMRCA in middle course of Vistula (which corresponds to Gothic homeland). BTW as I said majority of people living today in parts of southern Poland can have their origins in western Ukraine so that may answer your question?


If your numbers are accurate, then it's certainly remarkable that there seems to be a large founder effect from a possibly Norman source. I1-Z63 is still a good place to look for Gothic contribution, although I'm not saying that we will get an accurate measure by looking at just the I1-Z63 percentage. In fact, it may be difficult to get an accurate measure from modern Y-DNA at all.

Still, I'm not satisfied with this sample. I'd like to look at the I1 Project, but it's currently giving me errors, so maybe later.
Hmm well I don't have permission to post links so I will give you directions. Google "srpski dnk projekat" and click on first result, then click on tab "СВИ ДНК РЕЗУЛТАТИ ПО ПРЕЗИМЕНИМА" and you will see table with haplogroups by surnames. Notice that there are 14 I1 results that do not have specific subgroup.
I think Norman input under any circumstances can never be as large as Gothic one.

motzart
31-12-14, 01:10
In favor of the Goths we have evidence of 4000 years of continuity of I2a1 in Northern Europe, from Loschbour in 6000 B.C. to Ajvide 58 in 2000 B.C., we have an archeological record of depopulation of Scandinavia in the age of Germanic migrations and a modern distribution that matches the written history of where those people settled.

sparkey
02-01-15, 18:50
I think concentrations are more important than you think, and concentrations can not fluctuate independently on every location. Why? Because it is not the way Germanic peoples migrated. Germanic tribes migrated en-masse, taking all of tribe members with them, so what we got after they left were only small leftovers. "Expanding" was certainly not what they did. On other hand Slavic tribes did that, they migrated by conquering piece by piece of new lands, while they never abandoned their old homeland. Not until the 6/7th century did they start with massive migrations too. I believe we were taught that in elementary school as main difference between their migrations.

I don't see the connection. The populations that Goths contributed to did not remain Gothic, so of course they fluctuated afterward, and they would have even if they had, since how the population fluctuates internally doesn't depend on how they got there. Anyway, even if we accept the idea that all Goths left their homeland and left no remnants, I would still expect to see remnant neighboring tribes with similar genetics. Groups like the Anglo-Saxons, Suebi, etc. left behind plenty of peoples of related (and even their own) tribes with practically indistinguishable genetics, and we get nice comparisons between modern populations near their origins and at their destinations. Are the Goths supposed to be different?


Hmm well I don't have permission to post links so I will give you directions. Google "srpski dnk projekat" and click on first result, then click on tab "СВИ ДНК РЕЗУЛТАТИ ПО ПРЕЗИМЕНИМА" and you will see table with haplogroups by surnames. Notice that there are 14 I1 results that do not have specific subgroup.
I think Norman input under any circumstances can never be as large as Gothic one.

Thanks, I've seen Poreklo's DNA Project before, they're very good. Their results have informed a couple of my additions to my "Searching for famous I2 carriers (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/27655-Searching-for-famous-I2-carriers)" thread.

Still waiting on FTDNA to start working again to get additional data, though.

motzart
03-01-15, 03:25
Anyway, even if we accept the idea that all Goths left their homeland and left no remnants, I would still expect to see remnant neighboring tribes with similar genetics. Groups like the Anglo-Saxons, Suebi, etc. left behind plenty of peoples of related (and even their own) tribes with practically indistinguishable genetics, and we get nice comparisons between modern populations near their origins and at their destinations. Are the Goths supposed to be different?

Couple problems with that. We don't have any Anglo Saxon Y DNA or Suebi DNA at all so your point is just an assumption.

sparkey
03-01-15, 08:33
Couple problems with that. We don't have any Anglo Saxon Y DNA or Suebi DNA at all so your point is just an assumption.

I think it's a reasonable assumption based on diversity patterns of Germanic-looking subclades like I1-Z58 and R1b-U106. You think it's a problematic assumption that Anglo-Saxons and Suebi carried those?

clintCG
16-01-15, 17:06
I don't see the connection. The populations that Goths contributed to did not remain Gothic, so of course they fluctuated afterward, and they would have even if they had, since how the population fluctuates internally doesn't depend on how they got there. Anyway, even if we accept the idea that all Goths left their homeland and left no remnants, I would still expect to see remnant neighboring tribes with similar genetics. Groups like the Anglo-Saxons, Suebi, etc. left behind plenty of peoples of related (and even their own) tribes with practically indistinguishable genetics, and we get nice comparisons between modern populations near their origins and at their destinations. Are the Goths supposed to be different?
There is no historical proof for Goths assimilating other peoples. Goths left remnants of course, but not very large (in Poland). And we still don't know how much connection do eastern Germanic peoples of Goths and Vandals have with other Germanic peoples.
But let's ask counter-question: if I2a Din was brought by Slavs, then why don't Slavs that are today in Poland have similar genetics to southern ones? I need some evidence that I2a was brought by Slavs.

sparkey
16-01-15, 17:29
But let's ask counter-question: if I2a Din was brought by Slavs, then why don't Slavs that are today in Poland have similar genetics to southern ones? I need some evidence that I2a was brought by Slavs.

Well, (Southern) Poland is a hotspot for I2a-Din-S diversity. I don't think we expect the Poles and the Slavs in the Balkans to look very similar in terms of haplogroup subclade percentage, though, even if I2a-Din was largely transmitted to the Balkans via Poland. Too many effects from substrata, superstrata, population fluctuation over time, etc.

clintCG
16-01-15, 19:24
Well, (Southern) Poland is a hotspot for I2a-Din-S diversity. I don't think we expect the Poles and the Slavs in the Balkans to look very similar in terms of haplogroup subclade percentage, though, even if I2a-Din was largely transmitted to the Balkans via Poland. Too many effects from substrata, superstrata, population fluctuation over time, etc.
I expect Poles and Balkan Slavs to have same percentage of haplogroups, because that is where Balkan Slavs came from, according to current official version of history. I don't think concentration of R1a can shrink from 56 percent in Poles (where Croatian homeland was), to under 15 percent in Dalmatian Croats, and in same way I don't think anything could explain how can Sorbs have 65 percent of R1a while Montenegrins (who, according to history, came from western Poland/eastern Germany) have like 8 percent of it. Again, I ask you, if Slavs brought I2a Din indeed, then how can modern concentration of haplogroups in Balkans differ so much from original Slavic homeland?
On the other hand, (southern) Poland has highest diversity of I2a-Din, and that is where Goths lived before they migrated to south and Slavs moved in. IMO both diversity and concentration patterns of I2a-Din represent migrations of Goths very good.

Sile
16-01-15, 20:43
I expect Poles and Balkan Slavs to have same percentage of haplogroups, because that is where Balkan Slavs came from, according to current official version of history. I don't think concentration of R1a can shrink from 56 percent in Poles (where Croatian homeland was), to under 15 percent in Dalmatian Croats, and in same way I don't think anything could explain how can Sorbs have 65 percent of R1a while Montenegrins (who, according to history, came from western Poland/eastern Germany) have like 8 percent of it. Again, I ask you, if Slavs brought I2a Din indeed, then how can modern concentration of haplogroups in Balkans differ so much from original Slavic homeland?
On the other hand, (southern) Poland has highest diversity of I2a-Din, and that is where Goths lived before they migrated to south and Slavs moved in. IMO both diversity and concentration patterns of I2a-Din represent migrations of Goths very good.

I2a in balkans is an assumption of modern slavs that the marker is slavic. Because the cimmerians who came from southern Ukraine to the balkans in 700 BC ( 1400 years before the slavs ) carried this marker. The slavs ASSUME that cimmerians are slavs and continually make a claim to absorb indigenous tribes from various areas

gyms
17-01-15, 08:58
"I need some evidence that I2a was brought by Slavs."

There is absolutely no evidece for that.

clintCG
18-01-15, 15:22
"I need some evidence that I2a was brought by Slavs."

There is absolutely no evidece for that.
Paleolithic continuity theory is outdated, so only two possible carriers that could have brought it in such a large number were Goths and Slavs. I assume it is much more probable that Goths brought I2a Din rather than Slavs.


I2a in balkans is an assumption of modern slavs that the marker is slavic. Because the cimmerians who came from southern Ukraine to the balkans in 700 BC ( 1400 years before the slavs ) carried this marker. The slavs ASSUME that cimmerians are slavs and continually make a claim to absorb indigenous tribes from various areas
Yes, they assume it is Slavic only because Yugoslavians are linguistically Slavic today. I am not familiar with fact that Cimmerians brought I2a Din with them, and their arrival on Balkans is probably too old for arrival of I2a Din. Current spread of I2a Din is result of sudden expansion from Poland that happened around 2000 years ago.

LeBrok
18-01-15, 17:20
Yes, they assume it is Slavic only because Yugoslavians are linguistically Slavic today. I am not familiar with fact that Cimmerians brought I2a Din with them, and their arrival on Balkans is probably too old for arrival of I2a Din. Current spread of I2a Din is result of sudden expansion from Poland that happened around 2000 years ago.
They didn't need to come in numbers. The expansion could have happened when they have gotten to Balkans 1,500 years ago. Balkans were depopulated at this time and it would help expansion of population of newcomers.

clintCG
22-01-15, 13:07
Well I need more evidence to even consider Cimmerians as carriers of I2a Din...

Tomenable
03-03-15, 13:43
IIRC Ken Nordtvedt and Vadim Verenich estimate the age of formation of I2a1b1 as 2800 years ago and its TMRCA as 2500 years ago. Place of formation was Eastern or East-Central Europe according to them. This young age combined with its presence among Slavic (especially East Slavic and South Slavic) populations and its lack of presence among Baltic populations, suggests that this mutation originally formed in one of members of the Proto-Slavic community around year 800 BCE. The time when the Balto-Slavic community split (an event illustrated by the graph below), forming Proto-Slavs and the other two groups (Proto East Balts and Proto West Balts - according to Kromer's 2003 theory) has been variously estimated at between 1500 BCE and 500 BCE, but most authors place it between 1400 and 1200 BCE:

Atkinson - 1400 BCE
Novotná & Blažek - 1400–1340 BCE
Sergei Starostin - 1210 BCE
Chang et. al. - 600 BCE

http://s21.postimg.org/r6k2ijrjr/Modele.png

If this mutation is younger than the split of the Balto-Slavic community, then this fact nicely explains why I2a1b1 is present among Slavs but not among Balts. Had this lineage been present among Balto-Slavs before they split some 3400 - 3200 years ago, it should be present among both Balts and Slavs today (unless it was so small in numbers that - just by chance - only Slavs inherited it, and not Balts).

Now when it comes to R1a:


The point is that Croats belong R1a Z280

This claim is completely wrong.

Data from Underhill 2014 shows that Croats have the highest proportion of M458 in entire R1a among South Slavs (read below).

Among Slavic and Baltic populations, when it comes to people with haplogroup R1a, two major clades dominate - Z280 and M458.

The age of these two clades is:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1a/

Z280:

Time when mutation emerged (in one male) - ca. 5000 years ago (95% probability that in period 5600 - 4400 y.a.).
Time of the most recent common ancestor - ca. 4800 years ago (95% probability that in period 5400 - 4200 y.a.).

M458:

Time when mutation emerged (in one male) - ca. 5000 lat temu (95% probability that in period 5600 - 4400 y.a.).
Time of the most recent common ancestor - ok. 4500 lat temu (95% probability that in period 5400 - 4200 y.a.).

=================================================

Distribution of percentage shares of these clades within all of R1a forms an interesting continuum (but also a clinal distribution in some areas).

If individuals with R1a haplogroup in each population = 100%, then respective shares of Z280 and M458 within that R1a are:

Population (R1a Z280 / R1a M458 / other clades of R1a) - according to Underhill 2014 (+ Ukrainians from Lviv & Lithuanians from another - Russian - source, as well as alternative data for Russians, Poles and Belarusians from the same Russian source):

WeS = Western Slavs
SoS = Southern Slavs
EaS = Eastern Slavs
Balt = Balts

[WeS] Czechs-----------------------------(20,2 / 79,8 / 0,0)
[WeS] Czechs Utah------------------------(19,9 / 70,0 / 10,1)
[SoS] Croatia interior-----------------------(32,0 / 68,0 / 0,0)
[WeS] Poland------------------------------(42,0 / 58,0 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Cherkassy-----------------(46,9 / 53,1 / 0,0)
[WeS] Poland (another source)--------------(51,7 / 48,3 / 0,0)
[WeS] Slovakia-----------------------------(52,1 / 46,2 / 1,7)
[WeS] Poles Wroclaw-----------------------(56,8 / 43,2 / 0,0)
[SoS] Bulgaria------------------------------(51,2 / 42,0 / 6,8)
[EaS] Ukrainians Lviv------------------------(58,2 / 41,8 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Ivano-Frankivsk-------------(60,0 / 40,0 / 0,0)
[EaS] Belarusians Brest----------------------(61,4 / 38,6 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Kostroma--------------------(62,6 / 37,4 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Donetsk--------------------(67,4 / 30,4 / 2,2)
[EaS] Belarusians (another source)-----------(69,7 / 30,3 / 0,0)
[SoS] Macedonians--------------------------(72,7 / 27,3 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Pskov------------------------(72,6 / 25,8 / 1,6)
[EaS] Russians Oryol-------------------------(76,4 / 23,6 / 0,0)
[SoS] Serbia---------------------------------(64,9 / 23,2 / 11,9)
[EaS] Belarusians (Underhill)------------------(76,8 / 23,2 / 0,0)
[SoS] Bosnia--------------------------------(80,2 / 19,8 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians (another source)--------------(80,8 / 19,2 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Belgorod----------------------(81,2 / 18,8 / 0,0)
[Balt] Lithuanians----------------------------(81,8 / 18,2 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Khmilnyk---------------------(84,3 / 15,7 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Akkerman--------------------(88,4 / 11,6 / 0,0)
[SoS] Slovenia-------------------------------(83,9 / 10,7 / 5,4)
[SoS] Herzegovina----------------------------(93,8 / 6,2 / 0,0)

Chart:

http://s17.postimg.org/8i4qm1een/R1a_chart.png

And graph:

http://s29.postimg.org/n8pi0uko7/Graph_Clades.png

http://s29.postimg.org/n8pi0uko7/Graph_Clades.png

=======================================

And here a map showing the percentage share of M458 among total R1a (based on data from Underhill, data from the other source not included):

Boundaries of frequency areas are approximate / conventional (since Underhill collected samples mostly from specific cities or groups of locations):

http://s2.postimg.org/y56xlyfex/M458.png

Tomenable
03-03-15, 13:58
IIRC Ken Nordtvedt and Vadim Verenich estimate the age of formation of I2a1b1 as 2800 years ago and its TMRCA as 2500 years ago. Place of formation was Eastern or East-Central Europe according to them. This young age combined with its presence among Slavic (especially East Slavic and South Slavic) populations and its lack of presence among Baltic populations, suggests that this mutation originally formed in one of members of the Proto-Slavic community around year 800 BCE. The time when the Balto-Slavic community split (an event illustrated by the graph below), forming Proto-Slavs and the other two groups (Proto East Balts and Proto West Balts - according to Kromer's 2003 theory) has been variously estimated at between 1500 BCE and 500 BCE, but most authors place it between 1400 and 1200 BCE

Interestingly, Baltic clades N-L550 and N-L1025 have similar ages and TMRCAs as I2a1b1:

N1c1a1a1a (L550): found throughout the Baltic and North Slavic countries
N1c1a1a1a1 (L1025): found especially in Balto-Slavic countries, with a peak in Lithuania and Latvia

N-L550 formed 3300 ybp, TMRCA 2700 ybp
N-L1025 formed 2700 ybp, TMRCA 2500 ybp

Now compare this to I2a1b1 which (according to Nordtvedt & Verenich) formed 2800 ybp, TMRCA 2500 ybp.

Data on distribution of N1c1a (old name N3) and R1a in Lithuania - from Kasperaviciute 2004:

http://genofond.invint.net/genofond.ru/LoadFile50a7.pdf?file_id=966

http://images70.fotosik.pl/664/fed9ba0fa382d46b.jpg

Map (southern region marked as SA - inhabited largely by ethnic Poles - has 61,8% R1a and only 29,4% N3):

http://images70.fotosik.pl/664/e51a41f174799001.jpg

Tomenable
03-03-15, 15:20
As for I2a1b frequencies:

Croats - 37,8%
Ukrainians from Lviv - 22,1%
Belarusians - 17,9%
Russians - 11,7%
Poles - 6,4% (according to some other studies more)
Lithuania - 3,5%

Tomenable
03-03-15, 16:32
IIRC it was Nordtvedt himself who located I2a Din TMRCA in middle course of Vistula

They previously located I1 TMRCA in Scandinavia and R1b TMRCA in Spain - both of which turned out to be wrong.

So such assumptions are not reliable. What you really need are ancient DNA samples.

The following info was announced around April 2014:

"This year [2014] begins a major research program, the goal of which is to examine ancient DNA from several dozen archaeological sites from the area of Poland. This project is supposed to test ancient DNA of inhabitants of Poland from pre-Roman, Roman, early Medieval and Medieval times and compare it to DNA of modern inhabitants. Research is going to last at least 5 years, its authors are - among others - prof. Hanna Koćka-Krenz and prof. Janusz Piontek."

So we must wait until 2019.

clintCG
03-03-15, 22:57
This still doesn't explain it and perfectly supports my theory. Why is there so much difference between Hezegovina and Slavonia Croats? Don't they all descend from same Slavs? Why do then Slavonians have over 50 percent of R1a and Herzegovinians and Montenegrins have only about 6 percent of R1a?

It is because Slavs settled in northern Yugoslavia, in lands suitable for farming (R1a carriers), and Goths (I2a1b) settled in Dinaric Alps. If they were all Slavic as modern history claims they would all have same amount of HG's. It is just like our medieval history sources tell us...

Reason why there is some I2a1b in Ukraine is because it comes from Gothic leftovers. As we know from history bigger part of Goths migrated over Danube to Balkans while smaller part was subdued by Huns and remained on Black Sea coast. Even Gothic dialect was spoken in Crimea until 19th century.

Assumption that it is Slavic comes from the fact that today carriers of I2a1b are linguistically Slavic, which they were not in the past.

Also 3-4 thousand years of I2a1 continuity in Neolithic hunter-gatherer Scandinavians support my theory (from Motala to Ajvide), as well as evidence for depopulation at that time.
It is clear that I2a1 got to Poland from Scandinavia, not from eastern Europe, and I2a1b in Poland existed long before any Slavic or proto-Slavic tribe entered it.

BTW no chance there is so much R1a even in northern Croatia as you listed it on map.

Tomenable
04-03-15, 02:44
Assumption that it is Slavic comes from the fact that today carriers of I2a1b are linguistically Slavic, which they were not in the past.

In the past the extent of South Slavic languages was larger than it is today.

On the other hand, the extend of East Slavic languages was smaller in the past than today.

Map: Territories inhabited by Slavic peoples in the mid-9th century (around year 850 AD):

(thick black lines) ludność słowiańska w zdecydowanej przewadze ======== Slavic population constitutes vast majority
(thin black lines) ludność słowiańska w rozproszeniu ================== dispersed settlement of Slavic population
(small red circles) ludność słowiańska poza głównym terytorium osiedlenia == Slavic people outside of main settlement area

http://s16.postimg.org/a1qohl76d/Slavic_world_850.png

Boundaries of ethnic Slavic territories in year 850 AD underlined:

http://s8.postimg.org/shpocs2jp/Slavdom_Poland.png

Map posted above is originally from:

"Słowianie, ich wędrówki, siedziby i otoczenie etniczne we wczesnośredniowiecznej Europie"
("Slavs, their migrations, homelands and ethnic environment in Early Medieval Europe")
by Adam Sengebusch

And another similar map (also for year ca. 850 AD - as you can see it shows a bit larger extent of East Slavic territory):

http://hetman3333.blox.pl/resource/mapa_slowianie.JPG


BTW no chance there is so much R1a even in northern Croatia as you listed it on map.

You did not understand what the map says, apparently. Take a look at the chart I posted above.

Tomenable
04-03-15, 02:54
^ Below is continuation of my posts from previous page (read discussion on page 31 first):


Also 3-4 thousand years of I2a1 continuity in Neolithic hunter-gatherer Scandinavians support my theory (from Motala to Ajvide), as well as evidence for depopulation at that time.

There was lack of continuity between Neolithic Scandinavians and Scandinavians of Bronze & Iron Ages (see: Malmström et. al. 2009).

Also, there is a very long long way from I2a1 to I2a1b1. For example Sardinians are I2a1a, not I2a1b (and certainly not I2a1b1).

I2a was present not only in prehistoric Scandinavia but in most of Mesolithic and Neolithic Europe.

Check for example I2a1 from Loschbour (5960-5750 BCE) or I2a from Tiszaszölös-Domaha'za in Hungary (5780-5650 BCE).

And more anient I2a in Hungary was discovered at Apc-Berekalja I (Lengyel culture), dating to 4490-4360 BCE.

There is also Neolithic I2a1 from Starčevo culture in Croatia, at site Vinkovci Jugobanka, dated 5840-5480 years BCE.

Finally there is I2a1b L161+, CTS1293+ from Els Trocs in Spain, dated 5310-5206 BCE (see Haak 2015).

As well as I2a1b from Funnelbeaker culture dating to 3360-3086 BCE. And I2a1 from France (Treilles, Aveyron) dated 3000 BCE.

Finally more I2a1 from Dolmen of La Pierre Fritte, Villeneuve-sur-Yonne in France, dated 2750-2725 BCE.

Tomenable
04-03-15, 03:17
Why is there so much difference between Hezegovina and Slavonia Croats? Don't they all descend from same Slavs?

Slavs were already divided into distinct tribes when they were first described by people of the Mediterranean world.

So no - they don't all descend from "same Slavs". From Slavs, but not same ones. From different groups of Slavs.

Croats for example came to the Balkans from what is now Czechoslovakia. Croats came to the Balkans relatively late, but mixed with other Slavs who had already been there before them (most likely ancestors of Slovenes and Bosniaks). Most of Slavic groups had come to the Balkans before Croats, from areas of Ukraine-Moldova, crossing Romania on their way. And before crossing the Danube and flooding into the Balkans, those Slavs had settled north of the Danube in southern Romania.


If they were all Slavic as modern history claims they would all have same amount of HG's.

Wrong. First of all you have random drift (due to which frequencies can change), and secondly you have founder effects.

Slavs dispersed in various directions and those migrating groups certainly did not have identical frequencies of haplogroups.

Imagine somewhere near the Ukrainian-Belarusian borderland there lived - let's say - 360 thousand Proto-Slavic males including 160 thousand Z280, 120 thousand M458, 60 thousand I2a1b1 and 20 thousand other haplogroups. And now that bunch of 360 k divided into three groups of 120 k each, one migrated westward to Central Europe, one southward to the Balkans, one eastward to Russia.

It is possible that among those who migrated westward there was - just by chance - more of M458.

Among those who came to the Balkans there could be - on ther other hand - more of I2a1b1.

If you are assuming that when people migrate they spread haplogroups always in the same proportion, then entire world should have the same structure of haplogroups (since all humans dispersed originally from one place - most likely North-Eastern Africa).

Tomenable
04-03-15, 03:31
Reason why there is some I2a1b in Ukraine is because it comes from Gothic leftovers. As we know from history bigger part of Goths migrated over Danube to Balkans while smaller part was subdued by Huns and remained on Black Sea coast. Even Gothic dialect was spoken in Crimea until 19th century.

Frequency distribution of I2a1b in Ukraine totally does NOT correspond to places where Gothic leftovers lived.

Gothic leftovers lived in Crimea, while the highest % of I2a1b is in the opposite end - in Western & Northern Ukraine.

======================

Take a look at this map (note this sharp decline of I2a1b exactly in the Slavic-Italian ethnic borderland; note also how West Slavic Sorbs - "cousins" of South Slavic Serbs - near the East German-Czech border have a high % of I2a1b):

http://s15.postimg.org/3z7ueb3tn/I2a1.png

As you can see the highest frequency of I2a1b is in Western and Northern Ukraine - most Slavic parts of Ukraine (video below):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXhLsJrj_N8


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXhLsJrj_N8

Among Ukrainians from Lviv (Western Ukraine) I2a1b is as frequent as 22,1% - according to this Russian data:

http://s18.postimg.org/9soz3j0nt/Ukraine_Lviv.png

Tomenable
04-03-15, 03:53
It is clear that I2a1 got to Poland from Scandinavia

What ??? That would make absolutely no sense, because I2a1 is clearly not related to Germanic peoples.

There is no genetic continuity between Neolithic Scandinavians and Germanic Scandinavians (see Malmström et. al. 2009).

Moreover, as I already wrote above, I2a1 is common among Mesolithic and Neolithic samples of ancient DNA from entire Europe discovered so far. You are clearly not up-to-date with ancient DNA findings if you think that it was found only in Sweden.

I listed ancient I2a1 from other countries (Hungary, France, Spain, Croatia, Luxembourg, Germany) in my post above.

But the point is, that I2a1 is not I2a1b1. There are dozens of SNPs (and dozens of centuries) separating the two.

Also remember that we have virtually no samples of ancient Y-DNA from Eastern Europe. This will change only in the following years.

Tomenable
04-03-15, 04:08
Coming back to that map posted above:


note this sharp decline of I2a1b exactly in the Slavic-Italian ethnic borderland

And this is crucial. Because Goths did not stop their migration in what is now Slovenia.

They entered Italy, they sacked Rome, established a kingdom. So why there is so little of I2a1b in Italy ???

Simply because I2a1b has absolutely nothing to do with Goths. Northern Italy has <1% of it.

Tomenable
04-03-15, 04:27
As for that list of well-known individuals with I2a1b, which was posted before:

http://s10.postimg.org/rcr746bix/Marcin_Luter.png

Martin Luther being I2a1b is not surprising. His ancestors were from Thuringia. Eastern Thuringia was settled by Slavs during the Migration Period - and those particular Slavs from Thuringia did not suffer any major demographic losses, as they were Christianized early on (already by Charlemagne IIRC) and without bloodshed. So Luther family could be paternally descended from Germanized Slavs.

gyms
04-03-15, 09:14
^ Below is continuation of my posts from previous page (read discussion on page 31 first):



There was lack of continuity between Neolithic Scandinavians and Scandinavians of Bronze & Iron Ages (see: Malmström et. al. 2009).

Also, there is a very long long way from I2a1 to I2a1b1. For example Sardinians are I2a1a, not I2a1b (and certainly not I2a1b1).

I2a was present not only in prehistoric Scandinavia but in most of Mesolithic and Neolithic Europe.

Check for example I2a1 from Loschbour (5960-5750 BCE) or I2a from Tiszaszölös-Domaha'za in Hungary (5780-5650 BCE).

And more anient I2a in Hungary was discovered at Apc-Berekalja I (Lengyel culture), dating to 4490-4360 BCE.

There is also Neolithic I2a1 from Starčevo culture in Croatia, at site Vinkovci Jugobanka, dated 5840-5480 years BCE.

Finally there is I2a1b L161+, CTS1293+ from Els Trocs in Spain, dated 5310-5206 BCE (see Haak 2015).

As well as I2a1b from Funnelbeaker culture dating to 3360-3086 BCE. And I2a1 from France (Treilles, Aveyron) dated 3000 BCE.

Finally more I2a1 from Dolmen of La Pierre Fritte, Villeneuve-sur-Yonne in France, dated 2750-2725 BCE.

A couple of the bones (Loschbour and Motala12) were even found to be L178+ L161- L621-, putting them as a possibly new more ancient branch off of the tree branch leading to our modern L178+ L621+ Dinaric and L178+ L161+ Isles populations.

clintCG
04-03-15, 16:56
Frequency distribution of I2a1b in Ukraine totally does NOT correspond to places where Gothic leftovers lived.Gothic leftovers lived in Crimea, while the highest % of I2a1b is in the opposite end - in Western & Northern Ukraine.

That is pure BS. Goths occupied both north and west of present day Ukraine. I must admit that this was a good deception you tried to pass but unfortunately it doesn't work for me. Check out this map:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/90/Pre_Migration_Age_Germanic.png

If I2a1b is Slavic- why is it not found in any slightly larger quantity in other Slavic lands except south ones and Ukraine? It is because small number of Goths remained in Ukraine and settled permanently in western Balkans.


And this is crucial. Because Goths did not stop their migration in what is now Slovenia.

They entered Italy, they sacked Rome, established a kingdom. So why there is so little of I2a1b in Italy ???

Simply because I2a1b has absolutely nothing to do with Goths. Northern Italy has <1% of it.

Wrong again. Northern Italy has some I2a1b, in Trento area there is as much as 10 percent of it. Southern Italy has not I2a1b like North does because Goths left nothing there, in some cases only small garrisons.

Gothic conquest of Italy was of strictly political nature. Nowhere will you find any historical source that says that Goths relocated to Italy from Balkans. They settled (like Jordanes says) permanently on western Balkans, and they conquered Italy for political reasons and never settled there in large numbers. From Wikipedia:

Theoderic sought to revive Roman culture and government and in doing so, profited the Italian people.[14] It was in both characters together that he set out in 488, by commission from the Byzantine emperor Zeno, to recover Italy from Odoacer. By 493 Ravenna was taken, where Theoderic would set up his capital. It was also at this time that Odoacer was killed by Theoderic's own hand. Ostrogothic power was fully established over Italy, Sicily, Dalmatia and the lands to the north of Italy.


Italy was conquered because of establishing Roman administration, not because Goths wanted to settle there. Only Gothic soldiers went to Italy, and Gothic people as whole never relocated to Italy as you are trying to say.


There was lack of continuity between Neolithic Scandinavians and Scandinavians of Bronze & Iron Ages

Then why are Scandinavians so genetically close to those same Western Hunter-Gatherers?


I listed ancient I2a1 from other countries (Hungary, France, Spain, Croatia, Luxembourg, Germany) in my post above.But the point is, that I2a1 is not I2a1b1. There are dozens of SNPs (and dozens of centuries) separating the two.

Yes, but I do not know if I2a1 samples from other European countries can qualify as ancestors of I2a1b Dinaric.

On other hand, I2a1 from northern Europe (Motala and Lochsbour) is very possible ancestor of Dinaric and Isles. I will quote gyms:


A couple of the bones (Loschbour and Motala12) were even found to be L178+ L161- L621-, putting them as a possibly new more ancient branch off of the tree branch leading to our modern L178+ L621+ Dinaric and L178+ L161+ Isles populations.




Wrong. First of all you have random drift (due to which frequencies can change), and secondly you have founder effects.
Slavs dispersed in various directions and those migrating groups certainly did not have identical frequencies of haplogroups


You are explaining differences among Slavs by "accident". They have different HG's "by accident". There is sharp reduction of I2a Din when we leave Dinaric Alps and go to plains of northern Yugoslavia "by accident".


There is no accident. It is not accidental that I2a1b is common only in lands where Goths lived. It is not accidental that from history we know that Slavs settled only in agriculturaly good areas while pre-Slavs lived in Dinaric Alps. It is not also accidental that Borreby racial type was found by Carleton S. Coon as dominant in Montenegro and parts of Herzegovina, and as we know Borreby type is Germanic type common in Germany and western Norway.

Main plus for Slavs are Slavic toponyms that are sometimes found in other Slavic lands and Slavic language. And nothing else.

clintCG
04-03-15, 17:23
^continuing last post


Slavs were already divided into distinct tribes when they were first described by people of the Mediterranean world.So no - they don't all descend from "same Slavs". From Slavs, but not same ones. From different groups of Slavs.
Croats for example came to the Balkans from what is now Czechoslovakia. Croats came to the Balkans relatively late, but mixed with other Slavs who had already been there before them (most likely ancestors of Slovenes and Bosniaks). Most of Slavic groups had come to the Balkans before Croats, from areas of Ukraine-Moldova, crossing Romania on their way. And before crossing the Danube and flooding into the Balkans, those Slavs had settled north of the Danube in southern Romania.

According to all historical sources Herzegovinians and Slavonians are considered as same Croats. Yet they are so different. Most of our medieval historical sources say that people of Dinaric Alps is descended from Goths. As Thomas Archdeacon says, Croats are descended from Goths, and got Slavic name much later.

Official history tells us that Slavic tribes of Serbs (of so called "White Serbia") came from western Slavic lands, that Montenegrins came from Elbe Slavs in northwestern Germany and that Croats came from south Poland/Czechoslovakia.
There is absolutely no historical proof for Balkan Slavs coming from Ukraine/Moldova, which would explain I2a1b. Every historical proof that speaks about coming of Slavs to Yugoslavia says that they came from WESTERN Slavic lands, which are predominantly R1a, and I2a Din is non-existent there.

My opinion: Croats from north Croatia and most of Serbs of plains are descended from Slavs.
Croats (from Herzegovina, Dalmatia, Lika), Montenegrins and smaller part of Bosnians of Dinaric Alps are descended from Goths.
There is more than enough genetic, historical, anthropological and cultural proof.

Tomenable
04-03-15, 18:59
Then why are Scandinavians so genetically close to those same Western Hunter-Gatherers?

Scandinavians are close to Yamnaya (see Haak 2015), not to Western Hunter-Gatherers. There is no continuity of Y-DNA (I2a and I2c haplogroups are virtually absent in modern Scandinavia) and only very small, if any, continuity of mtDNA:

http://s17.postimg.org/yqhw32nnz/Sweden_DNA.png

http://s17.postimg.org/yqhw32nnz/Sweden_DNA.png

And:

http://s17.postimg.org/ielmikdhr/Sweden_mt_DNA.png

http://s17.postimg.org/ielmikdhr/Sweden_mt_DNA.png

Tomenable
04-03-15, 19:09
There is absolutely no historical proof for Balkan Slavs coming from Ukraine/Moldova, which would explain I2a1b. Every historical proof that speaks about coming of Slavs to Yugoslavia says that they came from WESTERN Slavic lands

You are completely mistaken, you should read early Byzantine primary sources on Slavs.

First Slavs came to Moesia and Thrace, crossing the Danube River along what is now Romanian-Bulgarian border.

Later from Moesia & Thrace they were spreading westward and southward within the Balkans.

It is illustrated by this map (it shows areas inhabited by Slavs in year 500 AD):


Slavs, name of a people (communication community), speakers of an Indo-European language. Between the 6th and the 7th c. they spread across a great territory in Europe, from Ukraine in the east to the Balkans in the south, the river Unstrut, possibly even the Upper Main, in the west, and Schleswig Holstein in the north-west (...)

The name is recorded for the first time in Greek and Latin sources during the first half of the 6th century as: Σκλαβηνοι; Σκλαβοι; sclavi. It may be what the Slavs called themselves. The original form, is reconstructed by some as *slověne; perhaps this has something to do with the Slav word slovo, which in Polish still means ‘word’ and ‘language’. During the Middle Ages Slavs are sometimes also referred to as “Wends, from the Antique Veneti (cf. Germanic Wenden, Finnish Venäja)

The earliest written record on S., from around 550 AD is in →Cassiodorus, his work known from its summary, handed down by →Jordanes (Getica), and →Procopius of Caesarea (especially, his De bello Gothico). Both Jordanes and Procopius report that Slavs were divided into Sclaveni and Antae; Jordanes mentions also the race of the Venethi whom he considers an earlier name of the people, or possibly, a tribe contemporary to the Sclaveni and Antae (Getica, V.34-35, p. 16). From Procopius we learn that the Sclaveni and Antae were known originally as Spori, or Sporoi (De bello Gothico III.14, p. 272-273).

According to →Jordanes the Sclaveni lived in the lands to the north of the Danube, as far as the Upper Vistula in the west and the Dniester in the east (map 1-2.); the territory of the Antae extended east from the Dniester to the Dnieper (Getica, V.34-35, p. 16). If we accept that Antae indeed were Slavs, then the first Slav ruler known from the written record was Boz, defeated in late 4th century by Vinitharius of the →Ostrogoths (Getica, XLVIII.246-247, p. 101-102).

According to the Byzantine records in the second half of 6th and during the 7th century Slavs moved into the Balkans. (...)

http://s29.postimg.org/p5om5i2rr/Slavs_500.png

And directions of migrations added:

http://s16.postimg.org/glnb80k9h/Slavs_Two.png

Sile
04-03-15, 19:21
You are completely mistaken, you should read early Byzantine primary sources on Slavs.

First Slavs came to Moesia and Thrace, crossing the Danube River along what is now Romanian-Bulgarian border.

Later from Moesia & Thrace they were spreading westward and southward within the Balkans.

It is illustrated by this map (it shows areas inhabited by Slavs in year 500 AD):

http://s29.postimg.org/p5om5i2rr/Slavs_500.png

That is many centuries after the goths first crossed in the same place

Tomenable
04-03-15, 20:16
crossed in the same place

Well, that is the best place to cross. There are not many places to cross, due to mountains:

Dark red - mountain ranges
Light green - best crossings

http://s27.postimg.org/rmxudxgub/Places_to_cross.png

And the Goths didn't cross on their own, but the Romans opened their gates to them (refugees):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcuVJUKZvx4

clintCG
04-03-15, 20:39
I am not talking about haplogroup continuity in Scandinavians. Haplogroups do not tell much about you. You can be I1 African.
I am talking about autosomal DNA. When autosomal DNA was compared, Scandinavians (together with some Baltics) were matched closest with those Western Hunter Gatherers.

It is true that Slavs crossed the Danube on eastern Balkans, but that DOESN'T MEAN they came from Moldavia and Ukraine. What emperor Constantine says in De Administrando Imperio about where Slavic Serbs and Croats came from:


31. Of the Croats and of the country they now dwell in.The Croats who now live in the region of Dalmatia are descended from the unbaptized Croats, also called 'white', who live beyond Turkey (he means Hungary) and next to Francia, and have for Slav neighbours the unbaptized Serbs. 'Croats' in the Slav tongue means 'those who occupy much territory'.


32. Of the Serbs and of the country they now dwell in.
The Serbs are descended from the unbaptized Serbs, also called 'white', who live beyond Turkey (Hungary) in a place called by them Boïki, where their neighbour is Francia, as is also Great Croatia, the unbaptized, also called 'white'; in this place, then, these Serbs also originally dwelt

Where did they live:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/White_serbia_white_croatia01.png/640px-White_serbia_white_croatia01.png





To sum up: It is clear that Slavs that settled in Yugoslavia came from WESTERN Slavic lands, and NOT from Ukraine. As we know, I2a Din is practically absent in western Slavic lands, and since Slavic Yugoslavs did not come from Ukraine, it becomes perfectly clear that Slavs are NOT the ones who spread I2a Din, but the Goths.
Yugoslav languages are also closer to western ones than to eastern Slavic ones.
It is clear who spread I2a Din.

sparkey
04-03-15, 20:48
To sum up: It is clear that Slavs that settled in Yugoslavia came from WESTERN Slavic lands, and NOT from Ukraine. As we know, I2a Din is practically absent in western Slavic lands, and since Slavic Yugoslavs did not come from Ukraine, it becomes perfectly clear that Slavs are NOT the ones who spread I2a Din, but the Goths.
Yugoslav languages are also closer to western ones than to eastern Slavic ones.
It is clear who spread I2a Din.

West Slavs are about ~10% I2a-Din, with the concentration increasing as you get closer to the Balkans (Slovaks are ~15% I2a-Din). Far from "practically absent." How much I2a-Din do Germanic peoples have, meanwhile? I'd say "practically absent," outside of places with historic Slavic input.

I'd agree with the summary that I2a-Din migrated into the Balkans from the direction of Poland, rather than directly from Ukraine, by the way. The clines hint at that.

Tomenable
04-03-15, 21:10
When autosomal DNA was compared, Scandinavians (together with some Baltics) were matched closest with those Western Hunter Gatherers.

You are not up-to-date. Read Haak 2015. Most of Hunter-Gatherer ancestry in Scandinavians (or at least Norwegians) matches Yamnaya population (descendants of Eastern Hunter-Gatherers from Russia - genetically similar to Western ones). See the graph below:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NoGN9ni1kms/VOSGkPjblNI/AAAAAAAACBo/ROwmMxVJFpI/s1600/Untitled3.png

And here you can find data for more modern populations than in the graph above:

"Genetic distance of Yamnaya samples to other groups":

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3840-Genetic-distance-of-Yamnaya-samples-to-other-groups

http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/43356-Bell-Beakers-Gimbutas-and-R1b/page9


To sum up: It is clear that Slavs that settled in Yugoslavia came from WESTERN Slavic lands

Nope. First of all, Croats and Serbs came to the Balkans later than other Slavs (for example Slovenes came before Croats).

As for White Croats and White Serbs (Sorbs) - they share common ancestors with Balkan Serbs and Balkan Croats.

But they did not come to the Balkans from Germany. They split into two groups - one migrated to the Balkans, one to Germany.

Moreover Sorbs in Germany are mixed with other Slavic tribes (Lusatians among others), and so are Serbs in the Balkans.

hrvat22
04-03-15, 21:17
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280


http://pereformat.ru/2013/10/kolybel-evropejskoj-civilizacii/

I. Rozhansky

2013/10/18

Croatia haplogroup R1a represented almost exclusively by the Central Eurasian subclade Z280


https://www.familytreedna.com/public/dinaric_alps_dna/default.aspx?section=ymap

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/r1a/default.aspx?section=ymap

As for I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983 haplotype which has a majority of Croats.. it comes from White Croatia, today southern Poland and has a mutation I2a1b2a1a S17250/YP204...


So far, most or all of those who are negative for S17250 have patrilineage
originating near the Carpathians, particularly southeastern Poland and
extreme western Ukraine.

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I/2014-05/1400615460

I2a1b2a1a S17250/YP204
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a* -
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a1 Z16971
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a2 Y4882
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983


This means that all those who have this mutation I2a1b2a1a S17250 / YP204 are White Croatian origin...Today people with this mutation I2a1b2a1a S17250 / YP204 are located in the Ukraine, Czech Republic, Belarus, Poland, Croatia, Russia, etc ... which proves that the migration of Croats went in different directions and that historical data for Greate Croatia were reality....



http://yfull.com/tree/I2/

gyms
04-03-15, 21:26
http://yfull.com/tree/I-L621/

hrvat22
04-03-15, 21:44
http://tatur.su/history/novyiy-vzglyad-na-proishozhdenie-i2a2-dinaric-po-materialam-internet-resursa-molekulyarnaya-genealogiya-i-istoriko-arheologicheskim-dannyim/

hrvat22
04-03-15, 21:46
I am not talking about haplogroup continuity in Scandinavians. Haplogroups do not tell much about you. You can be I1 African.
I am talking about autosomal DNA. When autosomal DNA was compared, Scandinavians (together with some Baltics) were matched closest with those Western Hunter Gatherers.

It is true that Slavs crossed the Danube on eastern Balkans, but that DOESN'T MEAN they came from Moldavia and Ukraine. What emperor Constantine says in De Administrando Imperio about where Slavic Serbs and Croats came from:





Where did they live:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/White_serbia_white_croatia01.png/640px-White_serbia_white_croatia01.png





To sum up: It is clear that Slavs that settled in Yugoslavia came from WESTERN Slavic lands, and NOT from Ukraine. As we know, I2a Din is practically absent in western Slavic lands, and since Slavic Yugoslavs did not come from Ukraine, it becomes perfectly clear that Slavs are NOT the ones who spread I2a Din, but the Goths.
Yugoslav languages are also closer to western ones than to eastern Slavic ones.
It is clear who spread I2a Din.



White Serbia do not exist ...

Tomenable
04-03-15, 22:37
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280

Not according to Underhill et. al. 2014:

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png


There is more than enough genetic, historical, anthropological and cultural proof.

There is no way to distinguish Western Slavic and Eastern Germanic people anthropologically.

They were very similar to each other racially. Summary and all graphs below taken from:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

(http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf)======================

I will post graphs in next post below.

Tomenable
04-03-15, 23:19
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280

Not according to Underhill's study from 2014 - see the chart below (appendix to his 2014 study):

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png

You quoted data from 2013, so Underhill's data is more up-to-date because it's from 2014.

==================================

clintCG - you wrote that there is an "anthropological proof" that some South Slavs are descended from West Slavs, and other South Slavs from Goths.

But how is it possible considering that West Slavic and East Germanic people (including Goths) were practically indistinguishable in anthropological terms ???

At least according to this 2008 study by the Institute of Anthropology of the University of Poznan:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

The Institute (website in English): http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/html/indexe.html

http://s2.postimg.org/fbi08lb3d/Antropologia_Summ.png (http://postimage.org/)

And several anthropological graph from the same study:

http://s17.postimg.org/ayax3yatr/Antropologia1.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s1.postimg.org/odx4w23v3/Antropologia2.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s2.postimg.org/j1qtsz1pl/Antropologia3.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s29.postimg.org/whduigkpj/Antropologia4.png (http://postimage.org/)
image upload no size limit (http://postimage.org/)

http://s22.postimg.org/nf19hep8x/Antropologia5.png (http://postimage.org/)
upload images free (http://postimage.org/)

http://s29.postimg.org/axnb20f6f/Antropologia6.png (http://postimage.org/)
uploading pictures (http://postimage.org/)

http://s30.postimg.org/71kyezf81/Antropologia7.png (http://postimage.org/)
upload gifs (http://postimage.org/)

http://s14.postimg.org/uc9n12gg1/Antropologia8.png (http://postimage.org/)
windows 7 screenshot (http://postimage.org/app.php)

http://s1.postimg.org/6xggh12xb/Antropologia9.png (http://postimage.org/)
post images (http://postimage.org/)

Tomenable
04-03-15, 23:21
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280

Not according to Underhill's study from 2014 - see the chart below (appendix to his 2014 study):

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png

You quoted data from 2013, so Underhill's data is more up-to-date because it's from 2014.

==================================

clintCG - you wrote that there is an "anthropological proof" that some South Slavs are descended from West Slavs, and other South Slavs from Goths.

But how is it possible considering that West Slavic and East Germanic people (including Goths) were practically indistinguishable in anthropological terms ???

At least according to this 2008 study by the Institute of Anthropology of the University of Poznan:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

The Institute (website in English): http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/html/indexe.html

http://s2.postimg.org/fbi08lb3d/Antropologia_Summ.png (http://postimage.org/)

And several anthropological graph from the same study:

http://s17.postimg.org/ayax3yatr/Antropologia1.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s1.postimg.org/odx4w23v3/Antropologia2.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s2.postimg.org/j1qtsz1pl/Antropologia3.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s29.postimg.org/whduigkpj/Antropologia4.png (http://postimage.org/)
image upload no size limit (http://postimage.org/)

http://s22.postimg.org/nf19hep8x/Antropologia5.png (http://postimage.org/)
upload images free (http://postimage.org/)

http://s29.postimg.org/axnb20f6f/Antropologia6.png (http://postimage.org/)
uploading pictures (http://postimage.org/)

http://s30.postimg.org/71kyezf81/Antropologia7.png (http://postimage.org/)
upload gifs (http://postimage.org/)

http://s14.postimg.org/uc9n12gg1/Antropologia8.png (http://postimage.org/)
windows 7 screenshot (http://postimage.org/app.php)

http://s1.postimg.org/6xggh12xb/Antropologia9.png (http://postimage.org/)
post images (http://postimage.org/)

Tomenable
04-03-15, 23:21
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280

Not according to Underhill's study from 2014 - see the chart below (appendix to his 2014 study):

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png

You quoted data from 2013, so Underhill's data is more up-to-date because it's from 2014.

==================================

clintCG - you wrote that there is an "anthropological proof" (do you mean biological anthropology?) that some South Slavs are descended from West Slavs, and other South Slavs from Goths.

But how is it possible considering that North Slavic people (West and East Slavs) and East Germanic people (including Goths) were practically indistinguishable in anthropological terms ???

At least according to this 2008 study by the Institute of Anthropology of the University of Poznan:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

The Institute (website in English): http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/html/indexe.html

http://s2.postimg.org/fbi08lb3d/Antropologia_Summ.png (http://postimage.org/)

And several anthropological graphs from the same study:

http://s17.postimg.org/ayax3yatr/Antropologia1.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s1.postimg.org/odx4w23v3/Antropologia2.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s2.postimg.org/j1qtsz1pl/Antropologia3.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s29.postimg.org/whduigkpj/Antropologia4.png (http://postimage.org/)
image upload no size limit (http://postimage.org/)

http://s22.postimg.org/nf19hep8x/Antropologia5.png (http://postimage.org/)
upload images free (http://postimage.org/)

http://s29.postimg.org/axnb20f6f/Antropologia6.png (http://postimage.org/)
uploading pictures (http://postimage.org/)

http://s30.postimg.org/71kyezf81/Antropologia7.png (http://postimage.org/)
upload gifs (http://postimage.org/)

http://s14.postimg.org/uc9n12gg1/Antropologia8.png (http://postimage.org/)
windows 7 screenshot (http://postimage.org/app.php)

http://s1.postimg.org/6xggh12xb/Antropologia9.png (http://postimage.org/)
post images (http://postimage.org/)

hrvat22
05-03-15, 06:47
Not according to Underhill's study from 2014 - see the chart below (appendix to his 2014 study):

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png

You quoted data from 2013, so Underhill's data is more up-to-date because it's from 2014.

==================================

clintCG - you wrote that there is an "anthropological proof" (do you mean biological anthropology?) that some South Slavs are descended from West Slavs, and other South Slavs from Goths.

But how is it possible considering that North Slavic people (West and East Slavs) and East Germanic people (including Goths) were practically indistinguishable in anthropological terms ???

At least according to this 2008 study by the Institute of Anthropology of the University of Poznan:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

The Institute (website in English): http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/html/indexe.html

http://s2.postimg.org/fbi08lb3d/Antropologia_Summ.png (http://postimage.org/)

And several anthropological graphs from the same study:

http://s17.postimg.org/ayax3yatr/Antropologia1.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s1.postimg.org/odx4w23v3/Antropologia2.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s2.postimg.org/j1qtsz1pl/Antropologia3.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s29.postimg.org/whduigkpj/Antropologia4.png (http://postimage.org/)
image upload no size limit (http://postimage.org/)

http://s22.postimg.org/nf19hep8x/Antropologia5.png (http://postimage.org/)
upload images free (http://postimage.org/)

http://s29.postimg.org/axnb20f6f/Antropologia6.png (http://postimage.org/)
uploading pictures (http://postimage.org/)

http://s30.postimg.org/71kyezf81/Antropologia7.png (http://postimage.org/)
upload gifs (http://postimage.org/)

http://s14.postimg.org/uc9n12gg1/Antropologia8.png (http://postimage.org/)
windows 7 screenshot (http://postimage.org/app.php)

http://s1.postimg.org/6xggh12xb/Antropologia9.png (http://postimage.org/)
post images (http://postimage.org/)


This information for the Croatian R1a is from the year 2005...

http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/22/10/1964.full


.

Croats mainland 108...

Therefore these data that you mention are only for one part of Croatia and they are out of date....

hrvat22
05-03-15, 06:49
Not according to Underhill's study from 2014 - see the chart below (appendix to his 2014 study):

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png

You quoted data from 2013, so Underhill's data is more up-to-date because it's from 2014.

==================================

clintCG - you wrote that there is an "anthropological proof" (do you mean biological anthropology?) that some South Slavs are descended from West Slavs, and other South Slavs from Goths.

But how is it possible considering that North Slavic people (West and East Slavs) and East Germanic people (including Goths) were practically indistinguishable in anthropological terms ???

At least according to this 2008 study by the Institute of Anthropology of the University of Poznan:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

The Institute (website in English): http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/html/indexe.html

http://s2.postimg.org/fbi08lb3d/Antropologia_Summ.png (http://postimage.org/)

And several anthropological graphs from the same study:

http://s17.postimg.org/ayax3yatr/Antropologia1.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s1.postimg.org/odx4w23v3/Antropologia2.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s2.postimg.org/j1qtsz1pl/Antropologia3.png (http://postimage.org/)

http://s29.postimg.org/whduigkpj/Antropologia4.png (http://postimage.org/)
image upload no size limit (http://postimage.org/)

http://s22.postimg.org/nf19hep8x/Antropologia5.png (http://postimage.org/)
upload images free (http://postimage.org/)

http://s29.postimg.org/axnb20f6f/Antropologia6.png (http://postimage.org/)
uploading pictures (http://postimage.org/)

http://s30.postimg.org/71kyezf81/Antropologia7.png (http://postimage.org/)
upload gifs (http://postimage.org/)

http://s14.postimg.org/uc9n12gg1/Antropologia8.png (http://postimage.org/)
windows 7 screenshot (http://postimage.org/app.php)

http://s1.postimg.org/6xggh12xb/Antropologia9.png (http://postimage.org/)
post images (http://postimage.org/)


http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/22/10/1964.full

hrvat22
05-03-15, 06:53
(http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/22/10/1964.full)
Tomenable (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/members/49064-Tomenable)


Not according to Underhill's study from 2014 - see the chart below (appendix to his 2014 study):


You quoted data from 2013, so Underhill's data is more up-to-date because it's from 2014.


http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/22/10/1964.full


Croats mainland 108 ..

This research for Croatian R1a haplotype is from year 2005 ...

Sile
05-03-15, 07:05
Well, that is the best place to cross. There are not many places to cross, due to mountains:

Dark red - mountain ranges
Light green - best crossings

http://s27.postimg.org/rmxudxgub/Places_to_cross.png

And the Goths didn't cross on their own, but the Romans opened their gates to them (refugees):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcuVJUKZvx4

the bridge was constructed by the Romans under Trajan and maintained until the goths crossed over it. it was used to aid the fleeing dacians from the goths

Tomenable
05-03-15, 11:28
Venetian doge Andrea Dandolo writes about one mission of Neretvians in Venetia in 830. : "...Quia a Gothis originem traxerunt", which means "...which are descended from Goths".

That's typical for such sources. Medieval writers often would read ancient historians, see who lived where according to those ancient sources, and then assume that Medieval inhabitants were direct descendants of ancient inhabitants. Adam von Bremen (and many other Medieval historians and chroniclers) wrote for example that West Slavs - including Czechs and Poles - are descendants of Vandals:

"Sclavania igitur, amplissima Germaniae provintia, a Winulis incolitur, qui olim dicti sum Wandali; decies maior esse fertur nostra Saxonia, presertim si Boemiam et eos, qui trans Oddaram sunt, Polanos, quaia nec habitu nec lingua discrepant, in partem adiecreris Sclavaniae."

Which translates:

"Slavania, the biggest of provinces of Germania, is inhabited by the Winnils, who were formerly called Vandals. It is much bigger than our Saxony, especially when it includes the Czechs and the Poles across the Oder, since they are no different in customs and language".

Some other Medieval sources also claimed that Poles are descendants of Sarmatians and / or Scythians.

According to Alberic of Trois-Fontaines the invasion of Gaul by Vandals and Alans was led by Craco, duke of Cracow:

"413 quaedam pars Vandalorum cum Alanis Gallias infestavit duce Craco qui fuit dux Cracoviae."

Which translates:

"In 413 AD Vandals and Alans led by chief Craco, who was duke of Cracow, were plundering Gaul."


This research for Croatian R1a haplotype is from year 2005

OK, maybe the sample was collected in 2005. But it was tested for subclades in 2014.

At least we know where was this sample collected from (the map from your link shows locations).

How about Rozhansky's sample from 2013 - where in Croatia does it come from ???

Tomenable
05-03-15, 11:40
BTW - someone wrote here, that Goths came from Southern Poland. This is wrong.

If anything, from Northern Poland. Though there are also theories, that not from Poland.

hrvat22
05-03-15, 11:54
Tomenable (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/members/49064-Tomenable)




How about Rozhansky's sample from 2013 - where in Croatia does it come from ???

These are the latest research for Croats with a sample of about 1100 people...

http://www.draganprimorac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Croatian-national-reference-Y-STR-haplotype-database_.-Molecular-biology-reports-2012.pdf


Rozhansky' has its own database for R1a haplotype but there are also data on public DNA projects for R1a....

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/dinaric_alps_dna/default.aspx?section=ymap

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/r1a/default.aspx?section=ymap

clintCG
05-03-15, 13:43
BTW - someone wrote here, that Goths came from Southern Poland. This is wrong.
If anything, from Northern Poland. Though there are also theories, that not from Poland.

Nope... Goths did come from Northern Poland, but settled in western Ukraine/southern Poland very early. According to Coon and his work "The Races of Europe" Gothic skeletons from Chersonese region in Crimea are dated very early- from 100 B.C to 100 A.D., then you can imagine how early they came to southern Poland and western Ukraine.


That's typical for such sources. Medieval writers often would read ancient historians, see who lived where according to those ancient sources, and then assume that Medieval inhabitants were direct descendants of ancient inhabitants.
No. Most historians (for example Marko Vego: "Povijest humske zemlje") assume that this particular Venetian used "Historia Salonitana" and "Chronicles of Priest of Duklja" as his sources for claiming Gothic origin of Narentines, and those are not ones that were composed according to ancient historians, but according to folk traditions which tell about Gothic origin.

Those chroniclers are not of foreign origin, like Adam von Bremen is, when he writes about Poles. Those chroniclers are of our (ex-Yu) origin and they tell about our origin, not about someone else's. I doubt there is single Polish chronicler that claims non-Slavic origin of Poles, while there are plenty of YU chroniclers that tell of our Gothic origin, based on folk tradition and not on foreign ancient historians.


Nope. First of all, Croats and Serbs came to the Balkans later than other Slavs (for example Slovenes came before Croats).
As for White Croats and White Serbs (Sorbs) - they share common ancestors with Balkan Serbs and Balkan Croats.
But they did not come to the Balkans from Germany. They split into two groups - one migrated to the Balkans, one to Germany.
Moreover Sorbs in Germany are mixed with other Slavic tribes (Lusatians among others), and so are Serbs in the Balkans.

What you say is OK. However, I challenge you to find any historical source which would prove that Slavs came to Balkans from eastern Slavic lands rather than from western ones- that would explain your theory of I2a Din arrival, which is not the case.


West Slavs are about ~10% I2a-Din, with the concentration increasing as you get closer to the Balkans (Slovaks are ~15% I2a-Din). Far from "practically absent." How much I2a-Din do Germanic peoples have, meanwhile? I'd say "practically absent," outside of places with historic Slavic input.

I'd agree with the summary that I2a-Din migrated into the Balkans from the direction of Poland, rather than directly from Ukraine, by the way. The clines hint at that.

You misunderstood me. I agreed with Tomenable that I2a Din came from western Ukraine/s.Poland to Balkans. But not with Slavs- it was with Goths.

You can not compare hg concentration of modern north and west Germanic peoples with hg conc of ancient east Germanics.
For example, Scandinavians have 1/3 of R1a while other Germanics have almost none. Does it mean that it is not Germanic? No. It just means it is unique for them. Just like I2a Din is common among east Germanic peoples and not common among other Germanic peoples.

The fact that I2a Din concentration is 15 percent in Slovaks does not mean much. It is only because it is so close to Balkans, because Balkan Slavs often settled in other countries to escape Ottomans and their invasion. Hungarians have 16 percent of I2a Din too, and they are not Slavic.
Other west Slavs have significantly lesser I2a Din conc than Slovaks.

Some of you explain things with "pure coincidence" too much.

I already proved that none of eastern Slavs came to Balkans.
Only western Slavs came. And that can not explain so high conc of I2a Din in Dinaric Alps.
If you compare population and I2a Din concs of west Slavs you will see that they, on average, do not have more that 7-8 percent of it.
Let's take your claims that I2a Din was brought by Slavs as right-
And then explain me: was it "pure coincidence" that Herzegovinians and west Montenegrins increased their I2a Din from 7 percent to 70 percent when they got to Balkans, while at same time reducing R1a from 60 percent to 5 percent? No, it is theoretically impossible.
It is also theoretically impossible that I2a Din decreasing and R1a increasing as we head from Dinaric Alps to plains of Yugoslavia is "pure coincidence".
Since Balkan Slavs are descended from west Slavs it is clear that it was not them who are responsible for a huge concentration of I2a Din here.
On other hand it is much more logical that Goths brought it with them from Ukraine, and that small part of them that got enslaved by Huns remained in Ukraine and so we got their 20 percent of I2a Din...


you wrote that there is an "anthropological proof" (do you mean biological anthropology?) that some South Slavs are descended from West Slavs, and other South Slavs from Goths.

But how is it possible considering that North Slavic people (West and East Slavs) and East Germanic people (including Goths) were practically indistinguishable in anthropological terms ???

Comparing skulls and skeletons is much more unreliable than comparing living descendants.
Carleton S. Coon found that Dinaric Alps "Slavs" differ much from other Slavs.
You will find that in greatest work of racial anthropology "The Races of Europe" (1939)
He also found out that many of them are of racial types that are not found in any Slavic people, but that are very frequent among Germanic peoples.

Read this part: http://theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-XII12.htm

What he says about Herzegovina Croats:
"The Catholics are likewise the tallest and the lightest skinned in Bosnia; being the oldest population in the region in point of conversion, and the least affected by outside influences, the Catholic element preserves both a pre-Slavic and a pre-Turkish racial configuration"

For Montenegrins, as you will see if you read it, he says that they are tallest and heaviest Europeans, and that they differ in many, many traits from your typical Slavs.

Most common racial type in Montenegro is Borreby, which is non-existent in Slavic lands and pretty common in Germanic ones:
http://theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe-map9a.jpg

Ike
05-03-15, 14:07
So when did those Goths come and what language did they speak?

Tomenable
05-03-15, 17:57
You will find that in greatest work of racial anthropology "The Races of Europe" (1939)
This (from 1939 - good year! :O) is not "the greatest work of racial anthropology". It is obsolete by now.

And classifications such as "Borreby", etc., are also obsolete, since they were arbitrarily defined categories.

Why don't you check graphs from the 2008 study that I linked. It is using modern methods:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

http://s2.postimg.org/fbi08lb3d/Antropologia_Summ.png

I posted those graphs here:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26903-How-did-I2a-Din-get-to-the-Balkans?p=451305&viewfull=1#post451305

And here more about methodology:

http://archeowiesci.pl/2008/11/12/od-kiedy-slowianie-zyja-nad-wisla-i-odra/


Prof. Janusz Piontek made a demographical simulation (...) Thereafter he researched osteological material - examining ancient bones. On this basis he estimated what was the dynamics of demographic developments during the period of Roman influences, and during the early Middle Ages. He compared data concerning Wielbark and Przeworsk cultures and that concerning the early Middle Ages. (...) Piontek's results are consistent with results of research by dr Robert Dąbrowski, who collected rich craniological material from the period of Roman influences and from the early Middle Ages. He used the method of craniological distances of Mahalanobis, as a method taking into account individual skulls (...) It turned out, that skulls of people representing Wielbark, Przeworsk and Chernyakhov cultures were very similar to early Medieval skulls of Western Slavic populations. (...) Similarities were extraordinarily high.

- We anthropologists do not claim, that we are explaining political, historical, and ethnic-cultural transformations. - said prof. Piontek (...)

Because some of Polish anthropologists and even archaeologists question the possibility of researching genetic similarities between human populations based on craniological and odontological features (comparing skulls, bones and teeth), prof. Piontek presented examples from recent global literature which debunk their assertions. He cited several specific examples from literature on the subject, concerning analyses of ethnogenesis based on nonmetrical features - performed by scientists from Japan. Also commonly accepted are studies on teeth, in order to prove or disprove morphological continuity of population in time - for example research by prof. Joel irish concerning the continuity/discontinuity of settlement in Egypt. Piontek proved that standards he used in his studies on ethnogenesis of Slavs are in agreement with standards accepted today in the scientific world. (...)

- Lack of intergroup differences between populations from times of Roman influences and later West Slavic populations, in terms of craniological and odontological features, testifies to the similar genetic structure of both populations - prof. Piontek finished his lecture.

sparkey
05-03-15, 20:14
You can not compare hg concentration of modern north and west Germanic peoples with hg conc of ancient east Germanics.
For example, Scandinavians have 1/3 of R1a while other Germanics have almost none. Does it mean that it is not Germanic? No. It just means it is unique for them. Just like I2a Din is common among east Germanic peoples and not common among other Germanic peoples.

If we don't have ancient samples, the best we have are contemporary populations. I absolutely expect East Germanic peoples to have had different haplogroup concentrations than modern North and West Germanic peoples, but I find it highly unlikely that their dominant haplogroup would be effectively absent (outside of areas with Slavic input) in the way that I2a-Din is among modern North and West Germanic peoples. R1a isn't comparable to I2a-Din here. It does range in concentration among Germanic peoples from something like 5% (England/Netherlands) to something like 25% (Norway/Iceland) but it never drops off completely. Unlike I2a-Din, R1a (specifically subclades like L664 and Z284) absolutely looks like it could be common to Germanic peoples.

clintCG
05-03-15, 23:00
This (from 1939 - good year! :O) is not "the greatest work of racial anthropology". It is obsolete by now.

And classifications such as "Borreby", etc., are also obsolete, since they were arbitrarily defined categories.

Why don't you check graphs from the 2008 study that I linked. It is using modern methods

Obsolete? How come?
Racial anthropology has been drastically politicized since the end of world war, and since then anthropologists began stopping with any racial classifications defining it as "racist" and denying existence of subracial types in Europe.
One of best anthropologists of his time came and determined that in this area, in many cases people are much closer to Germanic than to Slavic racial types. For example you can just compare statures of European people and notice similarity there as well.

And to be honest that study you posted does not prove nothing. It just proves similarity (to some extent) between peoples of Wielbark and Chernyakov cultures. And to claim that Wielbark culture is east Germanic and Chernyakov Slavic is utter nonsense. There were lots of Goths in Chernyakov area also- they reached Crimea in 1st century A.D and possibly even before, so it is no wonder that people from those two cultures are similar- both were inhabited by Goths. Only later one was inhabited by some Slavs and Dacians as well.


If we don't have ancient samples, the best we have are contemporary populations. I absolutely expect East Germanic peoples to have had different haplogroup concentrations than modern North and West Germanic peoples, but I find it highly unlikely that their dominant haplogroup would be effectively absent (outside of areas with Slavic input) in the way that I2a-Din is among modern North and West Germanic peoples. R1a isn't comparable to I2a-Din here. It does range in concentration among Germanic peoples from something like 5% (England/Netherlands) to something like 25% (Norway/Iceland) but it never drops off completely. Unlike I2a-Din, R1a (specifically subclades like L664 and Z284) absolutely looks like it could be common to Germanic peoples.
I do not think we can compare these two cases. Goths (and other east Germanics) split from others much, much earlier. As I said there was Gothic presence in Ukraine even in 1st century B.C, and they came from northern Poland. I don't want to claim that Goths didn't come from Scandinavia- since all Germanic peoples eventually came from there, but I would not place their arrival from Scandinavia to continental Europe sooner than 400 B.C.
On other hand- Germanic ancestors of Englishmen, Angles and Saxons, came to England from Denmark much later, in 5th century, so it is perfectly normal that they have some Germanic R1a (in their case 4.5%, and keep in mind that some might be of Slavic origin as well) like Scandinavians do.
Other Germanic peoples, for example Germans have practically none of Germanic R1a (Z284 and similar), and their R1a comes from Slavic sources.
So I think R1a and I2a Din are comparable when it comes to majority of Germanic peoples.

Tomenable
06-03-15, 00:12
What you say is OK. However, I challenge you to find any historical source which would prove that Slavs came to Balkans from eastern Slavic lands rather than from western ones- that would explain your theory of I2a Din arrival, which is not the case.

All sources I have read say that the first wave of Slavs came from eastern Slavic lands, across Romania. Coming from western Slavic lands would mean going right across territories inhabited until year 568 AD by Langobards and Gepids - Austria, Hungary & southern Moravia. Moreover, we have a precise description of the area inhabited by Slavs in Byzantine neighbourhood around year 500 AD. Procopius (VII: 14, 30) wrote that they lived north of the Danube. Jordanes (V: 30-37) provided even more details, as he wrote (V: 34-35):

"(34) Within these rivers lies Dacia, encircled by the lofty Alps as by a crown. Near their left ridge, which inclines toward the north, and beginning at the source of the Vistula, the populous race of the Venethi dwell, occupying a great expanse of land. Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes. (35) The abode of the Sclaveni extends from the city of Noviodunum and the lake called Mursianus to the Danaster, and northward as far as the Vistula. (...) The Antes (...) dwelling above the curve of the sea of Pontus, spread from the Danaster to the Danaper, rivers that are many days' journey apart."

Marek Dulnicz, "The Lombard Headman Called Ildigis and the Slavs" (in English), identifies those geographical locations as follows:

http://opac.regesta-imperii.de/lang_en/autoren.php?name=Dulinicz%2C+Marek

http://s23.postimg.org/ilmk9f6q3/Slavs_500_AD.png

1) Noviodunum - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noviodunum_%28castra%29

2) lake Mursianus:

"Lake Mursianus was in fact, according to the majority of researchers, the vast marshes at the juncture of the Drava and the Danube; (...) the lake or marshes in question might have extended as far as to the juncture of the Tisza and the Danube. The lake’s name was derived from the town of Mursa (present-day Osijek)."

3) Danaster = Dniester river

4) Danaper = Dnieper river

5) "Alps" = Carpathians

Source of the Vistula is located close to the present-day Bielsko-Biała: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bielsko-Bia%C5%82a

And "the curve of the sea of Pontus [Black Sea]" was the coastline (which forms a nice curve) in the region of present-day Odessa.

Basing on that info I made a map showing the extent of Slavs in 500 AD (or rather 2 of their 3 branches - Sclaveni and Antes):

As described by Jordanes & Procopius:

http://s15.postimg.org/y4ciscwd7/Slavs_500_AD_b.png

Let's also add - because this is important - that both the Sclaveni and the Antes migrated to the Balkans together.

One of maps I posted before shows that (it shows areas were those groups lived mixed before crossing the Danube).

It was - more or less - this area:

http://s14.postimg.org/7u6vch8j5/Slavs_500_AD_c.png

Tomenable
06-03-15, 00:31
And to be honest that study you posted does not prove nothing. It just proves similarity (to some extent) between peoples of Wielbark and Chernyakov cultures. And to claim that Wielbark culture is east Germanic and Chernyakov Slavic is utter nonsense. There were lots of Goths in Chernyakov area also- they reached Crimea in 1st century A.D and possibly even before, so it is no wonder that people from those two cultures are similar- both were inhabited by Goths. Only later one was inhabited by some Slavs and Dacians as well.

Well, check that post again - I counted both Wielbark and Chernyakov cultures as Gothic (and Przeworsk culture as Vandal).

But that study shows that Wielbark / Chernyakov / Przeworsk were all similar to Slavic populations who lived in later times.

There was closer similarity between North Slavic and East Germanic people, than between East Germanic and West/North Germanic.

Each of those populations perhaps absorbed different Non-IE substrates, but East Germanics and North Slavs absorbed similar substrates. And also they had a common IE origin, there was even a proto Balto-Slavo-Germanic language according to some researchers.

Tomenable
06-03-15, 10:30
Now some excerpts about Slavic invasion of the Balkans (they did not move in as "peaceful farmers", contrary to what some users claimed):

Procopius, Book V, XXVII, 134:

"(...) This exploit, then, was accomplished by the Goths on the third day after they were repulsed in the assault on the wall. But twenty days after the city and harbor of Portus were captured, Martinus and Valerian arrived, bringing with them sixteen hundred horsemen, the most of whom were Huns and Sclaveni and Antae, who are settled above the Ister River not far from its banks. (...)"

Procopius about Slavic invaders capturing and enslavic a lot of Romans:

Procopius, Book VII, XIII - describing events in year 545 AD:

"(...) For a great throng of the barbarians, the Sclaveni, had, as it happened, recently crossed the Ister, plundering the adjoining country and enslaved a very great number of Romans. (...)"

Procopius of Caesarea:

"(...) In Illyria and Thracia, from the Ionian Gulf to Byzantine surrounding cities, where Hellas and Chersonese regions are situated, (...) the Sklavenes and the Antes, penetrating practically every year since Justinian administering the Roman Empire, were inflicting irreversible damage to their inhabitants. In each invasion I estimate 200,000 Romans were either took as prisoners or killed (...)"


Procopius about Roman attempts to stop the Slavic invasion:

"(...) the Empire wasn't able to find just one only man just as brave to undertake this task. (...)"

Pope Gregory I in a letter to Exarch of Italy from year 599:

"(...) It deeply afflicts and disquiets me the Slavic nation that menace us. It afflicts me from what I already suffer from you, it disquiets me because they have already started to penetrate into the Italic peninsula through Istria. (...)"

And according to Priscus of Panium, in 610 Slavic tribes flooded into Greece.

Procopius of Caesarea:

"(...) Nay further, they [the Slavs] do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair are neither very fair or blond, nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type (...)"

Procopius of Caesarea:

"(...) In more or less the same time [549 - 550] a Slavic army (...) gathered itself together and after crossing without encountering any resistance from anyone the river Ister [Danube], and later with similar ease the river Heuros, it divided itself for two parts. (...) Commanders of Roman garrisons in Illyria and Thrace fought against both those parts and even though they had already separated from each other, the Romans suffered - contrary to their expectations - a defeat, and some of them fell dead on the spot, while others found salvation in escaping. (...) After all garrisons had suffered such defeats at the hands of either one or the other one of barbarian armies, one of enemy bands fought against troops of Asbados. He was a member of Emperor Justinian's personal guard (...) and he led a numerous and elite force of cavalry, which had been garrisoned for a long time inside the Thracian stronghold of Tdzurulon. But also they were forced to retreat by the Slavs and most of them, shamefully escaping, got slaughtered, while Asbados himself was captured and temporarily left alive, but soon after that the Slavs skinned him alive and threw him into a burning campfire. After that the Slavs were plundering all neighbouring Thracian and Illyrian lands without any obstacles and both of their two units captured many strongholds. (...) And those who had defeated Asbados, later plundered in turn everything up to the sea coast, and captured in an assault the coastal city of Toperus (...) And they slaughtered 25,000 men, plundered everything, and enslaved all the children and all the women. (...)"

John of Ephesus:

"(...) In third year after the death of Emperor Justin, during the reign of victorious Tiberius, the damned nation of the Slavs has risen, and marching through entire Hellas, through lands of Thessaly and Thrace, captured many cities and strongholds, plundered, burned and robbed, seized the land and settled there with full ease, without fear, like in their own land. (...) they were plundering the country, burning it and robbing, as far as the Great Walls [of Constantinople], and this is how they captured many thousands of cattle, as well as many other kinds of booty. (...) Until today, that is until year 584, they still continue to live in peace in lands of the Rhomaioi, without fear and concern, plundering, murdering and burning, getting rich and highjacking gold and silver, capturing horses and plenty of weapons; and they have learned to fight better than the Rhomaioi. (...)"

Menander Protector:

"(...) About the fourth year of the reign of Caesar Tiberius Constantine, some hundred thousand Slavs broke into Thrace, and pillaged that and many other regions. As Greece was being laid waste by the Slavs, with trouble liable to flare up anywhere, and as Tiberius had at his disposal by no means sufficient forces, he sent a delegation to the Khagan of the Avars. (...)"

Strategikon of Maurice:

"(...) They do not keep prisoners in perpetual slavery like other peoples, but they demarcate for them a limited period of time, after which they give them a choice: they can return home after purchasing their freedom, or stay among them as free people and friends. (...)"

Jordanes:

"(...) These people, as we started to say at the beginning of our account or catalogue of nations, though off-shoots from one stock, have now three names, that is, Venedi, Antes and Sclaveni. (...) they now rage in war far and wide, in punishment for our sins (...) Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes. (...)"

Procopius of Caesarea:

"(...) Belisarius was eager to capture alive one of the men of note among the enemy, in order that he might learn what the reason might be why the barbarians were holding out in their desperate situation. And Valerian promised readily to perform such a service for him. For there were some men in his command, he said, from the nation of the Sklaveni, who are accustomed to conceal themselves behind a small rock or any bush which may happen to be near and pounce upon an enemy. In fact, they are constantly practising this in their native haunts along the river Ister, both on the Romans and on the barbarians as well. (...)"

Abraham ben Jacob (a 10th century Sephardic Jewish traveller from Muslim Spain):

"(...) Slavic countries extend from the Mediterranean Sea to the Northern Ocean. (...) Generally speaking, Slavs are warlike and violent, and if not their internal discord and lack of unity, no other nation would be able to match them in strength. (...)"

=================================

And here about the arrival of the Croats (but it was much later - not during the 500s, but during the 600s):

Constantine Porphyrogennetos, "De Administrando Imperio":

"(...) their ancestors were Pagan Croats and Serbs, known also as White [Croats and Serbs]. Great Croatia, called also White [Croatia], until today is still Pagan, just like neighbouring [Lusatian / West Slavic] Serbs [Sorbs] (...)"

And another excerpt - "De Administrando Imperio":

"(...) Therefore everyone, who would like to do research about Dalmatia, can read herein about the way how the Slavic peoples took it. The Croats with their families came to Dalmatia and found the Avars in possesson of that land. After fighting against each other for some time, the Croats defeated the Avars, partially murdered them and partially forced them to submissiveness. Since that moment the country was seized by the Croats. (...)"

=====================
=====================

However, I would agree with you that large part of ancestry of South Slavs comes from Pre-Slavic inhabitants.

This seems to be confirmed by the way how Slavs treated captives and prisoners of war - they often allowed them to join their communities.

As Strategikon of Maurice wrote:

"(...) They [Slavs] do not keep prisoners in perpetual slavery like other peoples, but they demarcate for them a limited period of time, after which they give them a choice: they can return home after purchasing their freedom, or stay among them as free people and friends. (...)"

And now let's quote "Phenotype of old Slavs, 6th to 10th centuries", by Łukasz M. Stanaszek:

http://www.archeo.uw.edu.pl/swarch/Swiatowit-r2001-t3_%2844%29-nB-s205-212.pdf

http://s4.postimg.org/i64k6ay25/Slavs.png

However, there are considerable differences in pigmentation between various South Slavs.

The most dark-pigmented are probably Bulgarians - apparently the most strongly hybridised (haplogroup frequencies of Bulgarians confirm this).

Tomenable
06-03-15, 10:31
Now some excerpts about Slavic invasion of the Balkans (they did not move in as "peaceful farmers", contrary to what some users claimed):

Procopius, Book V, XXVII, 134:

"(...) This exploit, then, was accomplished by the Goths on the third day after they were repulsed in the assault on the wall. But twenty days after the city and harbor of Portus were captured, Martinus and Valerian arrived, bringing with them sixteen hundred horsemen, the most of whom were Huns and Sclaveni and Antae, who [Sclaveni and Antae] are settled above the Ister River not far from its banks. (...)"

Procopius about Slavic invaders capturing and enslavic a lot of Romans:

Procopius, Book VII, XIII - describing events in year 545 AD:

"(...) For a great throng of the barbarians, the Sclaveni, had, as it happened, recently crossed the Ister, plundering the adjoining country and enslaved a very great number of Romans. (...)"

Procopius of Caesarea:

"(...) In Illyria and Thracia, from the Ionian Gulf to Byzantine surrounding cities, where Hellas and Chersonese regions are situated, (...) the Sklavenes and the Antes, penetrating practically every year since Justinian administering the Roman Empire, were inflicting irreversible damage to their inhabitants. In each invasion I estimate 200,000 Romans were either took as prisoners or killed (...)"

Procopius about Roman attempts to stop the Slavic invasion:

"(...) the Empire wasn't able to find just one only man just as brave to undertake this task. (...)"

Pope Gregory I in a letter to Exarch of Italy from year 599:

"(...) It deeply afflicts and disquiets me the Slavic nation that menace us. It afflicts me from what I already suffer from you, it disquiets me because they have already started to penetrate into the Italic peninsula through Istria.(...)"

And according to Priscus of Panium, in 610 Slavic tribes flooded into Greece.

Procopius of Caesarea:

"(...) Nay further, they [the Slavs] do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair are neither very fair or blond, nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type (...)"

Procopius of Caesarea:

"(...) In more or less the same time [549 - 550] a Slavic army (...) gathered itself together and after crossing without encountering any resistance from anyone the river Ister [Danube], and later with similar ease the river Heuros, it divided itself for two parts. (...) Commanders of Roman garrisons in Illyria and Thrace fought against both those parts and even though they had already separated from each other, the Romans suffered - contrary to their expectations - a defeat, and some of them fell dead on the spot, while others found salvation in escaping. (...) After all garrisons had suffered such defeats at the hands of either one or the other one of barbarian armies, one of enemy bands fought against troops of Asbados. He was a member of Emperor Justinian's personal guard (...) and he led a numerous and elite force of cavalry, which had been garrisoned for a long time inside the Thracian stronghold of Tdzurulon. But also they were forced to retreat by the Slavs and most of them, shamefully escaping, got slaughtered, while Asbados himself was captured and temporarily left alive, but soon after that the Slavs skinned him alive and threw him into a burning campfire. After that the Slavs were plundering all neighbouring Thracian and Illyrian lands without any obstacles and both of their two units captured many strongholds. (...) And those who had defeated Asbados, later plundered in turn everything up to the sea coast, and captured in an assault the coastal city of Toperus (...) And they slaughtered 25,000 men, plundered everything, and enslaved all the children and all the women. (...)"

John of Ephesus:

"(...) In third year after the death of Emperor Justin, during the reign of victorious Tiberius, the damned nation of the Slavs has risen, and marching through entire Hellas, through lands of Thessaly and Thrace, captured many cities and strongholds, plundered, burned and robbed, seized the land and settled there with full ease, without fear, like in their own land. (...) they were plundering the country, burning it and robbing, as far as the Great Walls [of Constantinople], and this is how they captured many thousands of cattle, as well as many other kinds of booty. (...) Until today, that is until year 584, they still continue to live in peace in lands of the Rhomaioi, without fear and concern, plundering, murdering and burning, getting rich and highjacking gold and silver, capturing horses and plenty of weapons; and they have learned to fight better than the Rhomaioi. (...)"

Menander Protector:

"(...) About the fourth year of the reign of Caesar Tiberius Constantine, some hundred thousand Slavs broke into Thrace, and pillaged that and many other regions. As Greece was being laid waste by the Slavs, with trouble liable to flare up anywhere, and as Tiberius had at his disposal by no means sufficient forces, he sent a delegation to the Khagan of the Avars. (...)"

Strategikon of Maurice:

"(...) They [Slavs] do not keep prisoners in perpetual slavery like other peoples, but they demarcate for them a limited period of time, after which they give them a choice: they can return home after purchasing their freedom, or stay among them as free people and friends. (...)"

Jordanes:

"(...) These people, as we started to say at the beginning of our account or catalogue of nations, though off-shoots from one stock, have now three names, that is, Venedi, Antes and Sclaveni. (...) they now rage in war far and wide, in punishment for our sins (...) Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes. (...)"

Procopius of Caesarea (about squatting Slavs):

"(...) Belisarius was eager to capture alive one of the men of note among the enemy, in order that he might learn what the reason might be why the barbarians were holding out in their desperate situation. And Valerian promised readily to perform such a service for him. For there were some men in his command, he said, from the nation of the Sklaveni, who are accustomed to conceal themselves behind a small rock or any bush which may happen to be near and pounce upon an enemy. In fact, they are constantly practising this in their native haunts along the river Ister, both on the Romans and on the barbarians as well. (...)"

Abraham ben Jacob (a 10th century Sephardic Jewish traveller from Muslim Spain):

"(...) Slavic countries extend from the Mediterranean Sea to the Northern Ocean. (...) Generally speaking, Slavs are warlike and violent, and if not their internal discord and lack of unity, no other nation would be able to match them in strength. (...)"

=================================

And here about the arrival of the Croats (but it was much later - not during the 500s, but during the 600s):

Constantine Porphyrogennetos, "De Administrando Imperio":

"(...) their ancestors were Pagan Croats and Serbs, known also as White [Croats and Serbs]. Great Croatia, called also White [Croatia], until today is still Pagan, just like neighbouring [Lusatian / West Slavic] Serbs [Sorbs] (...)"

And another excerpt - "De Administrando Imperio":

"(...) Therefore everyone, who would like to do research about Dalmatia, can read herein about the way how the Slavic peoples took it. The Croats with their families came to Dalmatia and found the Avars in control of that land. After fighting against each other for some time, the Croats defeated the Avars, partially murdered them and partially forced them to submissiveness. Since that moment the country was seized by the Croats. (...)"

=====================
=====================

However, I would agree with you that large part of ancestry of South Slavs comes from Pre-Slavic inhabitants.

This seems to be confirmed by the way how Slavs treated captives and prisoners of war - they often allowed them to join their communities.

As Strategikon of Maurice wrote:

"(...) They [Slavs] do not keep prisoners in perpetual slavery like other peoples, but they demarcate for them a limited period of time, after which they give them a choice: they can return home after purchasing their freedom, or stay among them as free people and friends. (...)"

And now let's quote "Phenotype of old Slavs, 6th to 10th centuries", by Łukasz M. Stanaszek:

http://www.archeo.uw.edu.pl/swarch/Swiatowit-r2001-t3_%2844%29-nB-s205-212.pdf


"Phenotype of old Slavs, 6th to 10th centuries", by Łukasz M. Stanaszek.

I. Byzantine sources:

1. Procopius of Caesarea (6th century):

- "(...) Valerian chose one of the Sklaveni who are men of mighty stature. (...)"

- "(...) Nay further, they do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair are neither very fair or very blonde, nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type, but they are slightly ruddy in color. (...)"

2. Theophilact Simokatta (describing events from year 595):

"(...) The Emperor was with great curiosity listening to stories about this tribe, he has welcomed these newcomers from the land of barbarians, and after being amazed by their height and mighty stature, he sent these men to Heraclea. (...)"

3. Theophanes the Confessor (describing the same event from year 595):

"(...) The Emperor was admiring their beauty and their stalwart stature. (...)"

4. Pseudo-Maurice (Strategikon) - late 6th century / early 7th century:

"(...) Tribes of Sclaveni and Antes (...) are very resistant to hardships, they easily endure both heat and cold, rain and lack of garment. (...)"

5. Constantine Porphyrogennetos, "De Administrando Imperio":

About ancestors of Balkan Croats and ancestors of Balkan Serbs:

"(...) their ancestors were Pagan Croats and Serbs, known also as White [Croats and Serbs]. Great Croatia, called also White [Croatia], until today is still Pagan, just like neighbouring [Lusatian / West Slavic] Serbs [Sorbs] (...)"

II. Muslim and Sephardi Jewish sources:

6. Al-Baladuri (late 7th century):

"(...) Slavs are a tribe of ruddy complexion and fair hair. (...)"

7. Ibn Qutajba (describing events from years 691 - 694):

"(...) If only Prince wanted, outside of his doors would be black Sudanians or ruddy Slavs (...)"

The same information is repeated also by 8. Al-Baladuri (9th century).

9. Al-Ahtal (late 7th century):

"(...) Birds of the desert saw in those people a crowd of fair-haired Slavs. (...)"

10. Jaqut (13th century, but using much older primary sources):

"(...) Slavs are a tribe of ruddy complexion and fair hair. (...)"

11. Ibn Al-Kalbi (late 8th century / early 9th century):

"(...) Slavs are a numerous nation, fair-haired and of ruddy [pink] complexion. (...)"

12. Al-Gahiz (early 9th century):

"(...) Among Slavs, abominable and ugly are their smoothness of hair [as opposed to curly hair] and delicateness, as well as blond or ruddy colour of their hair and beards, and also whiteness of their eyelashes (...)"

Al-Gahiz:

"(...) Tell me friend, after how many generations a Zang became black, and a Slav became white? (...)"

13. Abraham ben Jacob (years 965 - 966):

"(...) What is peculiar [when it comes to Slavs], most of Bojema people [Bohemians / Czechs] are of swarthy complexion and dark hair, while fair colors are rare among them [compared to frequencies among other West and East Slavs]. (...)"

Abraham ben Jacob:

"(...) Slavic people are often haunted by two diseases (...) these are two types of rash: redness and abscess (...)"

14. Ibn Al-Faqih (10th century):

"(...) There exist two kinds of Slavic people. First kind are people of swarthy complexion and dark hair. They live near the coast of the [Mediterranean] Sea. The other kind are fair people, who live inland. (...)"

Ibn Al-Faqih:

"(...) Inhabitants of Iraq are people (...) who are not born with hair colour intermediate between russet, blond, matt-white and white [bright blond], as it happens among children born from Slavic women. (...) People of Iraq are free from russet hair colour of Slavs. (...)"

15. Al-Masudi (10th century):

He writes that dominant complexion among Slavic people is fair, not dark.

[B]III. German sources:

15. Saint Bruno of Querfurt:

He wrote that in Poland having a beard is a common custom among men.

http://s27.postimg.org/6yw6zhqtf/Chart.png

http://s4.postimg.org/i64k6ay25/Slavs.png

http://s4.postimg.org/i64k6ay25/Slavs.png

However, there are considerable differences in pigmentation between various South Slavs.

The most dark-pigmented are probably Bulgarians - apparently the most strongly hybridised ones.

Later during times of the Bulgar Empire, Bulgars were also settling Byzantine prisoners in their lands.

===============================================

I do not exclude the possibility, that some of South Slavs mixed with Goths (who had been there before Slavs came).

However - not much seems to indicate, that this particular haplogroup (I2a-Din) is Gothic. It seems more Slavic.

Mayber both Slavs and Goths had that haplogroup already before coming to the Balkans ??? Let's wait for ancient DNA.

===============================================

As for the Avars:


Menander Protector:

"(...) About the fourth year of the reign of Caesar Tiberius Constantine, some hundred thousand Slavs [but 100,000 of just warriors, or men+women+children?] broke into Thrace, and pillaged that and many other regions. As Greece was being laid waste by the Slavs, with trouble liable to flare up anywhere, and as Tiberius had at his disposal by no means sufficient forces, he sent a delegation to the Khagan of the Avars [to ask them for help against the Slavs!]. (...)"


Indeed, the Avars initially became allies of the Romans against the Slavs! Only later - after defeating (and subjugating) some Slavic tribes, and negotiating peace with some other ones - the Avars turned against their former allies (the Romans) and - together with the Slavs - started attacking the Empire.

Moreover, the combined Avar-Slavic (or rather Slavic-Avar) army, often commited very nasty things - including expulsions of local populations.

The Avars all fought as horsemen (they had no native Avar infantry!) - they would move in front of the advancing invasion force, plunder settlements, remove the local population, and Slavs (mostly infantry, but some horsemen too) followed with their families, and settled the deserted ("cleansed") land.

This is also an answer to question asked by Maciamo "what happened to local pre-Slavic inhabitants?". In some regions, the locals were assimilated by Slavs. But in some other regions, the area was ethnically cleansed by Avars (with help of Slavs), and Slavs settled empty territory. Maybe founder effects took place in such areas (it depends whether the number of colonists in those deserted areas was large - it could be small and not genetically average / representative).

Tomenable
06-03-15, 11:42
Let's also remember that most of early Slavs practiced polygamy and were rather sexually liberated (according to the article below) - which is probably why some Slavic tribes later preferred to get decimated in fights against crusaders than accept Christianity (I'm talking here about certain Pagan Slavic tribes in East Germany).

Article in question: http://slowianolubia.blogspot.com/2013/09/kultura-seksualna-sowian.html

A Muslim source - "Kitab al-mamalik wal--masalik" ("The book of roads and countries") - wrote that among Slavs pre-marital sex was something normal, even though after marriage women had to be faithful to their husbands (so before marriage they could have sex with anyone they wanted, but after marriage only one partner).

Those facts mentioned above - together with "democratic" behaviour (early Slavs were democratic - chieftains were being elected by all free men, and only in times of war), such as allowing slaves (captives, prisoners of war) to join their communities as free man (see: Strategikon of Maurice) - contributed to hybridisation.

By contrast it seems that most of Germanic tribes were monogamic (this is what Tacitus claimed in "Germania"). Only high-ranking nobles had many wifes. In case of Slavs every man could have many wifes, so they would take foreign women en masse, which made differentiation of Slavic phenotypes and hybridisation faster.

Perhaps word "slaves" comes from "Slavs" because Slavs were on a large scale incorporating slaves (captives / prisoners of war) into their communities.

If some citizen of the Roman Empire was enslaved by Slavs, and later they allowed him to join them, then he was becoming one of them.

This also explains why Slavs were so successful in spreading their language. By contrast Franks, Lombards, Goths, etc. assimilated into Romance-speaking locals.

=================
=================

PS:

Just as an off-topic sidenote:


Abraham ben Jacob (a 10th century Sephardic Jewish traveller from Muslim Spain):

"(...) Slavic countries extend from the Mediterranean Sea to the Northern Ocean. (...) Generally speaking, Slavs are warlike and violent, and if not their internal discord and lack of unity, no other nation would be able to match them in strength. (...)"

This "internal discord and lack of unity" is SOOO true, even today. :) Just look what Yugoslavians did to each other - war, genocides, religious hatred...

This particular thing did not change between the 10th and the 20th / 21st centuries... :)

Slavic tribes in what is now East Germany (belonging to ethnic groups of Veleti, Obotrites, Rujani, Sorbs) were also conquered because of internal discord.

==================================


they did not move in as "peaceful farmers", contrary to what some users claim

Peter Heather in "Empires and Barbarians" also admits violent character of Slavic migration into the Balkans.

BTW - "peaceful farmers" would not have a god of war who rides a white horse as their main deity (or one of main deities):

http://www.gregorkarnas.com/onephoto/2012/2012_01_19/index.htm

Svyatovit (this representation is a 9th-century (or even older) sculpture made of limestone from Podolia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podolia), so called Zbruch Idol, found in 1848):

http://epika.org/house-of-mythology/17-svetovid


Svetovid is the Slavic god of war, fertility and abundance. He is four-headed war god. Svetovid's four heads stand for the four sides of the world that this all-seeing god is looking at. His attributes are a sword, a bridle, a saddle, and a white horse. (...)

http://www.gregorkarnas.com/onephoto/2012/2012_01_19/fot_G_Karnas_Swietowit_ze_Zbrucza_1.jpg

http://www.gregorkarnas.com/onephoto/2012/2012_01_19/fot_G_Karnas_Swietowit_ze_Zbrucza_2.jpg

http://www.gregorkarnas.com/onephoto/2012/2012_01_19/fot_G_Karnas_Swietowit_ze_Zbrucza_3.jpg

http://s15.postimg.org/ww4zy1o7v/wiatowid_ze_Zbrucza.jpghttp://s9.postimg.org/d26e3h9n3/Posag_Ze_Zbrucza.jpg

This sculpture was found at the bottom of a river (Zbruch River (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbruch_River)), where it spent several centuries (up to even 1000 years).

Water probably damaged it during that time. On the other hand, you shouldn't expect Michelangelo's skills from 9th century people.

Tomenable
06-03-15, 13:31
Jordanes (6th century AD):

"(...) These people, as we started to say at the beginning of our account or catalogue of nations, though off-shoots from one stock, have now three names, that is, Venedi, Antes and Sclaveni. (...) they now rage in war far and wide, in punishment for our sins (...) Within these rivers lies Dacia, encircled by the lofty Alps as by a crown. Near their left ridge, which inclines toward the north, and beginning at the source of the Vistula, the populous race of the Venethi dwell, occupying a great expanse of land. Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes. (...) The abode of the Sclaveni extends from the city of Noviodunum and the lake called Mursianus to the Danaster, and northward as far as the Vistula. (...) The Antes (...) dwelling above the curve of the sea of Pontus, spread from the Danaster to the Danaper, rivers that are many days' journey apart. (...)"LeBrok in another thread posted a nice map showing the situation in year 125 AD (2nd century AD):

http://postimg.org/image/tbsbpd6l7/full/

http://s9.postimg.org/7clx25pr3/Barbaricum_125_AD.png

clintCG
06-03-15, 22:32
Listen...
That area you refer where Slavs came from was inhabited by Slavs for long time. In my language it is called "Vlach plain" (Vlaška nizija), don't know what is English name, but it is basically area around Bulgaria north of Danube.


That is where Slavic tribes lived for a long time, and then Avars came in somewhere around 560 and Slavs accepted their rule. For a whole century they lived there and jumped over to Balkan just for raiding, and only after siege of Constantinople in 626 those Slavs started to settle over Danube.
Keep in mind that those Slavs can only be ancestors of Bulgarians, but not of Yugoslavians. Yugoslavians came from west Slavic lands.


Pope Gregory I in a letter to Exarch of Italy from year 599:
"(...) It deeply afflicts and disquiets me the Slavic nation that menace us. It afflicts me from what I already suffer from you, it disquiets me because they have already started to penetrate into the Italic peninsula through Istria.(...)"


You say it right here. Slavs from western lands started moving in long after Gepids fell.


Slavs also lived much more westward than the source of Vistula you mentioned.
I already posted maps of white Croatia and Serbia. Toponyms of Slavic origin in Montenegro are found in Elbe region of northeastern Germany, around 800 toponyms in total. (From book "Odakle su došli preci Crnogoraca", Dr. Radoslav Rotković)

http://www.montenegrina.net/images/mape/polablje_mapa2.gif


You can use Berlin as navigation point (in lower right corner of map).




I think it is clear that no ancestors of Slavic Croats, Serbs, and Montenegrins came from eastern Slavic lands.


Even if some of them came from there, as you say, there is no way that such a large quantity was brought by Slavs. Ukraine has only around 13 percent of I2a (not only Din but also other groups), and it has massive amount of R1a, while Herzegovina Croats and west Montenegrins have only around 6 percent of R1a and around 70 percent of I2a1b "Dinaric". It is much more logical that I2a Din in Ukraine (I guess around 10 percent) would be mostly from Gothic leftovers.


Keep in mind that when your sources say that Croats settled in Dalmatia, they actually mean Roman province of Dalmatia (not only modern coastal Croatia), which also includes parts of northern Croatia and Bosnia where Slavs settled.


LeBrok in another thread posted a nice map showing the situation in year 125 AD (2nd century AD):
As I already said by that time many Goths already reached Ukraine.



Also I think that your accounts of Avars and Slavs doing ethnic cleansing are little bit overexaggerated. If you ever saw Dinarides, Herzegovina or Montenegro, you would see that it is impossible to conquer anyone living in those mountains, and I don't think Slavs would even look to settle there too (because land is totally unsuitable for farming). Montenegro was not even conquered single time in 500 years it was surronded by Ottomans, even Pushkin made a poem about how Napoleon tried to do same but failed.


And about anthropology: we can not learn much from Arab sources. From their point of view all Europeans were of tall stature, for example.
Let's look at tallest Europeans and their statures:
Dinaric Alps residents are tallest with measured 184.6 cm average on 17-year old boys (Pineau et al, 2005).
Nations:
1.Montenegrins 183-184+ (Bjelica D et al)
2.Dutch 183+ (there is one study in which they are taller than Montenegrins, but it is not measured, it is self-reported, also in TRoE by Coon Dutch are 171, Montenegrins 177).
3.Sweden, around 182


Now lets look at average heights in some of Slavic lands other than southern ones:
Russia 176, Poland 178.5, Slovakia 179.4, Czech 180.3, Ukraine 176


Europeans are on average tall, but Germanic peoples are slightly taller than others, with Montenegrin (Coon: 177cm)-Herzegovina (same:175cm) populations holding record. http://theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-XII12.htm



Tomenable, if you are interested in historical and cultural connections between Dinaric population and Germanics please send me PM and I will gladly reply you with some of material because I do not intend on posting it publicly on forum (I need it for some other purposes).

Best Regards

Tomenable
07-03-15, 11:23
Yugoslavians came from west Slavic lands.

I discussed the history of Slovenes with several Slovenes, and they told me that most of Slovenes came from east Slavic lands.

They quoted sources.

They wrote that there were two migrations to Slovenia - first (earlier) from East Slavic lands. Second (later) from West Slavic.

But first was more numerous, according to their source.


only after siege of Constantinople in 626 those Slavs started to settle over Danube.

This is incorrect.

John of Ephesus (see above) clearly wrote that they started to settle over Danube already in the 2nd half of the 500s. Also Procopius (VII, 40,7) indicates that Slavs who were plundering the Balkans in 545 - 551, penetrated as far as eastern Bosnia, and - as archaeological evidence suggests - settled there (see: Barisic 1969, Cremosnik 1970). Also around the same time (ca. 550) other groups of Slavs settled in Lower and Upper Moesia and Little Scythia - Procopius wrote that they settled for example in the regions of castles of Ulmetum and Adina (including those castles). Archaeological evidence fully supports this as well (see: Cankova-Petkova 1970 and Comsa 1974). So Slavs started to settled over Danube already in the middle of the 6th century, or 75 years earlier than you claimed.

===========================

And let's quote John of Ephesus (he wrote this in year 584):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Ephesus

"(...) In third year after the death of Emperor Justin [or abdication? - abdication was 574, death 578], during the reign of victorious Tiberius, the damned nation of the Slavs has risen, and marching through entire Hellas, through lands of Thessaly and Thrace, captured many cities and strongholds, plundered, burned and robbed, seized the land and settled there with full ease, without fear, like in their own land. (...) they were plundering the country, burning it and robbing, as far as the Great Walls [of Constantinople], and this is how they captured many thousands of cattle, as well as many other kinds of booty. (...) Until today, that is until year 584, they still continue to live in peace in lands of the Rhomaioi, without fear and concern, plundering, murdering and burning, getting rich and highjacking gold and silver, capturing horses and plenty of weapons; and they have learned to fight better than the Rhomaioi. (...)"

And Menander Protector (he wrote also in the 580s or 590s):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menander_Protector

"(...) About the fourth year of the reign of Caesar Tiberius Constantine, some hundred thousand Slavs broke into Thrace, and pillaged that and many other regions. As Greece was being laid waste by the Slavs, with trouble liable to flare up anywhere, and as Tiberius had at his disposal by no means sufficient forces, he sent a delegation to the Khagan of the Avars. (...)

There was Justin I (died 527), after that Justinian (died 565) and Justin II (died 578), succeeded by Tiberius already in 574 (since Justin II became insane):

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/308817/Justin-II


In 571 the part of Armenia governed by Persia revolted and requested assistance from the Byzantine Empire. In the late summer of the following year, Justin’s forces invaded Persia. The Persians, however, not only repulsed the Byzantines but themselves invaded Byzantine territory, capturing a number of important cities, including Dara, which fell in November 573. After learning of the fall of Dara, Justin became insane, and in 574 the empress Sophia, acting on his behalf, entered into peace negotiations. Induced by Sophia to adopt as his son the general Tiberius, Justin conferred on him the title of caesar in December 574. Thereafter, Justin, although nominally still emperor, lived in retirement until his death.

The the third after the death of Justin was 580 (John of Ephesus).

The fourth year of reign of Tiberius was 578 (Menander Protector).

So around that time - 578 to 580 - there was another major influx of Slavs over Danube, and they settled - John of Ephesus is clear about this.

Tomenable
07-03-15, 11:50
Europeans are on average tall, but Germanic peoples are slightly taller than others

Slavs, Balts, Baltic Finns, and Germanics are taller than others - not just Germanics.

This is confirmed by Byzantine (not just Arab) sources describing Slavs as well:

Procopius of Caesarea (born in ca. 490 died in 565), "De Bello Gothico":

"(...)Nay further, the Slavs do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair are neither very fair or blond, nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type (...)"

Theofylaktos Simokattes, "Oikumenike Historia" (written in years 585 - 641), describing events from 595:

"(...) The Emperor was with great curiosity listening to stories about this tribe, he has welcomed these newcomers from the land of Slavs, and after being amazed by their height and mighty stature, he sent these men to Heraclea. (...)"

Theophanes the Confessor (describing the same event from 595):

"(...) The Emperor was admiring their beauty and their stalwart stature. (...)"

Countries/regions with above 178 cm tall males (on average) according to wikipedia - no data was given for Latvia, Belarus and Ukraine:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?145160-Slavic-Germanic-Baltic-and-Finnic-peoples-are-the-tallest-peoples/page2&

While Russia's average (176 cm in year 1992) includes Asian minorities in Russia:

There is also one mistake in this graph - data for Dinaric Alps is from Croatia and Herzegovina (from a 2005 study), not from Bosnia and Slovenia. The average was also less than 185,6 cm, but authors added one centimeter because the sample consisted of young men (some could be still growing).

http://s24.postimg.org/r2kyvxckl/Tallest_nations.png

Height = genes + nutrition. Nutrition is important too - therefore with genes being equal, richer (with better nutrition) country will have taller people.

Tomenable
07-03-15, 12:09
Now lets look at average heights in some of Slavic lands other than southern ones:
Russia 176, Ukraine 176

Russia and Ukraine both have a lot of Non-Slavic minorities. Ukraine is also very poor (= bad nutrition).

And even ethnic Russians and Ukrainians are mixed with Ugric, Turkic, Tatar, Romanian, Asian, etc. peoples.


I don't think Slavs would even look to settle there too (because land is totally unsuitable for farming).

Slavs were very good in farming on land which is hard to farm:

"(...) In more recent literature on the subject more and more clearly the old opinion about the widespread use or even exclusive use of slash-and-burn agriculture among first Slavs is being questioned, while a more complex picture of their articulture is presented. Early Slavic agriculture simultaneously knew and used various directions of arable farming, starting from intensive manual cultivation of infield allotments, through fallow system of farming, to peripheral slash-and-burn system. Realizing the many-sidedness of early Slavic agriculture allows to understand its considerable elasticity and its ability to adapt to changing conditions, (...) Slavs, while colonizing the Balkan Peninsula as well as some parts of Eastern Alpine countries, initially settled mainly in abandoned territories, which had not been in agricultural use already for long time and were often overgrown by forests. Due to this fact activity of settlers had to be directed first of all towards recultivation of those areas with use of traditional method of burning forests. In this sense we can talk about intensification of slash-and-burn agriculture in initial period of Slavic colonization of the Balkans. Excerpts from Nomos georgikos (Farmer's law) cited to support this theory, refer to the use of fire in order to cleanse and reclaim from nature pieces of land for agriculture. About this kind of activity of Slavic settlers we are informed also by document of Bavarian duke Tassilon from year 777 written for monastery in Kremsmunster: "We grant also this land, which had been brought to condition suitable for cultivation by these Slavs (...), below the place which is called Las, near Todicha and Sirnik" (...)"

Garden plants - especially leguminous plants - had a very important place in Slavic agriculture.

Someone also claimed in this thread, that agriculture was "everything" for Slavs.

This is not true. Slavs were known as farmers because they were good farmers. But it doesn't mean they couldn't do other things.

Slavs also worked as artisans during Slavic-Avar military campaign.

Slavic carpenters and boatbuilders constructed the fleets which attacked Constantinople in 624 AD and Thessaloniki in 614-616 / 620 AD.

Slavic fleet also blockaded the harbour of Thessaloniki in years 674-677.

Slavic piracy was very widespread in the Aegean Sea and in the Adriatic Sea. They plundered Greek islands and parts of Italy.

L. II, IV, 190, 102 of Miracula S. Demetrii writes that Slavic people had many skilled artisans - carpenters, joiners and smiths.

L. II, IV, 190, 101 - 102 says about a Slavic foreman and his artisans - who were ordered to construct a sophisticated siege tower. The same source says about specialization among Slavic smiths. For example, some of them specialized in producing arrowheads.

Kurnatowska also writes, that there are proofs for existence of goldsmiths and other metal-workers in early Slavic settlements.

While Slavic carpenters, joiners, smiths and producers of arrows were skilled, it seems that there were no professional potters in Slavic societies.

Slavic pottery was produced by each family on its own, rather than by artisans specialized in producing pottery (Kurnatowska, page 69).

====================================


Slavs also lived much more westward than the source of Vistula you mentioned.

Not in 500 AD.

Slavs started moving westward and northward into Poland and East Germany only after year 518 AD. Here are two maps from "Germanie na ziemiach polskich w zaraniu średniowiecza" ("Germanic peoples in Polish lands at the beginning of the Middle Ages") by Polish historian Adam Sengebush:

http://s22.postimg.org/tawixhs9t/Sengebusch1.png

http://s11.postimg.org/61o60qr37/Sengebusch2.png

A recent study on mtDNA in Iron Age Poland confirms that there is continuity of maternal lineages in Poland from ancient times to now:

"Ancient DNA Reveals Matrilineal Continuity in Present-Day Poland over the Last Two Millennia":

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0110839

So expanding Slavic invaders (maps posted above) perhaps decimated Germanic males, but took Germanic females as their wifes.

The same could later happen in the Balkans and that's why we don't see much Germanic Y-DNA there.

clintCG
07-03-15, 12:45
discussed the history of Slovenes with several Slovenes, and they told me that most of Slovenes came from east Slavic lands.
They quoted sources.
They wrote that there were two migrations to Slovenia - first (earlier) from East Slavic lands. Second (later) from West Slavic.
But first was more numerous.
No. First one came from Moravia (west Slavic lands) around 550, and second one from east came after Lombards retreated from Italy.
I don't know for sources which claim that one from east Slavic lands was more numerous. After all Slovene (and other Yugoslavian) populations have much higher linguistic similarity to western Slavs.

There was of course migration from eastern Slavic lands- but every Byzantine historian says that ancestors of Croats and Serbs came from western ones.
East Slavic migration, too, cannot explain such a high presence of I2a Din. Ukraine conc of I2a is 13%, and deduct conc of I2a2 and other groups in Ukraine and you will get even lower presence of I2a Din in Ukraine. You still can't explain why does I2a1b Din steadily fall with conc as we go from mountains to plains...

Explain me why would Slavs settle in rocky, unfertile mountains (where our clans live).

Serbian academic dr. Miloš Blagojević in book „Serbia in time of Nemanjići“ (Belgrade, 1989):
It is clear that Serbs, when coming to new homeland were farmers, andthat’s why they, by rule, settled in areas which were farmed in Roman times:in river valleys and karst fields- or župas, as they called them. Aboutagricultural profession we also have existence of so called “Grain pits” (Žitnejame), which were used for storing grains, and for using stone mills. It isproven that they grew millet, and most probably wheat and other grains.

Pre-Slavic population was collectively called "Vlasi" (not to be confused with modern-day Vlachs) and they lived in Dinaric mountains (Lika, Herzegovina, Montenegro), uninterested in agriculture (except livestock), that is, in exact areas where we find most of I2a1b.

Xavier Marmier, after his stay in Montenegro 1854. Published in Paris book about his impressions. About agriculture he writes like this:
“Nevertheless, most often it is the women that dig, sow and reap… Because of small interest for agriculture, and lacking crafts and trading skills, Montenegrin people can not be rich”.
Same thing Tacitus writes in "Germania"

Compare that with what Francise Conte writes in “Les Slaves”:
“Eastern part of our continent had more stable village society, which kept all the way up until modern age, in comparison to way of life we had in Western Europe. Villager was for a long time a symbol of Slavic civilization, whether it is word about Pole, or Slovak, Serb or Ukrainian, or, before everyone, about famous Russian muzhik. From start of new era Slavs were mostly occupied with agriculture and on that way they made their living, although importance of cattle, and of hunting in forests rich with animals were not underestimated. To this we should add three important elements: honey gathering, mushrooms gathering and fishing on rivers and lakes which are plentiful in eastern Europe. Arab traveler-writers (in many ways our best sources from 9th to 12th century) gave us precious informations: trader Ibrahim Ibn Jakub, Spanish Jew travelled around 965. through Poland, Bohemia, Slavic territories on Elbe and Baltic and wrote that this people “took up agriculture with special joy and interest”, and that their country is “very rich with food”.


Russia and Ukraine both have a lot of Non-Slavic minorities. Ukraine is also very poor (= bad nutrition).
And even ethnic Russians and Ukrainians are mixed with Ugric, Turkic, Tatar, Romanian, Asian, etc. peoples.
Well, why does not poor nutrition matter in us? We were (untill 1945) among poorest in Europe.
Check this out (Montenegro- a land of warriors, Trevor Roy, 1913):

Considering the remarkable stature and strength of the men, the quantity of their daily food is incredibly meagre. At daybreak they breakfast on a piece of heavy maize bread, and take absolutely nothing more until sunset, when they eat more bread, this time with a little milk. They seldom eat meat, except at a feast, for they cannot afford such luxury. Upon this scant diet they are able to make wonderful journeys showing the stamina of the race climbing almost inaccessible mountains, and traversing paths at giddy heights, where seemingly only mountain goats would find footing; and they will maintain this most arduous travelling for hour after hour without the least sign of fatigue.

Map from "The Races of Europe" is most precise because it shows what was height like before people started eating industrialized junk food packed with hormons:
http://theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe-map5a.jpg
http://theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe-map5b.jpg


You said it is "inaccurate" and "obsolete" yet you quote choniclers from 6th to 10th century who only give information about pigmentation and height. Anthropological research is much more than that. Subracial classification is dependent on lots of factors and I already explained where are racially closest people to us located...

Tomenable
07-03-15, 13:16
Map from "The Races of Europe" is most precise because it shows what was height like before people started eating industrialized junk food packed with hormons:

It is not about eating "industrialized junk food packed with hormons", but about eating things in proper amounts and proportions (balanced diet).

Moreover, the data for each country which you posted does not account for ethnic diversity and ethnic differences in height.

In Poland, Baltic countries and western part of the USSR before WW2 about 10% (in some regions more) of the population were ethnic Jews.

And Jews were on average much shorter than Non-Jews - even Jewish sources (written by Jewish scholars) confirm this, such as this book:


"Żydzi w Polsce Odrodzonej. Działalność społeczna, gospodarcza, oświatowa i kulturalna."

In English (plus a table of contents translated to English - author of each chapter is given):

"Jews in the Reborn Poland. Social, economic, educational and cultural activity":

VOLUME ONE, Warsaw 1933:

Publisher's Note
Introduction - Dr Ozjasz Thon

PART I - Jews in the old Polish Rzeczpospolita [Commonwealth]:

1. Growth of Jewish population in the lands of old Polish Commonwealth - Dr Ignacy Schiper
2. External history of Jews in the old Commonwealth - Dr Emanuel Ringelblum
3. Internal Organization of Jews in the old Commonwealth - Dr I. Schiper
4. Economic history of Jews of the Crown and of the Grand Duchy in pre-partitions times - Dr I. Schiper
5. Fundamental rights of Jews in pre-partitions Poland - Dr Mojżesz Schorr
6. Jewish taxes to the state and to patrons - Dr I. Schiper

PART II - Jewish culture in Poland before the partitions:

7. Rabbinic literature of Jews in the old Commonwealth - Dr Jeremjasz Frenkel
8. Vernacular languages of Polish Jews and their folk literature in the old Commonwealth - Dr I. Schiper
9. Jewish apologists and polemicists in the old Commonwealth - Dr I. Schiper
10. Secular sciences among Jews in the old Commonwealth - Dr I. Schiper
11. Misticism and messianic movements among Jews in the old Commonwealth - Dr I. Schiper
12. Chasidism among Jews in the old Commonwealth - Dr Jeremiasz Frenkel
13. Jewish doctors in the old Commonwealth - Dr Majer Bałaban
14. Plastic arts among Jews in the old Commonwealth - Dr I. Schiper
15. Jewish education in the old Commonwealth - Dr Majer Bałaban
16. Customs and private life of Jews in the old Commonwealth - Dr Majer Bałaban

PART III - Polish Jews in the post-partitions period until year 1918:

17. History of Jews in Galicia (1772 - 1918) - Dr Filip Friedman
18. Galician Jews during the World War (1914 - 1918) - Dr I. Schiper
19. History of Jews in the Duchy of Warsaw and in the Kingdom of Poland (1795 - 1863) - Dr I. Schiper
20. History of Jews in the Kingdom of Poland since 1864 until 1918 - Samuel Hirszhorn
21. Development of Chasidism among Jews in post-partitions Poland (1795 - 1918) - Dr Jeremiasz Frenkel
22. History of Zionism in Polish lands (until 1918) - Dr Ignacy Schiper
23. Jewish working class movement in pre-war period - Arjeh Tartakower
24. Jews in Polish Legions (1914 - 1917) - Władysław Konic
25. Jews under the Prussian partition (1772 - 1918) - Dr I. Schiper
26. Jews in northern and eastern Kresy in post-partitions times - Dr I. Schiper

VOLUME TWO, Warsaw 1933:

PART III - Polish Jews in the post-partitions period until year 1918 (continued):

26. Jews in northern and eastern Kresy in post-partitions times (continued) - Dr I. Schiper
27. Participation of Polish Jews in science (19th century and early 20th century) - Mateusz Mieses
28. Modern Hebrew literature in Poland - Dr Jeremiasz Frenkel
29. Jewish contribution to Polish literature (until year 1918) - Dr Wilhelm Fallek
30. Development of Jewish literature in post-partitions Poland - Dr I. Schiper
31. Rabbinic literature of Polish Jews in post-partitions times - Izaak Lewin
32. Polish Jews and fine arts until year 1918 - Aleksander Hafftka

PART IV - Jews in the Rzeczpospolita [Republic] of Poland in period 1918 - 1933:

34. Racial structure of Polish Jews - Dr Henryk Szpidbaum
35. Numbers and natural development of Jewish population in Poland - Dr Arjeh Tartakower
36. Fundamental rights of Jewish minority in Poland and their history - Dr Michał Ringel
37. Legislation of the Reborn Poland concerning its Jewish national minority - Aleksander Hafftka
38. Legislation of the Reborn Poland concerning Jewish communities - Dr Michał Ringel
39. Jewish political parties in the Reborn Poland - Aleksander Hafftka
40. Parliamentary life of Jews in the Reborn Poland - Aleksander Hafftka
41. Parliamentary and political activity of Jewish deputies and senators in the Reborn Poland - A. Hafftka

PART V - Economic life:

42. Occupational and social structure of Jews in the Reborn Poland - Dr Arjeh Tartakower
43. Issues concerning pauperization of Jewish population in Poland - J. Borenstein
44. Jews in agriculture in the areas of former Congress Poland and Eastern Kresy - Engineer Bernard Dobrzyński
45. Jews in agriculture in the region of Lesser Poland - Dr Ignacy Schiper
46. Jews in Polish banking - Adolf Peretz
47. Jews in banking and credit (Greater Poland, Lesser Poland, Wilno Region, Eastern Kresy) - Dr Ignacy Schiper
48. Participation of Jews in trade of the Reborn Poland - Engineer Maurycy Zajdeman
49. Participation of Jews in the branch of dealership and commission - Leon Perl
50. Jews in Polish industry - Dr Ignacy Schiper & Aleksander Hafftka
51. Participation of Jews in communication and transport - Dr Ignacy Schiper
52. Jewish artisans in the Reborn Poland - A. Hafftka
53. Jewish working class in Poland - Dr Arjeh Tartakower
54. Jewish cooperatives in the Reborn Poland - Abraham Prowalski

Tomenable
07-03-15, 13:43
After all Slovene (and other Yugoslavian) populations have much higher linguistic similarity to western Slavs.

And Montenegrins have much higher linguistic similarity to other Slavs than to Goths... :grin:

Macedonians and Bulgarians have higher linguistic similarity to East Slavs. Serbs probably too.

Not sure about Croats. Slovene is similar to Slovakian but also to South Slavic languages.

Tomenable
07-03-15, 14:01
From start of new era Slavs were mostly occupied with agriculture

It is clear that Serbs, when coming to new homeland were farmers
(...)
It is proven that they grew millet, and most probably wheat and other grains.

Goths were also mostly occupied with agriculture. And they grew millet as well:

"Stable Carbon and Nitrogen Isotope Analysis of Human Diet Change in Prehistoric and Historic Poland":

https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap:10:0::NO:10:P10_ACCESSION_NUM:osu1330969837
(https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap:10:0::NO:10:P10_ACCESSION_NUM:osu1330969837)
People of the Wielbark culture had a lot of millet in their diet according to this study.

clintCG
07-03-15, 14:28
Goths were also mostly occupied with agriculture. And they grew millet as well:
"Stable Carbon and Nitrogen Isotope Analysis of Human Diet Change in Prehistoric and Historic Poland":
https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap:10:0::NO...:osu1330969837 (https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap:10:0::NO:10:P10_ACCESSION_NUM:osu1330969837)
(https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap:10:0::NO:10:P10_ACCESSION_NUM:osu1330969837)Peo ple of the Wielbark culture had a lot of millet in their diet according to this study
Most peoples in Europe at that period were occupied with agriculture, they were not hunter-gatherers, for God's sake... the real question is: to what extent were they occupied with agriculture? Read Germania, then read sources about Slavs.

It is not about eating "industrialized junk food packed with hormons", but about eating things in proper amounts and proportions (balanced diet).
Moreover, the data for each country which you posted does not account for ethnic diversity and ethnic differences in height.
In Poland, Baltic countries and western part of the USSR before WW2 about 10% (in some regions more) of the population were ethnic Jews.
And Jews were on average much shorter than Non-Jews - even Jewish sources (written by Jewish scholars) confirm this, such as this book:

From his writings you can clearly see he examined native inhabitants of areas that were examined- otherwise those researches would make no sense.
Even if Jews in Poland were examined- they for sure could lower average for max 1cm. Those just sound like claims that Finns are not tallest because they have Samis... and Samis are like only 10.000, even if they all were 150cm they could not move Finn average even for 0.1cm...

I am still waiting for explanation of how could I2a1b Din be spread with East Slavic migration (I2a1b Din in Ukraine is like 11 percent) and make such a huge conc in Dinaric mountains... as well as increasing R1a and decreasing I2a Din as we move towards northern plains... those things don't just happen by "pure accident".

Tomenable
07-03-15, 14:34
From his writings you can clearly see he examined native inhabitants of areas that were examined- otherwise those researches would make no sense.
Even if Jews in Poland were examined- they for sure could lower average for max 1cm.

Jews were native inhabitants in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - they lived there for several centuries.


every Byzantine historian says that ancestors of Croats and Serbs came from western ones.

Croats and Serbs came from West Slavic lands, but they did not come to empty space. They came to lands inhabited by other Slavic tribes before.

So Serbs and Croats mixed with other Slavic tribes, who had come from East Slavic lands. Especially Serbs appear to be a highly mixed group.


I2a1b Din in Ukraine is like 11 percent)

In Western and North-Western Ukraine it is over 22 percent. Ukraine is not genetically homogeneous.

===========================================

As for Slovene language - the reason why it is so similar to West Slavic, is because it was originally spoken as far north as the Danube:

Green area = extent of Slovene-speaking populations in the Early Middle Ages (times of the Slavic Principality of Carantania):

Hrvati = Croats (Slavic)
Moravski Slovani = Moravians (Slavic)
Bavarci = Bavarians
Langobardi = Langobards
Romani = Romans / Romance-speakers
Obri = Avars

http://www.gis.si/egw/ZSS_T04_P02/img/karta2.jpg

By the way Slovenes are called "Alpine Slavs" - they also settled in the mountains which were largely unfavourable for agriculture.

Tomenable
07-03-15, 16:41
One more thing from page 31:


Germanic tribes migrated en-masse, taking all of tribe members with them, so what we got after they left were only small leftovers.

Actually Jordanes wrote that it was "Gothic army with families" which migrated (under the leadership of Filimer).

So only warriors and families of warriors. Not entire society.

And we don't even know if those were all warriors - because "army" doesn't necessarily mean "all armed forces".

Hannibal destroyed a Roman army at Cannaea but it was only one army, and Rome had more armies.

clintCG
07-03-15, 17:07
In Western and North-Western Ukraine it is over 22 percent. Ukraine is not genetically homogeneous. They did not came from specifically those parts... so Ukraine has 11 percent. And even if whole Ukraine had 22 percent it still would not explain lack of R1a and great regional differences here.


By the way Slovenes are called "Alpine Slavs" - they also settled in the mountains which were largely unfavourable for agriculture.
I am talking about Slavs in general... and, it is not just about mountains. It is about type of ground. Dinaric mountains in this area are mostly karstic. There are mountain areas here which are at about 1400m of elevation and very steep but still farmable. Compare:
Slovenia:
http://www.trek-inn.com/images/julian_alps.jpg
http://www.slovenian-alps.com/en/imagelib/magnify/default/_kaj-poceti/_relax/Pogled_na_gore.JPG_1.jpg.png

Herzegovina:
http://www.traveltop.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Federacija-Bosna-i-Hercegovina-Bosnia-and-Herzegovina.jpg

http://www.stazeibogaze.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/IMGP5817.jpg



This is getting pointless... if you support Slavic theory, you need to give explanation of these regional genetic differences.


Actually Jordanes wrote that it was "Gothic army with families" which migrated (under the leadership of Filimer).So only warriors and families of warriors. Not entire society.
And we don't even know if those were all warriors - because "army" doesn't necessarily mean "all armed forces".
Hannibal destroyed a Roman army at Cannaea but it was only one army, and Rome had more armies.

If they headed only for conquest he would says "warriors". But it is clear that people migrated (besides that Jordanes has some errors like identifying Dacian tribes with Goths).
When Goths crossed Danube they were Gothic people. In "Chronicles of Priest of Duklja" it is Gothic people that came from north. In "Historia Salonitana" it is also Gothic people that came from Poland.
So are you trying to say that Goths were outbred even before they hit the Ukraine? That they were no more Germanic? That they incorporated various peoples into them? That is simply not true- as Tacitus says, Germanics have no tendencies towards large-scale mixing with other peoples. Good luck with that propaganda...

BTW IMO Goths also lived in more fertile lands until they were pushed by Slavs and Avars.

And I am not saying that Gothic theory is only possible one. I just think it is most possible while Paleolithic continuity is least possible.

There is also smaller possibility that I2a1b originated in some of east-Germanic tribes that joined Slavic tribes who came to Balkan and eventually became Slavic.
This is theory of Serbian DNA administrators of Serbian DNA project at poreklo.rs which is largest database on Yugoslavian DNA. Their theory says that I2a1b is Bastarnae in origin but eventually became Slavic.

Tomenable
07-03-15, 18:29
So are you trying to say that Goths were outbred even before they hit the Ukraine? That they were no more Germanic? That they incorporated various peoples into them?

Well the Gothic kingdom was certainly not mono-ethnic.

It was inhabited by various tribes, whether allies or subjects of Goths, or integral elements incorporated into the Gothic nation.


That is simply not true- as Tacitus says, Germanics have no tendencies towards large-scale mixing with other peoples.

As you admitted above, Tacitus has some errors.

If Germanics have no tendencies towards mixing then why do you (and several other members on this forum) claim that every haplogroup is Germanic ???

Some people claim: I1 Germanic, I2b Germanic, R1b Germanic, R1a Germanic, I2a-Din Germanic, N1c1 (some "Varangian" branch) Germanic. What else ??? And yet no mixing ???

You - people who claim "Germanicness" of everything - already made Germanics a mongrel people by such claims, that they had every kind of haplogroup.

Each of these haplogroups is older than the ethnogenesis of Germanic people, which took place no earlier than the Bronze Age. So they had to mix, if they ever really carried all of these haplogroups.

Recent research on Langobard DNA also supports the mixing theory:

"Lombards on the Move – An Integrative Study of the Migration Period Cemetery at Szólád, Hungary", November 2014:

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0110793#pone-0110793-g005

Abstract:


In 2005 to 2007 45 skeletons of adults and subadults were excavated at the Lombard period cemetery at Szólád (6th century A.D.), Hungary. Embedded into the well-recorded historical context, the article presents the results obtained by an integrative investigation including anthropological, molecular genetic and isotopic (δ15N, δ13C, 87Sr/86Sr) analyses. Skeletal stress markers as well as traces of interpersonal violence were found to occur frequently. The mitochondrial DNA profiles revealed a heterogeneous spectrum of lineages that belong to the haplogroups H, U, J, HV, T2, I, and K, which are common in present-day Europe and in the Near East, while N1a and N1b are today quite rare. Evidence of possible direct maternal kinship was identified in only three pairs of individuals. According to enamel strontium isotope ratios, at least 31% of the individuals died at a location other than their birthplace and/or had moved during childhood. Based on the peculiar 87Sr/86Sr ratio distribution between females, males, and subadults in comparison to local vegetation and soil samples, we propose a three-phase model of group movement. An initial patrilocal group with narrower male but wider female Sr isotope distribution settled at Szólád, whilst the majority of subadults represented in the cemetery yielded a distinct Sr isotope signature. Owing to the virtual absence of Szólád-born adults in the cemetery, we may conclude that the settlement was abandoned after approx. one generation. Population heterogeneity is furthermore supported by the carbon and nitrogen isotope data. They indicate that a group of high-ranking men had access to larger shares of animal-derived food whilst a few individuals consumed remarkable amounts of millet. The inferred dynamics of the burial community are in agreement with hypotheses of a highly mobile lifestyle during the Migration Period and a short-term occupation of Pannonia by Lombard settlers as conveyed by written sources.

Unfortunately no Y-chromosomes could be examined - only mitochondrial DNA.

And here some more details:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30869-Lombards-on-the-move-austria-hungaria?p=449309&viewfull=1#post449309


The paper is basically a confirmation of the historical record: the Lombards were a migratory group who spent some time in Pannonia before continuing onward and eventually reaching Italy. (...) The reproduced data of 28 individuals exhibited a high variability of mitochondrial haplotypes (78.6%). Twenty-two different lineages were identified. This composition includes a large number of hgs that commonly occur in present-day European populations. There are signs of a lot of violence:

"Four skull fractures and eight traumata on the postcranial skeleton were identified in a total of eight adults and one juvenile individual (Table E in File S1). The skull injuries were exclusive to male remains and included three cases of sharp-force trauma (Ind. 4, 13, 27) as well as one case of a depressed fracture (Ind. 43). Three skull fractures bore traces of healing, whilst one had occurred around the time of death."

It's also clear that they were a heavily militarized group, with a lot of wealth, as exhibited in the grave goods. (...) Although there seems to have been malnourishment among the children and some of the adults (lower status ones?), no attempt was made to access the fresh water fish in a near by lake. If their ultimate origin was around the Baltic Sea, doesn't that seem a little peculiar - Scandinavians who don't like fish? (...)

This is their conclusion from all the data:


The biological evidence suggests that the residents of Szólád were not a close reproductive community. This is in agreement with the notion of a partnership of convenience that resembled Germanic tribe formations with people of different cultural backgrounds maintaining regular contact with other contemporary gentes. Influence from several different European regions is supported archaeologically by the grave constructions that included ledge graves and graves with straight walls, some of which were surrounded by rectangular or circular ditches. The stylistic analysis of the grave goods, such as brooches and weaponry, revealed parallels to south-western and central Germany, Moravia and the middle Danube as well as to Italy. The latter also indicates the possible presence of members of the Roman population of Pannonia, who had settled the area prior to the Lombard period.

So authors of this paper claim that Lombards were a mongrel group of several origins already before settling in Italy.

After that they got even more mongrelized by mixing with Italians.

Of course Langobards =/= Goths, but they were also Germanic-speakers (or at least a significant part of them).


Their theory says that I2a1b is Bastarnae in origin but eventually became Slavic.

That's good to know because - if true - then at least this confirms, that I2a1b is not Germanic.

The Bastarnae (Peucini) were originally Celtic, and later became Germanized (started to speak a Germanic language).

Tomenable
07-03-15, 19:01
And I am not saying that Gothic theory is only possible one.
And I'm not saying that it is 100% impossible... I'm just tired of people who see "Germanicness" everywhere. :grin:

But maybe you are right - in such case when and why did Goths stop speaking Germanic and start speaking Slavic ???

For example in Crimea Gothic language is attested as late as the 16th century. But in the Balkans not.

So in the Balkans they started speaking Slavic much earlier than they started speaking Tatar in Crimea:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Tatar_language

Were Slavs and Goths good friends and allies against the Byzantine Empire, or did Slavs and Avars conquer Goths ???

Tomenable
07-03-15, 19:13
if you support Slavic theory, you need to give explanation of these regional genetic differences.

I don't need to explain anything. I already did (see previous posts).

And there are similar - or even greater - differences between Germanic peoples. Norwegians are ca. 30/30/30 mix of I1/R1b/R1a.

But almost all of Norwegian R1a is Z284 (unlike for example in case of German and Austrian R1a - which are totally different clades).

English people are ca. 70% R1b on the other hand. Germans are 40-45% R1b. Swedes have a lot of I1 and N1c1, but not much of R1.

Etc., etc.

And now you claim that people who are over 50% I2a-Din are also Germanic. It adds even more confusion to the already huge mix. If you claim that people with so different genetics can all have common origin, why do you expect Slavs to all have identical genetics ???

I have already seen attempts to reduce Slavic genes as much as possible.

At first it was claimed that only R1a is originally Slavic. Then it was claimed that most of R1a is not even Slavic.

Perhaps Slavic people don't exist. http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/smilies/main/grin.png But Slavic languages have more speakers than Germanic and Romance among Europeans.

Slavic language is not Esperanto - it is not invented, and real people were responsible for spreading it around Europe.

clintCG
07-03-15, 19:46
I do not try to make "Germanicness" of everything. Of course Goths did mix with other peoples, but what are you trying to say is that they got mongrelized and mixed with other people before they even arrived to eastern Europe, which of course, is not true.

That's good to know because - if true - then at least this confirms, that I2a1b is not Germanic.The Bastarnae (Peucini) were originally Celtic, and later became Germanized (started to speak a Germanic language).
No. They were Germanics who later received Celtic influence.

http://www.archaeology.ru/Download/Liachin/Lyakhin_2010_K_voprosu.pdf - E.V Lyahin- K voprosu o prarodine Bastarnov (About question of Bastarnae proto-homeland)

Here I will translate main points from this study translated by Serbian DNA project administration:

1. Tribal group of Bastarnae is formed at area between rivers Oder- Nisa and upper Vistula, area of today Silesia in Poland.

2. Bastarnae belong to Jastorf archaeologic culture which is considered proto-Germanic.

3. In period 5-4. century B.C Celts arrive to Czech area (attracted by lots of ore). Celts have developed society with already formed aristocracy and are carriers of La Tene culture.
4. Neighboring proto-Germanic tribes in Silesia (ancestors of Bastarnae) receive intensive influences from their Celtic neighbors, society of Bastarnae becomes diferentiated by classes, receiving influences of developed La Tene culture. That culture of La Tene-ish Germanics in Silesia will separate in 4th century B.C as Gubin archaeological culture, that is, Jastorf Germanic with La Tene Celtic influences.

5. Starting with 5th century B.C climate in northern and central Europe begins to change, cold periods increase and hunger threatens Jastorf culture, which is very numerous. Ancestors of Bastarnae in old homeland try with sacrificing animals, and then people. Practice of sacrificing people was soonly replaced by exile of young, capable warriors out of tribe.
6. Area of Pridnestrovie (modern day Moldova?) in that period (3rd century B.C) represents empty land between Sarmatians which subdued Scythians on east and Celtic settlements in Panonia. In that so called "Getic desert" Bastarnae start to settle at half of 3rd century B.C. Sources from antiquity mention them 220. B.C

7. Bastarnae mix with Sarmatians and other peoples in area of Moldova and western Ukraine.
8. At around 180. B.C Bastarnae, on invitation of Macedonians cross Danube and come to Balkans to fight against Romans, as fully organised society with their own "principes" and "rex". In their conquests they are joined by Scordisci Celts.

9. Bastarnae will then return again to Podniestrovie (Moldova), bringing with them Panonian-Balkan elements in culture which will together with local cultures and their own La Tene-ized Jastorf Culture will create Zarubnitsy culture which will be main culture of proto-Slavic homeland in next centuries.

That is, in short, what Lyahin describes, and Serbian administrator adds this:

10. Gothic invasion from north will break continuity of Zarubnitsy culture and on her place will appear new cultures, Chernyakhov before all

11. Elements of Zarubnitsy culture reappear again in first authentic Slavic culture Prague-Korchak.

12. Arabian writer-traveller Massudi in 9th century mentions Bastarnae as Slavic tribe near Serbs and others.

13. Bastarnae and Germanic tribe similar to them Sciiri (Odoacer is half-Sciirian) are mentioned even during Migration period

This might be the answer on why Tacitus specifically mention Bastarnae as ones who had mixed marriages (in this case with Sarmatians), while for other Germanics he explicitly says that they did not form such marriages. Maybe Bastarnae were descended from those expelled young warriors, that married girls from areas they came to. Sarmatian here has, I would say, geographical meaning ("from European Sarmatia") and I think girls they married were, in most cases, proto-Slavic or proto-Balto-Slavic.
According to them, this can explain how did some Germanics bring their domination (in meaning of Y-DNA genetics) in some Slavic tribes with I2a Din, and they lost their language and partially lost culture, or in other words, they accepted language and partially accepted culture of R1a1 carriers. That is why we call our language "mother tongue" (Muttersprache, maternji jezik), because mothers are those who teach children language.

Plus those interesting notices:


"First, from eyes of genetics, area on which Isles, and then Disles separated from Dinaric matches more northern Germany and Poland than Balkans or eastern Europe. Except that continental forms of Isles are found on exactly that area. It would be logical that right there we find people that are M423, and not neither Disles, nor Isles nor Dinaric. Those people do not exist in public bases, but AFAIK Nordtvedt mentioned a few haplotypes that he has and that can be classified as M423*, and which are found exactly in Poland and northern Germany. If this assumption is correct then we should search for oldest branches of I2a1 Din right in area of eastern Germany and western Poland.

Second, from eyes of archaeology, all archaeological cultures have their genesis, that is, it can be seen from which previous culture they were formed, as we see Russian archaeologists clearly find Zarubnitsy and other cultures connected to Bastarnae. Đorđe Janković, too, considered Zarubnitsy culture as oldest Slavic, claiming origin of Prague culture from it and connecting material culture of dalmatian Serbs with upper cultures.

Third, from eyes of history, there is plentiful of antiquity sources which describe migrations of Bastarnae, and then Arabic source from 9th century which clearly mentions Bastarnae as one people among Serbs and Slavs.

And last, linguistically, Serbo-Croatian shtokavian and language of Macedonian and Bulgar Slavs can be made as one common proto-language, which shows some characteristics different to all other Slavic languages, which shows one foreign (I2a1b) component in big sea of R1a1."





In my opinion, I2a1b is of ancient Germanic origin, but question of how did it appear in modern-day Slavic-speaking populations and how so unusual different concentration regions of I2a1b and R1a1 are found in Yugoslavia are questions which are yet to be answered.

If Bastarnae carried I2a1b then probably some other east-Germanic tribes also did, which has led me to conclusion of Gothic origin, and Gothic retreat from Avars and Slavs would also explain this concentration pattern. What has also led me to such conclusion was that concetration of I2a1b would be unsually high for a few young warriors expelled from Gubin-Jastorf culture... and as I already explained before conc and diversity patterns of I2a1 Din fit nice in Gothic migrations... but that may and may not be true...

Who knows........

Tomenable
08-03-15, 01:22
9. Bastarnae will then return again to Podniestrovie (Moldova), bringing with them Panonian-Balkan elements in culture which will together with local cultures and their own La Tene-ized Jastorf Culture will create Zarubnitsy culture which will be main culture of proto-Slavic homeland in next centuries.

I'm not familiar with this theory. I have read that the emergence of the Zarubintsy culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zarubintsy_culture) is associated with an eastward migration of people belonging to the Pomeranian culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomeranian_culture) into territory occupied by people of the Milograd culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milograd_culture), and the subsequent mixture between those cultures, which lasted for quite a long time (W. W. Siedow, Седов В. В., Славяние верхнево Поднепровья и Подвинья). The Zarubintsy culture is considered by some scholars Proto-Slavic as it seems to correspond with archaic Slavic hydronymy (Третьяков П. Н., Памятники зарубинецкой культуры). Milograd culture is considered by many scholars Balto-Slavic (before its differentiation into Proto-Slavic, West Baltic and East Baltic) or West Baltic, but Siedow wrote: "В лингвистической литературе высказывались предположения о формировании праславянского на основе одного из окраинных западнобалтийских диалектов или, наоборот, о происхождении западнобалтийских диалектов от одной из групп праславянских говоров." Also Bernstein wrote: "Нет сомнения в том, что балто-славянская сообщность охватила прежде всего праславянский, прусский, ятвяжский язык". So Proto-Slavic and West-Baltic were more closely related than was Proto-Slavic with East Baltic (let's remind you that according to more recent theories, there was no such a thing as a unified Baltic, which later splint into West Baltic and East Baltic - but there was Balto-Slavic which split directly into three branches: West Baltic, Slavic and East Baltic). By the end of the 1st century AD the Zarubintsy culture - according to Siedow - was conquered by Sarmatians, but part of their population escaped northward as refugees and settled in Prussia (archaeological prove of this are supposed to be the type of fibulae which had been previously produced by the Zarubintsy culture, and which start to appear in Prussia in the 2nd century AD). Before that, the Lusatian culture fell to Scythians (see page 76 here: http://www.parzifal-ev.de/uploads/media/gimbutas.pdf), so most likely the Pomeranian culture - which evolved out of the Lusatian culture (see below) had some Scythian admixture as well.

https://archive.org/details/TheBalts

If we add also your info about contribution of Gubin culture (I guess it contributed more to southern part of that culture than to its northern part), then we have a picture of Proto-Slavs emerging from a mixture of the following archaeological cultures: Milograd (West Balts? or Balto-Slavs?), Pomeranian ("Lusatian" - whoever those Lusatians were - mixed with Scythians) and Gubin (Germano-Celtic Bastarnae?). This would mean that those four peoples contributed to the ethnogenesis of Slavs. So they would be ancestors of Slavs, not some later addition to Slavs. So even if Bastarnae (or maybe Celts who influenced them) originally carried I2a-Din, then still it was part of Slavs since the beginning of their ethnogenesis. A later addition to Slavs - on the other hand - would be Sarmatians, to which the Zarubintsy culture fell by the end of the 1st century AD (according to Siedow). When it comes to the Pomeranian culture:


About 650 BC, it evolved from the Lusatian culture between the lower Vistula and Parseta rivers,[2] and subsequently expanded southward.

But it evolved as the result of Scythian influence on the Lusatian culture (see Marija Gimbutas in the link above).

The study by Haak et. al. 2015 found R1a Z280 in an individual of the Lusatian culture from Halberstadt in Germany.

I quoted all the details about that Z280 individual here (what is interesting, that guy was probably a redhead):

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30952-Red-hair-existed-in-pre-historic-Europe?p=451553&viewfull=1#post451553

R1a Z280 is today present in all Slavic and Baltic populations in frequencies between ca. 10% and ca. 50% of all males.

================

All of this suggests that Proto-Slavs evolved out of an interesting mix of Balts (or Balto-Slavs as they are also called - but Balto-Slavic language was rather more similar to modern Baltic languages than to modern Slavic), Lusatians (maybe they spoke some unknown Indo-European language - Venedic, if such a language existed - some scholars hypothesize the existence of Venedic languages as yet another branch of IE), the Bastarnae or Peucini (Germano-Celtic), Scythians and - the final addition - Sarmatians.

I am probably starting to sound like Germanophiles who see "Germanicness" everywhere. :grin:

================

As for the Balto-Slavic past. There are several theories about this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Balto-Slavic_theories_Kromer.svg

The graph illustrates several models of Balto-Slavic interactions, trying to explain similarities between the two groups (Schleicher - common ancestral language separating into Baltic and Slavic; Endzelins - two separate languages which came under influence of each other at some point; Rozwadowski - common ancestry, then separation, followed by becoming close neighbours again; Meillet - prolonged close influences despite lack of common ancestry; Kromer - common ancestry with Baltia never constituting a linguistic unity, but East Baltic and West Baltic groups separating directly from Balto-Slavic). Rozwadowski's model is also interesting.

Currently the mostly commonly accepted model when it comes to differentiation of Baltic is this first suggested by Kromer in 2003 - namely that there was no unified Baltic language (from which later West Baltic and East Baltic emerged), but that Balto-Slavic (which, however, was more similar to Baltic than to Slavic) split directly into three parts - West Baltic (now extinct), Slavic and East Baltic.

Here the theories of Schleicher and Endzelins are outlined:


The close relationship of the Baltic and Slavic languages is indicated by a series of common innovations not shared with other Indo-European languages, and by the fact that the relative chronology of these innovations can be established. Furthermore, there are also many correspondences in vocabulary: the Baltic and Slavic languages share many inherited words. These are either not found at all in other Indo-European languages (except when borrowed) or are inherited from Proto-Indo-European but have undergone identical changes in meaning when compared to other Indo-European languages.

Baltic and Slavic share many close phonological, lexical, morphosyntactic and accentological similarities. The notable early Indo-Europeanist August Schleicher (1861) proposed a simple solution: From Proto-Indo-European descended Proto-Balto-Slavic, out of which Proto-Baltic and Proto-Slavic emerged. The Latvian linguist Jānis Endzelīns thought, however, that any similarities among Baltic and Slavic languages were a result of an intensive language contact.

There is also no perfect agreement on when did the separation of Slavic and Baltic (or both Baltic groups) take place.

Proposed dates range from ca. 1500 BCE to ca. 500 BCE (3500 - 2500 years ago):

Atkinson - 1400 BCE
Novotná & Blažek - 1400–1340 BCE
Sergei Starostin - 1210 BCE
Chang et. al. - 600 BCE (http://www.linguisticsociety.org/files/news/ChangEtAlPreprint.pdf)

===============================


As for the Balto-Slavic past. There are several theories about this

Or maybe something like this:

http://s7.postimg.org/rcznqxcgb/New_Model.png


In my opinion, I2a1b is of ancient Germanic origin

Except that I2 is Non-Indo-European and Germanic people are Indo-European (despite Non-IE admixtures).

So it can only be Pre-Germanic rather than Germnaic. Or it can be Pre-Slavic.

I1 is also Pre-Germanic (it was probably absorbed by Proto-Germanic Indo-Europeans from LBK culture).

Ezio
08-03-15, 11:44
Slavs, Balts, Baltic Finns, and Germanics are taller than others - not just Germanics.

This is confirmed by Byzantine (not just Arab) sources describing Slavs as well:

Procopius of Caesarea (born in ca. 490 died in 565), "De Bello Gothico":

"(...)Nay further, the Slavs do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair are neither very fair or blond, nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type (...)"

Theofylaktos Simokattes, "Oikumenike Historia" (written in years 585 - 641), describing events from 595:

"(...) The Emperor was with great curiosity listening to stories about this tribe, he has welcomed these newcomers from the land of Slavs, and after being amazed by their height and mighty stature, he sent these men to Heraclea. (...)"

Theophanes the Confessor (describing the same event from 595):

"(...) The Emperor was admiring their beauty and their stalwart stature. (...)"

Countries/regions with above 178 cm tall males (on average) according to wikipedia - no data was given for Latvia, Belarus and Ukraine:


While Russia's average (176 cm in year 1992) includes Asian minorities in Russia:

There is also one mistake in this graph - data for Dinaric Alps is from Croatia and Herzegovina (from a 2005 study), not from Bosnia and Slovenia. The average was also less than 185,6 cm, but authors added one centimeter because the sample consisted of young men (some could be still growing).


Height = genes + nutrition. Nutrition is important too - therefore with genes being equal, richer (with better nutrition) country will have taller people.

Sweden should be higher up. The average male height is 181.4 cm.

clintCG
08-03-15, 16:27
Except that I2 is Non-Indo-European and Germanic people are Indo-European (despite Non-IE admixtures).So it can only be Pre-Germanic rather than Germnaic. Or it can be Pre-Slavic.
I1 is also Pre-Germanic (it was probably absorbed by Proto-Germanic Indo-Europeans from LBK culture).
Please... Germanic peoples are linguistically Indo-Europeans, ethnically (or should I say genetically) they are mix of Indo-Europeans and proto-Europeans. Slavic peoples are mainly Indo-European both linguistically and ethnically.
BTW Germanic languages have lots of words of non-Indo-European origin.
I2 and I1 were indeed formed before Germanic, Balto-Slavic, Celtic or any of European peoples were formed.
But when I2a1b Din branch was formed it was already a part of proto-Germanic peoples, and since it was most likely brought to Balkans by east-Germanic tribes, I see no problem in calling it "Germanic".

I don't need to explain anything. I already did (see previous posts).
I saw your explanations of Slavic origin, but I did not hear explanation of why I2a Din grows as we approach Dinaric Alps and R1a drops to very small numbers (5 percent). Some members said it is "pure coincidence", but such pattern is impossible, especially when we consider the fact that modern east-Slavic populations of Ukraine have about 11 (some regions are higher) percent of it, while at same time they are huge in R1a.

I just posted theory of Bastarnae origin, but it still cannot explain it very well. If Bastarnae slavicized (in terms of language) and settled in Balkans as separate tribe, it would make sense, but since they just blended in east-Slavic population it makes no sense.
That is why, in my opinion, I2a Din was brought by some other east-Germanic tribe (in this case Goths), as they were known to have settled in this area since 370's. According to medieval sources all of pre-Slavic populations in Yugoslavia retreated before Slavs and Avars to inaccesible areas (they collectively were called "Vlasi"). Also I explained that only Gothic soldiers went to Italy and settled there as its conquest was purely political (re-establishment of Roman administration and removal of Odoacer by account of emperor Zeno).
Plus there are plentiful of our medieval sources that describe settling of Goths here. And also anthropological similarity to other Germanic peoples...


And about "attacking Slavdom": haplogroup diversity does not mean genetical diversity, nor does it mean that peoples with haplogroup diversity are "mongrels" (as it is non-functional part of DNA), and it certainly does not mean that Slavs are not diverse. Just compare Bulgarians and Poles for example. And Slavs are still largest European group of peoples and largest in territory, too... I don't see why are you offended by this.

The problem at us is many times when someone does not like a theory- he prohibits it (by force). Here is part from famous Yugoslav song "Uz Maršala Tita" (With Marshal Tito):

"[...]Of an ancient kindred we are, but Goths we are not
Part of ancient Slavdom are we.
Whoever says otherwise slanders and lies,
will feel our fist."

"Rod prastari svi smo, a Goti mi nismo,
Slavenstva smo drevnoga čest.
Ko drukčije kaže, kleveće i laže,
Našu će osjetit' pest"
In Yugoslavia it was prohibited to speak about it, and even after fall of it, as one of our historians say, if you research on it you will most likely be stigmatised as "fascist and traitor".



Sweden should be higher up. The average male height is 181.4 cm.

Yes, that's why I put it as higher (but I recalled it bad so I circled it at 182).

mihaitzateo
08-03-15, 17:35
@clintCG (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/members/49335-clintCG)
Dacians are said to have been very tall people also.
As for Jordanes telling that Dacians and Goths were same,I am not that sure about it.
And Dacians were also mountain people. And Goths I do not think were mountain people.
Since you are from Montenegro,I heard that from all Slavs,only Montenegrins,Serbians,Bosnians have some folk customs related to wolves and some of the Serbians telling that a folk custom tells that Serbians are descending from a grey wolf . Dacians = wolf people.
So another theory is that Romanians are Dacians latinized as language and mixed more with different populations,Serbians,Montenegrins,Bosnians,Dacians with strong Slavic language influence (Romanians have part Slavic influence,in language).There is known that lots of Dacians moved south of Danube,after Roman Empire conquest,fearing barbarian invasions.
I do not know about Croatians but I understand that Serbians,Bosnians,Montenegrins are all mountain loving people and they also have quite closed paternal lines.

mihaitzateo
08-03-15, 17:41
@Tormenable:
Go do a little research about consonants/vowels number in Serbo-Croatian and Russian,Ukrainian,Polish.
If I remember exactly,Serbo-Croatian has like 46% consonants,54% vowels,being a very melodious language.
Russian has like 60% consonants,now how come Russian and Serbo-Croatian are said to be from same group of IE languages,I have no idea.

gyms
08-03-15, 18:15
@clintCG (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/members/49335-clintCG)
Dacians are said to have been very tall people also.
As for Jordanes telling that Dacians and Goths were same,I am not that sure about it.
And Dacians were also mountain people. And Goths I do not think were mountain people.
Since you are from Montenegro,I heard that from all Slavs,only Montenegrins,Serbians,Bosnians have some folk customs related to wolves and some of the Serbians telling that a folk custom tells that Serbians are descending from a grey wolf . Dacians = wolf people.
So another theory is that Romanians are Dacians latinized as language and mixed more with different populations,Serbians,Montenegrins,Bosnians,Dacians with strong Slavic language influence (Romanians have part Slavic influence,in language).There is known that lots of Dacians moved south of Danube,after Roman Empire conquest,fearing barbarian invasions.
I do not know about Croatians but I understand that Serbians,Bosnians,Montenegrins are all mountain loving people and they also have quite closed paternal lines.


http://www.imninalu.net/myths-Vlach.htm

The supporters of the Daco-Roman continuity assert that the Dacians were colonized by Romans in such a way that they adopted Latin language and became the ancestors of present-day Romanians (or even dare to say that the Dacians' language was close to Latin, which is utterly improbable). The occupation lasted about 160 years only, a period that was characterized not by an idyllic relationship between the two peoples but by violent rebellions of the Dacians against the invaders with consequent retaliation and repression. After the Romans evacuated Dacia because of the imminent Barbaric invasions, which actually happened, the hypothetical Daco-Romans were supposed to have survived for about a millennium hidden in caves and forests in Transylvania, not being noticed by the different peoples that populated the land in successive waves of immigration. Of course, there is not a single document that might prove such a theory, and from a logical viewpoint is quite unlikely that an entire people would be completely ignored by all Germanic and Eurasian settlers for such a long period.

http://www.ceupress.com/books/html/HistoryAndMythInRomanianConsciousness.html

This book stems from the idea that there is a considerable difference between real history and discourse history. Boia points out that history is constantly reconstructed, adapted and sometimes mythified from the perspective of the present day, of present states of mind and ideologies. Boia closely examines the process of historical culture and conscience in nineteenth and twentieth century Romania, particularly concentrating on the impact of the national ideology on history. Based upon his findings, the author identifies several key mythical configurations and analyses the manner in which Romanians have reconstituted their own highly ideologized history over the last two centuries.
The strength of History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness lies in the author's ability to fully deconstruct the entire Romanian historiographic system and demonstrate the increasing acuteness of national problems in general, and in particular the exploitation of history to support national ideology.

clintCG
08-03-15, 19:16
@clintCG (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/members/49335-clintCG)
Dacians are said to have been very tall people also.
As for Jordanes telling that Dacians and Goths were same,I am not that sure about it.
And Dacians were also mountain people. And Goths I do not think were mountain people.
Since you are from Montenegro,I heard that from all Slavs,only Montenegrins,Serbians,Bosnians have some folk customs related to wolves and some of the Serbians telling that a folk custom tells that Serbians are descending from a grey wolf . Dacians = wolf people.
So another theory is that Romanians are Dacians latinized as language and mixed more with different populations,Serbians,Montenegrins,Bosnians,Dacians with strong Slavic language influence (Romanians have part Slavic influence,in language).There is known that lots of Dacians moved south of Danube,after Roman Empire conquest,fearing barbarian invasions.
I do not know about Croatians but I understand that Serbians,Bosnians,Montenegrins are all mountain loving people and they also have quite closed paternal lines.
Of course Goths were not mountain people, but they, as a pre-Slavic population of western Balkans settled mountains and unaccessible areas when Slavs and Avars came, and that is where we find up to 70 percent of I2a1b (Herzegovina Croats, west Montenegro, etc...). In other words, they inhabited mountains out of necessity.
When we start moving towards plains we see R1a increase and I2a Din decrease.

Don't be offended, but most of your post is BS pseudo-history. Paleolithic continuity theory is dead anyways.

Sile
08-03-15, 19:41
I'm not familiar with this theory. I have read that the emergence of the Zarubintsy culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zarubintsy_culture) is associated with an eastward migration of people belonging to the Pomeranian culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomeranian_culture) into territory occupied by people of the Milograd culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milograd_culture), and the subsequent mixture between those cultures, which lasted for quite a long time (W. W. Siedow, Седов В. В., Славяние верхнево Поднепровья и Подвинья). The Zarubintsy culture is considered by some scholars Proto-Slavic as it seems to correspond with archaic Slavic hydronymy (Третьяков П. Н., Памятники зарубинецкой культуры). Milograd culture is considered by many scholars Balto-Slavic (before its differentiation into Proto-Slavic, West Baltic and East Baltic) or West Baltic, but Siedow wrote: "В лингвистической литературе высказывались предположения о формировании праславянского на основе одного из окраинных западнобалтийских диалектов или, наоборот, о происхождении западнобалтийских диалектов от одной из групп праславянских говоров." Also Bernstein wrote: "Нет сомнения в том, что балто-славянская сообщность охватила прежде всего праславянский, прусский, ятвяжский язык". So Proto-Slavic and West-Baltic were more closely related than was Proto-Slavic with East Baltic (let's remind you that according to more recent theories, there was no such a thing as a unified Baltic, which later splint into West Baltic and East Baltic - but there was Balto-Slavic which split directly into three branches: West Baltic, Slavic and East Baltic). By the end of the 1st century AD the Zarubintsy culture - according to Siedow - was conquered by Sarmatians, but part of their population escaped northward as refugees and settled in Prussia (archaeological prove of this are supposed to be the type of fibulae which had been previously produced by the Zarubintsy culture, and which start to appear in Prussia in the 2nd century AD). Before that, the Lusatian culture fell to Scythians (see page 76 here: http://www.parzifal-ev.de/uploads/media/gimbutas.pdf), so most likely the Pomeranian culture - which evolved out of the Lusatian culture (see below) had some Scythian admixture as well.

https://archive.org/details/TheBalts

If we add also your info about contribution of Gubin culture (I guess it contributed more to southern part of that culture than to its northern part), then we have a picture of Proto-Slavs emerging from a mixture of the following archaeological cultures: Milograd (West Balts? or Balto-Slavs?), Pomeranian ("Lusatian" - whoever those Lusatians were - mixed with Scythians) and Gubin (Germano-Celtic Bastarnae?). This would mean that those four peoples contributed to the ethnogenesis of Slavs. So they would be ancestors of Slavs, not some later addition to Slavs. So even if Bastarnae (or maybe Celts who influenced them) originally carried I2a-Din, then still it was part of Slavs since the beginning of their ethnogenesis. A later addition to Slavs - on the other hand - would be Sarmatians, to which the Zarubintsy culture fell by the end of the 1st century AD (according to Siedow). When it comes to the Pomeranian culture:



But it evolved as the result of Scythian influence on the Lusatian culture (see Marija Gimbutas in the link above).

The study by Haak et. al. 2015 found R1a Z280 in an individual of the Lusatian culture from Halberstadt in Germany.

I quoted all the details about that Z280 individual here (what is interesting, that guy was probably a redhead):

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30952-Red-hair-existed-in-pre-historic-Europe?p=451553&viewfull=1#post451553

R1a Z280 is today present in all Slavic and Baltic populations in frequencies between ca. 10% and ca. 50% of all males.

================

All of this suggests that Proto-Slavs evolved out of an interesting mix of Balts (or Balto-Slavs as they are also called - but Balto-Slavic language was rather more similar to modern Baltic languages than to modern Slavic), Lusatians (maybe they spoke some unknown Indo-European language - Venedic, if such a language existed - some scholars hypothesize the existence of Venedic languages as yet another branch of IE), the Bastarnae or Peucini (Germano-Celtic), Scythians and - the final addition - Sarmatians.

I am probably starting to sound like Germanophiles who see "Germanicness" everywhere. :grin:

================

As for the Balto-Slavic past. There are several theories about this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Balto-Slavic_theories_Kromer.svg

The graph illustrates several models of Balto-Slavic interactions, trying to explain similarities between the two groups (Schleicher - common ancestral language separating into Baltic and Slavic; Endzelins - two separate languages which came under influence of each other at some point; Rozwadowski - common ancestry, then separation, followed by becoming close neighbours again; Meillet - prolonged close influences despite lack of common ancestry; Kromer - common ancestry with Baltia never constituting a linguistic unity, but East Baltic and West Baltic groups separating directly from Balto-Slavic). Rozwadowski's model is also interesting.

Currently the mostly commonly accepted model when it comes to differentiation of Baltic is this first suggested by Kromer in 2003 - namely that there was no unified Baltic language (from which later West Baltic and East Baltic emerged), but that Balto-Slavic (which, however, was more similar to Baltic than to Slavic) split directly into three parts - West Baltic (now extinct), Slavic and East Baltic.

Here the theories of Schleicher and Endzelins are outlined:



There is also no perfect agreement on when did the separation of Slavic and Baltic (or both Baltic groups) take place.

Proposed dates range from ca. 1500 BCE to ca. 500 BCE (3500 - 2500 years ago):

Atkinson - 1400 BCE
Novotná & Blažek - 1400–1340 BCE
Sergei Starostin - 1210 BCE
Chang et. al. - 600 BCE (http://www.linguisticsociety.org/files/news/ChangEtAlPreprint.pdf)

===============================



Or maybe something like this:

http://s7.postimg.org/rcznqxcgb/New_Model.png



Except that I2 is Non-Indo-European and Germanic people are Indo-European (despite Non-IE admixtures).

So it can only be Pre-Germanic rather than Germnaic. Or it can be Pre-Slavic.

I1 is also Pre-Germanic (it was probably absorbed by Proto-Germanic Indo-Europeans from LBK culture).



https://www.academia.edu/4835555/Gallo-Scythians

referred as Bastanae

https://www.academia.edu/4118437/Mediolana_and_the_Zaravetz_Culture


Who Were The Bastarnae ? (https://balkancelts.wordpress.com/2014/03/26/who-were-the-bastarnae-2/) Filed under: Archaeology (https://balkancelts.wordpress.com/category/archaeology/), History (https://balkancelts.wordpress.com/category/history/), Numismatics (https://balkancelts.wordpress.com/category/numismatics/) — 1 Comment (https://balkancelts.wordpress.com/2014/03/26/who-were-the-bastarnae-2/#comments)
March 26, 2014




https://balkancelts.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/bast-intr.jpg?w=640 (https://balkancelts.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/bast-intr.jpg)





‘…the Bastarnæ, the bravest nation of all’.

(Appianus, Mithridatic Wars 10:69)





The most enigmatic ‘barbarian’ people to appear in southeastern Europe in the late Iron Age are undoubtedly the Bastarnae (Βαστάρναι / Βαστέρναι).

While archaeological/numismatic evidence indicates that the Bastarnae tribes had reached the Danube Delta as early as the second half of the 4th c. BC, they first appear in historical sources in connection with the events of 179 BC as allies of Philip V of Macedonia in his war with Rome (Livy 40:5, 57-58), and remain a constant factor in the history of southeastern Europe for over 500 years. Due to the fact that archaeologists have failed to associate a particular archaeological culture with the Bastarnae, the ethnic origin of this people has hitherto remained shrouded in mystery, with a lack of clarity on whether they were initially of Scythian, Germanic or Celtic origin. However, as illustrated below, a chronological analysis of the ancient sources relating to the Bastarnae in general, and archaeological, numismatic and linguistic evidence from the territory of the Bastarnae Peucini tribe in particular, enables us to finally shed some light on this question.





https://balkancelts.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/pel.jpg?w=640 (https://balkancelts.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/pel.jpg)
Bastarnae ‘Huşi-Vovrieşti type’ tetradrachms from the Celtic settlement at Pelczyska, Poland (2nd c. BC)
(see Balkancelts ‘The Celts in Poland’ article)






THE SOURCES


Later authors such as Dio Cassius (3rd c. AD – Dio LI.23.3, 24.2) and Zosimus (late 5th/early 6th c. AD – Zosimus I.34) define the Bastarnae as ‘Scythians’, and to a great extent this is true. By the late Roman period the Bastarnae tribes had been living in the region vaguely referred to as ‘Scythia’ for over half a millennium, and mixing with the local tribes (‘mixed marriages are giving them to some extent the vile appearance of the Sarmatians’ – Tac. Ger. 46). Thus, they were by this stage indeed Scythians, in the same way, for example, the Celtic Scordisci in Thrace are referred to in Roman sources as ‘Thracians’, having inhabited the region of Thrace for a number of centuries. However, as with the latter case, geographical situation by no means indicates ethnic origin.




https://balkancelts.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/pel-wom.jpg?w=640 (https://balkancelts.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/pel-wom.jpg)
Facial Reconstruction of a Bastarnae woman found in Burial # 9 at the Celtic settlement in Pelczyska, Poland

(see Balkancelts ‘Face of a Stranger’ article’)





While sources such as Strabo (early 1st c. AD – see below), and Tacitus (circa 100 AD; Tac. Ger. 43), are often cited to support the view that the Bastarnae were of Germanic origin, in fact, a closer analysis of the testimony of both these sources reveals that neither is in fact certain about who the Bastarnae were. While Strabo informs us that the Bastarnae lived mixed with the Thracian and Celtic tribes in Thrace, both north and south of the river, he also admits, ‘I know neither the Bastarnae, nor the Sarmatae nor, in a word, any of the peoples who dwell above the Pontus’ (Strabo VII, 2:4). Tacitus states the following:

‘Peucini, quos quidam Bastarnas, vocunt sermon cultu, sede ac domiciliis ut Germani agunt’ (Tac. op cit.)

i.e. – he informs us, not that the Bastarnae were Germani, but that they were ‘similar to the Germani’. In this case one should bear in mind that many of the Celts who migrated into southeastern Europe and Asia-Minor from the end of the 4th c. BC onwards originated from the Belgae group of Celtic tribes (see also ‘Galatia’ article), who are described in ancient sources as being most like the Germani.

The other ancient authors are clear on the ethnic origin of the Bastarnae. The earliest source, Polybius (200-118 BC; XXIV 9,13) refers to them as Celtic (Galatians), while Livy (59 BC – 17 AD) tells us that they had the same customs and spoke the same language as the Celtic Scordisci, and also mentions close military and political ties between the Bastarnae and Scordisci (Livy 40:57). Plutarch (46 – 120 AD; Aem. 9.6) refers to them as ‘Gauls on the Danube who are called Bastarnae’.





THE BASTARNAE IN THRACE



It was in the wake of the aforementioned events of 179 BC that the Peucini, the southern branch of the Bastarnae, were drawn south of the Danube into Thrace. They were at this stage a powerful military and political force in southeastern Europe, which is illustrated by the enthusiasm that Philip V of Macedonia showed at the prospect of being allied to them:
‘The envoys whom he had sent to the Bastarnae to summon assistance had returned and brought back with them some young nobles, amongst them some of royal blood. One of these promised to give his sister in marriage to Philip’s son, and the king was quite elated at the prospect of an alliance with that nation’ (Livy 40:5).
Although Philip’s sudden death meant that the joint attack on Rome by the Macedonians and Bastarnae came to nothing, by this time a large group of the (Peucini) Bastarnae had already migrated into Thrace, and a group of 30,000 of them subsequently settled in Dardania; another larger group of Bastarnae returned eastwards and settled in the area of today’s eastern Bulgaria (Livy 40:58), where Bastarnae kingdoms were established in the Dobruja area. At the beginning of the 1st c. AD Strabo (VII, 3:2) mentions that the ethnic make-up of this area consisted of a complex mix of Thracians, Scythians, Celts and Bastarnae:
“the Bastarnae tribes are mingled with the Thracians, more indeed with those beyond the Ister (Danube), but also with those this side. And mingled with them are also the Celtic tribes…”.

A thriving ‘barbarian’ culture emerged in this area (southeastern Romania/northeastern Bulgaria) during the 2nd/ 1st c. BC, based on a symbiotic relationship between these various groups and the Greek Black Sea colonies – a culture which was brought to a brutal end in the mid 1st c. BC by the destructive rampage of the Getic leader Burebista, which also paved the way for the Roman conquest of the Dobruja.






https://balkancelts.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/aelis.jpg?w=640 (https://balkancelts.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/aelis.jpg)
Bronze issue of the (Peucini) Bastarnae king Aelis (s. Dobruja region, Bulgaria – c. 180-150 BC).
- Jugate heads of the Dioskouroi right, in wreathed caps / jugate horse heads right; monogram & ΠΕ (for Peucini) below

(see also ‘Balkancelts ‘Peucini’ article)





In summary, an analysis of the ancient sources would appear to indicate that the Bastarnae tribes were initially of Celtic (Belgic) origin. This is confirmed by numismatic, archaeological, and linguistic evidence from the territory of the Bastarnae Peucini tribe in n.e. Bulgaria, s.e. Romania, Moldova and Ukraine. One should also note that the first archaeological/numismatic evidence of the presence of the Bastarnae in s.e. Europe (2nd half of the 4th c. BC) corresponds chronologically with the Celtic migration into the region.
It would therefore appear, based on the available scientific data, that the elusive Bastarnae tribes were not some mysterious Germanic people who appeared in southeastern Europe during this period, but that they, like the Galatians, were tribes of the Belgae group who migrated into the area during the Celtic expansion at the end of the 4th / beginning of the 3rd c. BC. Scientific evidence from the Dobruja region (loc cit) further indicates that the original Celto-Germanic (Belgic) nature of this culture subsequently underwent a fundamental metamorphosis due to prolonged contact and co-existence with the Hellenistic and Scythian cultures, the resulting fusion of Celtic, Hellenistic and Scythian cultural elements culminating in a unique and distinct Bastarnae ethnicity by the Roman period.



In the later Roman period the policy of ethnic engineering further strengthened the Bastarnae presence south of the Danube. Under the Emperor Probus (276-82) 100,000 of them were settled in Thrace (Historia Augusta Probus 18), and shortly afterwards Emperor Diocletian (284-305) carried out another ‘massive’ transfer of the Bastarnae population to the south of the Danube (Eutropius IX.25; see Balkancelts ‘Ethnic Engineering’ article). Thus, the Bastarnae presence on the territory of today’s Bulgaria, already well established since the 2nd c. BC, was further reinforced by the policies of both Probus and Diocletian.

mihaitzateo
09-03-15, 01:03
I am not offended,but if someone would study Romanian and South Slavic will find cognates that are not found in other Slavic or IE languages.
I found a very strange cognate,Sardinian,Serbo-Croatian and Romanian has it and maybe,also some Albanian dialect,about a product made from sheep or pig intestines.
I also read a study about how the bride is taken,from her parents home and that is almost identical to what is happening in Transylvania,Romania.
A study about Serbo-Croatian people customs (Serbians,Montenegrins,Bosnians,Croatians and Slovenians).
I have a personal theory that Bosnians,Serbians,Croatians are coming from Transylvania,they were Dacians occupied by Roman Empire and moved on South of Danube,when Roman Empire retired.
Who knows,maybe most closed language from today languages to Dacian language is Serbo-Croatian?
Montenegrins I think are Dacians from South of Danube.
The fact that Albanians,Montenegrins,Serbians,Croatians,Bosnians are about 90% or more Dinarids,as phenotype shows they did not received too much genetic input in last thousands of years.
At Romanians,only 33% are Dinarids.
However,I think in mountain villages,percentage increases.

mihaitzateo
09-03-15, 01:14
Gyms,only Romanians from a part of South Romania were called "Vlachs".
From wikipedia:
"The word Vlach is ultimately of Germanic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_languages) origin, from the word Walha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walha), "foreigner", "stranger", a name used by ancient Germanic peoples to refer to Romance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_languages)-speaking and (Romanized) Celtic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts) neighbours"
See Welsh,Wallons also,as example.
But they were not calling themselves "Vlachs" foreign people were calling them like that,because of their Romance language.
They were calling themselves "Munteni".
Go get a clue,Olt,a major river in Romania,from which another group of Romanians are taking their name,Olteni,is a word of Celtic origin,cognate to Olten district from Switzerland.
What is telling that?
That the name is preserved at least from the time of Dacians.
There 7 large areas of folklore in Romania,Moldova being one of them,which covers Moldova from Romania,Bessarabia and Bukovine.
These people are called "moldoveni" no one ever called them "Vlachi" because their accent have a little of Eastern Slavic sonority.
They also had a lot of contact to Eastern Slavs (especially Ukrainians) and they are having very few J2 and E-V13,but having high I2-din and also about 20% or even more R1A.
You should know that the term in Romanian ,even old Romanian,for Germans is "nemtzi" cognate to Slavic "nemczi" which means strangers.
Also in both Serbo-Croatian and Romanian (old Romanian) Italians are called "Taliani" - in Serbo Croatian "Talieni" in Romanian - plural form.

Tomenable
09-03-15, 14:37
Please... Germanic peoples are linguistically Indo-Europeans, ethnically (or should I say genetically) they are mix of Indo-Europeans and proto-Europeans

You are not up-to-date with new findings. Germanic peoples are ethnically mostly Indo-Europeans.

Both light skin and lactase persistence in European populations were spread by Indo-European migrations:

"High frequency of lactose intolerance in a prehistoric hunter-gatherer population in northern Europe":

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/10/89

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186%2F1471-2148-10-89


Here we investigate the frequency of an allele (-13910*T) associated with lactase persistence in a Neolithic Scandinavian population. From the 14 individuals originally examined, 10 yielded reliable results. We find that the T allele frequency was very low (5%) in this Middle Neolithic hunter-gatherer population, and that the frequency is dramatically different from the extant Swedish population (74%).

We conclude that this difference in frequency could not have arisen by genetic drift and is either due to selection or, more likely, replacement of hunter-gatherer populations by new immigrants.

The most probable reason for this, is the population replacement in Scandinavia - as revealed by genetic studies:

"Ancient DNA Reveals Lack of Continuity between Neolithic Hunter-Gatherers and Contemporary Scandinavians":

http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2809%2901694-7?cc=y

Lactose tolerance was spread by Indo-Europeans, who were pastoralists and whose diet largely consisted of dairy (milk):

https://dnaexplained.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/hammer-2014-27.jpg?w=584&h=383

Lactase persistence gene allows you to consume more dairy products and drink more milk.

That's what Proto-Indo-European pastoralists did.

So modern Scandinavians are descendants of Indo-European immigrants, not of prehistoric Scandinavians.

Archaeology only confirms this conclusion, that Scandinavia was colonized by IE immigrants:

http://dienekes.blogspot.fi/2015/02/scandinavian-team-looking-for-indo.html


“Two thousand years ago, we started having Kurgan graves in Scandinavia,” said Ellingvag. The commonalities between burial mounds in Norway and Scythian/Saka mounds in Kazakhstan are striking, he said. “[The Scythian people] had these ornaments, these animal ornaments, which are very, very important in Scandinavian art … and the ornaments are actually quite similar, which is striking, it’s very special.”

Tomenable
09-03-15, 14:39
Lactase persistence is more common in Northern Europe than in Southern Europe today.

This is in agreement with recent findings that Northern Europeans have more of Indo-European ancestry.

By contrast Southern Europeans have more ancestry from Middle Eastern Neolithic farmers.

arvistro
09-03-15, 14:49
According to this map
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1566/863
it actually looks like Germanic (or Germano Celtic?)/non-Germanic, rather than North/South in Europe. With Baltic states and East Slavs looking as yellow, as Spain and other South Euros. Not sure where exactly Poland borders are, it looks like part of it is drawn yellow too.

Indeed, LP frequency can vary from 15–54% in eastern and southern Europe to 62–86% in central and western Europe, and to as high as 89–96% in the British Isles and Scandinavia (from text in link above)

Tomenable
09-03-15, 15:11
Percent of lactose intolerance in Southern Europe is much higher than in Eastern Europe:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactase_persistence#Distribution

Percent of Lactase Persistence (according to Bersaglieri 2004):

Sardinians (Italy) 7.1%
Tuscans (Italy) 6.3%
North Italians 35.7%
French (France) 43.1%
French Basques 66.7%
Orcadians 68.8%
Swedes and Finns 81.5%
Irish people 90.0%

Since Irish, Basques and Finnish people are not Germanic (or at least no more than Orcadians or Swedes), I don't see any correlation.

And Basques are a strange case, since their Y-DNA is Indo-European even though they speak a Non-Indo-European language.

BTW:


Lactose intolerance is a little different. Before the genetics of lactose digestion were understood, the test for lactose tolerance/intolerance was rather artifical and involved drinking a measured amount of milk of a certain quality and seeing the effects. It had been noted that individuals varied considerably. Some could drink half a glass of milk happily whlist others got sick from the smallest amount. Others could of course consume large quantities of the stuff with no ill effects whatsoever. Whatever the merits of the tolerance/intolerance tests, it was a line, however artificial. So, whilst Bersaglieri's data show 92.9% of Sardinians are Lactase non persistent, Lactose intolerance tests show 86% of Sardinians to be Lactose intolerant.

Angela
09-03-15, 16:35
Gentlemen, I have no personal stake in the matter at hand, but perhaps it's as well, in this as in all matters, to be a little more precise and not make generalizations that are not actually supported by the data? Haak et al:
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-dIAiuvDRSMs/VOmimlVjEVI/AAAAAAAACCE/h2aiCQmTRqE/w350-h365-no/Haak_et_al_Fig_3_small.

So, while Corded Ware and other LN/EBA people in elite burials were mostly "Yamnaya Indo-European", northern Europeans today are about 50% Yamnaya, which is about half EHG and half "Armenian" like. Actually, I would maintain that their "Yamnaya" percentage is inflated even at 50%, but that's a topic for another thread.

As for the "Yamnaya Indo-Europeans" spreading some of the light pigmentation genes, Yamnaya Indo-Europeans from Samara were dark haired, dark eyed, and not particularly fair skinned (lots of SLC24A5, but very little SLC42A5 and some other light pigmentation genes.) I don't quite see how that particular group could have done much spreading of light pigmentation. It's of course true that Yamnaya people from more westerly areas or more northerly areas than Samara might have had a different and more "light" set of alleles, more similar perhaps to the Samara HG rather than to the Karelia HG. We'll have to wait and see. We may be seeing a series of localized founder effects.

Looking at the distribution of light pigmentation alleles in Genetiker's work (I make no personal assertions as to its 100% accuracy) to which Fire-Haired directed our attention, it seems that in terms of skin pigmentation SLC42A5has a "hot spot" in the SHG of Scandinavia (Motala) If this result is duplicated in the forthcoming paper, perhaps it spread from there by various processes and at various times? (Interesting that WHG should lack these alleles, and then they show up in a WHG/ANE hunter group, but mutations happen where they happen. Also interesting that this Motala group should have samples with alleles that correlate with fair hair and fair skin, and also code for the EDAR Mongoloid mutation (4/7). Ancient dna always surprises.)

See:
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/07/phenotype-snps-from-prehistoric-europe/

Lactase persistence is another issue. Yamnaya and EHG were lactose intolerant as were the Neolithic farmers. The gene first shows up in central Europe. This is the data from the genetiker site. Only the bold is the derived allele.
CM6, rs182549, ability to digest milk Alberstedt LN I0118 CC
Corded Ware LN I0103 CC
Esperstedt MN I0172 CC
LBK EN I0054 CC
Spain EN I0410 CC
Spain EN I0412 CC
Spain MN I0408 CC
Unetice EBA I0047 CC
Yamnaya I0231 CC
Yamnaya I0443 CC
MCM6, rs4988235, ability to digest milk
Alberstedt LN I0118 GG
Baalberge MN I0560 GG
Baalberge MN I0807 GG
Bell Beaker LN I0108 GG
Bell Beaker LN I0111 GG
Bell Beaker LN I0112 GA
Bell Beaker LN I0806 GG
BenzigerodeHeimburg LN I0058 GG
BenzigerodeHeimburg LN I0059 GG
BenzigerodeHeimburg LN I0171 GG
Corded Ware LN I0103 GG
Corded Ware LN I0104 GG
Esperstedt MN I0172 GG
Halberstadt LBA I0099 GG
Karelia HG I0061 GG
LBK EN I0022 GG
LBK EN I0025 GG
LBK EN I0026 GG
LBK EN I0046 GG
LBK EN I0054 GG
LBK EN I0100 GG
LBK EN I0659 GG
LBK EN I0821 GG
Motala HG I0011 GG
Motala HG I0012 GG
Motala HG I0013 GG
Motala HG I0014 GG
Motala HG I0015 GG
Motala HG I0016 GG
Motala HG I0017 GG
Samara HG I0124 GG
Spain EN I0409 GG
Spain EN I0410 GG
Spain EN I0412 GG
Spain EN I0413 GG
Spain MN I0405 GG
Spain MN I0406 GG
Spain MN I0407 GG
Spain MN I0408 GG
Unetice EBA I0047 GG
Unetice EBA I0114 GG
Unetice EBA I0116 GG
Unetice EBA I0117 GG
Unetice EBA I0164 GA
Yamnaya I0231 GG
Yamnaya I0357 GG
Yamnaya I0370 GG
Yamnaya I0429 GG
Yamnaya I0438 GG
Yamnaya I0443 GG
Yamnaya I0444 GG

clintCG
09-03-15, 17:01
You are not up-to-date with new findings. Germanic peoples are ethnically mostly Indo-Europeans.
Both light skin and lactase persistence in European populations were spread by Indo-European migrations:
"High frequency of lactose intolerance in a prehistoric hunter-gatherer population in northern Europe":
Sorry, what I meant to say is that by haplogroups they are mix of Indo-Europeans and proto-Europeans, not by autosomal DNA...
I do not know much about lactose tolerance so I'm going to skip that part.
But part when you claim that light skin gene is of only Indo-European origin is a big lie. European light skin is of Neanderthal origin
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/01/140129-neanderthal-genes-genetics-migration-africa-eurasian-science/

"For example, the Neanderthal version of the skin gene POU2F3 is found in around 66 percent of East Asians, while the Neanderthal version of BNC2, which affects skin color, among other traits, is found in 70 percent of Europeans".

"Two studies published concurrently in Nature and Science on Wednesday suggest that while the Neanderthal contribution to our genomes was modest, it may have proved vitally important.

Some parts of non-African genomes are totally devoid of Neanderthal DNA, but other regions abound with it, including those containing genes that affect our skin and hair. This hints that the Neanderthal gene versions conferred some benefit, and were kept during evolution".

You can not survive for a long time in northern climate with dark skin... Neanderthals had light skin, and quite often they had light eyes and hair, and it is obvious that European genes for light pigmentation is of Neanderthal origin.

I will quote Peter Frost on hair and eye pigmentation:
"For others still, this color diversity arose through random factors: genetic drift, founder effects, relaxation of natural selection, etc. But these factors could not have produced such a wide variety of hair and eye hues in the 35,000 years that modern humans have inhabited Europe. The hair-color gene (MC1R) has at least 7 alleles that exist only in Europe and the same is probably true for the eye-color gene (OCA2). If we take the hypothesis of a relaxation of selection, nearly a million years would be needed to accumulate this amount of diversity. Moreover, it is odd that the same sort of diversification has evolved at two different genes whose only point in common is to color a facial feature".




But let's not go in off-topic further and further.


My point is that I2a1b Din was already common among proto-Germanic peoples, just like clades of some other haplogroups were, regardless of whether they are proto-European (Indo-Europeanized) or Indo-European.
Area where Isles, Disles and Dinaric split from I2a M423 does not match eastern Europe. Nor can its concentration gradient in Yugoslavia be explained with Slavic migration...

Tomenable
09-03-15, 20:10
But part when you claim that light skin gene is of only Indo-European origin is a big lie. European light skin is of Neanderthal origin

Sorry but Neanderthals lived across most of Eurasia, from the Altai Mountains (bones found recently) to Iberia. Maybe even in China.

But the 8000-year-old Loschbour hunter (from what is now Luxembourg) had dark skin, for example.

So apparently not everywhere people interbred with Neanderthals. There were only few instances of interbreeding.

Ancestors of Indo-Europeans and East Asians could interbreed with Neanderthals - ancestors of other Non-Indo-Europeans perhaps did not.

It is possible that only later Indo-Europeans spread Neanderthal genes from one corner of Eurasia to most of the continent.

Diurpaneus
10-03-15, 18:39
http://www.imninalu.net/myths-Vlach.htm



The article manipulates the many existing uncertainties towards an extreme direction,without taking a critical approach.
It is very convenient to choose the amnesia moments;and our hypocrisy does that quite often.

The Romans intensively exploited the province Dacia Traiana for its very rich deposits of gold,iron and salt.
Thus,the use of Latin became a necessity.

Some linguistic evidence

It is very hard for a language to preserve the peripheral words,because of the simplifying impulse.
These tendencies affect even the native speakers.
In the case of Latin,this simplification inevitably occured in the Imperial Age,due its tremendous expansion.
So, these apparently meaningless words can be used for tracking the "genuine"Romans.

Romanian has several,here's one of them:

bade(addressing formula to an elder man,elder brother,lover)
THE ONLY CORRESPONDENCE- A COUPLE OF WORDS FROM A LAZIO DIALECT
bade-old man
bad-to grow old
Badea is a usual Romanian family name.

Also,several common words of Latin origin preserved only in the Transylvanian dialect:

nea(snow),Latin nix,nivis
pacurar(shepherd), from pecorarius
arina(sand),from arena
june(young man), from juvenis
ai(garlic),from alium

The province Dacia Traiana stretched along the Carpathians,so do the Romanians,this can't be coincidental.
Any person with a decent line of thought realizes the importance of this event in the Romanian ethnogenesis.Though, it clearly wasn't the only Romance imput.


Transylvania was a peripheral area within both Hunnic and Avar confederations,cause the steppe peoples preferred the lowlands,while the Gepids peaked in the northern parts.



P.S. You're obviously capable of changing the environment;not in this way,though.

Ike
11-03-15, 05:55
You should know that the term in Romanian ,even old Romanian,for Germans is "nemtzi" cognate to Slavic "nemczi" which means strangers..

"Nemczi" is more close to "mute".

gyms
11-03-15, 09:09
The article manipulates the many existing uncertainties towards an extreme direction,without taking a critical approach.
It is very convenient to choose the amnesia moments;and our hypocrisy does that quite often.

The Romans intensively exploited the province Dacia Traiana for its very rich deposits of gold,iron and salt.
Thus,the use of Latin became a necessity.

Some linguistic evidence

It is very hard for a language to preserve the peripheral words,because of the simplifying impulse.
These tendencies affect even the native speakers.
In the case of Latin,this simplification inevitably occured in the Imperial Age,due its tremendous expansion.
So, these apparently meaningless words can be used for tracking the "genuine"Romans.

Romanian has several,here's one of them:

bade(addressing formula to an elder man,elder brother,lover)
THE ONLY CORRESPONDENCE- A COUPLE OF WORDS FROM A LAZIO DIALECT
bade-old man
bad-to grow old
Badea is a usual Romanian family name.

Also,several common words of Latin origin preserved only in the Transylvanian dialect:

nea(snow),Latin nix,nivis
pacurar(shepherd), from pecorarius
arina(sand),from arena
june(young man), from juvenis
ai(garlic),from alium

The province Dacia Traiana stretched along the Carpathians,so do the Romanians,this can't be coincidental.
Any person with a decent line of thought realizes the importance of this event in the Romanian ethnogenesis.Though, it clearly wasn't the only Romance imput.


Transylvania was a peripheral area within both Hunnic and Avar confederations,cause the steppe peoples preferred the lowlands,while the Gepids peaked in the northern parts.



P.S. You're obviously capable of changing the environment;not in this way,though.

http://www.icr.ro/files/items/12669_1_History%20and%20Myth%20in%20the%20Romanian %20Consciousness_Lucian%20Boia.pdf

Tomenable
12-03-15, 01:31
An anthropological paper about Croats:

https://ariets.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/15311416.pdf


(...) Our results showed marked craniometrical similarities between early medieval Croat and medieval Polish series. Among all of the 39 analyzed European sites, the two exhibiting the greatest similarities were Nin, a site representing the nucleus of the early medieval Croat state (72), and Cedynia, a Polish site located approximately 75 km south of the Baltic Sea. Conversely, the 5 analyzed Iranian sites exhibited no similarity with the early medieval Croat sites and were all located in the diametrically opposite part of the scatter plot. These results suggest that early medieval Croats were of Slavic ancestry, and that early medieval Croats and Poles at one time shared a common homeland. Recent genetic analyses of the nonrecombining Y chromosome from 25 extant European and Middle Eastern populations support the Slavic affiliation of the Croats, and also indicate significant genetic similarities between modern Croats and Poles (1). (...)

Tomenable
13-03-15, 15:54
As for Slavic expansion into the Balkans:

South Slavonic tribes were raiding Roman lands from their homeland north of the Danube river in what is now southern Romania since around the 490s, but they started to settle south of the Danube (in Balkans "proper") only since around 545. First settlements from ca. 545 - 550 were established in eastern Bosnia, Lower and Upper Moesia, and Little Scythia - including the regions of Ulmetum and Adina. Around the same time (ca. 550) first Slavic immigrants probably reached what is now Slovenia (they could be the same tribe which had besieged Durazzo in 547). Second wave of Slavs came to Slovenia after 568 (this time from the north, most probably from Moravia). According to John of Ephesus and Menander Protector another major wave of Slavs (Menander wrote that their strength was 100,000 but he didn't specify whether that included only warriors or all people) broke into Thrace and Thessaly as far as the Great Walls of Constantinople in period 577 - 580, and settled in vast areas. Sources mention that those Slavs were led by a war chief named Ardagast or Radogost (Ардагаст), and a king named Musokios. They could also reach as far as Greece "proper" already by ca. 580, when they sacked Athens, for which there is archaeological evidence (other sources indicate that Slavs started to settle in Attica and the Peloponnese only later, around 610). In 599 Pope Gregory I in a letter to Exarch of Italy wrote that Slavs had already seized most of Istria, and were penetrating into the Italian Peninsula. After mentioned invasions by Slavs, in 584 AD Byzantine Emperor Maurice sent emissaries to the Khagan of the Avars - Bayan I -, asking him for help against Slavs. The Avars initially worked as Byzantine allies against the Slavs. In 584 Ardagast with his Slavs besieged Constantinople but was repulsed by combined Byzantine-Avar forces, and later lost two more battles against Byzantine and Avar forces led by certain Comentiolus (the battle of Erginia River and the battle of Ansinon, near Hadrianopole). Comentiolus also pushed the Slavic settlers out of the region of Astica. In 585 the Byzantines-Avars decided to attack the original South Slavic lands across the Danube - forces under command of Priscus and Gentzon crossed the river at Dorostolon (present-day Silistra) and surprise-attacked the Slavs in their native territory (as most of their forces had long been campaigning in the Byzantine part of Balkans). They attacked at midnight and defeated the Slavs, Ardagast fell on a tree stump and was almost captured, luckily he was near a river and eluded the attackers. But later alliances switched - the Avars abandoned their Byzantine allies and instead started to cooperate with the Slavs, having subordinated some of their tribes (most notably the southern branch of Dudlebes), and having signed alliances with other tribes. So the conquest and colonization of most of the Balkans by the Slavs could be completed with Avar help in the early 600s. Avars were not very numerous but they were excellent horsemen, while Slavs comprised all of the infantry and crews of the navy, as well as some of the horsemen too.

But despite repeated attempts the Slavs-Avars never managed to capture two heavily fortified coastal cities - Constantinople and Thessalonica.

Croats and Serbs is another story. They came to the Balkans much later, in the 2nd half of the 7th century, invited by the Byzantines to fight against Avars and South Slavic tribes (ancestors of modern Bosniaks, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Bulgarians) in Dalmatia. Croats and Serbs were originally West Slavs. Slovenes emerged from two waves of Slavic immigration - one from the east (South Slavs) and one West Slavic - from the north - but which came earlier than Serbo-Croatian speakers. Before coming to the Balkans, Croats had established their tribal state somewhere around the Carpathian Mountains. It was called White Croatia. Ancestors of Serbs on the other hand, migrated in two directions - one wave settled in Germany (those became Sorbs), one in the Balkans.

==============================

Chronological differentiation of Slavic languages (Starostin 2004):

Dates along the X axis represent time since Common Slavic, while dates within the tree represent years:

Serbian could as well be named Serbo-Croatian: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian

http://images66.fotosik.pl/696/fddec0302c0c8ab9.jpg

According to this diagram, Common Slavic started to differentiate itself already between 130 AD and 270 AD.

This only supports written sources (Jordanes, Procopius, etc.) which say that Slavs were divided into several nations already in the 6th century.

So Slavs were not culturally monolithic by that time, and there already existed several distinct Slavic dialects / languages.

Polish language started to differentiate from Czecho-Slovak already around 780 AD according to this data.

Tomenable
13-03-15, 16:12
Some groups of Slavic people also penetrated into Italy through Istria.

That was reported for example by Pope Gregory I in his letter (dated 599 AD) to Exarch of Italy:

"(...) It deeply afflicts and disquiets me the Slavic nation that menace us. It afflicts me from what I already suffer from you, it disquiets me because they have already started to penetrate into the Italic Peninsula through Istria. (...)" - Pope Gregory I

Also later there were Slavic raids against Italy, and some settlements were established in Italy by Slavic pirates coming across the Adriatic Sea.

Some episodes are mentioned for example in "Historia Langobardorum" written by Paul the Deacon in the 8th century AD:

"Historia Langobardorum", Book 4, chapter XLIV:


Then on the death of Arichis, who had held the dukedom fifty years, Aio, his son, was made leader of the Samnites, [1] and still Radoald and Grimoald [2] obeyed him in all things as their elder brother and lord. When this Aio had already governed the dukedom of Beneventum a year and five months, the Slavs came with a great number of ships and set up their camp not far from the city of Sipontum (Siponto). They made hidden pit-falls around their camp and when Aio came upon them in the absence of Raduald and Grimoald and attempted to conquer them, his horse fell into one of these pit-falls, the Slavs rushed upon him and he was killed with a number of others.

"Historia Langobardorum", Book 6, chapter XXIV:


When Ado who we said was caretaker [1] had died at Forum Julii, Ferdulf, a man tricky and conceited, who came from the territories of Liguria, obtained the dukedom. Because he wanted to have the glory of a victory over the Slavs, he brought great misfortune upon himself and the people of Forum Julii. He gave sums of money to certain Slavs to send upon his request an army of Slavs into this province, and it was accordingly done. But that was the cause of great disaster in this province of Forum Julii. The freebooters of the Slavs fell upon the flocks and upon the shepherds of the sheep that pastured in their neighborhoods and drove away the booty taken from them. The ruler of that place, whom they called in their own language "sculdahis," [2] a man of noble birth and strong in courage and capacity, followed them, but nevertheless he could not overtake the freebooters. Duke Ferdulf met him as he was returning thence and when he asked him what had become of these robbers, Argait, for that was his name, answered that they had escaped. Then Ferdulf in rage thus spoke to him: "When could you do anything bravely, you whose name, Argait, comes from the word coward," [3] and Argait, provoked by great anger, since he was a brave man, answered as follows: "May God so will that you and I, duke Ferdulf, may not depart from this life until others know which of us is the greater coward." When they had spoken to each other in turn, these words, in the vulgar tongue [4] it happened not many days afterwards, that the army of the Slavs, for whose coming duke Ferdulf had given his sums of money, now arrived in great strength. And when they had set their camp upon the very top of a mountain and it was hard to approach them from almost any side, duke Ferdulf, coming upon them with his army, began to go around that mountain in order that he could attack them by more level places. Then Argait of whom we have spoken thus said to Ferdulf: "Remember, duke Ferdulf, that you said I was lazy and useless and that you called me in our common speech a coward, but now may the anger of God come upon him who shall be the last of us to attack those Slavs," and saying these words, he turned his horse where the ascent was difficult on account of the steepness of the mountain, and began to attack the fortified camp of the Slavs. Ferdulf, being ashamed not to attack the Slavs himself, through the same difficult places, followed him through those steep and hard and pathless spots, and his army too, considering it base not to follow their leader, began also to press on after him. Consequently the Slavs, seeing that they were coming upon them through steep places, prepared themselves manfully, and fighting against them more with stones and axes [1] than with arms they threw them nearly all from their horses and killed them. And thus they obtained their victory, not by their own strength, but by chance. There all the nobility of the Friulans perished. There duke Ferdulf fell and there too he who had provoked him was killed. And there so great a number of brave men were vanquished by the wickedness and thoughtlessness of dissension as could, with unity and wholesome counsel, overthrow many thousands of their enemies.

==========================

One of most important Italian bases of ethnically Slavic pirates and settlers in Central Italy was Bari.

There were also some Slavic settlements in Calabria - Slavic language was spoken there until the 12th century.

Among Muslim invaders of Southern Italy and Sicily, there were also Slavic mercenaries and people of ethnic Slavic descent:


(...) In the third decade of the 10th century, due to Byzantine threat, came from Tripoli Emir Masud the Slav (Masud Sāqlābi) - of Slavic descent - and together with his druzhina he captured the strategically important castle of Santa Agata. From the same period we have information about Slavic settlements on Sicily - one of them was called Sclafani - and about the district of Palermo called Hārat as-Sāqāliba. Also bases of Slavic pirates existed on that island - those could be pirates from the South Slavic tribe of Narentines, who during their pirate raids plundered even the coasts of Spain. Last information about Slavs in that region is from the 12th century. (...)

mihaitzateo
13-03-15, 18:51
Romanian and South Slavs are a lot more closed from a cultural point of view,I mean folk customs,folk songs,traditional foods ,traditional drinks and so on,than South Slavs are to East Slavs or to West Slavs.
Serbo-Croatians are Dacian people speaking heavy Slavic influenced language,they also have stronger Italic influence,than Romanians,especially Serbians,Montenegrins,Romanians are not so pure Dacians,are more mixed people,but also culturally Dacian people.
Transilvania,Serbia,Croatia,Montenegro,Bosnia have traditional drink a distilled drink,made from prunes,while Ukrainians,Russians,Belarusians,Poles have vodka.
Bulgarians also have traditional drink wine,besides Rakja.
All these people,Bulgarians,Serbians,Montenegrins,Croatians, Bosnians and Romanians likes a lot forests and mountains,they do not like steppes or plains,as it is the case with Russians or Ukrainians or Poles,who are planes/steppes dwelling people.
You do not find weird that the capital of Bulgaria,Sofia,the capital of Montenegro,Podgorica,the capital of Bosnia,Sarajevo,the capital of Serbia,Belgrade,the capital of Croatia,Zagreb are located very closed to mountains?
What about Moscow,Kiev,Warsaw?These are located in the plains.
Old capital of Romania,Targoviste,was also very closed to the mountains,20-30km north of Targoviste are some mountains.
Dacians people were mountain loving people.

if you take pictures from Cluj and from Zagreb,you would not say are taken in different towns.
Did anyone took any tests of the R1A from Croatia to see is a Slavic clade ?
I doubt.
While Bosnia,Serbia,have not so significant percentages of R1A and Montenegro have very low percentages of R1A,5% or lower.

Tomenable
13-03-15, 19:16
How can Serbo-Croatians be "Dacian" if they came from the area of present-day Poland and Czechoslovakia.

Above I quoted an anthropological paper which says that Early Medieval Croatian skulls were identical with Early Medieval Polish skulls.

Romanians also have a lot of Slavic influence, especially in southern Romania. Later they became Vlachicized linguistically.


Did anyone took any tests of the R1A from Croatia to see is a Slavic clade ?

Croats have a lot of R1a and it is mostly M458 and Z280. Serbs have less of R1a and it is more diverse. Serbs are more genetically mixed.

Sorbs in East Germany have common ancestors with Serbs in the Balkans. And Sorbs in East Germany also happen to have quite a lot of I2a-Din.


What about Moscow,Kiev,Warsaw?These are located in the plains.

For most of Polish history, Cracow was the capital of Poland. And Cracow is near the mountains.

Warsaw became the capital of Poland only during the 1600s. Also several other cities were capitals of Poland for brief periods of time.


while Ukrainians,Russians,Belarusians,Poles have vodka.

Poland has always been the battleground between beer, vodka and wine. Vodka took the upper hand in Communist times.


if you take pictures from Cluj and from Zagreb,you would not say are taken in different towns.

That's because both cities were influenced by German (or Central European in general) cultural patterns.


While Bosnia,Serbia,have not so significant percentages of R1A

They do - both have between 15% and 20% R1a (I forgot exact numbers, but I can check later). These are significant percentages.

Hauteville
13-03-15, 19:20
I have voted for paleolithic continuity.

Tomenable
13-03-15, 19:44
Paleolithic continuity is now least probable because of the young age of I2a-Din (according to new estimates).

Hauteville
13-03-15, 19:48
Paleolithic continuity is now least probable because of the young age of I2a-Din (according to new estimates).
So, your hypotesis for the spread in the Balkans is?I'm really interesting to that for some reasons.

Tomenable
13-03-15, 19:50
I think that it came with Slavs, but maybe not only with Slavs.

First of all, linking haplogroups to particular ethnicities is always uncertain.

After all, the same haplogroup can be shared by several ethnic groups.

Hauteville
13-03-15, 19:57
Thanks to that.

clintCG
13-03-15, 20:51
An anthropological paper about Croats:

https://ariets.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/15311416.pdf

This proves nothing. Croatia was settled by both Goths and Slavs, and northern parts are very strong in R1a. Also if they got their skulls from town settlements it is more probable that they are Slavic.

I already posted what Coon said of modern Montenegrins and Croatian Herzegovinians, how they in almost all characteristics differ from your typical Slav, and how closest relatives to them (anthropologically) live in northern Germany and parts of Denmark.

Now let's see what he says about Serbians (that got influenced a lot by migrations from mountain regions):
"The modern Serbs, like the rest of the Yugoslavs, fall more into the Dinaric racial classification than any other. Not as tall as the inhabitants of the mountain chain itself, they attain a national stature mean of about 168 cm., which varies somewhat regionally, reaching the figure of 170 cm. and over as one approaches Bosnia and Montenegro. The bodily build of the Serbs, as with most other southern Slavic peoples, is neither thick-set nor lean as a rule, but of moderate European proportions. A relative sitting height mean of 52.8 and a relative span of 102, emphasize the relative length of leg and shortness of arm. These are the proportions that one finds in southern Germany, rather than in northern Slavic countries

Tomenable
13-03-15, 22:38
how they in almost all characteristics differ from your typical Slav

I posted a link to an anthropological paper which says that East Germanic tribes (Goths, Vandals, etc.) were very similar anthropologically to North Slavic peoples.

This might be the result of common ancestry (Balto-Slavo-Germanic branch of IE languages) and lack of mixing with pre-IE inhabitants of Scandinavia.


losest relatives to them (anthropologically) live in northern Germany and parts of Denmark.

Vandals and Goths had nothing to do with northern Germany and parts of Denmark.

Anthropological data shows that West Germanic =/= North Germanic =/= East Germanic. All those Germanic-speaking groups were different from each other.


This proves nothing.

This proves that original Croats (those who established Nin - which was the cradle of Croatian realm - and expanded from there) were anthropologically like Poles. It is of course possible that those original Croats later conquered and absorbed some other peoples (like for example those remnants of Goths if you insist).


Now let's see what he says about Serbians

DNA data shows that Serbs are less genetically Slavic than Croats. First of all Serbs have much less R1a than Croats, and also less I2a-Din.

They probably assimilated a lot of pre-barbarian (be it pre-Slavic, pre-Germanic or pre-whatever - but pre-barbarian) inhabitants of the Balkans.

The same applies to Bulgarians who have a very high diversity of various Y-DNA haplogroups, with predominant E1b1b.

Y-DNA haplogroups of Bulgarians (Eupedia + Underhill for R1a):

E1b1b - 23,5%
I2a - 20%
R1a - 17% (according to Underhill 17,6%, including 16,4% of Z280 and M458 combined - but Z280 more numerous)
R1b - 11%
J2 - 11%
G - 5%
I1 - 4%
J1 - 3%
I2b - 2%
T - 1,5%
Q - 0,5%
N - 0,5%
others - 1%

If we assume that all of Z280 & M458 + all of I2a is Slavic while nothing is Slavic from other haplogroups, then Bulgarians are still just 36% Slavic.

What did Coon write about Bulgarians - did he claim that they are mostly Slavic ???


These are the proportions that one finds in southern Germany, rather than in northern Slavic countries

Southern Germany is mostly Non-Germanic. Predominant genetic ancestry in Southern Germany is Italo-Celtic (as well as Neolithic farmers).

mihaitzateo
13-03-15, 22:40
This proves nothing. Croatia was settled by both Goths and Slavs, and northern parts are very strong in R1a. Also if they got their skulls from town settlements it is more probable that they are Slavic.

I already posted what Coon said of modern Montenegrins and Croatian Herzegovinians, how they in almost all characteristics differ from your typical Slav, and how closest relatives to them (anthropologically) live in northern Germany and parts of Denmark.

Now let's see what he says about Serbians (that got influenced a lot by migrations from mountain regions):
"The modern Serbs, like the rest of the Yugoslavs, fall more into the Dinaric racial classification than any other. Not as tall as the inhabitants of the mountain chain itself, they attain a national stature mean of about 168 cm., which varies somewhat regionally, reaching the figure of 170 cm. and over as one approaches Bosnia and Montenegro. The bodily build of the Serbs, as with most other southern Slavic peoples, is neither thick-set nor lean as a rule, but of moderate European proportions. A relative sitting height mean of 52.8 and a relative span of 102, emphasize the relative length of leg and shortness of arm. These are the proportions that one finds in southern Germany, rather than in northern Slavic countries
Slavs settled South Germany!
:)

Tomenable
13-03-15, 22:56
They did settle some parts of South Germany, but their presence was of course much stronger in East and North Germany.

As for Slavs in South Germany (in Bavaria / Bayern) - there is a good German publication about them (written in German):

Hans Losert, "Moinvinidi, Radanzvinidi und Nabavinida. Geschichte und Archäologie der Slawen in Bayern", 2009.

================================

Those particular Slavic tribes which settled in Bavaria aren't well-known today because they were Christianized very early on (compared to other Slavic tribes) and were among first West Slavic groups which got Germanized. Slavs in Franconia (today north-eastern Bavaria) became part of the Frankish state at some point after 740 and became Christianized by Charlemagne around year 800, when he ordered to construct 14 churches for them. Those Slavic tribes were called Moinwinidi and Radanzwinidi (and also Nabavinida) and they lived along the rivers Main and Regnitz, as Charlemagne's document from year 794 AD reveals:

"(...) in terra Sclavorum, qui sedent inter Moinum et Radentiam fluvios, qui vocantur Moinwinidi et Radanzwinidi."

In English:

"(...) in the land of Slavs, who live between rivers Main and Regnitz, who are called Moinwinidi and Radanzwinidi."

Assimilation of those Slavs in Bavaria lasted several centuries. In year 1162 we still have Slavic names among them (for example certain guys Dragan and Gleische from Effelder near Coburg); in 1233 in Herzogtum Meranien we have a certain important guy Konrad Slavir. Slapansgereute (Schlappenreuth) near Bamberg is a settlement founded by Slapan, who was Slavic. His descendants can be traced in sources until the 15th century. According to historian Erwin Herrmann the family of Walpoten from Franconia was also Slavic - their castles have names of Slavic origin (Trebgast, Zwernitz). Medieval von Slawendorf family were also Franconian Slavs. Slavic population of Slawendorf (later called Altenstadt, today part of Bayeruth) preserved their language until the 14th century, as there are 14th century documents which say about Slavic inhabitants there. Near Weichenwasserlos there is a toponym Grotze suggesting existence of a Slavic castle. This Grotze is surrounded by settlements with names of Slavic origin - Granitz auf der Dobrich, Dobdansdorf in den Tibitzen, in der Peusteritz. Graitzstein, Greyczberg near Staffelstein, Marktgraitz, Teunz are other former Slavic castles in the region. German summary of the article about those Slavic tribes by Jerzy Strzelczyk:

http://s9.postimg.org/qxyj9j8pr/Slavs_in_Franconia.png

http://s9.postimg.org/qxyj9j8pr/Slavs_in_Franconia.png

The following was the approximate maximum extent of Slavic early westward expansion and compact (large-scale) settlement - which was around year 850 AD: Starting from the north-west, compact Slavic settlement (not including some individual, dispersed Slavic communities which had migrated even farther west but lived in ethnically mixed areas in which Slavs were never majority) encompassed the following westernmost regions: Fehrman island, Wagrien (Wagria), outskirts of Hamburg, Lauenburg region, Lüneburger Heide, Wolfsburg region, Magdeburg region. South of Magdeburg the boundary of ethnic Slavic territory can be drawn as a meridional line extending up to Erfurt and the eastern part of the Thüringer Wald. From the Thüringer Wald the boundary was a line extending in south-western direction up to the River Main and the outskirts of Bamberg. From Bamberg the 9th century Slavic-Germanic ethnic boundary sharply turned towards Austrian Linz, and then once again turned meridionally, extending up to the Alpine city of Liezen at the River Enns. In the Alps groups of Slavs migrated through mountain valleys up to eastern Tirol and the Upper Drava River. There was also large-scale Slavic settlement in the Julian Alps, in area north-west of Udine, and in what is today the Provincia di Gorizia of Italy. Slavic westward colonization did cross the Saale River, in the following area: from the southern outskirts of Magdeburg, through the area of Erfurt, and up to the Thüringer Wald and the Main River near Bamberg - situation in year ca. 850 AD was roughly like this:

http://s27.postimg.org/diabe9q2r/Slavs_west_of_the_Saale.png

http://s27.postimg.org/diabe9q2r/Slavs_west_of_the_Saale.png

One group of Slavs migrated even as far as the Rhine - but in that area they were just a Slavic drop in a sea of other ethnicities.

There was also a time - from year 804 to year 809 - when Slavs, united with Charlemagne, fought against Saxons. At that time Slavs captured the region of future Hamburg (at that time it did not yet exist, as it was built by Charlemagne in 808-809) and all lands of Northern Saxons - known as Nordalbingia. I'm not sure if significant numbers of Slavs actually settled there, but some did (read below). During those 5 years Slavs had access to the North Sea. In 880 Slavs captured Hamburg in cooperation with the Danes. And in 983 Slavs (the Obotrites under king Mstivoj) once again captured and destroyed Hamburg, this time on their own.

===========================================

Timeline of the early phase of history of Slavs in Germany, from the beginning of historical record until the death of Charlemagne:

⦁ 512 - the Heruli migrate from middle Danube to North Germany and encounter territories already inhabited by Slavs on their way there (Procopius)
⦁ 6th century - Slavic settlement at Prague numbers over 600 houses: http://www.archaeobotany.org/download/posters/novak_roztoky_abstract_whv2010.pdf
⦁ ca. 550 - Slavs start migrating into what is now East Germany
⦁ 595 - Slavs (probably ancestors of Slovenes or / and Croats) fight against Frankish-dependent Bavarian duke Tassilo in modern Austria and Bohemia
⦁ 596 - Slavs, probably allied with the Avars, defeat the Bavarians under Tassilo, killing 2,000 of them
⦁ 610 - battle of Aguntum (4 km to the east of present-day Lienz), Bavarians finally stop Slavic westward expansion in this region (Paul the Deacon)
⦁ 620s - a major war between Slavs and Avars (who had previously been allies)
⦁ 624 - a smuggler of weapons from the Frankish Empire, Samo (born near Sens at the Yonne river in central France), who had previously been illegally smuggling across the border and selling weapons to Slavs, enters Slavic lands, joins Slavs in their fight against the Avars, and due to his merits in battle, united Slavic tribes elect him their king (source: Fredegar's chronicle). Samo was probably a Gallo-Roman.
⦁ 630 - Walluk, duke of Carantanians (northern Slovenes), joins Samo's Federation.
⦁ 631 - Slavic Federation defeats the Frankish Empire in the battle of Wogastisburg
⦁ 631 - after the victory at Wogastisburg Slavic armies invade and plunder Thuringia
⦁ 632 - Dervan, duke of Surbi (Sorbs) joins the Slavic Federation under king Samo
⦁ 636 - Dervan is killed in one of battles against Randulf, governor of Thuringia
⦁ 661 - the federation disintegrates into many realms again after Samo's death. According to Fredegar's chronicle Samo had 12 Slavic wifes, 22 sons and 15 daughters.
⦁ 772 - Charlemagne invades Southern Saxons
⦁ 777 - conquest of Southern Saxons is completed
⦁ 780 - first Frankish contact with the Obodrites at the Middle Elbe
⦁ 782 - Sorbs raid and plunder Thuringia and Frankish-controlled Saxony
⦁ 782 - Saxon uprising against Franks under Widukind. Obodrites side with Franks
⦁ 785 - uprising squashed, Widukind surrenders and adopts Christianity in Attigny
⦁ 789 - Wieczan (Witzan) becomes the supreme duke (rex / princeps) of Obodrites
⦁ 789 - Obodrites mentioned as "old good allies" of Charlemagne (against Saxons)
⦁ 789 - Wieczan asks Charlemagne for assistance against his troublesome eastern neighbours, the Holy Union of the Veleti, under supreme duke Drogowit.
⦁ 789 - Charlemagne, allied with Frisians, Sorbs and Obodrites (under duke Wieczan), invades Veleti. Frankish army crosses the Elbe near modern Wolmirstadt. Allied forces besiege Brenna, the main stronghold of Veleti duke Drogowit. Seeing that resistance is pointless, Drogowit negotiates peace. Veleti pay a single tribute to Charlemagne. Charlemagne satisfied with tribute returns back to Francia.
⦁ 795 - Obodrite duke Wieczan (dux Witzan), ally of Franks against Nordalbingians (northernmost Saxon tribe, who remain independent from Frankish rule).
⦁ 795 - at the Elbe near Bardowick Nordalbingians ambush Obodrites, killing Wieczan
⦁ ca. 796 - Drozko elected new rex / princeps of the Obodrites. Drozko has a son named Czedrog (Chedrog). Drozko continues pro-Frankish policies of Wieczan and Charlemagne is his ally. Danes, Northern Saxons and Veleti are his enemies.
⦁ 795-798 - in revenge for Wieczan's death, Charlemagne raids Nordalbingians and carries out first forcible population transfers and deportations of Saxons.
⦁ 798 - battle of Swentana (Bornhöved) between Obodrites under Drozko and Nordalbingians (at the same time Charlemagne's army is near Minden, raiding Ostphalia). Obodrites win. About 3 - 4 thousand Saxons perish.
⦁ 799 - son of Charlemagne mediates in conflict between Obodrites and Veleti
⦁ 804 - conquest of Nordalbingians by Franks (with Veleti help) is completed, forcible deportation of over 10,000 Nordalbingian men, with families, to Gaul.
⦁ 804 - in Hollenstedt at the Elbe Drozko is crowned King by Charlemagne, he is also awarded Nordalbingia, which becomes part of the Slavic Obodrite realm (sources: Ann. Regni Francorum a 804, Chron. Moiss a 804). Archaeological evidence of Slavic settlements and pottery in Nordalbingia discovered in Hamburg and in Domplatz, dated to 8th-9th centuries (R. Schindler connects these with Drozko's reign).
⦁ ca. 805 - Charlemagne fortifies Frankish-Slavic border (limes sorabicus and limes saxonicus) and establishes permanent military posts along it. He introduces capitulare duplex in 805 - a kind of embargo for export of weaponry to Slavic lands (including even his allied Obodrites). Several places are chosen for trade with Slavs.
⦁ 805 - Franks invade the Sorbian-Lusatian tribe of the Glomaci
⦁ 805 - duke Lecho of the Bohemians (Czechs) dies in battle against Charlemagne
⦁ 806 - Sorbs (Siurbs) agree to pay tribute to Charlemgne after their duke - Miliduch (Milidouch / Milito) - is killed in a battle against Franks near modern Halle.
⦁ 808 - Drozko, king of the Obodrites. Godelaib, one of their minor dukes.
⦁ 808 - the Danes under duke Godfred (his realm is in Jutland), allied with the Veleti, invade the Obodrite realm (Jutland had previously become a refuge for Saxon refugees during Frankish-Obodrite invasions of Nordalbingia). Danes and Veleti manage to capture several Obodrite strongholds in the process.
⦁ 808 - at least two out of member-tribes of the Obodrite realm, Smolincy and Linianie, betray and unite with Danish-Veleti army. King Drozko is forced to abandon his realm and escapes to Francia. Godelaib is captured and executed. Godfred annexes Nordalbingia, two other Obodrite provinces - Obodrsko and Wagria - pay tribute.
⦁ 808-809 - Veleti wage offensive war against Obodrites and then against Franks
⦁ 808 - Charlemagne sends his son to crush the Veleti and Obodrite traitors, but he is defeated and has to retreat. Godfred proposes peace to Charlemagne, negotiations take place in Bandenflut at the Stör River, but they fail and war continues on.
⦁ 809 - Drozko returns from exile to his country. He signs truce with Danes in exchange for giving them one of his sons (maybe Chedrog) as a hostage. He allies with Saxons against Veleti and these Obotrite trines which seceded from his realm. Allied Obodrite loyalists and Saxons besiege a stronghold of Smolincy at Connoburg. The stronghold is captured and destroyed, power over rebellious tribes is restored.
⦁ 809 - Godfred violates the truce and invades Obodrites, he demolishes Slavic coastal town at Rerik (near modern Wismar), and deports local merchants to Haithabu (Hedeby), Denmark. Drozko is killed by Danish assassins at Rerik.
⦁ 809 - after the death of Drozko Charlemagne deprives the Obodrites of Nordalbingia and incorporates it to his Empire. The land is depopulated due to war, disease and deportations, so he brings in new settlers from entire Empire. Charlemagne establishes three new castles to strengthen the defence of his borders: first is at Eselfeld at the Stör River, second is at Hamburg, third is at Hochbucki near Lenzen at the Elbe.
⦁ 810 - Veleti attack the Frankish Empire and destroy their new castle at Hochbucki
⦁ 812 - Franks and Obodrites (under their new grand duke, Slavomir) in retaliation invade Veleti territories and manage to force them to pay a tribute.
⦁ 813 - coronation of Louis I by Charlemagne in Aachen.
⦁ 814 - death of Charlemagne, Louis I takes power in the Empire. Those of Slavic tribes which had been paying tribute to Charlemagne, stop paying it.

mihaitzateo
13-03-15, 23:35
Next thing we will find out is that the Viking raids are linked to Slavic expansion and that in fact that so called R1A Norse is Slavic .
Slavic people went and conquered Norway and Denmark and Sweden,settled there,learned Norse language and after,started to raid in Great Britain,France and so on.
:)

Tomenable
13-03-15, 23:52
Events of the Slavic expansion that I described above all took place between years 490 and 814 (the death of Charlemagne).

The Viking voyages started later than events that I described - after 792, when Scandinavians figured out the technology of long-distance sea travel.

Scandinavian R1a is mostly Z284, which has the highest frequency in Norway and most likely came to Scandinavia with the Battle-Axe culture.

It is likely that R1a Z284 was present in Scandinavia even before R1b migrated there. So no, I do not link it with Slavic expansion.


Slavic people went and conquered Norway and Denmark and Sweden,settled there,learned Norse language and after,started to raid in Great Britain,France and so on.

As a matter of fact historical sources (including Medieval chroniclers Orderic Vitalis, Saxo Grammaticus and Adam von Bremen) mention that Slavic warriors - including Obotrites, Veleti and Poles - participated in Danish invasions of Great Britain. That's because the kingdom of Denmark and the kingdom of Poland were good allies in the Middle Ages. The Obotrites were also Danish allies during some periods, but if you read the timeline I posted above, then you will see that politics in the region was complicated and alliances frequently changed. There was no "Germanic solidarity" or "Slavic solidarity", as Slavic realms often fought as allies of Germanic realms against other Germanic-Slavic alliances. Religion was more important than language or ethnicity. Poland was Christian and fought against Pagan Slavs west of it.

English "Historia Ecclesiastica" written by Orderic Vitalis, says that in 1069 Sveyn Estridsen's Danish army which invaded England was supported by Poles and Veleti. And "Gesta Danorum" by Saxo Grammaticus wrote that Harald Bluetooth's army included a lot of Slavic mercenaries. Also Cnut the Great's army which invaded England in 1015 included Polish troops - given to him by his ally, Polish king Boleslav I. This is even mentioned by wikipedia (source: Lawson, Cnut, p. 49):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cnut_the_Great#Conquest_of_England

If these facts - mentioned by reliable sources - aren't known to the general British public, then it must be due to their Anglocentric ignorance and chauvinism.

=====================

Poland and Denmark had an alliance in the 11th century (for example German chronicler Thietmar - who was hostile to both Poland and Denmark - mentioned that). Polish reinforcements supported Denmark in its campaigns. According to Medieval sources such as "Historia Ecclesiastica" by Orderic Vitalis, Adam of Bremen, "Chronicon Thietmari" by Thietmar, "Gesta Danorum" by Saxo, "Cnutonis regis gesta sive enconium Emmae reginae" by a monk from Saint Bertin, "Jomsvikinga Saga", and other sources, Polish troops participated in Danish invasions of Britain. According to Orderic Vitalis the Poles (Poleni) as well as the Veleti (Veleti) participated in Svein Estridsen's invasion of England in 1069. Cnut the Great when he invaded England in 1015-1016 also had Polish reinforcements. Finally Harald Bluetooth employed Slavic mercenaries - according to "Gesta Danorum" - but Saxo doesn't mention if there were Poles among them. Also Helmold's "Chronica Slavorum" mentions Poles being used as mercenaries by other armies. In year 1000 Emperor Otto I got 300 Polish Loricati (armoured cavalry) from Polish king Boleslav I.

Denmark and Poland have a long tradition of being good allies. Not only against Germany, but also against Sweden.

So stop your Pan-Germanic rubbish and look at the reality. Germans were enemies of Denmark. They Germanized most of Schleswig - which was originally Danish land. First capital of Denmark - Hedeby - is now located in Germany. City of Schleswig - another historical capital of Denmark - is also in Germany.

In the Early Middle Ages ethnically Danish people lived as far south as the Bay of Kiel and the mouth of the Eider River.

Later German "Drag nach Norden" pushed the ethnic Danes farther north, just like they tried to push the ethnic Poles as far east as possible.

As a person of Polish-Lithuanian, Slavic and Baltic ancestry, I consider Germans historical enemies of my people. But not the Danes.

So I'm not anti-Germanic, because the Danes were not my ancestor's enemies. Only the Germans - or actually die Deutschen (their proper name).

clintCG
14-03-15, 00:19
Vandals and Goths had nothing to do with northern Germany and parts of Denmark.

Anthropological data shows that West Germanic =/= North Germanic =/= East Germanic. All those Germanic-speaking groups were different from each other.
Of course, but South Slav=East Slav=West Slav always... please.
I don't expect Slavs to bring typically Germanic phenotypes... or maybe I am wrong?


This proves that original Croats (those who established Nin - which was the cradle of Croatian realm - and expanded from there) were anthropologically like Poles. It is of course possible that those original Croats later conquered and absorbed some other peoples (like for example those remnants of Goths if you insist).
Nations today are modern construct, as difference between, for example, Herzegovina and Zagorje Croats, is huge.
Croats "expanded" from Nin? Interesting. Not even 10% of Croats are descended from medieval town population.
How would you explain that modern Croats (Herzegovina-lower Dalmatia especially) and other Slavs are so different? Why don't main Croatian phenotypes apear in other Slavs, and vice versa?

By the way- on skulls you can not examine pigmentation, nor you can examine various facial characteristics you can examine on living descendants. Those data was just raw measurements. I am quite sure medieval German and medieval Pole would get as much of matching as they got with Croats...

When you have living descendats, you get whole another story.

And about non-town residents of Middle ages here.
Our non-town population show continuity all the way from middle ages to our modern population. With medieval skulls from Ćipur we have the same nordo-cromagnoid "Borreby" type, and enormous skull size, brachycephaly and high byzogmatic breadth- traits non-existent among other Slavs of that period (Ivanović Božina M. "Antropogeneza i adaptacija Crnogoraca", Glasnik Antropološkog društva Jugoslavije, 1999.; Petar Vlahović: Dinarski tip i njegovi varijeteti u Crnoj Gori).

So we have continuity in phenotype from Middle Ages to modern times in our populations. But we don't have same continuity among Dalmatian Croats, who differ from medieval town Slavic populations.


What did Coon write about Bulgarians - did he claim that they are mostly Slavic ???

I think his opinion was that they were Slavic with strong foreign influences:

Bulgaria was once Thracian country; a few centuries after its Romanization, it was submerged by a Slavic invasion, the advance guard of the movement which brought Slavic speech into Serbia. This Slavic invasion, which resulted in a permanent settlement of the country, was followed by a further invasion of still heathen Ugrian tribes under Turkish leadership, similar to the movement which brought the ancestors of the Magyars to Hungary. The subsequent history of Bulgaria was the opposite to that of Hungary; the Bulgars, who had left their eastern Russian home before the rise of the Bolgar Empire, kept their Ugrian name, but gave up their language, in favor of the speech of their Slavic predecessors. Whereas the Magyars became Catholics, the Bulgars adopted Orthodox Christianity The next invaders of Bulgaria of importance were the Ottoman Turks, who took over the fertile Danubian farm lands, and settled large colonies of Asiatic Turks on them. Sporadic invasions of Tatars from South Russia mingled themselves with this Turkish body. At the time of the Russian conquest of the Caucasus, many Moslem Cherkesses fled to Bulgaria to avoid submission to Christians.


Since the war, many of the Turkish peasants have left Bulgaria, and many of the Cherkesses as well. There are still islands of these people throughout the country, but especially in the eastern lowlands, and there are minor colonies of Greeks, of Tatars, and of Rumanians. To the west, the Bulgarians occupy the greater part of Yugoslavian Macedonia, and border in this neighborhood on the Albanians. To the south, they extend to the head of the Aegean, where their settlements are interspersed with those of Turks and Greeks. Most of the Bulgarians are still Orthodox Christians, but a large minority, especially in Macedonia, is Moslem.

Their cephalic index is closer to Slavic standards than C.I of Yugoslavs:


The mean cephalic index of over 5000 Bulgarian soldiers is 79.6; this varies within the kingdom of Bulgaria from 80.8 in the north, to 79.9 in the southwest, and 78.2 in the south. Christian Bulgars of Macedonia have a mean of 83.3, in the region of Monastir this rises to 85; Moslem Bulgars are less brachycephalic, with a mean of 80.5, while in the neighborhood of Salonika small local samples of Bulgars are actually dolichocephalic, with a mean of 76.4, and in the neighborhood of Adrianople in Turkish Thrace, the mean is only 78.3. Bulgarian йmigrйs in the Crimea have a mean of 78.7.


Thus within the Bulgarian people there is a strong tendency toward dolichocephaly, strong enough to impress mesocephaly upon the nation as a whole. The strongest expression of this tendency is found in the southern part of the kingdom, and beyond Bulgarian territory proper. True brachycephals are found only among the Macedonian Bulgars who live in close contact with Albanians.


The basic element is the Atlanto-Mediterranean, which probably goes back to the Neolithic; the Neo-Danubian is probably of both Slavic and Ugrian introduction, although some of it may be older; the Nordic may be of several origins, including Thracian; the Dinaric is simply the result of Bulgarian admixture with local elements in Macedonia; the Turkic is found mostly in eastern Bulgaria, and then among townsmen and shepherds rather than among agriculturalists. Of these varied elements, the first two are the most important, and the first more than the second. The presence of a strongly entrenched Atlanto-Mediterranean population of Neolithic date in all of the lowland Balkans south and east of the Iron Gate is becoming increasingly evident. In Bulgaria it is geographically most concentrated along the southern ethnic periphery, and among Bulgarian colonies abroad, as in the Crimea.

Tomenable
14-03-15, 00:42
I think his opinion was that they were Slavic with strong foreign influences

So he was wrong because modern DNA studies show that they are only 1/3 Slavic in terms of Y-DNA. Maybe more in terms of mtDNA, but it has to be proven.

BTW - read what I wrote above, I am not Pan-Slavic or Anti-Germanic, Goths can be my friends, but stop claiming your stupid Pan-Germanic solidarity.

Pan-Germanism is a 19th century invention (just like Pan-Slavism, by the way). There are great differences between different Germanic peoples (not only in haplogroup frequencies) and also there was no such thing as Germanic solidarity historically. Look at what I wrote above, Denmark and Poland (later Denmark and Poland-Lithuania) were best allies. They historically shared the same enemies - the Holy Roman Empire, Pagan Slavic tribes, Sweden and Prussia-Brandenburg.

If you claim Gothic heritage - O.K., claim it - but don't be pathetic and don't say that Germans are your brothers. No, look at history to see who is your brother, and not at language etc. Slavic Russia for example is the second most dangerous hhistorical enemy of Poles, just after "Germanic" (allegedly) Germany.

clintCG
14-03-15, 00:42
Concetration gradient of I2a Din in Yugoslavia still remains unexplained (except with Gothic theory).

I2a Din has TMRCA somewhere in eastern Poland around course of Vistula 2500 years ago (Gothic homeland). According to Nordtvedt, today concentration of I2a Din was caused by mass expansions around 2000 years ago. As we know, there was no Slavic expansions at that time, but around same time Goths started arriving to eastern Europe. Then they moved to Balkans, part that was subdued by Huns stayed.
And then we know that in time of Slavic conquest they "magically dissapeared" from Balkans (having never relocated to Italy- only warriors went there).

Also place where I2a1b M423 split into "Isles", "Disles" and "Dinaric" does not match eastern Europe. It matches eastern Germany/western Poland more.

Please apply some logic...

clintCG
14-03-15, 00:46
I think his opinion was that they were Slavic with strong foreign influencesS

So he was wrong because modern DNA studies show that they are only 1/3 Slavic in terms of Y-DNA. Maybe more in terms of mtDNA, but it has to be proven.

BTW - read what I wrote above, I am not Pan-Slavic or Anti-Germanic, Goths can be my friends, but stop claiming your stupid Pan-Germanic solidarity.

Pan-Germanism is a 19th century invention (just like Pan-Slavism, by the way). There are great differences between Germanic peoples and also there was no such thing as Germanic solidarity historically. Look what I wrote above, Denmark and Poland (later Denmark and Poland-Lithuania) were best allies. They historically shared the same enemies - the Holy Roman Empire, Pagan Slavic tribes, Sweden and Prussia-Brandenburg.

If you claim Gothic heritage - O.K., claim it - but don't be pathetic and don't say that Germans are your brothers. No, look at history to see who is your brother, and not at language etc.
That is my interpretation, but if you re-read it you will see that he counts most of them as Atlanto-Mediterannean Pre-Slavic population, some as Slavic and minor parts as Turkic.

WTF man? Where did I claim that Germans are brothers? Or that any of Germanic peoples are my brothers? Why are you trying to turn this in discussion of nationalistic character?
Pan-Germanic solidarity? Where did I mention that in my posts?

If I talk about friends of my nation- we barely ever had any.

Tomenable
14-03-15, 00:49
If I talk about friends of my nation- we barely ever had any.

Croatian poet Ivan Gundulic considered Poland-Lithuania to be the best friend of Christian peoples of the Balkans in their struggle against the Turks:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Gunduli%C4%87#Osman

Montenegrins were also under Ottoman occupation. Poles-Lithuanians together with Austrians-Hungarians helped to liberate you from that occupation.

Tomenable
14-03-15, 00:59
Please apply some logic...

There cannot really be any logic in such a discussion. These are all speculations, only some more and some less probable.

Do you remember how not such a long time ago R1b was claimed to be the result of Paleolithic continuity in Western Europe ???

After that, they claimed that R1b expanded with early Neolithic farmers.

All of that was totally wrong, as it turns out. We now have ancient DNA samples and new TMRCA and age estimates.

So maybe let's wait for more ancient DNA samples with I2a-Din ???

I already wrote that in 2014 in Poland they started a large-scale research project on ancient DNA. By 2019 there will be results.

If they find I2a-Din in Gothic archaeological sites from the Iron Age in Poland, then I will perhaps admit that you were right.

clintCG
14-03-15, 01:00
Croatian writer Ivan Gundulic considered Poland-Lithuania to be the best friend of Christian peoples of the Balkans in their struggle against the Turks:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Gunduli%C4%87

Montenegrins were also under Ottoman occupation. Poles-Lithuanians together with Austrians-Hungarians helped to liberate you from that occupation.
Hah. We were not under Ottoman occupation. OK, northern part called Sandzak was, but it occupies small part. Town centres (except Cetinje) were also. But our clan lands were independent. No one "liberated us". We fought for 500 years, living in old clan system, isolated from rest of Europe. We could have become "privileged slaves" like other Balkanites, but we didn't. As Czech Josef Holeček says in "Černá Hora" , example where handful of men stood their ground for 500 years against incomprably larger enemy does not exist in history. (Reccommended also on that topic from him: Junácké kresby černohorské)

Poles-Lithuanians together with Austrians-Hungarians never did anything to help us. Anything. Only ones that sometimes helped were Russians. We were thankful for their help so we declared war on Japan in 1905. It officially lasted until 2006 :)

In fact whenever we conquered some piece of Ottoman land in 19th century those "European diplomats" always demanded from us to return it to Turkey. Slime.

But I do not know why did you feel such a strong urge to turn this in nationalistic discussion in first place?

Tomenable
14-03-15, 01:06
OK, so you were proudly hiding your asses in remote mountainous caves located out of Ottoman sight.

(reminds me of Romanian nationalists and their claim about Dacians surviving 1000 years hidden in caves and not mixing with all the invading hordes)

Very nice. But who cares ??? BTW - did you mention nationalism, or is it just dripping from your posts ???

=====================

Also - please read my previous post (#875).

mihaitzateo
14-03-15, 01:10
Nortvedt is of Scandinavian origin.
So I do not know how reliable is what he says about I2-din.
Would be really nice that I2-din is of Gothic origin but than,where are the Gothic words ?
Besides,if you read that book about Goths,Gothica,written by Jordanes is told that Goths came from Sweden,but compared to Swedes they are not that tall.
If you take average male height in Serbians,Croats,Bosnians,Montenegrins is higher than those of male Swedes.
I know that Serbo-Croatian have a few Gothic origin words and also some weird cognates to today Scandinavian languages,like how you are saying chair:
stolica on croatian,stol on swedish.

clintCG
14-03-15, 01:11
We were always raising rebbelions in surrounding areas, like Herzegovina

In fact, when they repelled one Turkish attack in 16th century, Montenegrins marched into Bosnia and raised siege of Jajce to rescue Hungarian garrison that was closely hemmed in by Turks. (Stephen Clissold, A short history of Yugoslavia from Early times to 1966, part IV, chapter 3, "the elective Vladikas")

Marching into Ottoman area to rescue other Europeans is far from "hiding asses in mountains".

So you better STFU on things you don't know anything about.

clintCG
14-03-15, 01:14
@mihaitzateo no pseudo-history here please.

Tomenable
14-03-15, 01:17
We were thankful for their help so we declared war on Japan in 1905. It officially lasted until 2006 :)

That's interesting.

Never occupied by the Ottomans (thanks to caves) and fighting against a much stronger enemy for over 100 years.

Great achievements. :good_job: :wink:

clintCG
14-03-15, 01:20
That's interesting. Never occupied by the Ottomans (thanks to caves) and fighting against a much stronger enemy for over 100 years.

Great achievements. :good_job: :wink:
It is because of solidarity with Russia, FFS. I was just telling you which countries helped us. And you claimed that Poles-Lithuanians helped. Please...

And about our "hiding in caves" read my previous post.

Tomenable
14-03-15, 01:23
Nortvedt is of Scandinavian origin.
So I do not know how reliable is what he says about I2-din.

I do not get your point here.

He is of Scandinavian origin yet he claims that I2a-Din is Slavic. So he is not biased, but rather objective.

What nationalistic or other interest does he have in claiming that I2a-Din is Slavic ???


Would be really nice that I2-din is of Gothic origin

What exactly would be nice about it ??? And why it isn't nice if I2a-Din is of Slavic origin ???


esides,if you read that book about Goths,Gothica,written by Jordanes is told that Goths came from Sweden,

Jordanes wrote that they came under King Berig in three boats. Do you know how many people can travel in three boats ???

Maybe 90 people (counting 30 per boat). And this is the legendary part of his work, by the way. Ask any historian.

Tomenable
14-03-15, 01:31
chair: stolica on croatian, stol on swedish.

And stolek in Polish. So what ???

Tomenable
14-03-15, 01:45
Y-DNA haplogroups of Bulgarians (Eupedia + Underhill for R1a):

E1b1b - 23,5%
I2a - 20%
R1a - 17% (according to Underhill 17,6%, including 16,4% of Z280 and M458 combined - but Z280 more numerous)
R1b - 11%
J2 - 11%
G - 5%
I1 - 4%
J1 - 3%
I2b - 2%
T - 1,5%
Q - 0,5%
N - 0,5%
others - 1%

If we assume that all of Z280 & M458 + all of I2a is Slavic while nothing is Slavic from other haplogroups, then Bulgarians are still just 36% Slavic.

Montenegrin Y-DNA haplogroups (data from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20091845):

I2a ----- 29.68%
E1b1b -- 26.98%
R1b ----- 9.41%
R1a ----- 7.67% (another source says 9.4%)
I1 ------- 6.19%
J2a ----- 4.70%
J2b ----- 4.46%
G2a ----- 2.48%
Q1b ----- 1.98%
I2b ----- 1.73%
H ------- 1.49%
N ------- 1.49%
L ------- 1.24%
J1 ------ 0.50%

In the end it seems that you are similar genetically to Bulgarians. Also a "mixed genetic salad".

Tomenable
14-03-15, 02:02
BTW - haplogroup E1b1b was found in Slavic graves from the island of Usedom / Uznam (together with R1a M458).

So it is possible that some of E1b1b also came to the Balkans with the Slavs.

gyms
14-03-15, 09:16
Bernie Cullen:

"Some of you may have heard about the Estonian Biocentre's release of 307 Y
chromosome sequences (mentioned by Dienekes here):
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/02/estonian-biocentre-high-coverage-y.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/02/estonian-biocentre-high-coverage-y.html)

13 of the samples are listed as haplogroup I: 5 belong to I1, 1 from the
country of Georgia belongs to "I3", and 7 belong to I2a. All of these I2a
samples are I-CTS10228 "Dinaric".

The I-P37 project compared these Dinaric sequences to Big Y results and is
in the process of comparing them to the sequences in the Hallast study. See
more details below, and also see
http://i2aproject.blogspot.com/2015/03/i-cts10228-dinaric-samples-in-estonian.html (http://i2aproject.blogspot.com/2015/03/i-cts10228-dinaric-samples-in-estonian.html)

Bernie

Estonian Biocentre samples #18357 & 18359 from Belarus have
CTS10228>Y4460>Y3118>Y5598>CTS5779
Two Big Ys in the I2a Project have this result, and when we compared these
four I-CTS5779 sequences, we found no shared SNPs below CTS5779.

Samples #18429 from Bosnia and #20364 from Herzegovina have
CTS10228>S17250*. They share some novel variants with each other that were
not tested in Big Ys. There are several Big Y results in this I-S17250*
group, but we found no shared SNPs below S17250.

Sample #18440 from Russia (Chuvash) has a I-CTS10228* result. There are
only two known I-CTS10228* people in the I-P37 project, one is from Poland
and the other belongs to the "Jewish Dinaric cluster". Sample 18440 shares
two novel variants with the person in the Jewish Dinaric cluster. The
positions (Chr Y: 13203040 and 9853064) are close to the centromere and it
may be difficult to design primers to test these SNPs individually. We have
asked a related Jewish Dinaric cluster member to test 13203040 at YSeq.net

Sample #21452 from Russia (Vepsas ethnic group, from north of St.
Petersburg) has CTS10228>Y4460* (ie. Y3118- S8201-). A Big Y result
(ancestry Riga, 1600s) shares two positions with 21452: 21835651 and
22669350. Another shared NV is at 22271330, but it is inside the 125bp
repeat region.

Sample #21481 from Lithuania has CTS10228>Y4460>Y3118* (ie. Y5598-)
result. There are three Big Y results in I-Y3118* but we found no
additional shared novel variants."

"Sample #18440 from Russia (Chuvash) has a I-CTS10228* result."!!!

clintCG
14-03-15, 10:11
In the end it seems that you are similar genetically to Bulgarians. Also a "mixed genetic salad".
Research by iGenea did not target only ethnic Montenegrins in Podgorica (city in eastern part) hospital, but also at least quarter was composed of national minorities like Muslim Bosniaks, Albanians, Roma, etc. in other words a totally random pick in one multicultural city. And what did you expect?

I prefer to use results by surnames and clans. Some of them can be found on Serbian DNA project: http://poreklo.rs/srpski-dnk-projekat/naslovna/
By using those results we can see that there are only three clans in eastern part of country that carry E1b (and among them there are exepctions also).

Rest of country is I2a (over 50 percent). There are some exceptions of course: I1 P109 in Drobnjak clan on northwest, R1b in few smaller families, R1a in Zeta plain taken from autochtone population (Slavic population, which lived there before these three E1b clans of Albanian origin came).
Montenegrins (especially western) are same people with Herzegovians (both "Serbian" and "Croatian ones"), and share similar genetic constitution (except few easternmost clans of Albanian origin).

We could have continued discussion without your nationalistic insults. But OK, whatever floats your boat...

mihaitzateo
14-03-15, 14:15
I have seen a study from Neamt county from Romania,which is a very mountainous area,an area that had a lot of forests in the past and now still has lots of forest.
People there had more than 40% I2-din.
How you explain this,since as you move in the plains of Moldavia,for example in Bessarabia,people have higher R1A,for example in Bessarabia R1A is about 30% and are clearly more light haired.The percent of I2-din also decreases,being 25% or so.
ClintCG explanation,with people that were I2-din before the Slavic expansion from 600 AD and moved to mountains,to escape Asian invaders,like Huns and so on,makes a lot of sense.I doubt I2-din was from Germanic people,I rather think it is from Dacian people,but that is another discussion.
Sadly,at the moment,except that study from Neamt county from Romania,there are no other studies about the paternal haplogroups of Romanian people living in the mountains.
I know it was a study made in Croatia and as you were moving South in Croatia,I2-din percentage was raising and R1A percentage was dropping.

gyms
14-03-15, 17:02
mihaitzateo:"I doubt I2-din was from Germanic people,I rather think it is from Dacian people,but that is another discussion."

Please show me some Dacian haplogroups.

Sample #18440 from Russia (Chuvash) has a I-CTS10228* result.

Sample #21452 from Russia (Vepsas ethnic group, from north of St.
Petersburg) has CTS10228>Y4460* (ie. Y3118- S8201-).

Estonian Biocentre samples #18357 & 18359 from Belarus have
CTS10228>Y4460>Y3118>Y5598>CTS5779
Two Big Ys in the I2a Project have this result, and when we compared these
four I-CTS5779 sequences, we found no shared SNPs below CTS5779.

The YFull tree now has dates if you click on the tree. For each nodes you get the number of SNPs with a pop)up showing these SNPs and 2 dates : "formed" and TMRCA.
Here is a link to the IJ, I, I1 and I2 simple tree : http://www.yfull.com/tree/IJ/ (http://www.yfull.com/tree/IJ/) and a more detailed I2 tree (with dates) is at http://www.yfull.com/tree/I2/ (http://www.yfull.com/tree/I2/)

One first comment. It's a little unclear for me why there is no proportionality between the number of SNP at a node and the time interval from "formed" to TMRCA. If anyone on this list has the beginning of an answer I am interested.

According to this timing , one reading is as follows : IJ entered Europe by the East and very first modern humans (east of Europe, still in contact with Turkey -remember that it was possible to cross by land at that time) are dated from 46500 to 43000. So, by 43000 bp IJ is evolving "in situ" to I by isolation from the parental group as they get deeper into Europe. Very first proto-aurignacians are dated from -41000. So there is a little gap but I think it's close enough when considering error bars.
I is dated from 43000 to 27500 which is interesting because 28000 is the commonly accepted date for the aurignacian / gravetian limit. So, roughly, this tree on a chrnological basis is finding a good fit between I haplogroup and the Aurignacian culture. Now, while I1 is difficult to fit with any known timing I2 might fit with the Gravetian culture dates.
Is it possible that Aurignacian and Gravetian are in such a ontinuity ? I leave it open for discussion.

Didier Vernade

mihaitzateo
14-03-15, 18:29
Gyms,from what I know are two branches of I2-din,I2-din South and I2-din North.
I guess this thread is about I2-dinaric,both branches.
But this thread suppose that I2 din should have came from somewhere in Balkans.
However,I think highest diversity of I2-din is found somewhere in Romanian Carpathians so this would rather support the idea that the I2-din mutation appeared here .
So the right question would be,from where I2 got in Carpathians and Balkans,not I2-din.
I do not know what kind of I2-din was found in Belarus or in Russia,but is very possible that I2-din spread from Balkans and Carpathians Eastwards and Northwards till Belarus and Russia.
Austria have significant I2-din,Hungary have significant I2-din ,etc.
EDIT:
very interesting information found on Igenea:
http://www.igenea.com/en/forum/d/haplogroup-i2i2a1-i2a2/721
They are saying,most I2-din from Bulgaria and Greece is I2-din North,same with most I2-din from Poland and Ukraine,while most I2-din from ex-Yugo,is I2-din South.
EDIT2:
@ClintCG:
What you have quoted from that physical resemblances,is extremely interesting.
I have found some guy on inet that was presenting about Serbs and he was saying that Serbs moved to Balkans from today land of Saxony,in South Germany.

gyms
14-03-15, 21:24
http://www.yfull.com/tree/IJ/


http://www.yfull.com/tree/I2/

Igmayka on Anthrogenica wrote:

Geno 2.0 results have identified two SNPs that split Dinaric, and three more that define it. All five are now available for order from FTDNA.

CTS10228 and CTS5966 were ancestral in one south-central Polish Dinaric, but derived in about seven other Dinarics across Central-Eastern Europe.

CTS10936, CTS11768, and CTS4002 were derived in all eight Dinarics, but ancestral in the nearest related clade (Disles).

Tomenable
16-03-15, 02:01
I2a-Din is found among 25,6% - 26,0% of inhabitants of the region of Polesie, according to Kushnierevich 2013:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29632-Poland-more-Germanic-or-Slavic/page3



2. Good indicator to show differences between Polish and Ukrainian/Belorussian populations is to check frequencies of subclades of haplogroup I and combined with frequency of haplgroup R1a. (various studies, reference points marked in yellow on map)


Belarus:

I1/I2a1/I2a2
R1a

sample size




South West
9.8/17.2/0
46.7

122


(Klyosov 2013)


West Polesia

8.3/25.6/0

44.6

121


(Kushnierevich 2013)


East Polesia

4.2/26/0
42.7

96


(Kushnierevich 2013)


Average

7.4/22.9/0
44.7

339





Ukraine:










Lviv

4.6/20.8/2.6
44.8

154


(Mielnik-Sikorska 2012 predicted by http://predictor.ydna.ru/)


Poland:










Zamość

4/14.1/0
56.6

99


(Battaglia 2009)


Białystkok

3.2/17.2/2.2
53.8

186


(Pepinski 2004 predicted by http://predictor.ydna.ru/)


Mazovia

5.1/12.9/2.4
56.5

255


(Stoltyszewski 2006 predicted by http://predictor.ydna.ru/)


Kurpie

7/8.2/1.9
61.4

158


(Rębała 2012)


Bydgoszcz
6.1/7.6/0.8
57.6

132


(Wozniak 2010 predicted by http://predictor.ydna.ru/)


Northern Poland
7.3/10.9/1.8
55

507


( Pawłowski 2003 predicted by http://predictor.ydna.ru/)


Kociewie

8.2/5.7/1.9
57.6

158


( Rębała 2012)


Gdańsk

6.7/10.1/1.9
57.7

208


( Rębała 2005 predicted by http://predictor.ydna.ru/)


Kashubia

13.7/2.9/1.5
62.3

204


( Rębała 2012)


Polish cost
10.3/5.1/1.3
59

78


( Wozniak 2010 predicted by http://predictor.ydna.ru/)


Average

7.2/9.5/1.6
57.8

1985





Sorbs:

9.8/3.3/1.6
65

123


( Rębała 2012)


Slovakia:










Bratislava

5.5/15/1.8
45.1

164


(Rębała 2012)


Czech Republic:









Average

5.1/8.6/2.7
34.2

257


( Luca 2006)




And according to one of users from our forum - Sile - the region of Polesie is the original homeland of Slavs:


As recently stated by historians and archeologists.............the slavs originate from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polesia

Slav origins

http://imageshack.com/scaled/medium/809/rxmc.jpg

This seems to confirm that I2a-Din expanded to the Balkans and elsewhere from Polesie, together with Slavs.

clintCG
16-03-15, 19:17
OK, but where did all R1a go in Dinaric area? Why is there only 5-6 percent R1a in Herzegovina, and 70 percent of I2a Din? There must exist more logical explanation other than "pure coincidence".
I am not familiar with claims that it is homeland of Slavs, but it might be true. However, we don't find most of diversity there (as we should find in homeland of I2a Din). We find most diversity in Poland somewhere around course of Vistula.
Also several peoples were present on same area (both Slavic and Germanic tribes)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/90/Pre_Migration_Age_Germanic.png





And about comparing skulls from "Gothic" and Medieval Slavic cultures: some of so called "Gothic cultures" were inhabited by Slavs for a great period of time. Wielbark culture existed untill end of 4th century: and by that time most of Goths already made it to the Balkans and Ukraine.

Tomenable
17-03-15, 14:44
I am not familiar with claims that it is homeland of Slavs

Here more about this theory:


THE Slavs form with the Balts (the Letts, Lithuanians, Prussians) the Balto­Slavonic group of the Indo-European family. Their languages have much in common with German on the one hand and with Iranian on the other. The differentiation of Balto-Slavonic into Old Baltic and Old Slavonic, and then of Old Slavonic into the separate Slavonic languages was caused partly by the isolation of the various tribes from one another, and partly by mutual assimilation and the influence of related dialects and unrelated languages. Thus it is not a matter of genealogy only, but is partly due to historical and political developments.
Until lately the place where the Old Balto-Slavonic branched off from the other Indo-European languages and the place of origin of the Slavs were matters of dispute. But in 1908 the Polish botanist Rostafinski put forward from botanical geography evidence from which we can fix the original home of the Balto-Slavs (and consequently that of the Germans too, for the Balts could only have originated in immediate proximity to the Germans). The Balto-Slavs have no expressions for beech (fagus sylvatica), larch (larix europaea), and yew (taxus baccata), but they have a word for hornbeam (carpinus betulus). Therefore their original home must have been within the hornbeam zone but outside of the three other tree-zones, that is within the basin of the middle Dnieper. Hence Polesie — the marshland traversed by the Pripet, but not south or east of Kiev—must be the original home of the Slavs. The North Europeans (ancestors of the Kelts, Germans, and Balto­Slavs) originally had names for beech and yew, and therefore lived north of the Carpathians and west of a line between Konigsberg and Odessa. The ancestors of the Balto-Slays crossed the beech and yew zone and made their way into Polesie; they then lost the word for beech, while they transferred the word for yew to the sallow (Slav. iva, salix caprea) and the black alder (Lithuan. yëva, rhamnus frangula), both of which have red wood. It is not likely that the tree-zones have greatly shifted since, say, B.C. 2000. For while the zones of the beech and yew extend fairly straight from the Baltic to the Black Sea, the boundary of the hornbeam forms an extended curve embracing Polesie. The reason for this curve is the temperate climate of Polesie which results from the enormous marshes and is favourable to the hornbeam, which cannot withstand great fluctuations of temperature. And this curve must have been there before the rise of the Old Balto-Slavonic language, otherwise the Balto-Slavs living without the limit of the beech and yew could not have possessed a word for the hornbeam. According to a tradition the Goths in their migration from the Vistula to the Pontus about the end of the second century A.D. came to a bottomless marshland, obviously on the upper Niemen and Pripet, where many of them perished. At that time the impassable morasses of Polesie had already existed for centuries, though their enormous depths may first have become marshland in historic times owing to the activity of the beaver—which raises dams of wood in order to maintain a uniform water level; and, as floating leaves and other remains of plants stuck in the dams, a gradually thickening layer of peat was formed from them and the land became continually more marshy. It follows that though the curve of the hornbeam boundary may have been a little smaller in prehistoric times than it is now, it cannot have been greater, and there can be no objection to the argument from the four tree-boundaries.

mihaitzateo
17-03-15, 18:14
Romania has highest percentage of I2-din North,Bosnia,Serbia highest percentage of I2-din South.
Poland,Ukraine have also significant I2-din North.
How can this be explained?
Maybe I2-din South was not brought by Slavic migration from around 600 AD,since is very sparse in Ukraine,Poland.
Would be nice to have some maps with I2-din South and I2-din North,maybe those will make things clearer.

Tomenable
17-03-15, 18:37
Romanians have a significant Slavic admixture, even though they've often tended to deny this for political, nationalistic and racist purposes.

Here something about this - how Romanian history was being politicized and influenced by various ideologies:

From "History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness":

http://books.openedition.org/ceup/934


(...) The Slavs, as is well known, had a significant influence on the Romanian language, as well as on early Romanian institutions and culture. In fact the appreciation of their role has also swung between extremes, according to the changing ideological and political conjuncture. In the Latinist phase, and in nineteenth-century historiography in general until quite late on, the Slav factor was eliminated or drastically minimized. The tendency is easily explained in the context of the process of modernization of Romanian society and the desperate attempt (with partial and temporary success) to escape from the Slav space of the continent. It is worth noting that up to B. P. Hasdeu, modern Romanian historians did not even know Slavonic or the various Slav languages, a paradoxical situation given the Slavonic packaging of medieval Romanian culture. Hasdeu himself, who was educated in a Slav environment and who could be considered the first Romanian Slavicist, did not prove to be an upholder of Slav influence. While he sought to moderate Latinism by recourse to the Dacian substratum, where the Slavs were concerned he strove to limit their impact on the Romanian synthesis. Hasdeu considered that the Romanian people had been fully formed when it entered into relations with the Slavs. Slav words had come into the Romanian language not by ethnic contact but through political, religious, and cultural links over some seven centuries, up to the time of Matei Basarab and Vasile Lupu. The reaction towards rehabilitating the Slavs and Slavonic culture in Romanian history came from the Junimists of the late nineteenth century as a reply to Latinism and, in a sense, as an exercise in rising above national complexes. I have already mentioned Panu’s suggestions in this direction. What caused a sensation, however, was the Etymological Dictionary (1870-1879) of Alexandru Cihac, a close associate of Junimea. The etymologies established by Cihac led to the unexpected conclusion that the lexical base of the Romanian language was more Slav (and of other origins) than Latin: two-fifths Slav elements, one-fifth Turkish, and likewise one-fifth Latin. Romanian became a mixed language in which Turkisms and words of Latin origin had about the same weight. The almost simultaneous publication of the dictionaries of Laurian and Cihac illustrates the extremes between which the interpretation of the Romanian language, and of origins and influences in general, was evolving (with the necessary observation that Cihac’s work is appreciated by specialists as being far superior to Laurian’s linguistic fantasies). This etymological Gordian knot was cut by Hasdeu with his seductive theory of the circulation of words. The structure of a language—Hasdeu shows—is not given by the mere number of words but by their circulation. Some words are almost forgotten, preserved only in dictionaries, while others are in constant use. Their value is thus very different. “It is true that Slavisms and even Turkisms exist in no small numbers among the Romanians; in circulation, however—that is, in the most vital activity of Romanian speech, in its most organic movement—they lose out almost completely in comparison with Latinisms.” It is possible to formulate complete sentences only with words of Latin origin, but no sentence is possible using exclusively words of other origins. Hasdeu’s demonstration turned the relationship round again, away from the emphasis on Slav influence. The Slav factor, however, was forcefully highlighted by Ioan Bogdan. For him, the Slavs became a constituent element of the Romanian synthesis: “The influence of the Slav element in the formation of our nation is so evident that we may say without exaggeration that we cannot even speak of a Romanian people before the absorption of Slav elements by the native Roman population in the course of the sixth to tenth centuries." In the Romanian language there are “an enormous number of Slav elements”, adopted either directly, through cohabitation, or through political and literary contacts. The Slavonic language was used in the church and the state, and even in “the day-to-day business of the Romanians” until the sixteenth or seventeenth century; and in the life of the state “almost all our old institutions are either of Slav origin or contain, alongside a few elements inherited from the Romans, a greater number of Slav elements”. Romanian-Bulgarian relations in particular are treated by Ioan Bogdan in a manner which Romanian nationalism could not fail to find disagreeable. While we, the Romanians, “were departing more and more from Roman culture and becoming savage”, the Bulgarians, “who came like barbarians over us, took from their Byzantine neighbors, under the protective wings of an organized and powerful state, a civilization which was then advanced, that of Byzantium, which was none other than the continuation, in a Greek form with oriental influences, of the old Roman civilization”. For three centuries the Bulgarian tsardom ruled north of the Danube; this is the period in which many Slav elements of culture and political organization penetrated Romanian society. (...)

And here on how nationalistic and racist attitudes, which were changing over time, affected theories of Romanian archaeology:

[Note: Nestor mentioned in this text is not a Medieval Russian chronicler, but a 20th century Romanian archaeologist]:

http://s23.postimg.org/6a69edicr/Romania_Slavs.png

http://s23.postimg.org/6a69edicr/Romania_Slavs.png

mihaitzateo
17-03-15, 19:56
I think Slavs is just a gross forgery.
Why?
Simple,because Thracians and Dacians could not just vanish.
So we have so called "Slavs" which are actually Thracians that have various influences.
We have Ukrainians,Russians,Belarusians,which have strong North Germanic (Varangian) influences and are heavily mixed with Fino-Ugric people.
We have West Slavs which are from Thracians that suffered strong influences from West Germanic people.
We have South Slavs,which are Dacians,strongly influenced by East Germanic people.
We have Romanians,which are Thracians that suffered strong influences from Romance people.
I am talking about cultural influences.Not about language. Is clear that Bosnia,Serbia,Montenegro have a certain style,in their villages,in their towns,in how a house of a peasant looks and so on.
That Poles,Czechs,Slovaks have a different style,that Russians and Bellarusians and Ukrainians have again a different style.
Romanians are closed culturally to Slavs,but are not identical,they have various different things.

Now coming to language:
If Romanians had Romance speakers as ruling class,this is what gave Romanian language and part of the culture,the style of cities and so on.
As for Serbians,Montenegrins,Bosnians these people with their high percentage of I2-din South seems to be the remnants of the Dacians.
How the languages are so closed?
Is possible that Thracians influenced by Viking or East Germanic people expanded South,they were genetically a mix of populations,but they were speaking something closed to today Slavic language.
A clear thing is that Slavs are not attested before 600 AD.
Baltic people are closed to Slavs,as language but culturally,they have things that Slavs do not have.
It is also possible that Baltic people conquered Thracians and that this is how Slavic people as an ethnicity appeared.
Anyway,the language I think have few in common with paternal lines,to impose a language to a conquered people,is enough to have the ruling class speaking that language.
It is very possible that R1A bearers brought Slavic language to South Slavs,they were just the ruling elite.

As for what Tormenable is saying,about skull measurements from Croatia being identical to those form Poland,that is just a myth.
Poland and Croatia have different phenotypes,not only one phenotype.
It is not possible to have a Baltid from Poland have same skull measurements with a Dinarid from Croatia.
How can you say Tormenable that Croatians and Poles are same race,when most Poles are Baltids as phenotypes while most Croats are Dinarids?
Come on,be serious.
:D

As for common language,or closed languages,would anyone tell that people from South America are same race with Spaniards,or would call them Spaniards,because they are speaking Spanish?
No,is just that the conquerors were Spaniards,which imposed the language there.
See,how easy a language can be imposed to a conquered population?

Sile
17-03-15, 20:33
I think Slavs is just a gross forgery.
Why?
Simple,because Thracians and Dacians could not just vanish.
So we have so called "Slavs" which are actually Thracians that have various influences.


Slavic is a cultural and liguistic terminology af various peoples from southern belarus and northern Ukraine, they have no ethnicity .............they emerged AFTER the end of the Roman empire, which is why I2a-Din cannot be slavic , because its older than slavic.
All these "slavs" did in the past was to take in any peoples that needed a refuge in the heavy forested area which I mentioned above.

Using the term Slavic is detrimental for finding out true genetic origins of markers

Slavic is exactly like the term Celtic .............neither have ethnicity.............I am still unsure about the term Germanic

mihaitzateo
17-03-15, 21:01
Slavic is a cultural and liguistic terminology af various peoples from southern belarus and northern Ukraine, they have no ethnicity .............they emerged AFTER the end of the Roman empire, which is why I2a-Din cannot be slavic , because its older than slavic.
All these "slavs" did in the past was to take in any peoples that needed a refuge in the heavy forested area which I mentioned above.

Using the term Slavic is detrimental for finding out true genetic origins of markers

Slavic is exactly like the term Celtic .............neither have ethnicity.............I am still unsure about the term Germanic

Would be nice to know a little more about the history of the people speaking proto-Slavic (from what I understand was same language with Old Church Slavonic),or what was called,that moved South of Europe,around 600 AD.
I was saying that culturally there are South Slavs,Eastern Slavs and Western Slavs,which are quite different.
What I have seen,at cities from Serbia or Croatia,these rather reminds of cities from Italy,than those from Russia.
Cities from Czech and Slovak republics,rather reminds of Germans burgs.
And I think between Western Slavs,Czech and Slovaks are quite different from a cultural point of view,compared to Poles.

Yetos
17-03-15, 21:19
OK, but where did all R1a go in Dinaric area? Why is there only 5-6 percent R1a in Herzegovina, and 70 percent of I2a Din? There must exist more logical explanation other than "pure coincidence".
I am not familiar with claims that it is homeland of Slavs, but it might be true. However, we don't find most of diversity there (as we should find in homeland of I2a Din). We find most diversity in Poland somewhere around course of Vistula.
Also several peoples were present on same area (both Slavic and Germanic tribes)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/90/Pre_Migration_Age_Germanic.png





And about comparing skulls from "Gothic" and Medieval Slavic cultures: some of so called "Gothic cultures" were inhabited by Slavs for a great period of time. Wielbark culture existed untill end of 4th century: and by that time most of Goths already made it to the Balkans and Ukraine.

Maybe R1a is not a mark of Slavic,

that explains also the existance of high R1a in Greece in areas we know that Dorians settle.

the other explanation is Slavs that entered Balkans finally went to Greece and Dalamtia and change their language.

Yetos
17-03-15, 21:21
Slavic is a cultural and liguistic terminology af various peoples from southern belarus and northern Ukraine, they have no ethnicity .............they emerged AFTER the end of the Roman empire, which is why I2a-Din cannot be slavic , because its older than slavic.
All these "slavs" did in the past was to take in any peoples that needed a refuge in the heavy forested area which I mentioned above.

Using the term Slavic is detrimental for finding out true genetic origins of markers

Slavic is exactly like the term Celtic .............neither have ethnicity.............I am still unsure about the term Germanic

I agree
Slavic Celtic Germanic are family of Nations with common characteristics

Tomenable
17-03-15, 22:37
I think Slavs is just a gross forgery.

Really ??? Rather "Germanic people" is just a gross forgery - this conclusion is supported by the most recent study on Langobards, which says that they were just a bunch of completely random bandits (not even biologically related to each other, and representing completely different anthropological / racial types - as the paper explains), who gathered themselves together just in order to plunder the Roman Empire:

"Lombards on the Move – An Integrative Study of the Migration Period Cemetery at Szólád, Hungary", November 2014:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30869-Lombards-on-the-move-austria-hungaria?p=449309&viewfull=1#post449309

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0110793#pone-0110793-g005


45 skeletons of adults and subadults were excavated at the Lombard period cemetery at Szólád (6th century A.D.), Hungary. Embedded into the well-recorded historical context, the article presents the results obtained by an integrative investigation including anthropological, molecular genetic and isotopic (δ15N, δ13C, 87Sr/86Sr) analyses. Skeletal stress markers as well as traces of interpersonal violence were found to occur frequently. The mitochondrial DNA profiles revealed a heterogeneous spectrum of lineages that belong to the haplogroups H, U, J, HV, T2, I, and K, which are common in present-day Europe and in the Near East, while N1a and N1b are today quite rare. Evidence of possible direct maternal kinship was identified in only three pairs of individuals. According to enamel strontium isotope ratios, at least 31% of the individuals died at a location other than their birthplace and/or had moved during childhood. Based on the peculiar 87Sr/86Sr ratio distribution between females, males, and subadults in comparison to local vegetation and soil samples, we propose a three-phase model of group movement. An initial patrilocal group with narrower male but wider female Sr isotope distribution settled at Szólád, whilst the majority of subadults represented in the cemetery yielded a distinct Sr isotope signature. Owing to the virtual absence of Szólád-born adults in the cemetery, we may conclude that the settlement was abandoned after approx. one generation. Population heterogeneity is furthermore supported by the carbon and nitrogen isotope data. They indicate that a group of high-ranking men had access to larger shares of animal-derived food whilst a few individuals consumed remarkable amounts of millet. The inferred dynamics of the burial community are in agreement with hypotheses of a highly mobile lifestyle during the Migration Period and a short-term occupation of Pannonia by Lombard settlers as conveyed by written sources.

They did not even know how to fish (which makes them the most unusual "Scandinavians" ever!):


The paper is basically a confirmation of the historical record: the Lombards were a migratory group who spent some time in Pannonia before continuing onward and eventually reaching Italy. (...) The reproduced data of 28 individuals exhibited a high variability of mitochondrial haplotypes (78.6%). Twenty-two different lineages were identified. This composition includes a large number of hgs that commonly occur in present-day European populations. There are signs of a lot of violence:

"Four skull fractures and eight traumata on the postcranial skeleton were identified in a total of eight adults and one juvenile individual (Table E in File S1). The skull injuries were exclusive to male remains and included three cases of sharp-force trauma (Ind. 4, 13, 27) as well as one case of a depressed fracture (Ind. 43). Three skull fractures bore traces of healing, whilst one had occurred around the time of death."

It's also clear that they were a heavily militarized group, with a lot of wealth, as exhibited in the grave goods. (...)Although there seems to have been malnourishment among the children and some of the adults, no attempt was made to access the fresh water fish in a near by lake. If their ultimate origin was around the Baltic Sea, doesn't that seem a little peculiar - Scandinavians who don't like fish? (...)


The biological evidence suggests that the residents of Szólád were not a close reproductive community. This is in agreement with the notion of a partnership of convenience that resembled Germanic tribe formations with people of different cultural backgrounds maintaining regular contact with other contemporary gentes. Influence from several different European regions is supported archaeologically by the grave constructions that included ledge graves and graves with straight walls, some of which were surrounded by rectangular or circular ditches. The stylistic analysis of the grave goods, such as brooches and weaponry, revealed parallels to south-western and central Germany, Moravia and the middle Danube as well as to Italy. The latter also indicates the possible presence of members of the Roman population

Let's add, that all 45 people buried there belonged to the tribal elite of Lombards (this is an elite cemetery - as the study explains). So if even Germanic elite was just a bunch of random mongrels, then how did the rest of the tribe look like ???

Tomenable
17-03-15, 22:51
"Germanics = a gross forgery" would explain why there are NO GENETIC TRACES of Germanic migrations:

Patrick Geary, "Rethinking Barbarian Invasions through Genomic History" (video lectures):

Part 1:

http://video.ias.edu/node/5304

Part 2:

https://video.ias.edu/topology/2013/1002-PatrickGeary

In these lectures Patrick Geary shows that there is no any genetic evidence of Germanic migrations.

Tomenable
17-03-15, 22:58
proto-Slavic (from what I understand was same language with Old Church Slavonic)

No - Old Church Slavonic was just one of many branches of languages which split from Proto-Slavic - as this graph illustrates:

http://www.linguisticsociety.org/files/news/ChangEtAlPreprint.pdf

Graph:

http://s17.postimg.org/p76vh6k8f/Slavic_split.png

http://s17.postimg.org/p76vh6k8f/Slavic_split.png

And here another graph - chronological differentiation of Slavic languages (S. Starostin 2004):

Dates along the X axis represent time since Common Slavic, while dates within the tree represent years:

http://images66.fotosik.pl/696/fddec0302c0c8ab9.jpg

Serbian could as well be named Serbo-Croatian: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian

http://images66.fotosik.pl/696/fddec0302c0c8ab9.jpg

According to this diagram, Common Slavic started to differentiate itself already between 130 AD and 270 AD. This only supports written sources (Jordanes, Procopius, etc.) which say that Slavs were divided into several branches already in the 6th century.

So Slavs were not culturally monolithic by that time, and there already existed several distinct Slavic dialects / languages.

Polish language differentiated from Czecho-Slovak already around 780 AD according to this data.

Tomenable
17-03-15, 23:03
You claim that "Slavs are a forgery". So you are claiming that 40% of Europeans are "a forgery".

Because 40% of Europeans live in Slavic-speaking countries (where official language is Slavic):

http://s30.postimg.org/9tmeqp7tt/Countries_Europe.png

http://s30.postimg.org/9tmeqp7tt/Countries_Europe.png

Even if you exclude Russia, then still 20% (1/5) of Europeans live in other Slavic countries:

http://s9.postimg.org/n8n0jr7hb/Slavic_states_pop_1991.png

YES - Slavs do have "mixed ancestries" - it is hard to be 40% of a continent's population and homogeneous!

But this does not make Slavs "a forgery" - at least not any more than "Germanics" and "Romances" are forgeries.

Tomenable
17-03-15, 23:25
Thracians and Dacians could not just vanish.

Celts (map below) also could not just vanish - they just became assimilated into / absorbed by everyone else:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Celts.svg/1000px-Celts.svg.png

Today both "Slavics", "Romances" and "Germanics" have some Celtic ancestry.

Which does not make the former three "forgeries". Just like any other ancestry doesn't do this.

Tomenable
17-03-15, 23:59
that Russians and Bellarusians and Ukrainians have again a different style.

Yes we can see this "common style" of Ukrainians and Russians today, in Donbass!:

http://aph-ukraina.deviantart.com/gallery/

http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2013/347/f/0/the_best_friends_of_ukraine_by_aph_ukraina-d6xte76.jpg

http://s15.postimg.org/6hvgv1upn/Peace_Talks.png

mihaitzateo
18-03-15, 00:02
Sure that Slavs as same people with same genetics is just a forgery.
I have not seen Germans pretending they have same genetics with English people,because they are speaking both West Germanic languages,neither I have seen Germans saying they are same people with Swedes,because they are both speaking Germanic languages.
Same,I do not see Spaniards pretending they all descend from same people with Italians,because they both speak Romance languages.
There are some people who come and claim that all Slavic speakers are descending from some people that were living somewhere in Ukraine/North of Ukraine and which emigrated in all Europe and multiplied so much that now are like over 200 millions.
Are you really serious?
:D
I am not seeing English people denying that they have Celtic admixture,that they have Viking admixture,that they have Balkanic admixture,from the colonists of Roman Empire brought there and so on.
However,talking with some Slavic speakers about the lots of Feno-Ugrian paternal lines in Eastern Slavs,is angering them,talking about the fact that South Slavs are rather similar to Greeks as genetics,than to Ukrainians,is angering them again and so on.
So yes,telling that all of today Slavic speakers are same people and descend from some people that migrated from I_do_not_know_where in today Ukraine is just a gross forgery,that is not supported with any real facts,but with fairy tales.
Same about the idea that all I2-din and R1A from Balkans was brought by Slavs,that is another forgery.

Yetos
18-03-15, 00:12
@ Tomenable,

Although I agree with you in many

I must disagree

1) in the diagram of Languages
2) in the origin of Slavs

sorry,

Slavs are after Scythian expansion to Europe, not Celtic, if they are from Celtic then their homeland should be max in Hungary and West, not East neither South of there, Slavic language are today primary in the lands of Thracians and Scythians (Scoloti)

Albanian and Greek has nothing in common, except loans.
Albanian is a lone language but from North Family
Greek is a tottaly of its own as family but comes from the same with Aryan,

OCS is not a language, that Language (OCS) is a kind of setting the foundation and cleansing so to work as a quide to grammar, alphabet, syntaxis of Slavic languages in order to have common literature and common official writting of expression, and to turn them to christianity.
it was a language needed, as Attic in Greek, as Hannover's Deutsch in German, as Latin Codexes to latino-celtic
it was mainly Great Moravia's rulers language with South Slavic elements and imports from Severi and Serbo-Croat.

Tomenable
18-03-15, 00:16
Mihaitzateo:


As for common language,or closed languages,would anyone tell that people from South America are same race with Spaniards,or would call them Spaniards,because they are speaking Spanish?
No,is just that the conquerors were Spaniards,which imposed the language there.
See,how easy a language can be imposed to a conquered population?

Are you claiming that most of the population of South and Central Americas are unmixed "pure" Native Americans / Amerindians ???

This is wrong.

Most of the population of Spanish-speaking America are Mestizos - which means that they have mixed Spanish-Amerindian ancestry.

Most of the people there personally describe themselves as Mestizos, so they are aware that they are mixed-race people.

But even ones who describe themselves as "pure" Indians probably in most cases have at least some degree of European ancestry.

This map shows the % of people who describe themselves as Native Americans (and most of them still have some European admixture):

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?162959-Race-mixing-is-white-genocide&p=3449154#post3449154

The "over 85%" color is only in case of Greenland (while 4 more countries have between 39% and 55% of Native Americans):

http://s8.postimg.org/4x5trn8xx/Rasy2a.png

If we include also people who describe themselves as Mestizos (mixed European-Amerindian) or Zambos (mixed African-Amerindian) then:

http://s22.postimg.org/89wz0hmvl/Rasy1a.png

================================

And here by comparison the % of people of fully (or almost fully) European ancestry in the Americas:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?149362-European-populations-worldwide


North America:

It was pretty difficult to find good stats for the Dutch possessions of Eustasius, Aruba, Saba, Curacao, Sint Maarten and Bonaire so they'll have to be included in the general Dutch (European) category, but from what I read they're not exactly white enclaves or very populous, so it doesn't really matter. North America has 4 majority European independent countries - Canada, the US, Costa Rica and Cuba. Puerto Rico says it's 3/4 European but we all know they have identity issues, and genetic results seem to suggest their ethnic European provenance is lower than 75% on average. The results range from less than half a percentage point for the Commonwealth realm of Grenada to probably everyone in the French overseas department of St Pierre et Miquelon. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Pierre_and_Miquelon)

6,082 ~100% St. Pierre et Miquelon (French Overseas Department)
8,100 ~90% Saint Barthelemy (French, 2011 estimates)
25,186,890 76.7% Canada (2011 census). Mixed Race (Multiracial + Latin American) 553,115 1.7%
2,733,005 75.6%Puerto Rico (US, 2010 Census, 2013 US estimates). Mixed race officially 3.3%. This is considered to be overreported for cultural reasons. However European blood is 66% on average and found in 98% of Puerto Riquenses.
223,553,265 72.4% USA (2010 census). Mixed Race (Two or more races) 9,009,073 2.9%
2,831,382 65.8% Costa Rica. Mixed race (Mestizo, Mulatto) 788,709 20.37%
7,080,713 64.01% Cuba (2012 Census). Mixed race (Mestizo, Mulatto) 2,942,462 26.6
19,913 31% Bermuda (UK) (2010 census). Mixed race (Mulatto) 8,351 13%
11,346 20% Cayman Islands (UK, 2011). Mixed race (Black/White) 22,693 40%
2,845,210 18% Guatemala (2012). Mixed race (Mestizo) 6,638,80342%
1,964,810 17% Nicaragua (World Factbook, 2007). Mixed race (Mestizo) 2,915,955 69%
1,602,720 16% Dominican Republic (2012 World Factbook). Mixed raced (Mulatto) 7,312,410 72%
16,599 15.6% Virgin Islands (US, 2010 census). Mixed race (Mulatto) 2,234 2.1%
14,799,382 12.5% Mexico (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexicans_of_European_descent)(average of high and low estimates from Britannica and the CIA World Factbook). Mixed race (Mestizo) 69,732,568 60%
804,202 12% El Salvador (Wikipedia). Mixed race (Mestizo) 5,221,775 86%
45,939 12% The Bahamas (2012 census). Mixed race included as blacks (85%, as in America, most blacks will be mixed race to some degree)
6,266 11% Greenland (Denmark, 2009)
27,928 9.2% Belize (2010 census, White, German Mennonite, and Other White). Mixed race (Mestizo, Creole, and Mixed) 232,925 77.7%
36,517 9% Guadeloupe (France, 2006 World Factbook estimates) Creolles counted amongst blacks, probably very high
2,520 8% Turks and Caicos (UK) 2012 Census. Mixed race: unrecorded.
2,300 7.5% Saint Martin (France, CIA world factbook, estimates) Mestizos numerous
257,460 7% Panama. Mixed race (Metizo, Mulatto) 3,054,000 80%
2,100 7% Virgin Islands (UK, 2001 and 2010 censuses). Mixed race nonspecified.
19,825 5% Martinique (French Overseas Department, 2009)
4,130 4% St Vincent & the Grenadines (2013 World Factbook). Mixed race 19,611 19%
11,283 4% Barbados (CIA World Factbook estimate). Mixed race unknown.
542 3.74% Anguilla (UK, 2001 census). Mixed race 661 4.65%
153 3% Montserrat (UK, 2001 census). Mixed race (Mulatto) 148 2.9%
1,019 2.2 St Kitts & Nevis (2001 census). Mixed race (Mulatto) 1,019 2.2%
1,652 1.9% Antigua & Barbuda (2011 census). Mixed race (Mulatto) 3,825 4.4%
34,670 1.2%Jamaica (2012 census). Mixed race: unrecorded. Mixed Jamaicans report themselves as 'black.' 92.4% of Jamaicans are 'black' but they're mostly admixed to some degree.
81,436 1% Honduras (World Factbook, 2011). Mixed race (Mestizo) 8,052,128 90%
99,9671% Haiti (2014 estimates). Mixed race (Mulatto) 999,673 10%
570 0.8% Dominica (2014 census). Mixed race (Mulatto) 13,546 19%
8,669 0.65% Trinidad & Tobago (2011 census). Mixed race (various) 302,788 22.8%
991 0.6% St Lucia (2010 census). Mixed race (Mulatto) 17,965 10.8%
413 0.4% Grenada (2001 census). Mixed race (Mulato) 8,457 8.2%

284,089,969

This is about 54% of the population of North America but bear in mind most of the rest are part-European, including most African-Americans and Afro-Caribbeans, which is serious population displacement for a continent that was 0% European in 1492.

South America:

There's a general perception that Argentines like to overstate their European blood. This perception is pretty accurate as Argentines think they're 97% European when the average Argentine is only 79% European by blood (though of course most Argentines are European, it's just definitely not as high as 97%). A similar phenomenon is true for Uruguay. On the other hand, in Brazil and Venezuela and other places, people seem to be pretty honest, even a bit strict (some Brazilian pardos are 90%+ European and the average is in the 70s) about declaring themselves to be European.

2,962 ~100% Falkland Islands (2012 census, World Factbook) though many will have minor Amerind admix from Chilean ancestors, also South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands/British Antarctic Territory
39,919,640 97% Argentina (2010 census, World Factbook but the average Argentine is only 79% European so this should be taken with a pinch of salt)
3,055,683 90.7% Uruguay (2011 census). Mixed race 202,140 6%
91,051,646 47.73% Brazil (2010 census). Mixed race (pardo) 82,277,333 43.13%
12,620,500 43.6% Venezuela (2011 census). Mixed race (Mestizo) 14,936,188 51.6%. Unlike Puerto Rico, European genes are much higher than reported ancestry at around 60.6%.
17,703,079 37% Colombia (2005 census). Mixed race (Mestizo) 23,444,618 49%. Average European blood: 65%
4,534,931 30% Chile (University of Chile estimates, self-reporting is much higher). Mixed race (Mestizo) 9,825,683 65%
537,245 18.5% Peru (Universia, Poblacion de Peru). Mixed race (Mestizo) 13,666,190 47%
1,583,415 15% Bolivia (2010, World Factbook CIA). Mixed race (Mestizo) 3,166,831 30%
35,003 14% French Guinea (France, estimates). Mixed race 175,013 70%
928,644 6.1% Ecuador (2010 census). Mixed race (Mestizo) 10,945,826 71/9%
193,350 3% Paraguay (2011 world factbook - other estimates as high as 20%). Mixed race (mestizo) 6,122,750 95%
2,264 0.5% Suriname (2004 census). Mixed race (maroons, creolle, mixed) 274,850 50.8%
1,974 0.3% Guyana (2002 census). Mixed race 125,727 16.7%

172,170,336

This is about 44% of the continent but again, there are very few people without at least some European ancestry.

===============
===============


Anyway,the language I think have few in common with paternal lines,to impose a language to a conquered people,is enough to have the ruling class speaking that language.
It is very possible that R1A bearers brought Slavic language to South Slavs,they were just the ruling elite.

It is possible - but there is no single rule. Sometimes language is inherited from maternal lines, not from paternal lines. This depends on culture.

Here is an example from South America - from Paraguay:

http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~munia/475/Presentations/Argentinabrief_history.pdf

Info about the beginnings of Paraguay from this book in the link above:


Only one beleaguered indigenous group found it expeditious to help the Spaniards.
After losing a battle against another small Spanish party from Buenos
Aires, the agricultural Guaraní of what is now Paraguay accepted the
Spaniards as great warriors and allies in their own struggles with the
surrounding bands. The Guaraní assisted the Spaniards of the Mendoza
expedition in founding Asunción in 1537. It was to be the first perma-
nent Spanish settlement in the Río de la Plata, as within four years, the
remaining 350 inhabitants of Buenos Aires abandoned the settlement
and moved to Asunción. Since there were only four Spanish women
in Asunción, the Spanish men emulated the native leaders and took
Guaraní women to serve them as concubines, servants, and food suppli-
ers. Guaraní chieftains were made to offer their daughters to Spaniards
in exchange for a military alliance against native enemies.

Having found no gold, the Spaniards adopted the native custom and
acquired the work of the indigenous women as a sign of wealth. “It is
the women who sow and reap the crop,” one Spaniard observed (Service
1954, 35). Their children were mestizo (of mixed Native American and
European ancestry) and grew up speaking Guaraní rather than Spanish;
however, these first-generation mestizos came to see themselves as
European and remained loyal to the king of Spain. Eventually, the
first- and second-generation mestizos became the gentry of Paraguay,
and in the decades following the abandonment of Buenos Aires, they
provided the leadership for the numerous military expeditions against
neighboring Indian groups, gaining greater wealth and status with the
number of Indian slaves captured in battle.

Settler Politics and Society
Pedro de Mendoza died on his return voyage to Spain, and in his place
the king dispatched Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca to govern the small landlocked
colony of Paraguay. Paraguay originally referred to the Spanish-held area around Asunción.
In the following centuries the term was extended to encompass territories to the
north and at various times included regions beyond the boundaries of the modern-day
nation of the same name.) Cabeza de Vaca was famous for his earlier
adventures as one of only three survivors of Juan Ponce de León’s
expedition to Florida and the Mississippi River; after being stranded in
a shipwreck in the Gulf of Mexico, Cabeza de Vaca had walked across
Texas and Mexico all the way to Mexico City.

Cabeza de Vaca brought more European settlers, all male. Together
the Spaniards and Guaraní warriors subdued rival tribes in the sur-
rounding territory, but in an attempt to cross the Chaco region, Cabeza
de Vaca nearly exhausted the resources of Asunción. Meanwhile, the
settlers belatedly learned that Pizarro had already claimed the wealth
of the Inca. Subsequently, because it was a land with no gold, Paraguay
lost its attractiveness for Spanish immigration, and few additional
Europeans arrived to challenge the influence of the original settlers.
Dissension nonetheless broke out among members of the Spanish
and mestizo community, many of whom disliked Governor Cabeza de
Vaca. At issue was the division of the dwindling number of Guaraní.

Soon after the Europeans arrived, diseases previously unknown to the
American natives ravaged the indigenous population. Mestizos gained
the immunities to European diseases from their fathers, and their
population in Paraguay expanded as the number of Guaraní women
and servants declined precipitously. In the semitropical environment of
Paraguay, the native death rates from successive epidemics of smallpox,
influenza, and other diseases rose to 40 percent within just one decade.
For this very reason slaving expeditions were sent out to replenish the
numbers of indigenous servants and concubines of the Spaniards and
later of the mestizo gentry.

The economic crisis caused by the decline of the Guaraní population
and the unpopularity of Governor Cabeza de Vaca spurred a faction of
Spanish settlers to mount the first coup d’état in the Río de la Plata.
The victorious faction returned Cabeza de Vaca to Spain in chains. A
veteran of the original Mendoza expedition, Domingo de Irala became
governor. The Guaraní too had grown desperate by their situation, rav-
aged by disease and the excessive Spanish demands for Indian servants,
female labor, and foodstuffs. A number of Guaraní rebelled against the
Spaniards in 1545, but the settler community put down the uprising
with the aid of “loyal” Indians.

In the relative poverty of Paraguay, the settlers enjoyed political
autonomy from Spain and freely established a social system to their
own liking. Governor Irala divided the Guaraní into
encomiendas (grants of Indian labor and tribute) among the individual Spanish set-
tlers. These encomiendas became a kind of permanent serfdom for the
indigenous peoples under Spanish rule. Spaniards in Asunción passed
these grants on to their mestizo sons.

Succeeding generations of mestizos moved from Asunción to establish other towns and other
encomiendas on the frontiers of Paraguay. Decline of the Guaraní population,
however, reduced the original size of the encomiendas, and by 1600, a mere 3,000 Indians
remained in Asunción. The encomiendas tended therefore to involve personal labor
more than tribute, giving the settlers in Paraguay a reputation for laziness.
“Having plenty of all things good to eat and drink,” one observer said with some exaggeration,
“they give themselves up to ease and idleness, and don’t much trouble themselves
with trading at all” (du Biscay 1968, 11).

The Paraguayan settlers nonetheless desired the European goods
symbolic of their rank and sought to reestablish the river link to the
estuary of the Río de la Plata. The mestizo citizens of Asunción took
it upon themselves to establish the river port of Santa Fe in 1573,
and in 1580, they went downriver again to the estuary of the Río de
la Plata. Mestizos of relatively high social status in Paraguay figured
prominently among the 75 founders of the second permanent settle-
ment of Buenos Aires. They were led by Juan de Garay, a Paraguayan
descendant of one of the original members of Mendoza’s expedition
of 44 years before.

mihaitzateo
18-03-15, 00:27
I do not know how many Amerindians are in South America.
For example 95% of the population of Paraguay are Metizos (which are mixed,European with Amerindians)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguay
But they are speaking Spanish language.
On the other hand,90% of the people from Uruguay are claming European ancestry.
And the origin of their European genetics is not only from Spain,but from other countries too.
No one knows the history of migrations of some people speaking proto-slavic,about 600 AD.
Some group of these people were allied to Avars,some were not.

Tomenable
18-03-15, 00:38
You have your chronology wrong. Slavs are first mentioned at the Danube River not in ca. 600 AD but in ca. 490 AD.

And Slavs start colonizing the Balkans not after ca. 600 AD but in ca. 545 AD (they were raiding the Balkans already before 545 AD).

The Avars appear for the first time when Slavs already colonize the Balkans - and the Avars were initially Byzantine allies.

Here is the story (I'm not sure if I posted it already before or not):

Slavs were raiding Roman lands from their homeland north of the Danube river in what is now southern Romania since around the 490s, but they started to settle south of the Danube (in Balkans "proper") only since around 545. First settlements from ca. 545 - 550 were established in eastern Bosnia, Lower and Upper Moesia, and Little Scythia - including the regions of Ulmetum and Adina. Around the same time (ca. 550) first Slavic immigrants probably reached what is now Slovenia (they could be the same tribe which had besieged Durazzo in 547). Second wave of Slavs came to Slovenia after 568 (this time from the north, most probably from Moravia). According to John of Ephesus and Menander Protector another major wave of Slavs (Menander wrote that their strength was 100,000 but he didn't specify whether that included only warriors or all people) broke into Thrace and Thessaly as far as the Great Walls of Constantinople in period 577 - 580, and settled in vast areas. Sources mention that those Slavs were led by a war chief named Ardagast or Radogost (Ардагаст), and a king named Musokios. They could also reach as far as Greece "proper" already by ca. 580, when they sacked Athens, for which there is archaeological evidence (other sources indicate that Slavs started to settle in Attica and the Peloponnese only later, around 610). In 599 Pope Gregory I in a letter to Exarch of Italy wrote that Slavs had already seized most of Istria, and were penetrating into the Italian Peninsula. After mentioned invasions by Slavs, in 584 AD Byzantine Emperor Maurice sent emissaries to the Khagan of the Avars - Bayan I -, asking him for help against Slavs. The Avars initially worked as Byzantine allies against the Slavs. In 584 Ardagast with his Slavs besieged Constantinople but was repulsed by combined Byzantine-Avar forces, and later lost two more battles against Byzantine and Avar forces led by certain Comentiolus (the battle of Erginia River and the battle of Ansinon, near Hadrianopole). Comentiolus also pushed the Slavic settlers out of the region of Astica. In 585 the Byzantines-Avars decided to attack the original South Slavic lands across the Danube - forces under command of Priscus and Gentzon crossed the river at Dorostolon (present-day Silistra) and surprise-attacked the Slavs in their native territory (as most of their forces had long been campaigning in the Byzantine part of Balkans). They attacked at midnight and defeated the Slavs, Ardagast fell on a tree stump and was almost captured, luckily he was near a river and eluded the attackers. But later alliances switched - the Avars abandoned their Byzantine allies and instead started to cooperate with the Slavs, having subordinated some of their tribes (most notably the southern branch of Dudlebes), and having signed alliances with other tribes. So the conquest and colonization of most of the Balkans by the Slavs could be completed with Avar help in the early 600s. Avars were not very numerous but they were excellent horsemen, while Slavs comprised all of the infantry and crews of the navy, as well as some of the horsemen too.

But despite repeated attempts the Slavs-Avars never managed to capture two heavily fortified coastal cities - Constantinople and Thessalonica.

Croats and Serbs is another story. They came to the Balkans much later, in the 2nd half of the 7th century, invited by the Byzantines to fight against Avars and South Slavic tribes (ancestors of modern Bosniaks, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Bulgarians) in Dalmatia. Croats and Serbs were originally West Slavs. Slovenes emerged from two waves of Slavic immigration - one from the east (South Slavs) and one West Slavic - from the north - but which came earlier than Serbo-Croatian speakers.

Before coming to the Balkans, Croats had established their tribal state somewhere around the Carpathian Mountains. It was called White Croatia.

Ancestors of Serbs on the other hand, migrated in two directions - one wave settled in Germany (those became Sorbs), one in the Balkans.

Tomenable
18-03-15, 00:40
As you can see we even know the names of Slavic leaders who were their commanders during the invasion of the Balkans.

Main Slavic commander was named Ardagast / Radogost (Ардагаст) - even English wikipedia has an article about him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ardagast


Ardagast or Radogost[1] (Cyrillic: Ардагаст ; fl. 584-597[2]) was a 6th-century South Slavic chieftain under King Musokios.

The etymology of the name may derive from Slavic "rada" - council and "gościć", "hostit" - to host, meaning the one who hosts the council. It could have been a personal name, or an acquired title, synonymous with council, assembly, or veche, leader or chieftain.

Menander Protector writes about Ardagast in his works, and he is mentioned in the Strategicon of Maurice.[1]

The Slavs who plundered Greece in 577 may have been under Ardagast leadership.[2]

After a treaty was concluded in 584 between Bayan I and Emperor Maurice, Ardagast raided Thrace penetrating as far as the Long Wall, the Slavs suffered defeats only twice, at Erginia river and Ansinon neighbourhood of Hadrianople by Comentiolus. The Slavs were later driven out of the Astica region.[3]

The raid in Thrace in 585[4] prompted Emperor Maurice to deal with the Slavs - sending an army with commander-in-chief Priscus and infantry commander Gentzon to cross the Danube at Dorostolon (present-day Silistra) and surprise attack the Slavs in their own territory (as the Slavs had long been pillaging the Byzantine Empire).[5] The Army arrived at the Slavic camp at midnight, surprising the Slavs who fled in confusion, Ardagast fell on a tree stump and was almost captured, but luckily he was near a river and eluded the attackers.[5]

Priscus sent his lieutenant Alexander across the Helibakion (Ialomiţa River) to find Slavs who were hiding in the woods and swamps, they failed to burn out the people hiding, but a Gepid Christian who was associated with the Slavs deserted and showed a secret passage after which the army easily captured the Slavs, who according to the Gepid, were spies sent by King Musokios that just heard about the attack on Ardagast.[6]

Tomenable
18-03-15, 00:43
So I repeat once again: the Slavs enter the Balkans on their own, 40 years (two generations) before the Avars show up.

When the Avars show up in the area, the Slavs are already colonizing the Balkans for 40 years on their own.

The Avars first show up as Byzantine allies against the Slavs. They defeat and subjugate several Slavic tribes (not all of them!).

But later the Avars betray the Byzantine Empire, and instead start to help the Slavs in finishing their colonization of the Balkans.

What exactly was the relationship between the Slavs and the Avars is uncertain. The Slavs were not a monolith so the Avars had different relations with each tribe (the often quoted except which says that the Avars were persecuting Slavs refers only to one tribe - the Dudlebes - and this is explicitly mentioned in that text, which says that the Avars were persecuting the "Dutleipa" and their women).

Moreover, we do not know for sure which Dudlebes did that text mention - because there were as many as 3 tribes of this name:

http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dulebowie

Actually those three tribes had slightly different names (one was Dulebes, second one Dudlebes, and last one Dutleipa).

The Avars were most likely persecuting the last of those tribes - Dutleipa - who lived in Lower Pannonia.

The other two lived respectively in Volhynia (Dulebes) and in Bohemia (Dudlebes).

So one of those tribes was West Slavic, one East Slavic and one South Slavic - yet all three had similar names.

Maybe they had a common ancestral tribe, which split into three groups. Or it could be just a coincidence.

Tomenable
18-03-15, 02:39
For example 95% of the population of Paraguay are Metizos (which are mixed,European with Amerindians)

If you check haplogroups - probably great majority of their Y-DNA is European and great majority of their mtDNA is Amerindian.

Yetos
18-03-15, 08:07
You have your chronology wrong. Slavs are first mentioned at the Danube River not in ca. 600 AD but in ca. 490 AD.

And Slavs start colonizing the Balkans not after ca. 600 AD but in ca. 545 AD (they were raiding the Balkans already before 545 AD).

The Avars appear for the first time when Slavs already colonize the Balkans - and the Avars were initially Byzantine allies.

Here is the story (I'm not sure if I posted it already before or not):

Slavs were raiding Roman lands from their homeland north of the Danube river in what is now southern Romania since around the 490s, but they started to settle south of the Danube (in Balkans "proper") only since around 545. First settlements from ca. 545 - 550 were established in eastern Bosnia, Lower and Upper Moesia, and Little Scythia - including the regions of Ulmetum and Adina. Around the same time (ca. 550) first Slavic immigrants probably reached what is now Slovenia (they could be the same tribe which had besieged Durazzo in 547). Second wave of Slavs came to Slovenia after 568 (this time from the north, most probably from Moravia). According to John of Ephesus and Menander Protector another major wave of Slavs (Menander wrote that their strength was 100,000 but he didn't specify whether that included only warriors or all people) broke into Thrace and Thessaly as far as the Great Walls of Constantinople in period 577 - 580, and settled in vast areas. Sources mention that those Slavs were led by a war chief named Ardagast or Radogost (Ардагаст), and a king named Musokios. They could also reach as far as Greece "proper" already by ca. 580, when they sacked Athens, for which there is archaeological evidence (other sources indicate that Slavs started to settle in Attica and the Peloponnese only later, around 610). In 599 Pope Gregory I in a letter to Exarch of Italy wrote that Slavs had already seized most of Istria, and were penetrating into the Italian Peninsula. After mentioned invasions by Slavs, in 584 AD Byzantine Emperor Maurice sent emissaries to the Khagan of the Avars - Bayan I -, asking him for help against Slavs. The Avars initially worked as Byzantine allies against the Slavs. In 584 Ardagast with his Slavs besieged Constantinople but was repulsed by combined Byzantine-Avar forces, and later lost two more battles against Byzantine and Avar forces led by certain Comentiolus (the battle of Erginia River and the battle of Ansinon, near Hadrianopole). Comentiolus also pushed the Slavic settlers out of the region of Astica. In 585 the Byzantines-Avars decided to attack the original South Slavic lands across the Danube - forces under command of Priscus and Gentzon crossed the river at Dorostolon (present-day Silistra) and surprise-attacked the Slavs in their native territory (as most of their forces had long been campaigning in the Byzantine part of Balkans). They attacked at midnight and defeated the Slavs, Ardagast fell on a tree stump and was almost captured, luckily he was near a river and eluded the attackers. But later alliances switched - the Avars abandoned their Byzantine allies and instead started to cooperate with the Slavs, having subordinated some of their tribes (most notably the southern branch of Dudlebes), and having signed alliances with other tribes. So the conquest and colonization of most of the Balkans by the Slavs could be completed with Avar help in the early 600s. Avars were not very numerous but they were excellent horsemen, while Slavs comprised all of the infantry and crews of the navy, as well as some of the horsemen too.

But despite repeated attempts the Slavs-Avars never managed to capture two heavily fortified coastal cities - Constantinople and Thessalonica.

Croats and Serbs is another story. They came to the Balkans much later, in the 2nd half of the 7th century, invited by the Byzantines to fight against Avars and South Slavic tribes (ancestors of modern Bosniaks, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Bulgarians) in Dalmatia. Croats and Serbs were originally West Slavs. Slovenes emerged from two waves of Slavic immigration - one from the east (South Slavs) and one West Slavic - from the north - but which came earlier than Serbo-Croatian speakers.

Before coming to the Balkans, Croats had established their tribal state somewhere around the Carpathian Mountains. It was called White Croatia.

Ancestors of Serbs on the other hand, migrated in two directions - one wave settled in Germany (those became Sorbs), one in the Balkans.

Even your chronology shows them after Scythian entrance, not after Celtic

Diurpaneus
18-03-15, 19:14
Slavic is a cultural and liguistic terminology af various peoples from southern belarus and northern Ukraine, they have no ethnicity .............they emerged AFTER the end of the Roman empire, which is why I2a-Din cannot be slavic , because its older than slavic.
All these "slavs" did in the past was to take in any peoples that needed a refuge in the heavy forested area which I mentioned above.

Using the term Slavic is detrimental for finding out true genetic origins of markers

Slavic is exactly like the term Celtic .............neither have ethnicity.............I am still unsure about the term Germanic


He's just playing.I mean, mihaitzateo/gyms...
Tormenable could be a 3rd clone, he seems to follow the same line.
The man has countless clones on the Romanian forum and he's been banned over and over again.

You must've noticed that some threads got diverted.

I don't know what the heck went wrong...
It probably has to do with the internet addiction.
These guys should have had their best time,chasing girls and so on,cause it won't happen twice.

hrvat22
18-03-15, 19:28
Tomenable (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/members/49064-Tomenable)



Croats and Serbs is another story. They came to the Balkans much later, in the 2nd half of the 7th century, invited by the Byzantines to fight against Avars


There is no record stating that Serbs are fighting with the Avars ... only Croats are mentioned as warriors against the Avars...



South Slavic tribes (ancestors of modern Bosniaks, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Bulgarians)

Ancestors of Bosniaks, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, Serbs and Croats are coming from White Croatia as Croats who later divided on these so-called nations....



but which came earlier than Serbo-Croatian speakers.

Genetically these are same people wich come from White Croatia and it is logical that this is one original Croatian language...


Ancestors of Serbs on the other hand, migrated in two directions - one wave settled in Germany (those became Sorbs), one in the Balkans.

Vast majority of Serbs have genes that come from White Croatia and is logical that they were Croatian origin....Serbs from Germany do not have genetic similarities with the Balkan Serbs which is logical since they are Croatian genetic origin...


Once again to understand .....I2a1b2a1a3A356/Z16983 has source in the White Croatia not in the Lusatian Serbs or East Germany and Boyko people....Therefore on Balkan arrives only Croats...




It is not possible that Croat from western Herzegovina, western Dalmatia or Croatian islands has the same genes as the Serb from eastern Herzegovina or Montenegro and that their ancestors have come from the same place to the same place at the same time ... They came from White Croatia as Croats which have through history converted to Orthodox Christianity and Islam and became Serbs or Bosniaks but genetically they are Croats.

doku
18-03-15, 19:41
Ancestors of Bosniaks, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, Serbs and Croats are coming from White Croatia as Croats who later divided on these so-called nations....

Why this respectable forum tolerate this chauvinistic idiot?

hrvat22
18-03-15, 20:07
Why this respectable forum tolerate this chauvinistic idiot?


You explain on tolerant and logical way who are the people with the same genes that comes from White Croatia......whether they Bosnians, Germans, Bulgarians, Turks, Serbs, Italian......logically they are Croats..... I have nothing against Bosniaks, Serbs etc. but it is an undeniable fact...That in place of White Croatia existed Bosnia it would be logical that we came to the Balkans as Bosnians :heart:

Garrick
18-03-15, 23:08
Why this respectable forum tolerate this chauvinistic idiot?

No one seriously pays attention to it.

Eupedia is a serious forum, anyone who wants to discuss has to offer plenty of arguments. Constructions and fantasies are for some other forums.

mihaitzateo
19-03-15, 00:08
Diurpaneus are you serious?
You do not see I have made a thread about Slavic words from Romanian?
Would a non-Romanian speaker able to do that?
What you do not like,that I do not follow the Slavo-phobia of average Romanian?
Or that I said that Bosnians,Montenegrins,Serbs are more Dacians that Romanians?
Go check a little the phenotypes in Romania,from where do you think 20% or 22% Neo-Danubian is coming?
From Dacians?
No,is not coming from Dacians.
Moldovans,North Transylvania people are very closed to South Ukrainians.
I do not deny the existence of Eastern Slavs (from whom average Romanian have more blood,than average so called "South Slav"),I was just saying that is not possible that the people who migrated around 600 AD from North Ukraine to be the ancestors of all Slavic speakers from today.
As for I2-din North ,which have the highest peak in Moldavia,from Romania and is common to Ukrainians and Poles,I did not invented that,is just scientific data.
I2-din North I think have highest diversity somewhere in Moldavia that belongs to Romania.
Which means there this mutation appeared.
We,Romanians,are a mixture of different nations,Eastern Slavs included,but also Eastern Germanic people,Italic people,Greek people,Thraco-Dacian people even some (but very few) Celtic blood and who knows what other people.

EDIt:
Gyms is pretending that Romanians came from South of Danube,but the fact we have plenty of I2-din North proves otherwise,since South of Danube there is very few or none I2-Din North,but I2-din North is in significant percentages in Ukraine and Poland.
South of Danube,Bulgarians have some I2-din North,but that was brought by Romanians who migrated South of Danube or by Bulgarians who came around 600 AD from NE Europe,from today land of Russia.

Tomenable
19-03-15, 03:13
Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, "De administrando imperio" (English):

http://www.antiquehistory.net/rab/porphyrogenitus.htm

"Emperor Heraclius and the conversion of the Croats and the Serbs":

https://www.academia.edu/228195/Emperor_Heraclius_and_the_conversion_of_the_Croats _and_the_Serbs


Gyms is pretending that Romanians came from South of Danube

Vlachs did. Not Romanians as a whole.

Because Vlachs are only one of several elements which contributed to the ethnogenesis of Romanians.

Tomenable
19-03-15, 03:22
About Slavic (but pre-Serbo-Croatian - Croats and Serbs came later) colonization of Dalmatia:

http://www.antiquehistory.net/rab/porphyrogenitus.htm#Dalmatia1


And so, therefore, the Slavs, or Avars, took counsel, and on one occasion when the Romani had crossed over, they laid ambush and attacked and defeated them. The aforesaid Slavs took the Roman arms and standards and the rest of their military insignia and crossed the river and came to the frontier pass, and when the Romani who were there saw them and beheld the standards and accoutrements of their own men, and so, when the aforesaid Slavs reached the pass, they let them through. Once through, they instantly expelled the Romani and took possession of the aforesaid city of Salona. There they settled and thereafter began gradually to make plundering raids and destroyed the Romani who dwelt in the plains and on the higher ground and took possession of their lands. The remnant of the Romani escaped to the cities of the coast and possess them still, namely, Decatera, Ragusa, Spalato, Tetrangourin, Diadora, Arbe, Vekla, and Opsara, the inhabitants of are called Romani to this day.

Since the reign of Heraclius, emperor of the Romans, as will be related in the narrative concerning the Croats and Serbs, the whole of Dalmatia and the nations about it, such as the Croats and Serbs, Zachlumi, Terbouniotes, Kanalites, Diocletians and Arentani, who are also called Pagani. But when the Roman empire, through the sloth and inexperience of those who then governed it and especially in the time of Michael from Amorion, the Lisper, had declined to the verge of total extinction, the inhabitants of the cities of Dalmatia became independent, subject neither to the emperor of the Romans nor to anybody else, and, what is more, the nations of those parts, the Croats and Serbs and Zachlumites, Terbuniotes and Kanalites and Diocletians and the Pagani, shook off the reins of the empire of the Romans and became self-governing and independent, subject to none. Princes, as they say, these nations had none, but only elders, as is the rule in the other Slavonic regions. Moreover, the majority of these Slavs were not even baptized, and remained unbaptized for long enough.

But in the time of Basil, the Christ-loving emperor, they sent diplomatic agents, begging and praying him that those of them who were unbaptized might receive baptism, and that they might be, as they had originally been, subject to the empire of the Romans; and that glorious emperor, of blessed memory, gave ear to them and sent out an imperial agent and priests with him and baptized all of them that were unbaptized of the aforesaid nations, and after baptizing them he then appointed for them princes whom they whom they themselves approved and chose, from the family which they themselves loved and favored. And from that day to this their princes come from these same families, and from no other. But the Pagani, who are called Arentani in the Roman tongue, were left unbaptized, in an inaccessible and precipitous part of the country. For 'Pagani' means 'unbaptized' in the Slavonic tongue. But later, they too sent to the glorious emperor and begged that they too might be baptized, and he sent and baptized them too. And since, as we said above, owing to the sloth and unexperience of those in power things had gone wrong way for the Romans, the inhabitants of the cities of Dalmatia also had become independent, subject neither to the emperor of the Romans nor to anybody else. (...)

Besa
19-03-15, 16:18
I would also (cautiously, very cautiously) point towards it being Palaeolithic (or the Mesolithic) for the simple reason that if I2a weren't the Palaeolithic/Mesolithic haplogroup there was in that region, I don't see which could; as well as the fact that I see rather improbable that it entered (en masse, that is) at another time:
1. Early Indo-Europeans: Were this the case, this zone would have been a hotspot for Indo-European migration, and archaeology tells of quite the contrary:

John Wilkes, The Illyrians, p. 34
And while in these areas there does appear to have been an Indo-European migration (though not nearly as large as in other places), in places where there is a higher concentration (such as the Croatian Islands & coast as well as western,southern & central Bosnia) there is no evidence of a migration, all the contrary (ibid).
2. Sea peoples: There is no evidence (archaeological or otherwise) of an intrusion of this area that I know of...
3. Sarmatians: In my opinion, Sarmatians are very closely related to Scythians, and they are both Iranic peoples, and they were probably R1a in their majority (especially East Iranians, as West Iranians had much more hg. J)
4. Slavs: I believe what may be a telling point against this theory is the lack of R1a (otherwise omnipresent in all other Slavic peoples) in this region.

This may be possible, but in my opinion only for some (perhaps most, certainly not all) of the I2a.

I voted slavs because they were slavicized Sarmatians.

You're quite wrong. The arrival of the two Slavicized Sarmatian tribes (Croats and Serbs) to the balkans is very well historically recorded. They were invited by the Roman empire to todays Croatia and Bosnia Herzogovina, bringing I2a and R1a.. which is a hotspot of I2a and to a lesser extent, R1a. the same region they came from, probably the Carpathian mountains recorded by Romans, is also a hot spot of I2a... and was a Sarmatian location and contact zone with slavs, which explains Romanians and their high i2a but also J2 and EV-13. The i2a in Slavs is from Sarmatians. later on they created empires and asimilated some of the already indigenous population of EV-13 and J2. Most of the south slavs and Croatia hasn't changed much, still high I2a and R1a, and there is a reason they speak slavic, and slavic culture. A minority wouldn't be able to asimilate a majority, unless we are talking military power which happened later on. but in the start they were invited to Croatia and Bosnia and came peaceful, there they settled and after the fall of the romans, the slavic empire spread all across the Balkans. If I2a was Illyrian/Thracian, explain how EV-13 exists among slavs even in non-albanian populated places, and how I2a is so low among Albanians? The longer south you go from Croatia and Bosnia (The place where the sarmatian-slavs were invited) the less I2a and R1a becomes... I2a became spread across balkans with the spread of slavic empires, like the Serbian empire which stretched all the way in to greece, slavicizing some of the populations.


read more here with pictures and everything:

misiraj . blogspot . no / 2015 / 03 / ancestors-of-croatians-and-haplogroup . html

misiraj . blogspot . no / 2015 / 03 / haplogroup-i2a-dinaric-and-slavic . html



Explain to me where Albanians came from? And how their language has words dating back to the Roman era? How it is a non-slavicized language, non-latinized, although latin words exist, their ancestors might of spoken latin in the roman empire... and non greek-language, except for some loan words. but they share mythology with ancient greeks. they lived mostly in the region today where they live. the EV-13 and J2 in south-slavs is from asimilating some proto-Albanians. But most south Slavs, especially Croatians are the most Sarmatian-Slavic of all, with Bosnians and Serbs coming in 2nd, and then Macedonian Slavs and Bulgarians, and then the greeks (because of the Serbian empire, R1a and I2a exists in greece.. probably the least Slavs and Sarmatians are Albanians who fled to the mountains.

The old Balkan people and the first inhabitants of the Balkans were E carriers and J2, they came from Egypt or Caucasus/Anatolia.. like the Pelasgians are believed to of come from Egypt. Then came R1b with the celts and maybe roman empire, and then came I2a and R1a with the proto-croatiand and proto-serbs.

The Pelasgians are believed to of been the ancestors of Illyrians and Thracians, they spoke a non-greek language and came from Egypt carrying haplogroup E, with some of them being asimilated with greeks. This is where the Greek-Albanian connection comes from, similar haplogroups, similar ancient mythology, similar culture in many aspects but two different languages, with the similarities being of Albanian having Dorian loan words.

The modern scholars dismissing the Albanian-Pelasgian connection is a claim with nothing to back it up. I can back it up with the haplogroups and history, where the Pelasgians came from and how they spoke a non greek language, how from there they immigrated north and divided into tribes. I remember even people here have connected Albanians to Egypt.

Pic of Pelasgian location in the start, before they might of immigrated north:

upload . wikimedia .org / wikipedia / commons / 6 / 6 7 / Pelasgians . jpg


The Dacians are believed to of been a Thracian tribe, which explains the Albanian-Romanian connection, it explains allot of similar words, it doesn't mean the Albanians immigrated to today from Dacia because there are similar words or because there is a tribe called Bessoi who immigrated there, there are tribes around the area they live that could be connected with them too like the Dardanians and Dalmatians. You can even connect the capital of Romania with the Albanians, bucuresti, Alb: ''Bukur'' = ''beautiful''.. male form: Bukuroshi... female form: Bukuroshja .. or male: ''Bukurosh'' and female: ''bukuroshe'' it means beautiful expressed in different forms.

it allows you to express allot of words in both male and female form in many different ways.

The proto-south-slavs (i2a, r1b) asimilated some of the EV-13, R1b, and J2 carriers (proto-Albanians) and I believe by this, proto-albanian language helped form the south-slavic languages.

If I2a is Illyrian/Thracian, and not Slavic-Sarmatian then explain to me the high EV-13 and J2-Balkanic among Romanians and also among some south Slavs like Serbs, Macedonian Slavs and Bulgarians? And how I2a fits with where the proto slavs came from (Ukraine/Moldova) and to where they settled (Croatia/Bosnia Herz) and how it diminishes the more south you go.

Picture:

freepages . genealogy . rootsweb . ancestry . com / ~ villandra / McKinstry / I2b1 / HaploIMap . gif

Location of Sarmatians:

fravahr.org / IMG / jpg / Scythians _ Map . jpg

There is no doubt the Sarmatians carried I2a into Already R1a slavic populations. this explains the i2a among slavs across europe.

The high I2a among Aroumns/Vlachs can be explained depending on where, they live all across the balkans. Many of them asimilating with the slavic population. They have also high E and J2, with the I2a they got from Sarmatians/Slavs. they have High R1b, the R1b could of come from either Romans or the Celts. The Romans must of carried some R1b into the balkans.

the proto-south-slavs could also of immigrated first to Poland from the Carpathians and then to Balkans.

R1a could of come with the early slavic settlements too (Sclaveni, antes) this explains the r1a in greek macedonia, where apparently the early slavs (before south slavs) settled. Slavs were known to of roamed all over these regions.. I don't know why this is not taken into consideration, when it is full of historical records. It is said they even formed a slavic macedonia (not fyrom). This, to me, disputes the claim that the ancient macedonians were haplogroup R1a carriers but rather EV-13 and J2.


wikipedia . org / wiki / Sclaveni

'' '' antes_people

But one thing you people, who claim I2a is illyrian, need to explain to me is how EV-13 and J2 exists in Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs? Please go ahead, I will listen. I'm open for anything as long as it has a logical explanation. And how it is historically recorded the proto-Serbs and Croats were invited to Croatia and Bosnia, if these people are Illyrian, why do they call themselves today with similar names of the ones who settled? Why do they speak a slavic language?

R1b, EV-13, I2a and J2b in anatolia can come from balkanic immigrations to the region during ottoman empire. There are millions of balkan people living there, atleast half of them have been asimilated and have only partial ancestry.

Besa
19-03-15, 22:49
Here is a quote about the ancestors of the Croats and Serbs:

Adam Naruszewicz in his work The History of Polish Nation:



"The Chrobats were known even in the 9th century under Constantine Porphyrogennetos rule, who describes them in his work De Administrando Imperio in these words: The Chrobat lived in that times (meaning, times of emperor Heraclius) close to Babigorea where Belo-Chrobat family is now, while others, those who went to Dalmatia living close to France, called Belo-Chrobat, belo meaning white, as they had their own Prince. They pay hommage to Otto the great, the ruler of Franks also being Saxon. Being pagans they ally with Turks. Those Chrobats who in Dalmatia reside, derive from the non baptized ones, ones allied Turks living near Franks and with Serbians bordering." Then he also states: "[...] the great Chrobatia which as the white is called, till this very day baptised is not, same as their neighbours Serbians. Cavalry and infantry has it as much as Christian Chrobatia, all for frequent F (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks)ranks' invasions."


the reference to them living next to Turks might come from when they lived in the Carpathian mountains/eurasia steppes as a Sarmatian tribe. the Sarmatians lived next to Turkic tribes. exact same area where haplogroup I2a is high... I don't see how the proto croats and serbs immigrated to croatia, Serbia and bosnia, and became asimilated by majorly illyrians i2a but with illyrians adopting their language and culture... it was quite the opposite, they came as a majority and in the process asimilated some of the local EV-13 population.

This is a later quote, but in the start, they actually were invited to todays Croatia and Bosnia, before expanding their empire and like that many different slavic nations were created. The homeland of the Serbs when they came there might of actually been Bosnia and north-serbia.

mihaitzateo
19-03-15, 23:28
Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, "De administrando imperio" (English):

http://www.antiquehistory.net/rab/porphyrogenitus.htm

"Emperor Heraclius and the conversion of the Croats and the Serbs":

https://www.academia.edu/228195/Emperor_Heraclius_and_the_conversion_of_the_Croats _and_the_Serbs



Vlachs did. Not Romanians as a whole.

Because Vlachs are only one of several elements which contributed to the ethnogenesis of Romanians.
Oh really!
I have already written and that is supported by proofs,in Romania there is most I2-din North from Europe.
South of Danube,there is some I2-din North in Bulgarians and North Greece,but few.
It was actually Romanian ancestors who spread I2-din North in Ukraine and Poland.
Go do some research about Gorali paternal lines,see what they are bearing most.
There are some Ukrainian speaking Gorali,that have a very typical Vlach looking.
And lots of I2-din.No idea if it is North or South.
You refuse to accept the scientific truth,that I2-din North can not be of Slavic origin.
I am talking about those people who emigrated at around 600 AD.
And you also refuse to accept the truth,that today Slavic languages appeared after Germanic migrations and Scandinavian language influence,on Eastern Slavs.
Sure Slavs existed before,but is very likely they were not speaking proto-Slavic,they were speaking something else.
I already said a very common sense thing,that Slavs are mostly from Thracians,which got this language after Sarmatians influence,which was not so high and after a bigger East Germanic influence.
How come Italians,Spaniards do not have pan-Latinism,Germans,Scandinavians,English and so on do not have pan-Germanism.
However,some Slavic speakers are having Pan-Slavism and are turning a blind eye at the very obvious differences between Slavic people,as they look and at other things.
Dude,pan-Slavism is so lol-mode,when not even Serbians,Croatians,Bosnians,Montenegrins which have same language and are less or more same people,could not get along well .
You think that forging history will make Slavic speakers getting along between them well?
lol.

Besa
20-03-15, 01:41
Oh really!
I have already written and that is supported by proofs,in Romania there is most I2-din North from Europe.
South of Danube,there is some I2-din North in Bulgarians and North Greece,but few.
It was actually Romanian ancestors who spread I2-din North in Ukraine and Poland.
Go do some research about Gorali paternal lines,see what they are bearing most.
There are some Ukrainian speaking Gorali,that have a very typical Vlach looking.
And lots of I2-din.No idea if it is North or South.
You refuse to accept the scientific truth,that I2-din North can not be of Slavic origin.
I am talking about those people who emigrated at around 600 AD.
And you also refuse to accept the truth,that today Slavic languages appeared after Germanic migrations and Scandinavian language influence,on Eastern Slavs.
Sure Slavs existed before,but is very likely they were not speaking proto-Slavic,they were speaking something else.
I already said a very common sense thing,that Slavs are mostly from Thracians,which got this language after Sarmatians influence,which was not so high and after a bigger East Germanic influence.
How come Italians,Spaniards do not have pan-Latinism,Germans,Scandinavians,English and so on do not have pan-Germanism.
However,some Slavic speakers are having Pan-Slavism and are turning a blind eye at the very obvious differences between Slavic people,as they look and at other things.
Dude,pan-Slavism is so lol-mode,when not even Serbians,Croatians,Bosnians,Montenegrins which have same language and are less or more same people,could not get along well .
You think that forging history will make Slavic speakers getting along between them well?
lol.

If I2a was spread in ukraine/moldova by Romanian ancestors then how did EV-13 and j2 get so high in Romanians? and how did I2a get so high in north-east Romanians (moldova area) where proto serbs and croatians immigrated from.. while not so much in rest of Romania and balkans compared to for example Croatia, Bosnia where the proto serbs and proto croatians immigrated to.

this map is kinda off, because the area around kosovo is much less i2a but regardless:

http://i45.tinypic.com/m7qtt3.png

Besa
20-03-15, 01:59
Also if I2a was Illyrian, I don't understand how the proto croatians and Serbs could of slavicized the Illyrians when they were invited by the Roman empire to live in Bosnia and croatia, there must of not been much people? If South slavs are majority illyrians then how could the illyrians have been slavicized by a minority that were invited and in addition to that adopted their names 'Croatians and Serbs' and their language and culture without any military power? it wasn't until the rise of the Serbian empire that the military power began taking over ancient Dardania, todays Montenegro, todays albania and parts of greece... slavicizing people and which gave birth to new slavic countries. The macedonian slavs for example are more alike serbs than their bulgarian neighbors, in my opinion, although they might of been called bulgarians... some of them do look bulgarian. regardless, the gene pool isn't that much of a difference between these 3 people. but I know the area around Macedonia and Kosovo was conquered by the bulgarians first, who named the area 'kosovo' before it fell to the Serbian empire.

Also the area around Kosovo, Nish, (Dardania) would be much higher I2a if it was Illyrian because Illyrians lived there, it might of been a contact zone for thracians and illyrians. As I said before, some put these as the same people.

Lets be honest here, I2a came with the proto-croatian and proto-serb immigration who were slavicized-Sarmatian tribes, it's probably sarmatian-scythian, because the proto-slavs were R1a carriers.

The Kurds for example, also an Iranic speaking tribe are high I.

And what haplogroup did the european Avars carry and the goths... history and haplogroups aren't really math.. It's more confusing.

clintCG
20-03-15, 15:38
You're quite wrong. The arrival of the two Slavicized Sarmatian tribes (Croats and Serbs) to the balkans is very well historically recorded. They were invited by the Roman empire to todays Croatia and Bosnia Herzogovina, bringing I2a and R1a.. which is a hotspot of I2a and to a lesser extent, R1a. the same region they came from, probably the Carpathian mountains recorded by Romans, is also a hot spot of I2a... and was a Sarmatian location and contact zone with slavs, which explains Romanians and their high i2a but also J2 and EV-13. The i2a in Slavs is from Sarmatians. later on they created empires and asimilated some of the already indigenous population of EV-13 and J2. Most of the south slavs and Croatia hasn't changed much, still high I2a and R1a, and there is a reason they speak slavic, and slavic culture. A minority wouldn't be able to asimilate a majority, unless we are talking military power which happened later on.

Age, place and expansion date does not match Slavs really well, nor does it match "slavicized Sarmatians" (which probably were even heavier on R1a)...
Since we find closest relatives of I2a1b Din- Disles and Isles in Britain, it is only logical that it came from west, not from east. That, and we have Ken Nordtvedt who estimated that TMRCA of I2a Din lived in Poland 2500 years ago, and that current spread of I2a Din "was triggered by massive migrations about 2000 years ago". It matches with Goths very well.
Also Motala12 I2a1b* bones suggest that ancestor of I2a1b Dinaric, Disles and Isles came to mainland Europe from Scandinavia.
Serbs and Croats did not come from Carpathians, they came from west Slavic lands (Poland, Czechoslovakia, eastern Germany), plus there were already some Slavs from eastern Slavic lands present here, but they were not as numerous.
Read "De administrando imperio" please.

I already listed sources which tell that Goths have settled on western Balkans since 370s, and that majority of them never left to Italy to settle- Theoderic conquered Italy for Byzantine emperor Zeno (to reestablish Roman administration), not to settle there. That is why we find most of I2a Din in Balkans, and very little in Italy (max is 10 percent in Trento area, northern Italy).

Your theory, like anyone elses, still does not explain why we find characteristic concentration pattern in Yugoslavia (as we go from Dinaric mountains towards the plains I2a Din drastically falls while R1a increases). They suggested that it was "Paleolithic continuity", but since that theory is dead, only possible explanation is that Goths retreated to Dinaric mountains when Slavs came (as we know Slavs did not come as "peaceful farmers", but as fierce warriors).

And add to that that most of our (Yugoslavian) medieval sources tell of our Gothic ancestry. And that south Slavic languages are richest in Gothic words (Croatian historian Mihovil Lovric in 1976 gathered around 1000 words of Gothic and proto-Germanic words in Chakavian dialect)

Tomenable
20-03-15, 16:33
Is this already I2a-Din or not yet (age 3360 - 3086 BC)?:

http://s30.postimg.org/rphodbnhd/is_this_I2a_Din.png

sparkey
20-03-15, 17:31
Is this already I2a-Din or not yet (age 3360 - 3086 BC)?:

http://s30.postimg.org/rphodbnhd/is_this_I2a_Din.png

Not yet. CTS11030 is phyloequivalent to M423 in modern populations, so it's shared by the Isles, Disles, and Dinaric branches. According to Nordtvedt's estimates, CTS11030 is somewhere between 12000 and 20000 years old, while Nordtvedt estimates I2a-Din at closer to 2500 years old.

Garrick
20-03-15, 18:56
I already listed sources which tell that Goths have settled on western Balkans since 370s, and that majority of them never left to Italy to settle- Theoderic conquered Italy for Byzantine emperor Zeno (to reestablish Roman administration), not to settle there. That is why we find most of I2a Din in Balkans, and very little in Italy (max is 10 percent in Trento area, northern Italy).


Yes, you're right that Goths were in Balkans in that time. And Goths who came to Balkans were mostly carriers of I1a3 (Y2245.2) probably. You can read in Eupedia (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I1_Y-DNA.shtml):

"Y2245.2+ makes up a big part of the Z63 in Russia, Ukraine, the Balkans, Italy and Iberia. Could have been spread by the Goths."

In Balkans was the largest population of Thracians. For example, you can see what Maciamo wrote in Eupedia (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29041-I2a-Din-came-to-the-Balkans-and-Dinaric-Alps-with-the-Thracians-Dacians-amp-Illyrians):
I2a-Din came to the Balkans and Dinaric Alps with the Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians "The presence of I2a-L621 in Romania and Bulgaria could be attributed to the migration of the ancient Dacians and Thracians, who emerged as a mixture of of indigenous peoples (I2a1b) and Indo-Europeans (R1a) sometime between 3000 and 1500 BCE.

The Illyrians, an IE tribe who conquered the territory of former Yugoslavia circa 1200-1000 BCE, might have been an offshoot from the Dacians or the Thracians, or a closely related tribe from the Carpathian basin."

According Maciamo, I2a-Din came to the Balkans with Thracians, and later Illyrians. Dacians were related to Thracians.

And you can see theory about Thracian and Balto-Slavic languages (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29386-Thracians-spoke-Balto-Slavic-language).

It is much more likely that I2a came with Thracians to the Balkans (than Goths, who are assumed to be dominant carriers of I1 haplogroup).

It is possible that Thracians had R1a haplogropup too, but to a lesser degree. Of course it is likely that one part of Thracians were E-V13 carriers, etc.

We will not enter in percents how exactly Thracians were carriers of some haplogroups (we cannot). The point is that Thracians brought I2a-Din to the Balkans, it is entirely possible.

Todays you can see I2a in the Balkans is similar in ex yu republics and in Romania, in Slavic speak countries the lowest is in Bulgaria:
Romania (26%),
Macedonia (23%)
Montenegro (29.5%),
Bosnia (55.5%),
Serbia (33%),
Croatia (37%)
Bulgaria (20%).

It is easiest to explain with the Thracians (and Illyrians).

Romanians (Dacians) would have a similar language with Serbs and another South Slavic people if they were not romanized, and conversely, that South Slavic people were romanized they would speak the same language as today's Romanians.

In other words, Romanians and South Slavs are closely origin but due to historical circumstances languages are different.

...
With the exception of the Greeks, today's Albanians differ from all other Balkan nations in the percentage of I2a. In Eupedia you can see 12% I2a for Albania, but this result is due Tosk Albanians. If we can analyse Geg Albanians the perctange of I2a is much lower. In today's Kosovo, where Geg Albanians are dominant, I2a cariers are only 2.5%! Low percentage I2a makes difference between (Geg) Albanians and other Balkan nations (South Slavs, Romanians) and it probably testifies about their different origin.

Sile
20-03-15, 19:29
If I2a was spread in ukraine/moldova by Romanian ancestors then how did EV-13 and j2 get so high in Romanians? and how did I2a get so high in north-east Romanians (moldova area) where proto serbs and croatians immigrated from.. while not so much in rest of Romania and balkans compared to for example Croatia, Bosnia where the proto serbs and proto croatians immigrated to.

this map is kinda off, because the area around kosovo is much less i2a but regardless:

http://i45.tinypic.com/m7qtt3.png

Another possibility is that I2a in the balkans came in late, that is after the massacre of the celtic-illyrians by the Romans. 150000 put to the sword and another 80000 send into captivity, the area could have been resupplied with Dacians and Getae ( anothe rbranch of Thracians ) found on the map above in romania and moldovia. these people where aided by Romans and resettled in bosnia, dalmatia and croatia

Sile
20-03-15, 19:35
Yes, you're right that Goths were in Balkans in that time. And Goths who came to Balkans were mostly carriers of I1a3 (Y2245.2) probably. You can read in Eupedia (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I1_Y-DNA.shtml):

"Y2245.2+ makes up a big part of the Z63 in Russia, Ukraine, the Balkans, Italy and Iberia. Could have been spread by the Goths."

In Balkans was the largest population of Thracians. For example, you can see what Maciamo wrote in Eupedia (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29041-I2a-Din-came-to-the-Balkans-and-Dinaric-Alps-with-the-Thracians-Dacians-amp-Illyrians):
I2a-Din came to the Balkans and Dinaric Alps with the Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians

"The presence of I2a-L621 in Romania and Bulgaria could be attributed to the migration of the ancient Dacians and Thracians, who emerged as a mixture of of indigenous peoples (I2a1b) and Indo-Europeans (R1a) sometime between 3000 and 1500 BCE.

The Illyrians, an IE tribe who conquered the territory of former Yugoslavia circa 1200-1000 BCE, might have been an offshoot from the Dacians or the Thracians, or a closely related tribe from the Carpathian basin."

According Maciamo, I2a-Din came to the Balkans with Thracians, and later Illyrians. Dacians were related to Thracians.

And you can see theory about Thracian and Balto-Slavic languages (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29386-Thracians-spoke-Balto-Slavic-language).

It is much more likely that I2a came with Thracians to the Balkans (than Goths, who are assumed to be dominant carriers of I1 haplogroup).

It is possible that Thracians had R1a haplogropup too, but to a lesser degree. Of course it is likely that one part of Thracians were E-V13 carriers, etc.

We will not enter in percents how exactly Thracians were carriers of some haplogroups (we cannot). The point is that Thracians brought I2a-Din to the Balkans, it is entirely possible.

Todays you can see I2a in the Balkans is similar in ex yu republics and in Romania, in Slavic speak countries the lowest is in Bulgaria:
Romania (26%),
Macedonia (23%)
Montenegro (29.5%),
Bosnia (55.5%),
Serbia (33%),
Croatia (37%)
Bulgaria (20%).

It is easiest to explain with the Thracians (and Illyrians).

Romanians (Dacians) would have a similar language with Serbs and another South Slavic people if they were not romanized, and conversely, that South Slavic people were romanized they would speak the same language as today's Romanians.

In other words, Romanians and South Slavs are closely origin but due to historical circumstances languages are different.

...
With the exception of the Greeks, today's Albanians differ from all other Balkan nations in the percentage of I2a. In Eupedia you can see 12% I2a for Albania, but this result is due Tosk Albanians. If we can analyse Geg Albanians the perctange of I2a is much lower. In today's Kosovo, where Geg Albanians are dominant, I2a cariers are only 2.5%! Low percentage I2a makes difference between (Geg) Albanians and other Balkan nations (South Slavs, Romanians) and it probably testifies about their different origin.

If we go back further for the I2 marker, we do not find it in the southern Balkans in any great numbers nor do we find it in western anatolia....its presence in late bronze-age is eastern anatolia and the romanian/moldavia/ukraine region ...........moving across the black sea was already in process from the early bronze age

mihaitzateo
20-03-15, 21:11
Besa,why would I believe that map?
I can tell you for sure that a test was made in Neamt Couny,which is a mountainous area,at the border with Transylvania and 40% I2-din was found.
Also,there the percentage of E-v13 and J2 was not that high.
How can you explain that Serbs have lots of E-v13 and J2?
And Montenegrins have even more?
That map is actually false ,Bessarabia have fewer I2-din that Romania,but has more R1A.
As for what Garrick tells,I also think Thracians had a language that today is closest to South Slavic.
But I think Thracians language got changed under various influence and is clear Slavic is most closed to Germanic languages,from all languages .
I understand a South Slav ,after other Slavic languages learns most easy Scandinavian,not English,or German.

clintCG
20-03-15, 22:09
Slušaj 'vako ;) ...

Yes, you're right that Goths were in Balkans in that time. And Goths who came to Balkans were mostly carriers of I1a3 (Y2245.2) probably. You can read in Eupedia (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplog..._Y-DNA.shtml):


"Y2245.2+ makes up a big part of the Z63 in Russia, Ukraine, the Balkans, Italy and Iberia. Could have been spread by the Goths."
Word of Eupedia admins is not holy and without errors. It says "could have been spread by Goths".
Z63 is actually very, very small part in our I1. All Z63 in Serbia and Montenegro descend from same Macura clan. And because their oldest origins are somewhere around Berane in Montenegro, I think they are descended from German Saxon miners, who came in large numbers to work in our medieval mines. Berane-Mojkovac was very important mining town- in medieval days it was called Brskovo ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brskovo ). Even its name is of German origin- "Biergsau", completely inhabited by Saxons, who even had their own priests and prince there. So it is most likely of Saxon origin, not of Gothic origin.

Most of our I1 is I1 P109, called "Drobnjak clan cluster", with value of 0 on STR481. Man with same value was found on Sicily, and Nordtvedt estimated that our carriers and he descend from same man who lived 850. He was definetly a Norman.
You can find all of this data on Serbian DNA project: http://poreklo.rs/srpski-dnk-projekat/naslovna/

I definetly do not expect that Normans (who left almost no influence at all) have more of their haplogroup than Goths (who, according to you, carried z63).
Since Z63 is left by medieval Saxon miners, and P109 by Normans, then we have to find what is Gothic haplogroup, because Goths left much, much more trace than both Normans and Saxons. And most logical theory is that I2a Dinaric came with them, because it perfectly matches their migrations, its age of expansion matches beginning of their migrations, and it also explains concentration pattern of I2a Dinaric in Yugoslavia. It also explains why dominant racial types found in Montenegro and Herzegovina are only found in Germanic peoples.
See all my previous posts.

I don't know why everyone expects Germanic migration-period tribes who came here to be so freaking high in I1, when even modern Germanic peoples (expect Scandinavians) rarely have it...


In Balkans was the largest population of Thracians. For example, you can see what Maciamo wrote in Eupedia (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...mp-Illyrians):
I2a-Din came to the Balkans and Dinaric Alps with the Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians
(...)
According Maciamo, I2a-Din came to the Balkans with Thracians, and later Illyrians. Dacians were related to Thracians.
And you can see theory about Thracian and Balto-Slavic languages (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...lavic-language).
It is much more likely that I2a came with Thracians to the Balkans (than Goths, who are assumed to be dominant carriers of I1 haplogroup).
It is possible that Thracians had R1a haplogropup too, but to a lesser degree. Of course it is likely that one part of Thracians were E-V13 carriers, etc.
We will not enter in percents how exactly Thracians were carriers of some haplogroups (we cannot). The point is that Thracians brought I2a-Din to the Balkans, it is entirely possible.
Todays you can see I2a in the Balkans is similar in ex yu republics and in Romania, in Slavic speak countries the lowest is in Bulgaria:
I repeat again- word of Eupedia mods is not holy, or without mistakes.

Give me reasons why would I2a Din be Thracian/Illyrian/whatever?
Do we find most diversity of I2a Din in proto-Thracian homeland? No. Do we have concentration pattern that fits their migrations? No. Did I2a Din form in their homeland? No!

On the other hand, we have TMRCA of I2a Din 2500 yrs ago in Poland, somewhere around Vistula- proto-homeland of Goths. I2a Din is estimated to have expanded drastically around 2000 years ago- which matches Gothic migrations.
And for gods sake, please understand that place where I2 M423 differentiated into Disles, Isles (found in Britain) and Dinaric simply does NOT match eastern Europe. In fact, from Motala12 bones we have evidence that I2a1b very possibly came from Scandinavia to continental Europe. See previous posts please.

I2a Din is highest in Herzegovina and western Montenegro (those numbers for Montenegro, as I already explained, included gypsies, Albanians, Bosniaks settled in eastern part).
It is also area where we find Germanic nordo-cromagnid "Borreby" racial type as dominant.

I2a Din in Romania is as high as it is in some parts of Ukraine- and IMO it is even more possibly Slavic than Thraco-Dacian.

One part of Goths living near Black Sea was actually enslaved by Huns and never came with rest to Balkans. That is why Gothic dialect survived in Crimea until 18th century.

And exactly in Black Sea area near Ukraine in Romania we have most carriers of I2a.
So I2a in Romania is not aboriginal. It is Gothic/Slavic.


In other words, Romanians and South Slavs are closely origin but due to historical circumstances languages are different.
Are we culturaly close? No. Linguistically? No. Anthropologically? No...

Besa
20-03-15, 23:19
Yes, you're right that Goths were in Balkans in that time. And Goths who came to Balkans were mostly carriers of I1a3 (Y2245.2) probably. You can read in Eupedia (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I1_Y-DNA.shtml):

"Y2245.2+ makes up a big part of the Z63 in Russia, Ukraine, the Balkans, Italy and Iberia. Could have been spread by the Goths."

In Balkans was the largest population of Thracians. For example, you can see what Maciamo wrote in Eupedia (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29041-I2a-Din-came-to-the-Balkans-and-Dinaric-Alps-with-the-Thracians-Dacians-amp-Illyrians):
I2a-Din came to the Balkans and Dinaric Alps with the Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians

"The presence of I2a-L621 in Romania and Bulgaria could be attributed to the migration of the ancient Dacians and Thracians, who emerged as a mixture of of indigenous peoples (I2a1b) and Indo-Europeans (R1a) sometime between 3000 and 1500 BCE.

The Illyrians, an IE tribe who conquered the territory of former Yugoslavia circa 1200-1000 BCE, might have been an offshoot from the Dacians or the Thracians, or a closely related tribe from the Carpathian basin."

According Maciamo, I2a-Din came to the Balkans with Thracians, and later Illyrians. Dacians were related to Thracians.

And you can see theory about Thracian and Balto-Slavic languages (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29386-Thracians-spoke-Balto-Slavic-language).

It is much more likely that I2a came with Thracians to the Balkans (than Goths, who are assumed to be dominant carriers of I1 haplogroup).

It is possible that Thracians had R1a haplogropup too, but to a lesser degree. Of course it is likely that one part of Thracians were E-V13 carriers, etc.

We will not enter in percents how exactly Thracians were carriers of some haplogroups (we cannot). The point is that Thracians brought I2a-Din to the Balkans, it is entirely possible.

Todays you can see I2a in the Balkans is similar in ex yu republics and in Romania, in Slavic speak countries the lowest is in Bulgaria:
Romania (26%),
Macedonia (23%)
Montenegro (29.5%),
Bosnia (55.5%),
Serbia (33%),
Croatia (37%)
Bulgaria (20%).

It is easiest to explain with the Thracians (and Illyrians).

Romanians (Dacians) would have a similar language with Serbs and another South Slavic people if they were not romanized, and conversely, that South Slavic people were romanized they would speak the same language as today's Romanians.

In other words, Romanians and South Slavs are closely origin but due to historical circumstances languages are different.

...
With the exception of the Greeks, today's Albanians differ from all other Balkan nations in the percentage of I2a. In Eupedia you can see 12% I2a for Albania, but this result is due Tosk Albanians. If we can analyse Geg Albanians the perctange of I2a is much lower. In today's Kosovo, where Geg Albanians are dominant, I2a cariers are only 2.5%! Low percentage I2a makes difference between (Geg) Albanians and other Balkan nations (South Slavs, Romanians) and it probably testifies about their different origin.

I2a did not come with the thracians, it peaks in croatia. i2a is highest in croatia and bosnia.

What Eupedia says is wrong. what Ken Nordtvedt says is right, and I'm saying the same before I even knew he said the same.

Albanians in Albania differ with 12%, Albanians in kosovo 3% or something... and they also differ because they have low r1a, they have the least percentage of these haplogroups that are associated with slavs.

If i2a came with illyrians and thracians, explain how haplogroup EV-13 and J2 exists among south slavs? how i2a lowers the more south you go from croatia but is still higher in macedonian slavs and bulgarians compared to albanians who are their neighbors... explain how EV-13 and J2 exists in Romanians and in all south slavs? how i2a also peaks in Ukraine/moldova where the proto-serbs and croats might of immigrated from? but less in the rest of romania... where i2a is high in moldova/ukraine both the goths and sarmatians ruled these places at one point in time

the only difference between albanians and romanians, aromanians/vlachs is they have high i2a

I2a either came with goth/slavs or with sarmatian/slavs.

Besa
20-03-15, 23:37
Besa,why would I believe that map?
I can tell you for sure that a test was made in Neamt Couny,which is a mountainous area,at the border with Transylvania and 40% I2-din was found.
Also,there the percentage of E-v13 and J2 was not that high.
How can you explain that Serbs have lots of E-v13 and J2?
And Montenegrins have even more?
That map is actually false ,Bessarabia have fewer I2-din that Romania,but has more R1A.
As for what Garrick tells,I also think Thracians had a language that today is closest to South Slavic.
But I think Thracians language got changed under various influence and is clear Slavic is most closed to Germanic languages,from all languages .
I understand a South Slav ,after other Slavic languages learns most easy Scandinavian,not English,or German.I alr

already explained all these things. it feels like im repeating myself. this map is not false you can google one yourself and find a pic or look at eupedia. only falls is kosovo has less i2a

Serbs, bosnians and croats have ev-13 and j2 because they asimilated some of the illyrians who were EV-13 and J2 carriers. the majority of proto serbs and croats them came as I2a-din and r1a carriers. montenigrins have high EV-13 because of Albanians and because they asimilated some of the Illyrians (proto-albanians) who were EV-13 and J2 carriers during the spread of the Serbian empire. the serbian empire stretched all the way to greece. which also spread i2a

same with Romanians they have high EV-13 and J2 because they are Dacians-Thracians who were EV-13 and J2 carriers. same as Illyrians. Thracian was not a balto-slavic language. Even Albanian has been linked to balto-slavic. the Daci might of come into contact with balto-slavic and might of influenced eachother.. or daci language might of influenced the proto-baltoslavic language

Romanians have high I2a because they either came in contact with the Sarmatians or goths one of them carriers i2a

Besa
20-03-15, 23:48
The reason why Croats have so low EV-13, but still exists at 10%? is because Croats and Serbs were invited to the region by the roman empire to fight the avars in the region of Croatia and Bosnia. where i2a peaks.. there they settled. they were given the land... they beat the avars and settled there, and at one point in time asimilated some of the illyrians, thats why bosnians (Serbian muslims) and croats have EV-13 and J2. the Serbian empire asimilated some illyrians and thracians (ev-13 and j2) and also spread i2a, ancestors of albanians fled to the mountains and thats why they have lower i2a and r1a.. where else do you think Albanians came from? Mars? only difference between albanians and neighboring countries is their low i2a and r1a...

r1b might come from celts, romans or something. I don't think proto-albanians fled from romans, because their language is influenced with latin dating back to roman era both western romance and eastern romance. proto-Albanians must of spoken latin a long time but also had their own language, they spoke both latin and greek during the byzantium empire, the jireck line which divided latin in the north and greek in the south, but somehow they still kept their language.. in Kosovo they were under yugoslavia for 100+ years, they read and wrote serbo-croatian, still barely any slavic words. Most of these claimed loan words are not even slavic, and every loan word they have their own words... like hajde is not slavic, its from turkish 'hadi' .. proto-alb: eja ... majmun is also from turkish.. most of their common words with south slavs are from turkish loan words.. but they have their own words for all these loan words. Only thing I can think of that is slavic is maybe ''peder'' and ''kurva'' and you know what that means ;)

I have also mentioned the Albanian-Romanian connection and 300 common words, yet they have lower i2a and r1a than romanians.. Illyrians and thracian-dacians were related people, both carrying haplogroup EV-13 and J2. then came the celts with r1b.

Albanians lived mostly where they live today. trying to connect them with tribes in Dacia and Thracia because of commonwords, I could do the same with in Illyria, like scodra from shkodra, dardania from the alb word dardhe which means pear.... or the tribe scitari (shqiptari) or thunaki (thuj) or delmatae (delme) meaning sheep i could go on and on... old city of dubrovnik: ragusa which meant grape in illyrian: alb:rrush... or city of Ulqin in montenegro.. ulk meant wolf in illyrian, alb: ulk/ujk.. same meaning.... conclusion is illyrians and thracians must of been related and spoken a similar language

doku
21-03-15, 00:26
Serbian muslims

Are you stoned?

Besa
21-03-15, 00:58
Are you stoned?
no, i'm not stoned, there were two tribes invited to the balkans by romans,, white serbs and white croatians in bosnia and croatia from there many different slavic tribes were created. Where did Bosniaks come from? there is no such thing as the term bosniak... in bosnia there live Croats, Serbs and then a group of people who identify as muslims and call themselves Bosniaks. With the Serbian empire conquering lands more countries were created... where did montenegro come from? Macedonian slavs? bulgarians? I don't know the whole history of that... but I know some of you came from white serbs and white croats

I don't see how i2a is illyrian and how the illyrians could of been slavicized,.. yet adopting the same name of white serbs and white croatians who came from around poland/ukraine/moldova area where i2a is high.... and also spread out in slavic countries

Same people killing eachother... relax, I heard Slobodan Milosovic who apparently was from montenegro was haplogroup EV-13, yet he killed Albanians... or what about Zeljko Raznatovic? EV-13? .. what about hitler? haplogroup E? you get my point...

Besa
21-03-15, 01:08
You even speak the same language, come on..... What is the problem? We are all humans anyway, if we go far back we came from the same place at one point in time.... Not all Serbs are bad, they are normal people. I actually go well with Serbs, more than any other group of people..... you just think they are evil people because of the war, those are nationalists driven by hate...

And this is coming from a guy who saw allot of shit in the war... before the war I had a machine gun pointed to my face and they threatened to kill me, i was a kid at that time

mihaitzateo
21-03-15, 01:22
I alr

already explained all these things. it feels like im repeating myself. this map is not false you can google one yourself and find a pic or look at eupedia. only falls is kosovo has less i2a

Serbs, bosnians and croats have ev-13 and j2 because they asimilated some of the illyrians who were EV-13 and J2 carriers. the majority of proto serbs and croats them came as I2a-din and r1a carriers. montenigrins have high EV-13 because of Albanians and because they asimilated some of the Illyrians (proto-albanians) who were EV-13 and J2 carriers during the spread of the Serbian empire. the serbian empire stretched all the way to greece. which also spread i2a

same with Romanians they have high EV-13 and J2 because they are Dacians-Thracians who were EV-13 and J2 carriers. same as Illyrians. Thracian was not a balto-slavic language. Even Albanian has been linked to balto-slavic. the Daci might of come into contact with balto-slavic and might of influenced eachother.. or daci language might of influenced the proto-baltoslavic language

Romanians have high I2a because they either came in contact with the Sarmatians or goths one of them carriers i2a
E-V13 is from North Africa,J2 is from Balkans,West Middle-east and Iran.
Guess which could be from Thracians.
Let me give you another hint,Thracians are known for having reddish hair.
E-V13 came with Neolithic people from Africa,which people brought agriculture,while J2 came ,still in Neolithic,but people from Middle-East brought it.
Besides,is a large error to suppose that Thracians were carrying only one haplogroup.
I think is pretty clear that Thracians were bearing at least J2 and R1A.
As for I2-din North,why should all be brought by a single population?
Slavs that migrated around 600 AD were very very likely very diverse people,from paternal HGs point of view.
I think this is why is so much R1A in Ukraine,from Scythians,Sarmatians,Slavic people and not only these.
And that map with I2A could have been good 10 years ago,not now :D.
I think is again a large error to treat i2-din North in same way with I2-din South.
Already written,Serbians,Bosnians,Montenegrins have most of their I2-din as I2-din South,while Romanians,Ukrainians,Poles have mostly I2-din North.

Besa
21-03-15, 01:36
E-V13 is from North Africa,J2 is from Balkans,West Middle-east and Iran.
Guess which could be from Thracians.
Let me give you another hint,Thracians are known for having reddish hair.
E-V13 came with Neolithic people from Africa,which people brought agriculture,while J2 came ,still in Neolithic,but people from Middle-East brought it.
Besides,is a large error to suppose that Thracians were carrying only one haplogroup.
I think is pretty clear that Thracians were bearing at least J2 and R1A.
As for I2-din North,why should all be brought by a single population?
Slavs that migrated around 600 AD were very very likely very diverse people,from paternal HGs point of view.
I think this is why is so much R1A in Ukraine,from Scythians,Sarmatians,Slavic people and not only these.
And that map with I2A could have been good 10 years ago,not now :D.
I think is again a large error to treat i2-din North in same way with I2-din South.
Already written,Serbians,Bosnians,Montenegrins have most of their I2-din as I2-din South,while Romanians,Ukrainians,Poles have mostly I2-din North.

EV-13 isn't from Africa... haplogroup E is from africa... ev-13 was spread by ancient greeks in north africa,... in anatolia EV-13 could of come from balkanic immigrations and deportations, millions of Albanians live there as they were deported during the yugoslav era to turkey. And also from Greek Muslims...

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-E-V13.gif

haplogroups have nothing neccesarily to do with hair color. I know people with EV-13 who look Irish. and it might not even be a fact, as they could of come in contact with celts and that claim could be based off of that..... there are people in the balkans still with red hair. you can find people from the middle east with red hair too.. I didn't say south slavs came only with i2a, they also broght r1a.. my theory is that they were slavicized sarmatian tribes i2a and r1a as the romans quoted, some mention them as slavs others as sarmatians... I don't think thracians carried one haplogroup.. if they carried r1a it would be much higher.. r1a was brought by slavic immigrations first one (sclaveni , antes) 2nd one (proto-serbs and croats)

Besa
21-03-15, 01:49
This is another map: I don't know how maps can be accurate, better to look at frequencies by country

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/HgE1b1b1a2.png/800px-HgE1b1b1a2.png

Besa
21-03-15, 01:54
Here is another map of I2a:

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

How come it barely exists in Albanians? Yet it exists in bulgarians, macedonian slavs, romanians, bosnians, serbs, croats, and to a lesser extent greeks? Same with r1a

Did Albanians come from mars somehow magically?

if i2adin was Illyrian/thracian instead of a recent immigration, it would be sky rocket high in Albanians too, as they are part of the Balkans too, non-slavic speaking people, just like Illyrians and Thracians, but you are doing everything to make them seem like they came from somewhere else. That would be magic, they just magically got locked like that. Where did their language come from? i2a would be higher in them too if it was illyrian simply of the fact that its high in all their neighbors, and most of them are slavic speaking, the romanians can be explained by the goths or sarmatians, my theory is one of them carried i2a there... the greeks and the spot in south albania can be explained by the Serbian empire.

let me guess you are gonna make up a theory how Albanians came from Italy with a boat? Well the ev-13 in italy can be explained by the ancient greeks, settling during Ottoman era, and also maybe the Messapians?

Besa
21-03-15, 02:00
here is r1a:

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1a.gif

it is non existent in albanians, yet common in south slavs, and greeks.. because the sclavenis and antes or some proto-slavs might of immigrated all the way to greece and even settled there...

Besa
21-03-15, 02:04
Only thing Albanians have in common with their neighbors is EV-13 and J2, and also R1b

Garrick
21-03-15, 02:13
Slušaj 'vako ;) ...

Word of Eupedia admins is not holy and without errors. It says "could have been spread by Goths".
Z63 is actually very, very small part in our I1. All Z63 in Serbia and Montenegro descend from same Macura clan. And because their oldest origins are somewhere around Berane in Montenegro, I think they are descended from German Saxon miners, who came in large numbers to work in our medieval mines. Berane-Mojkovac was very important mining town- in medieval days it was called Brskovo ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brskovo ). Even its name is of German origin- "Biergsau", completely inhabited by Saxons, who even had their own priests and prince there. So it is most likely of Saxon origin, not of Gothic origin.

Most of our I1 is I1 P109, called "Drobnjak clan cluster", with value of 0 on STR481. Man with same value was found on Sicily, and Nordtvedt estimated that our carriers and he descend from same man who lived 850. He was definetly a Norman.
You can find all of this data on Serbian DNA project: http://poreklo.rs/srpski-dnk-projekat/naslovna/

I definetly do not expect that Normans (who left almost no influence at all) have more of their haplogroup than Goths (who, according to you, carried z63).
Since Z63 is left by medieval Saxon miners, and P109 by Normans, then we have to find what is Gothic haplogroup, because Goths left much, much more trace than both Normans and Saxons. And most logical theory is that I2a Dinaric came with them, because it perfectly matches their migrations, its age of expansion matches beginning of their migrations, and it also explains concentration pattern of I2a Dinaric in Yugoslavia. It also explains why dominant racial types found in Montenegro and Herzegovina are only found in Germanic peoples.
See all my previous posts.

I don't know why everyone expects Germanic migration-period tribes who came here to be so freaking high in I1, when even modern Germanic peoples (expect Scandinavians) rarely have it...


I repeat again- word of Eupedia mods is not holy, or without mistakes.

Give me reasons why would I2a Din be Thracian/Illyrian/whatever?
Do we find most diversity of I2a Din in proto-Thracian homeland? No. Do we have concentration pattern that fits their migrations? No. Did I2a Din form in their homeland? No!

On the other hand, we have TMRCA of I2a Din 2500 yrs ago in Poland, somewhere around Vistula- proto-homeland of Goths. I2a Din is estimated to have expanded drastically around 2000 years ago- which matches Gothic migrations.
And for gods sake, please understand that place where I2 M423 differentiated into Disles, Isles (found in Britain) and Dinaric simply does NOT match eastern Europe. In fact, from Motala12 bones we have evidence that I2a1b very possibly came from Scandinavia to continental Europe. See previous posts please.

I2a Din is highest in Herzegovina and western Montenegro (those numbers for Montenegro, as I already explained, included gypsies, Albanians, Bosniaks settled in eastern part).
It is also area where we find Germanic nordo-cromagnid "Borreby" racial type as dominant.

I2a Din in Romania is as high as it is in some parts of Ukraine- and IMO it is even more possibly Slavic than Thraco-Dacian.

One part of Goths living near Black Sea was actually enslaved by Huns and never came with rest to Balkans. That is why Gothic dialect survived in Crimea until 18th century.

And exactly in Black Sea area near Ukraine in Romania we have most carriers of I2a.
So I2a in Romania is not aboriginal. It is Gothic/Slavic.


Are we culturaly close? No. Linguistically? No. Anthropologically? No...

Do not understimate Maciamo and Eupedia. Maciamo et al. thoroughly well examine an issue before publication on website. Of course, everything is subject to criticism.

I gave only one example (Eupedia). Many other sources speak about I1 haplogroup as dominant in Goths. It is logical if Goths originating from Southern Scandinavia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goths).

For example you can see www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/ (http://www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/)
UPDATE4: y-Haplogroup I1 Dispersal/Expansion

One should keep in mind that the range and distribution of all haplogroups in Europe have been complicated by the comparatively recent Migration of "Barbarians" (before about 500 AD) and the Migration of "Vikings" (around 800 AD to 1100 AD). The "Barbarians" were mainly Germanic tribes from east of the Rhine and north of the Danube, comprising of the Goths (Visigoths and Ostrogoths), Vandals, Lombards, Burgundians, Franks, and Suebi etc. Also the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes; plus the non-Germanic Huns from Central Asia.

In pdf file authors give one of maps where you can track the movement of Goths (I1):

http://i.imgur.com/c2kzxWh.jpg


You can see movent of Goths from Scandinavia to East Europe, Balkans, Italy, Spain etc.

It is interesting tests provide evidence about I1 haplogrop in Goths.

For example FamilytreeDNA highlights project with two people from Crimea Gothic roots.

https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/i1-ee/about/news

Our project tested two people who are descendants of the Crimean Goths, this kit № 228539 Afenko and kit № 228541 Aslanov. Their haplogroup (I1-M253) was determined in the course of scientific research laboratory Balanovsky.

Crimean Goths were those Gothic tribes who remained in the lands around the Black Sea, especially in Crimea. They were the least-powerful, least-known, and almost paradoxically, the longest-lasting of the Gothic communities. Their existence is well attested through the ages though the exact period when they ceased to exist as a distinct culture is unknown; as with the Goths in general, they may have been diffused with the surrounding peoples. In the Fourth Turkish letter by Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq, they are described as "a warlike people, who to this day inhabit many villages" though in the 5th century, Theodoric the Great failed to rouse Crimean Goths to support his war in Italy.

The descendants of Crimean Goths.
Urums (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urums), singular Urum (Greek: Ουρούμ Urúm, Turkish and Crimean Tatar: Urum, IPA: [uˈɾum]) is a broad historical term that was used by some Turkic-speaking peoples (Turks, Crimean Tatars) to define Greeks who lived in Muslim states, particularly in the Ottoman Empire and Crimea. In contemporary ethnography, the term Urum (or Urum Greek) applies only to Turk population.

Rumei (http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%B8) - one of two ethno-linguistic groups Azov Greeks. Unlike Urums - carriers of the Turkic dialects - rumei speak dialects of Modern Greek language, dating back to the language of the Byzantine and poorly understood by the inhabitants of modern Greece.



http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--npvMOFs3tw/TzwQmMvv40I/AAAAAAAAAvc/0lynY2FCCuw/s1600/2.jpg


...

For Dacians/Romanias. Dacians spoke own language before romanization, probably one of variant Thracian. Dacian language was predominant in Dacia and Moesia. About romanization of Dacia you can read:

http://theartofpolemics.com/2014/09/09/the-romanization-of-dacia-a-study-through-secondary-sources/

Today's Romanians are not Latin people by origin, but only linguistically, because they have replaced their mother language with Latin.

You can see haplogroups Romanians and South Slavs. And you can travel to Romania. In the greater part of Romania you will not notice the difference between Romanians and South Slavs. The language is not always good indicator of the closeness of the people (nations).

Garrick
21-03-15, 03:33
Are you stoned?

Doku replied Besa


I gave a lot of sources where Illyrians largerly were identified as ancestors of people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, today's Bosniacs, (Western) Serbs, (South) Croats etc. Of course Balkans as "door of Europe" had a many different impacts and there are variety of haplogroups among Balkan carriers.

Besa
21-03-15, 04:27
I don't see how a group of people couldn't of only carried one haplogroup. The Celts are majorly known to of carried R1b, while the proto slavs are known to of carried R1a. I don't see a difference allot of time between Albanians and Romanians either. Most Romanians I've seen looked like Albanians. Even allot of Bosnians.


I gave a lot of sources where Illyrians largerly were identified as ancestors of Bosniacs, (Western) Serbs, (South) Croats etc. Of course Balkans as "door of Europe" had a many different impacts and there are variety of haplogroups among Balkan carriers.

The Serbs were also called Triballians, a thracian tribe, because they lived in the same region as them. It seems south slavs have been called by allot of names based on where they lived, that doesn't make it neccessarily a fact.


How do you explain the EV-13 and J2 spread across the balkans, including in Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs, and Romanians? While I2a and R1a is low in Albanians. As I said, only difference between Romanians and Albanians is the Romanians high i2a and r1a. There are over 300 words I think alike only in Romanian and Albanian. That doesn't mean ancestors of Albanians moved from there, they could of lived same area where they lived today, there could be a relation between thracian and illyrian. Lets be honest, Albanians are either descendants from Illyrians, Thracians or Dacians. there is also a thrako-illyrian proposal.

There are two languages today that are considered paleo-balkanic, and it's albanian and greek. Albanian was spoken in the balkans in ancient times, but it wasn't called ''albanian'', where else would it come from. The dialect split between geg (north-Albanians) and tosk (south-Albanians) happened before the proto-south slavic immigration., probably during roman empire.. Albanian has allot of borrowings from latin, including from the time of the Roman empire. Romanian is latinized. Albanians were in the balkans during roman empire, same area where they lived.. yet i2a and r1a, both associated with slavs is low in Albanians. Therefor I2a cannot be illyrian or thracian.

Most scholars agree Albanian is either from Thracian or Illyrian, tell me of another proposal that has been seriously debated? There isn't enough of Illyrian to compare it to but the surviving words are similar or the same.. Thracian has been linked with balto-slavic? So has Albanian, most of those similar lithuanian words were also similar in Albanian. the theory of thracian and balto-slavic is just a theory that scholars dismiss.


The Albanian language is an Indo-European language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages) in a branch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_family#Subdivision) by itself, sharing its branch with no other extant language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_isolate). The other extant Indo-European languages in a branch by themselves are Armenian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_language) and, in some classifications, Greek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language). Though sharing lexical isoglosses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isogloss) with Greek, Balto-Slavic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balto-Slavic_languages), and Germanic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_languages), the vocabulary of Albanian is quite distinct. Once hastily grouped with Germanic and Balto-Slavic based on the merger of PIE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-European_language) *ǒ and *ǎ into *ǎ in a supposed "northern group",[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTEWatkins199838-10) Albanian has been proven to be distinct from these two because this vowel shift is only part of a larger push chainthat affected all long vowels.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTELabov199442-11) Albanian does share two features with Balto-Slavic languages: a lengthening of syllabic consonants before voiced obstruents and a distinct treatment of long syllables ending in a sonorant.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTEHamp199466.E2.80.9367-12) Conservative features of Albanian include the retention of the distinction between active and middle voice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_(grammar)#Middle), present tense, and aorist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aorist).
Albanian is considered to have evolved from an ancient Paleo-Balkan language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleo-Balkan_language), usually taken to be either Illyrian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrian_languages) or Thracian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thracian_language), but this is debated. (See also Thraco-Illyrian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thraco-Illyrian) and Messapian language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messapian_language).)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language

Besa
21-03-15, 04:41
Here:


The center of Albanian settlement remained the Mat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mat_(river)) river. In CE 1079 they are recorded farther south in the valley of the Shkumbin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shkumbin)river.[26] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTEKazhdan199152.E2.80.9353-27) The Shkumbin, a seasonal stream that lies near the old Via Egnatia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Via_Egnatia), is approximately the boundary of the primary dialect division for Albanian, Tosk-Gheg. The characteristics of Tosk and Gheg in the treatment of the native and loanwords from other languages are evidence that the dialectal split preceded the Slavic migration to the Balkans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_migration_to_the_Balkans),[27] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTEBrownOgilvie200823-28)[28] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTEFortson2004392-29)[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTEMalloryAdams19979-14) which means that in that period (5th to 6th centuries CE) Albanians were occupying pretty much the same area around the Shkumbin river, which straddled the Jireček Line (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jire%C4%8Dek_Line).[29] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTEDemiraj1999-30)[24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTEHamp1963-25)

if I2a was Illyrian/Thracian Albanians would be sky rocket high. Both r1a and I2a are associated with slavs, which lacks in Albanians. Haplogroup EV-13 and J2 is Thracian/Illyrian, it explains why its high in romanians and the rest of the balkans, because i2a carriers and r1a asimilated them when they migrated to the balkans. While some must of fled to the mountains or just co-existed and survived.

take a look at this document: common Albanian and Romanian words:


http://www.academia.edu/5766282/Common_Lexic_in_Romanian_and_Albanian._Substrate_a nd_Loanwords

take also a look at some of the last pages, most of the words are dacian origin, similarities in aromanian, romanian and albanian.

Besa
21-03-15, 05:02
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xZfpOTIHGioJ:www.mcser.org/journal/index.php/mjss/article/download/203/188+&cd=5&hl=no&ct=clnk&gl=no



The similarities between the Albanian and Romanian languages are acknowledged by all researchers focusing on this
topic.

Again, the only difference between Albanians and Romanians, is Romanians have higher genes associated with slavic speaking countries, their ancestors might of been in contact with balto-slavs and as its claimed (goths or sarmatians one of these i2a carriers) only difference between Bulgarians, Macedonian slavs and Albanians is.. Albanians have low I2a and r1a.. same goes for Albanians and Serbs.

Besa
21-03-15, 05:05
But I don't see how they came to the conclusion that some of those words are in slavic origin? It might even be the other way around, Thracian might of influenced balto-slavic, or even proto-albanian might of influenced south-slavic, it's more of a credible theory if you look at the gene pool.

Some of those words could even be in greek origin, like Luan - Leo - Lion or even the opposite.. I don't know how they came to the conclusion of who loaned from who...

regardless, there are hundreds of Romanian - Albanian words that are apparently from Dacian-Thracian. You can find many thracian words and even Illyrian.

Besa
21-03-15, 05:15
Albanian-Illyrian:






Andena/Andes/Andio/Antis - personal Illyrian names based on a root-word and- or ant-, found in both the southern and the Dalmatian-Pannonian (including modern Bosnia and Herzegovina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnia_and_Herzegovina)) onomastic provinces; cf. Alb. andë (northern Albanian dialect, or Gheg) and ëndë (southern Albanian dialect or Tosk) "appetite, pleasure, desire, wish";Andi proper name, Andizetes, an Illyrian people inhabiting the Roman province of Panonia.
aran "field"; cf. Alb. arë; plural ara
Ardiaioi/Ardiaei, name of an Illyrian people, cf. Alb. ardhja "arrival" or "descent", connected to hardhi "vine-branch, grape-vine", with a sense development similar to Germanic *stamniz, meaning both stem, tree stalk and tribe, lineage. However, the insufficiency of this theory is that so far there is no certainty as to the historical or etymological development of either ardhja/hardhi or Ardiaioi, as with many other words.
Bilia "daughter"; cf. Alb. bijë, dial. bilë
Bindo/Bindus, an Illyrian deity from Bihać, Bosnia and Herzegovina; cf. Alb. bind "to convince" or "to make believe", përbindësh "monster".
bounon, "hutt, cottage"; cf. Alb bun
brisa, "husk of grapes"; cf. Alb bërsí "lees, dregs; mash" ( < PA *brutiā)
Barba- "swamp", a toponym from Metubarbis; possibly related to Alb. bërrakë "swampy soil"
can- "dog"; related to Alb. qen
Daesitiates, a name of an Illyrian people, cf. Alb. dash "ram", corresponding contextually with south Slavonic dasa "ace", which might represent a borrowing and adaptation from Illyrian (or some other ancient language).
mal, "mountain"; cf. Alb mal
bardi, "white"; cf. Alb bardhë
drakoina "supper"; cf. Alb. darke, dreke
drenis, "deer"; cf. Alb dre, dreni
delme "sheep"; cf. Alb dele, Gheg dialect delme
dard, "pear"; cf. Alb dardhë
Hyllus (the name of an Illyrian king); cf. Alb. yll (hyll in some northern dialects) "star", also Alb. hyj "god", Ylli proper name.[74] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#cite_note-ReferenceB-92)sīca, "dagger"; cf. Alb thikë or thika "knife"
Ulc-, "wolf" (pln. Ulcinium); cf. Alb ujk "wolf", ulk (Northern Dialect)
loúgeon, "pool"; cf. Alb lag, legen "to wet, soak, bathe, wash" ( < PA *lauga), lëgatë "pool" ( < PA *leugatâ), lakshte "dew" ( < PA laugista)
mag- "great"; cf. Alb. i madh "big , great"
mantía "bramblebush"; Old and dial. Alb mandë "berry, mulberry" (mod. Alb mën, man)
rhinos, "fog, mist"; cf. Old Alb ren "cloud" (mod. Alb re, rê) ( < PA *rina)
Vendum "place"; cf. Proto-Alb. wen-ta (Mod. Alb. vend)

Besa
21-03-15, 05:23
Many of these Dacian words are even the same in illyrian.. if there were more texts of illyrian and thracian it would be easier to prove that the Albanians are the surviving thrako-Illyrians. The Dardanians are said to of been a thrako-illyrian mix... Dacian is considered a dialect of Thracian..

Garrick
21-03-15, 05:43
I don't see how a group of people couldn't of only carried one haplogroup. The Celts are majorly known to of carried R1b, while the proto slavs are known to of carried R1a. I don't see a difference allot of time between Albanians and Romanians either. Most Romanians I've seen looked like Albanians. Even allot of Bosnians.



The Serbs were also called Triballians, a thracian tribe, because they lived in the same region as them. It seems south slavs have been called by allot of names based on where they lived, that doesn't make it neccessarily a fact.


How do you explain the EV-13 and J2 spread across the balkans, including in Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs, and Romanians? While I2a and R1a is low in Albanians. As I said, only difference between Romanians and Albanians is the Romanians high i2a and r1a. There are over 300 words I think alike only in Romanian and Albanian. That doesn't mean ancestors of Albanians moved from there, they could of lived same area where they lived today, there could be a relation between thracian and illyrian. Lets be honest, Albanians are either descendants from Illyrians, Thracians or Dacians. there is also a thrako-illyrian proposal.

There are two languages today that are considered paleo-balkanic, and it's albanian and greek. Albanian was spoken in the balkans in ancient times, but it wasn't called ''albanian'', where else would it come from. The dialect split between geg (north-Albanians) and tosk (south-Albanians) happened before the proto-south slavic immigration., probably during roman empire.. Albanian has allot of borrowings from latin, including from the time of the Roman empire. Romanian is latinized. Albanians were in the balkans during roman empire, same area where they lived.. yet i2a and r1a, both associated with slavs is low in Albanians. Therefor I2a cannot be illyrian or thracian.

Most scholars agree Albanian is either from Thracian or Illyrian, tell me of another proposal that has been seriously debated? There isn't enough of Illyrian to compare it to but the surviving words are similar or the same.. Thracian has been linked with balto-slavic? So has Albanian, most of those similar lithuanian words were also similar in Albanian. the theory of thracian and balto-slavic is just a theory that scholars dismiss.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language

I2a is lower only in Geg Albanians, all other people in the Balkans (including Tosk Albanians) have higher percentage of I2a. Romanians have 26%, Geg Albanians (in Kosovo) only 2.5%. It shows different origins today's Geg Albanian population, compared with other Balkan population.

Thracians have not dissapeared. They were carriers of several haplogroups, among them I2a, and today South Slav people and Romanians have significant amount these haplogroup. Geg Albanians don't have.

Today's Serbs, and other South Slavs are descedents Thracians, Illyrians, Slavs, Celts etc... Balkans was "door of Europe" and it is logical that many people have stayed and mixed.

About Illyrians and connection with Bosnia and around, I gave sources and you can read it. Illyrians probably were I2a carriers, similar to Thracians, you can see in Eupedia. But in this moment nobody can give percentages. Thracians probably had I2a, E-V13, R1a etc.

For R1b carriers in the Balkans there are more branches. R1b carriers among Albanians (16% in Albania) are mostly R1b ht35, called Armenian haplotype. This haplogroup is from South Caucasus and Anatolia.

Latin words in Albanian language are borrowed from the Romanian (you can see for example Georgiev). Albanian and Greek are different, and Albanians are people of the continent, not of the shore like Greeks. And linguists found similarities betwen Albanian and Armenian. It is interesting that accent some words in Albanian and Russian is similar (in South Slavic is different!).

How we can link these specifities. Here in forum there is a assumption that people with Armenian R1b ht35 haplotype came from Caucasus to the today Ukraine, Moldavia, Romania and mixed with (numerous) E-V13 haplogroup carriers. Later, as they moved southward, they mixed with carriers of other haplogroups. For example Dienekes gave assumption that J2 carriers very lately entered in today's Albanian population.

Haplogroups have changed the understanding origin and movement of different populations, and some earlier conceptions have proved wrong. We still do not know much, but the science and new knowledge is advancing.

For example, Illyrian was Centum and today's Albanian is Satem as Armenian, Slavic (and probably Thracian and Dacian).

You could see that Austrian scholars several years ago showed that link between today's Albanians and Illyrians don't exist.

The part of problem is because children, especially in Balkans, learn wrong (own) history. And after school when become people, they don't want to hear another opinions and evidence. For example, there is jealousy in the Balkans to the Greeks and attempts of assumption of Greek history and culture. Ancient Greeks gave invaluable contribution to human civilization and it must be respected.

Besa
21-03-15, 05:49
It has nothing to do with jealousy. I think it's rather the opposite. in Albania i2a is 12% of tested ones? the tosk as I said could be from spread of Serbian empire, they might of settled there too, I know for a fact its true. where else did this i2a come from? The Gegs lived in mountains where Serbian empire did not reach.

Take a look at the documents I showed you, all the Dacian words similar only in Albanian and Aromanian and Romanian, forget the latin words or the slavic. But the latin words prove the Albanians were there before slavic immigration at the same place, both Aromanians and Romanians have similar latin loan words... scroll down some of the last pages, most of those words are Dacian origin.. You are ignoring evidence. All the quotes I showed you. and the documents, take a nice look. take a look at some of the Albanian-Illyrian words.

I don't see how connection between south-slavs and Illyrians exist besides at all, Croats and Serbs carry the same names of the ones who immigrated to the balkans, there is even mention of proto-croats and serbs living in carpathian mountains, or the area around there... same regions where I2adin is high or is spread. historical evidence, i've already posted this. the claim that I2a is Illyrian is the only arguement I see? What is the origin of Gegs then? There were mostly Illyrians, thracians, Dacians and greeks living in the balkans and also celts... phrygians and paionians.. which one of these is it?

You are just mixing things up saying Albanians have different origin, and then Gegs, like they came from mars or something? There are only two balkan languages today that exist that are considered paleo-balkanic, and it's Albanian and Greek. the rest went through latinization (Romanian and Aromanian)

A language can also become sentum or satem... I don't think There is enough of illyrian to conclude it's branch. As I said Albanian might be a branch of thrako-illyrian.

Yes, one should respect history instead of trying to forge it and steal the identity of people. I'm not stealing ancient greek history, the ancient greeks were majorly ev-13 and j2 carriers, allot of it in north africa and italy is from them, albanian/greek settlers, and also the messapians, an illyrian people, same region where they lived EV-13 and J2 is high. the r1a and i2a in greeks is from slavic speakers. As for the austrian scholars, allot of it is propganda. they claimed Albanian language is 3000 years old if i remember correctly and that it formed the south slavic languages? that's why I say most of these claimed slavic loan words might not be so. They have documents of Albanian-Messapian.. Albanian-Illyrian, Albanian-thracian... I've checked their site. its hard to find allot about illyrians because the illyrians left nothing... of course you leave ''lost for words'', in bosnia only thing you can find is a pyramide.

Illyrians did not speak Slavic, I don't see how some of the illyrian tribes went through latinization and then slavicization.... the south slavic language would be much different, there would be much more latin influence and influence from other languages. Many of the tribes that lived in Croatia and bosnia were not even Illyrians, but Celts and some are of unknown origin but not considered illyrian.

I don't even understand how people can be so blind :) It's like there is a conspiracy going on against Albanians, from this site and from the majority of people. it's like you make up any excuse, ''different origin'' , from mars?

Ken nordtvedt is right, i2a comes from a newly migration to the balkans.

Besa
21-03-15, 06:23
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Serbia

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Migration_of_Serbs.png

Although the map is wrong, Dardania area was conquered by Serbian empire 13th century, they were actually invited in Bosnia, if i'm not mistaken.. this is the spread of I2a and r1a.. actually, it is disputed if they were invited or not. All sources have different opinions but similar. and the above map i tihnk the light red is where they settled first because it is said they lived next to croats and they settled in todays croatia, so it must of been bosnia?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/99/Migration_of_serbs03_01.png/640px-Migration_of_serbs03_01.png

This is how east Romanians got high i2a, and ukraine/moldova, the exact exact same area.. Proto-Romanians came into contact with Sarmatians or goths. one of these the people around the region who carried i2a and r1a. proto-romanians came into contact with balto slavs too.. the proto-romanians were first high EV-13, J2

Besa
21-03-15, 06:35
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Croatia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_hypotheses_of_the_Croats

Maleth
21-03-15, 09:10
E-V13 is from North Africa,

It would not have been a problem if E-V13 came from North Africa or the Amazon, but there is only 1% in the whole of North Africa and that is mostly through Balkan (Greek) expansion to the area.

doku
21-03-15, 09:30
I gave a lot of sources where Illyrians largerly were identified as ancestors of people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, today's Bosniacs, (Western) Serbs, (South) Croats etc. Of course Balkans as "door of Europe" had a many different impacts and there are variety of haplogroups among Balkan carriers.
Garrick, I agree with you. There have been several waves of migration R1a1 and I2a Din to the Balkans. The last Slovenian DNA work from 2014 talking about that. The last wave was with the Slavs and was not as massive as previously thought.

Besa, nation in the Western Balkans are religious (primarily) and political structures created at beginning of the 19th century. What is White Serbs and White Croats? That's nonsense created by the nationalist historiography to promote the theory of blood and soil. Genetics says another. If you take ten most important families of Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks in Herzegovina and follow their genealogy in the last 500 years, we will come to one tribe or one mountain village (katun ili džemat). That is the real reason for the high concentration I2a Din in the Herzegovina.

Besa
21-03-15, 15:06
Garrick, I agree with you. There have been several waves of migration R1a1 and I2a Din to the Balkans. The last Slovenian DNA work from 2014 talking about that. The last wave was with the Slavs and was not as massive as previously thought.

Besa, nation in the Western Balkans are religious (primarily) and political structures created at beginning of the 19th century. What is White Serbs and White Croats? That's nonsense created by the nationalist historiography to promote the theory of blood and soil. Genetics says another. If you take ten most important families of Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks in Herzegovina and follow their genealogy in the last 500 years, we will come to one tribe or one mountain village (katun ili džemat). That is the real reason for the high concentration I2a Din in the Herzegovina.

If there have been different waves, it fits with the goth theory... they came in many waves.

it is recent immigration to the balkans. This explains why Albanians are low in both, i2adin and r1a, particularly Gegs (north-albanians) because when these immigrations happened they fled to the mountains. North-Albania/kosovo (Rugova mountains, drenica mountains) area are mountanious lands... you should see where people live, there are villages/towns in the mountains of north-albania.

If i2a is illyrian explain why its lower in Serbia area while peaking in Croatia and bosnia? allot of those tribes were not even illyrians, like the liburnians. there lived illyrians in south serbia too, how come lower i2a there? how come so low i2a around dardania? if its thracian/illyrian? how come so many slavic countries exist and all are high i2a and r1a? but at the same time they have EV-13 and j2?

I already showed you the document Albanian-Romanian-Aromanian-Dacian connection, allot of those words are thrako-illyrian too. scroll down, you'll see most words are from dacian/thracian. does south slavic have these connections? These are not coincidence. Both you and garrick are just making excuses. How it of loaned from Romanian? the origin is dacian, that means albanians were neighbors of dacians if they loaned, and we all know thracians and dacians were the same people, living next to related illyrians, in dardania there lived illyrians, thracians, and celts... all majorly kosovar albanian haplogrups, r1b, ev-13, j2...the proto serbs and proto croats is a historical fact recorded even by the Romans. its already been posted. Even most scholars agree Albanian language is either from Illyrian or Thracian-Dacian.

Actually genetics say i2adin came to the balkans ca, 2000-1400 years ago with the 2nd slavic immgiration. thats why this thread exists, there is historical proof.. while some insist it's illyrian/Thracian, which its not, or else Albanians would be higher. every other south slavic nation is high i2a and r1a except for Albanians because they fled these immigrations. The romanians and vlachs are high i2a because they came in contact with people around the carpathian mountains carrying i2a, other than that there is not much difference between Albanians and other people, except they less of slavic associated genes.

look at EV-13 it's spread across the balkans, with least in north croatia where the proto croats settled. You tell me how it got there? I can tell you, it was there during roman empire when i2a din came.

Not thracian-dacian not illyrian... you tell me where Albanians came from? Even Albanian mythology is close to thracian and illyrian, and both of these are close to ancient greek, same is Albanian. Same is allot of costumes and culture that Albanians share with ancient greeks. everyone knows illyrians and thracians lived next to greeks.

Have you seen how Albanians wear a white hat, egg shaped? this hat is from ancient balkanic times. used both by ancient greeks, dacians, illyrians, thracians, phrygians...


Its like you're trying to make up a non-balkanic origin of Albanians when they are more ancient than south slavs, there is a reason why you speak slavic. Albanians have more to do with the balkans. there are two languages today considered ancient balkanic, its albanian and greek.. only connection i see with south slavs is the claim of i2a, and some pyramid in bosnia, probably created by proto-albanians.... so all dacians, thracians, illyrians carried i2a? illyrians only carried i2a? then i2a would be much higher all around balkans, even albanians.. its non existent in Gegs, both i2a and r1a, slavic associated genes, so where did Gegs come from? Mars? Jupiter? some avoided these immigrations, while many were asimilated around montenegro area, where E is high.. Please stop lying to yourself and admit the truth. its highest peak is in croatia and bosnia where proto serbs and croat settled and in carpathian mountains, the spread of i2a across balkans comes from slavic immigrations and the serbian empire.

As I said before the r1a and J2 in Romanians and vlachs is from contact with people around the carpathian mountains and north of the romanian border. there lived balto-slavs, sarmatians/scythians, goths, etc..

The split between Gegs and Tosks preceeds the slavic immigrations, so they lived in the same area... meaning they don't have different ''origin''... the higher i2a in some comes from slavic immigrations/Serbian empire.

Besa
21-03-15, 16:09
It would not have been a problem if E-V13 came from North Africa or the Amazon, but there is only 1% in the whole of North Africa and that is mostly through Balkan (Greek) expansion to the area.

haplogroup E came from africa. EV-13 is a sub, it originated in the balkans.

mihaitzateo
21-03-15, 16:10
EV-13 isn't from Africa... haplogroup E is from africa... ev-13 was spread by ancient greeks in north africa,... in anatolia EV-13 could of come from balkanic immigrations and deportations, millions of Albanians live there as they were deported during the yugoslav era to turkey. And also from Greek Muslims...

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-E-V13.gif

haplogroups have nothing neccesarily to do with hair color. I know people with EV-13 who look Irish. and it might not even be a fact, as they could of come in contact with celts and that claim could be based off of that..... there are people in the balkans still with red hair. you can find people from the middle east with red hair too.. I didn't say south slavs came only with i2a, they also broght r1a.. my theory is that they were slavicized sarmatian tribes i2a and r1a as the romans quoted, some mention them as slavs others as sarmatians... I don't think thracians carried one haplogroup.. if they carried r1a it would be much higher.. r1a was brought by slavic immigrations first one (sclaveni , antes) 2nd one (proto-serbs and croats)

Besa , this is a serious forum, not an "Aryan propaganda"board.
Egypt if you search in history was thousands of years ahead of Indo-Europeans as civilization.
From ancient Egypt E-V13 came. Or E people came and they suffered a mutation to E-V13.
As for J2 that came from Middle-East which was also much more advanced that Indo-European speakers.
Greeks were just some Indo-European speakers that came and conquered the advanced , civilized people from where they settled.
Please go study first known laws in the world are in the Middle East.

Albanians are Indo-European speakers very likely the people that brought Albanian language were R1B or R1A or both.

mihaitzateo
21-03-15, 16:16
@Besa : Aromanians are related to lots of J2,between 20% and 40%.
No Aromanian ever joined Islamic religion.

Besa
21-03-15, 16:57
@Besa : Aromanians are related to lots of J2,between 20% and 40%.
No Aromanian ever joined Islamic religion.

Who are these they are related to? How did they get J2 and E? they differ from Alb because of higher i2a and r1a. my point is Illyrians and Thracians carried EV-13 and J2. proto-Romanians are from Dacians.

I don't really care about your feelings or how you feel about muslims or about man made fairytales.. History is history and it doesn't really change, facts are facts. I'm not calling Albanians - Aromanians or Romanians or vice versa, because there is too much i2a and r1a. The way I see it, Albanians are the surviving Thraco-Illyrians, while Aromanians and Romanians, and greeks are mixed with slavs (Not offending) and you complain about muslims? The Slavs who immigrated, the first wave, killed people, the Serbian empire killed people.... I'm just establishing a linguistical and historical point, about the illyrians, thracians and dacians and their relation to EV-13 and J2. I can see people in this forum have problems, it's like talking to walls.. but hey, you cannot steal history and other peoples identity. I'm not islamic, I'm an atheist. You would convert to if they killed your family, raped women before killing them, made you pay money you don't have: there are more muslims of slavic origin, they split because of different religion, why you think Pomaks exist? Gorani? Bosniak Muslims etc? although maybe Bosniak muslims might of been catholics before.. there are million greek muslims, Albanians didn't really split despite of religion. Christians yugoslav and greek authorities deported muslims to turkey,, because someone converted to islam doesnt mean they were ottoman collaborates, people converted to be left alone. you should study some Albanian history.. ALbanians have dozzens of heroes who fought against ottomans. The ottomans were like islamic state. they killed millions of people. they kidnapped kids, greeks, albanians, serbs, bosniaks, trained them and many of the leaders and soldiers were from these people...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomaks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Muslims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosniaks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorani
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croat_Muslims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_Muslims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_Muslims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslims_(nationality)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Albania


Religious observance and practice is generally lax and polls have shown that, compared to other countries, fewer Albanians consider religion to be a dominant factor in their lives.

The same in Kosovo.

You're religious nuts, not everyone cares about man made fairytales.. the way I see it. Christians in the balkans are bigger problem than muslims, who are victims of deportation.

clintCG
21-03-15, 17:48
I gave only one example (Eupedia). Many other sources speak about I1 haplogroup as dominant in Goths. It is logical if Goths originating from Southern Scandinavia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goths).
Please, read previous posts before commenting...
There is only one source claiming Scandinavian origin of Goths- Jordanes' Getica. And in Getica Jordanes made many mistakes- such as identifying Dacian Geats with Goths. Part of Gothic arrival from Scandinavia is mythological- Goths coming from Scandinavia in 3 longboats under king Berig (90 people max). So- it is only legendary.

I do think that their distant ancestors came from Scandinavia- but it was much, much earlier than thought.
Even in 4th century BC they lived in mainland Europe. From Wikipedia:
"Pliny[31] recounts a report of Pytheas, an explorer who visited Northern Europe in the 4th century BC., that the "Gutones, a people of Germany," inhabit the shores of an estuary of at least 6,000 stadia called Mentonomon (i.e., the Baltic Sea), where amber is cast up by the waves."

If they came from Scandinavia, I would not place their arrival later than 500 B.C.
They did carry some I1, like other Germanic peoples, but I think main haplogroup in them was I2a Din. We have continuity of I2a1 (and I2a1b*) from Motala 6000. B.C to Ajvide 2000. B.C, and some bones suggesting that I2a1b* from Motala is ancestor of Isles, Disles, and Dinaric- so I think it is quite possible that I2a1b M423 came to mainland Europe from Scandinavia.

I already explained that most of what Eupedia authors describe as "Gothic" actually comes from medieval Saxon miners, not from Goths.

Those two individuals tested can in no way be classified as "sure descendants of Crimean Goths", and their I1 can be from Rus' conquerors as well.


Sources that call us "Illyrian" do so because we live in ex-Roman province of Illyria, not because we are Illyrian...

There is almost nothing that contributes to "Illyro/Dacian/Thracian" theory". I2a Dinaric is most likely from Slavic or Gothic sources.

Garrick
21-03-15, 17:57
It would not have been a problem if E-V13 came from North Africa or the Amazon, but there is only 1% in the whole of North Africa and that is mostly through Balkan (Greek) expansion to the area.

There are three assumptions:
(1) E-V13 originated in the Middle East
(2) E-V13 originated in Anatolia
(3) E-V13 originated in Balkans.

Of course, E-V13 is subclade of E-M78, which is Northern African (Egypt) haplogroup.

My opinion is when early farmers (mostly E-V13 and J-M12) came to the Balkans, haplogroup E-V13 has already was formed. Probably it originated from Middle East, but and Anatolia can be country of origin. There are opinions that early farmers moved to the Caucasus and over the coast of the Black sea, and today's areas of Ukraine, Moldavia and Romania came to the Balkans, but I think probability of this assumption is less.

Besa
21-03-15, 17:58
Besa , this is a serious forum, not an "Aryan propaganda"board.
Egypt if you search in history was thousands of years ahead of Indo-Europeans as civilization.
From ancient Egypt E-V13 came. Or E people came and they suffered a mutation to E-V13.
As for J2 that came from Middle-East which was also much more advanced that Indo-European speakers.
Greeks were just some Indo-European speakers that came and conquered the advanced , civilized people from where they settled.
Please go study first known laws in the world are in the Middle East.

Albanians are Indo-European speakers very likely the people that brought Albanian language were R1B or R1A or both.

This isn't Aryan propganda. There is barely r1a in Albanians. Indo-European languages could of come from Anatolia, Greeks, are majorly ev-13 and j2, the i2a and r1a comes from slavs... ancient greeks were ev-13 and j2 but still greek is indo-european language, so is armenian and iranian.

You're still ignoring the dacian related words, the documents I posted, take a look and scroll down... there is a reason why Albanians have low i2a and r1a, use your brain a bit and maybe you will find the answer, I already posted the answer. Because they came from somewhere else? There is no historical record of any immigration, so we can assume they lived where they lived, added with the latin roman influence.

Some of you people haven't even done genetic tests, you could be EV-13 and J2... what if you're a Serb with EV-13, or maybe a croat or Bosniak? What would you say then? EV-13 is Illyrian/Thracian? How did these people get EV-13?

I know of a group with EV-13 and there are plenty of Slavic people with EV-13, both Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks, macedonian slavs, bulgarians etc...

Besa
21-03-15, 18:13
There are three assumptions:
(1) E-V13 originated in the Middle East
(2) E-V13 originated in Anatolia
(3) E-V13 originated in Balkans.

Of course, E-V13 is subclade of E-M78, which is Northern African (Egypt) haplogroup.

My opinion is when early farmers (mostly E-V13 and J-M12) came to the Balkans, haplogroup E-V13 has already was formed. Probably it originated from Middle East, but and Anatolia can be country of origin. There are opinions that early farmers moved to the Caucasus and over the coast of the Black sea, and today's areas of Ukraine, Moldavia and Romania came to the Balkans, but I think probability of this assumption is less.

If the last one was true, it would mean i2adin wasn't there. Anything else wouldn't make sense. It doesn't make sense either way..


In 1647, Dutch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_people) linguist and scholar Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Zuerius_van_Boxhorn) noted the similarity among Indo-European languages, and supposed that they derived from a primitive common language he called Scythian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythian). He included in his hypothesis Dutch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_language), Albanian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language), Greek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language), Latin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_language), Persian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_language), and German (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language), later adding Slavic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_languages), Celtic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_languages), and Baltic languages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_languages). However, Van Boxhorn's suggestions did not become widely known and did not stimulate further research.

There are other opinions.

Take a nice read here, wikipedia is updated all the time by intelligent people:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages

Take a look at the languages, spoken in ancient times, their relations and how i2a doesn't fit at all.. for example Ancient-Macedonian - related to greek, illyrian and thracian? How could i2a be illyrian/Thracian? It would be much higher around the area. yet lacks in Albanians. Can you connect macedon language with chinese? How could the illyrians of had a northern origin?

Or how about Paeonian? todays fyrom, linked with Illyrian-Thracian-Greek? I2a would be much higher if these people carried i2adin... it's mostly high in south-slavic speaking people, it lacks in Albanian.. this doesn't propose a different origin of Albanians as you claim, it proposes that i2a and R1a are newly immigrations which Albanians fled, except for some intermarriages between noble people during the middle ages... there were many principalities, and albanian noble people married for example noble people from Zeta (montenegro) some of these were even called Albanians and sometimes Serbs like the Balsic family and the Crnojevic.

Tomenable
21-03-15, 18:16
The map of dispersal of I1 posted by Garrick is already outdated, because we know that I1 was not present in prehistoric Scandinavia.

Already in 2014 it was discovered that I1 was present in Neolithic Central Europe, in LBKT culture (Linear Pottery in Transdanubia):

Check I1 M253 Balatonszemes-Bagódomb [individual BAB6] here: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/europeanneolithicdna.shtml

Map (the place where Neolithic I1 was found is marked as 8 - note that this I1 is about as old as the TMRCA age of I1 haplogroup):

http://s18.postimg.org/f6g88wkvr/LBKT_I1.png

And here is my map showing the distribution of types of Y-DNA discovered so far in Stone Age burials in Europe:

The oldest I1 (and the only one from Stone Ages) comes from that archaeological site of the LBKT culture:

http://s12.postimg.org/c79ohwcjx/R1a_R1b_Russia.png

Eupedia says:


However, evidence emerged (Szécsényi-Nagy et al. 2014 (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2014/09/03/008664)) from the testing of Early Neolithic Y-DNA from western Hungary that haplogroup I1 was in fact present in central Europe at the time of the Neolithic expansion. A single I1 sample was identified alongside a G2a2b sample, both from the early Linear Pottery (LBK) culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star%C4%8Devo_culture), which would later diffuse the new agricultural lifestyle to most of Poland, Germany and the Low Countries.

So I1 haplogroup clearly originally migrated into Scandinavia, and not from Scandinavia - contrary to what Garrick suggested.

Tomenable
21-03-15, 18:28
By the way:

Populations most closely resembling (in autosomal DNA) prehistoric Scandinavians, are modern Poles (1st) and modern Swedes (2nd):

Source:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.de/2012/04/prehistoric-scandinavians-genetically.html?m=1

That said, both in modern Sweden and in modern Poland Y-DNA haplogroups are much different than those in prehistoric Sweden.

So probably we both inherited this autosomal prehistoric Scandinavian-like component via maternal lineages (mtDNA).

Tomenable
21-03-15, 18:34
Not yet. CTS11030 is phyloequivalent to M423 in modern populations, so it's shared by the Isles, Disles, and Dinaric branches. According to Nordtvedt's estimates, CTS11030 is somewhere between 12000 and 20000 years old, while Nordtvedt estimates I2a-Din at closer to 2500 years old.

Thank you!

Garrick
21-03-15, 18:47
I2a Dinaric is most likely from Slavic or Gothic sources.

I2a is not Gothic. No serious source considers it.

Of course, Goths can be R1a or R1b (different sources), not only I1. But probability that the Goths were dominantly or significantly I2a carriers is in the minimum.

You can check your hypothetical idea with Sparkey, he is expert for haplogroup I2a.

Garrick
21-03-15, 19:00
So I1 haplogroup clearly originally migrated into Scandinavia, and not from Scandinavia - contrary to what Garrick suggested.

I only gave one map for movement of Goths. You can look it:



In pdf file authors give one of maps where you can track the movement of Goths


It was only purpose that map (this is not a Stone Age period), you can follow the movement of the Goths from north of Europe to Iberian peninsula.

I had no intention to elaborate movements carriers of I haplogroup in general, and it is not a theme in this post.

clintCG
21-03-15, 19:06
Great, keep supporting outdated Paleolithic continuity "trusted sources".
There is more than enough evidence that it is Gothic. Far more enough than Illyrian/Thracian.
Writings of Eupedia administrators were made when Paleolithic continuity theory was popular- but now it is outdated

Sile
21-03-15, 19:09
If i2a is illyrian explain why its lower in Serbia area while peaking in Croatia and bosnia? allot of those tribes were not even illyrians, like the liburnians. there lived illyrians in south serbia too, how come lower i2a there? how come so low i2a around dardania? if its thracian/illyrian? how come so many slavic countries exist and all are high i2a and r1a? but at the same time they have EV-13 and j2?

There where nearly no illyrians in southern Serbia, Serbia was the home of the Triballi Thracian tribe, they clashed with Auturiates "illyrian " tribe from northern Serbia. The Triballi thracians where one of the major tribes, along with Dacian, Getae , Moesian and Odyssian


I already showed you the document Albanian-Romanian-Aromanian-Dacian connection, allot of those words are thrako-illyrian too. scroll down, you'll see most words are from dacian/thracian. does south slavic have these connections? These are not coincidence. Both you and garrick are just making excuses. How it of loaned from Romanian? the origin is dacian, that means albanians were neighbors of dacians if they loaned, and we all know thracians and dacians were the same people, living next to related illyrians, in dardania there lived illyrians, thracians, and celts... all majorly kosovar albanian haplogrups, r1b, ev-13, j2...the proto serbs and proto croats is a historical fact recorded even by the Romans. its already been posted. Even most scholars agree Albanian language is either from Illyrian or Thracian-Dacian.

Albanians came via the southern Carpathian mountains of northern Romania, they fled from the advancement of central asian tribes moving west. The moved into Roman lands ( with the help of the Romans ) and resettled in the mountains of modern Albania...........that is why the Romans never recorded any Albanians in their lands until 150AD............I doubt very much that they where of any great number of people. A very small vocabulary , which is why the albanians have so many Romanain and Latin words.


Actually genetics say i2adin came to the balkans ca, 2000-1400 years ago with the 2nd slavic immgiration. thats why this thread exists, there is historical proof.. while some insist it's illyrian/Thracian, which its not, or else Albanians would be higher. every other south slavic nation is high i2a and r1a except for Albanians because they fled these immigrations. The romanians and vlachs are high i2a because they came in contact with people around the carpathian mountains carrying i2a, other than that there is not much difference between Albanians and other people, except they less of slavic associated genes.



who says this?




Not thracian-dacian not illyrian... you tell me where Albanians came from? Even Albanian mythology is close to thracian and illyrian, and both of these are close to ancient greek, same is Albanian. Same is allot of costumes and culture that Albanians share with ancient greeks. everyone knows illyrians and thracians lived next to greeks.


look above to previous comment


Its like you're trying to make up a non-balkanic origin of Albanians when they are more ancient than south slavs, there is a reason why you speak slavic. Albanians have more to do with the balkans. there are two languages today considered ancient balkanic, its albanian and greek.. only connection i see with south slavs is the claim of i2a, and some pyramid in bosnia, probably created by proto-albanians.... so all dacians, thracians, illyrians carried i2a? illyrians only carried i2a? then i2a would be much higher all around balkans, even albanians.. its non existent in Gegs, both i2a and r1a, slavic associated genes, so where did Gegs come from? Mars? Jupiter? some avoided these immigrations, while many were asimilated around montenegro area, where E is high.. Please stop lying to yourself and admit the truth. its highest peak is in croatia and bosnia where proto serbs and croat settled and in carpathian mountains, the spread of i2a across balkans comes from slavic immigrations and the serbian empire.

Albanians are non-balkanic ..............if they where there at the times of the Romans , the Roman historians would have noted the Albanians. The Romans sent surveys to every part of their empire looking for minerals and noting the populace.


The split between Gegs and Tosks preceeds the slavic immigrations, so they lived in the same area... meaning they don't have different ''origin''... the higher i2a in some comes from slavic immigrations/Serbian empire.

One of the groups is ancient macedonian and some are resettled thracian and "illyrian" that fled into the areas, and other group are dardani and some are epirotes. You also will see ancient Dorians who lived in albania in the bronze age and moved into Greece around 1000BC, the dorians of greece formed corinthians or spartans etc etc. The Corinthians retook and re-established themselves in southern albania at the same time they threw the liburnians out of Corfu circa 700BC

Sile
21-03-15, 19:21
The map of dispersal of I1 posted by Garrick is already outdated, because we know that I1 was not present in prehistoric Scandinavia.

Already in 2014 it was discovered that I1 was present in Neolithic Central Europe, in LBKT culture (Linear Pottery in Transdanubia):

Check I1 M253 Balatonszemes-Bagódomb [individual BAB6] here: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/europeanneolithicdna.shtml

Map (the place where Neolithic I1 was found is marked as 8 - note that this I1 is about as old as the TMRCA age of I1 haplogroup):

http://s18.postimg.org/f6g88wkvr/LBKT_I1.png

And here is my map showing the distribution of types of Y-DNA discovered so far in Stone Age burials in Europe:

The oldest I1 (and the only one from Stone Ages) comes from that archaeological site of the LBKT culture:

http://s12.postimg.org/c79ohwcjx/R1a_R1b_Russia.png

Eupedia says:



So I1 haplogroup clearly originally migrated into Scandinavia, and not from Scandinavia - contrary to what Garrick suggested.

I found this map

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zPTFaw2rnx-E.kfoCf5XA8Lgw

If I am not mistaken , was a sample in Hungaria a J2 ?

mihaitzateo
21-03-15, 19:33
Who are these they are related to? How did they get J2 and E? they differ from Alb because of higher i2a and r1a. my point is Illyrians and Thracians carried EV-13 and J2. proto-Romanians are from Dacians.

I don't really care about your feelings or how you feel about muslims or about man made fairytales.. History is history and it doesn't really change, facts are facts. I'm not calling Albanians - Aromanians or Romanians or vice versa, because there is too much i2a and r1a. The way I see it, Albanians are the surviving Thraco-Illyrians, while Aromanians and Romanians, and greeks are mixed with slavs (Not offending) and you complain about muslims? The Slavs who immigrated, the first wave, killed people, the Serbian empire killed people.... I'm just establishing a linguistical and historical point, about the illyrians, thracians and dacians and their relation to EV-13 and J2. I can see people in this forum have problems, it's like talking to walls.. but hey, you cannot steal history and other peoples identity. I'm not islamic, I'm an atheist. You would convert to if they killed your family, raped women before killing them, made you pay money you don't have: there are more muslims of slavic origin, they split because of different religion, why you think Pomaks exist? Gorani? Bosniak Muslims etc? although maybe Bosniak muslims might of been catholics before.. there are million greek muslims, Albanians didn't really split despite of religion. Christians yugoslav and greek authorities deported muslims to turkey,, because someone converted to islam doesnt mean they were ottoman collaborates, people converted to be left alone. you should study some Albanian history.. ALbanians have dozzens of heroes who fought against ottomans. The ottomans were like islamic state. they killed millions of people. they kidnapped kids, greeks, albanians, serbs, bosniaks, trained them and many of the leaders and soldiers were from these people...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomaks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Muslims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosniaks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorani
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croat_Muslims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_Muslims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_Muslims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslims_(nationality)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Albania



The same in Kosovo.

You're religious nuts, not everyone cares about man made fairytales.. the way I see it. Christians in the balkans are bigger problem than muslims, who are victims of deportation.
I already told you that Dacians and Thracians could not have carried E-V13.
This was brought by Neolithic people.
Or another clade of E was brought and E-V13 appeared in Balkans,from E.
As for J2,I think was brought by more people,once by Neolithic farmers but also Thracians carried J2.
Anyway,Thracians should have carried mostly R1A and R1B.
Is quite logic,there is some R1B branch that is at high rates in Albania,in Armenia and also extends in other parts of Europe.
Armenians are also speakers of Satem IE language,so is quite clear those people who brought Albanian,were Satem speakers.
Since Albanian is also Satem language.
That haplogroup is called R1b-L23 (HT35) and is present in significant numbers in Albania,Greece,Romania and so on.
Quite clear that Dacians,Thracians were carrying such HG.
I also think Thracians were not speaking a single language,but a group of languages.
And that were not only R1B-L23 carriers,they also carried R1A clades and so on.
Ancestors of the Slavs should have been also included in the Thracians and got their language after Germanic migrations.
But those who brought today Slavic language moved around 600 AD.
Not possible that at 600 Ad I2-din was not already present in high percentages in Romania and Balkans.
Also,R1A should have already been in Romania and Balkans from Thracians when Slavs moved at 600 AD.
I have no idea why some people believe that I2-din just came,with a migration and that were not more people carrying this HG.
Is very simple,people with I2-din were in the area from before Thracians or Slavs moved,so both these people assimilated I2-din people and carried with them,after.
In Romania plenty of Slavs settled but mostly in the plains.Maybe 90% of the Slavs settled in the plains,maybe even more. Slavic speakers were not pastoralists,but were practicing agriculture and raising pigs.
Let me give another clear thing,about how many Slavs settled in Romania,we also have as traditional the welcoming of someone with bread and salt.
Albania do not have such a thing.
And if these Slavic speakers would have been carried lots of I2-din than in the plains we should have a higher concentration of I2-din that in the mountains,in Romania.
However,is not like that,in the mountains there is more I2-din that in the plains.
And in the plains we have more R1A.
Which means Slavic speakers were not carrying too much I2-din.
So,can you please with something more logic at this thread and stop with anti-Slavic propaganda?
The Slavs that settled in Romania,and got assimilated to Romanian language are great citizens of Romania,they are more Romanian than city settlers,especially those city settlers from Muntenia/Wallachia which got Turkish influences.
Slavs are an essential part of the forming of the Romanian people.
So would be interested to make genetic testing of the average Romanian peasant and average Romanian shepherd.
I suppose average Romanian shepherd will have plenty of I2 and few J2 and E-V13,same about R1A,but also a decent percentage of R1B-l23,while average Romanian peasant is a mix of Neolithic and Slavic people,having 20% or more R1A,E-V13,J-2 in higher percentages.
Offtopic:
You will not get from me any sympathy for the independence of Kosovo,we have already two muslim states in Europe,Albania and Bosnia we do not need a third one.
Albania and Bosnia should not be received in EU until they do not sign they will not try to implement Muslim rules in their countries.
If they start to implement Muslim rules,they should leave EU.

Maleth
21-03-15, 19:47
haplogroup E came from africa. EV-13 is a sub, it originated in the balkans.

You are correct, to be more precise E-M78 were E-V13 that was mutated maybe some 18,000 BP probably mutated in Egypt. E-V13 was mutated some8/10,000 BP later. in Middle east, Anatolia or Balkans proper like Garrik stated.


Besa , this is a serious forum, not an "Aryan propaganda"board.
Egypt if you search in history was thousands of years ahead of Indo-Europeans as civilization.
From ancient Egypt E-V13 came. Or E people came and they suffered a mutation to E-V13.

This is about dna historical migratory correctness. E-M78 (were later E-V13 stems from) was mutated some 18/20,000 years BP in Egypt but well before the classic Egyptian era. Its much more likely that E-V13 was mutated in a completely different region outside Egypt considering the time gap. Present E-V13 (2%) in Egypt is very probable to Greek settlements (Alexandria was founded by Alexander the great and taken his name) and Greek settlement is well documented.


There are three assumptions:
(1) E-V13 originated in the Middle East
(2) E-V13 originated in Anatolia
(3) E-V13 originated in Balkans.

Of course, E-V13 is subclade of E-M78, which is Northern African (Egypt) haplogroup.

My opinion is when early farmers (mostly E-V13 and J-M12) came to the Balkans, haplogroup E-V13 has already was formed. Probably it originated from Middle East, but and Anatolia can be country of origin. There are opinions that early farmers moved to the Caucasus and over the coast of the Black sea, and today's areas of Ukraine, Moldavia and Romania came to the Balkans, but I think probability of this assumption is less.

Totally agree. I dont want to hijack this thread with E-V13 origins. If anyone is interested in contributing here is a dedicated thread.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30814-Where-did-E-V13-originate

mihaitzateo
21-03-15, 19:50
Here a picture of some Bosnian-Herzogovian shepherds:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Bosnian_and_Herzegovinian_Shepherd_Dog_%28Tornjak% 29_group.jpg
They are looking typical Vlach.
Another very shocking resemblance,two races of shepherd dogs,one from Bukovina,one from Bosnia&Herzegovina and Croatia:
The Romanian variant:
http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciob%C4%83nesc_rom%C3%A2nesc_de_Bucovina
The Bosnia&Herzegovina variant:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tornjak
I2-din originated in current day Moldavia,this mutation.
The theory with I2-din South (which Serbians got most) moving from South Germany is pure non-sense,there is not any trace of I2-din South in Germany,neither South of Danube,where is very few.
According to Romanian historians,Slavic migration was a peaceful move of a large mass of peasants.
EDIT:
Is really lol mode that so many people are wasting so much energy to prove I2-din is not from Romania and Balkans but that came here 1400 years ago.
It does not really matter what you say,this is not changing the history.

mihaitzateo
21-03-15, 20:06
I only gave one map for movement of Goths. You can look it:



It was only purpose that map (this is not a Stone Age period), you can follow the movement of the Goths from north of Europe to Iberian peninsula.

I had no intention to elaborate movements carriers of I haplogroup in general, and it is not a theme in this post.
According to Yamnaya samples closest resemblance to Norwegian people,I1 people were in Scandinavia before IE people came.
No I1 was found in Yamnaya people.
However,IE Germanic assimilated I1 people from Scandinavia,but they did not mixed almost at all to Sami people.
Which is suggesting that besides Finns and Sami people,which are sharing N1C,was another cultural group in Scandinavia,before Germanic speakers came and conquered them.And this group of people,mostly carrying I1 mixed with Germanic speakers and gave the Norse Germanic cultural group.
After,Germans started to move from Scandinavia and spread I1 in Europe.
See that Viking raids did not brought almost any N1C in Great Britain,however they brought R1A and I1 and other HGs.

Garrick
22-03-15, 15:11
Great, keep supporting outdated Paleolithic continuity "trusted sources".
There is more than enough evidence that it is Gothic. Far more enough than Illyrian/Thracian.
Writings of Eupedia administrators were made when Paleolithic continuity theory was popular- but now it is outdated

We speak about migration period from about 376 to 800 AD. It is important because different times make confusion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period

The Migration Period, also known as the Völkerwanderung[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period#cite_note-1) ("migration of peoples" in German (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language)) or Barbarian Invasions, was a period of intensified human migration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_migration) in Europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe) often defined, from the period when it seriously impacted the Roman world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_world), as running from about 376 to 800 AD[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period#cite_note-2)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period#cite_note-3) during the transition from Late Antiquity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Antiquity) to the Early Middle Ages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Middle_Ages). This period was marked by profound changes both within the Roman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire) and beyond its "barbarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbarian) frontier". The migrants who came first were Germanic tribes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_peoples) such as the Goths (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goths), Vandals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandals), Angles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angles), Saxons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxons), Lombards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lombards), Suebi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suebi), Frisii (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisii), Jutes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jutes) and Franks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks); they were later pushed westwards by the Huns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns), Avars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Avars), Slavs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs), Bulgars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars) and Alans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alans).[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period#cite_note-4) Later migrations (such as the Arab conquest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquests) and Viking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings), Norman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normans), Hungarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_people), Moorish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moors), Turkic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_peoples), and Mongol invasions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe)) also had significant effects (especially in North Africa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Africa), the Iberian peninsula (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_peninsula), Anatolia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolia) and Central (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Europe) and Eastern Europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Europe)); however, they are outside the scope of the Migration Period.
...

According different sources Goths can be I1, R1b and R1a carriers. I would not about percentages. Of course they could have other haplogroups. However probability that they were significant I2a-Din-S carriers is minimal.

When the Goths and Slavs arrived to Balkans, Balkan population had I2a haplogroup. Slavs couldn't change it significantly. And R1a existed in Balkans when Slavs arrived. Slavs could significantly change the situation only in the Pannonian Plain.

And I2a is probably older than Ken Nordtvedt suggest. Of course Thracians and Illyrians had this haplogroup, probability would be small in opposite case. Slavs didn't overpopulate mountain ares in Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia...

I2a is very significant haplogroup for Balkan, South Slavs and Romanians (division is linguistic-cultural, closeness according to haplogroups is obvious), even in Greece there is significant percentage I2a carriers (North Greece 16%, South Greece 9%!). And this is not due to Slavs (and had nothing to do with the Goths).

And only Geg Albanians (not Tosk Albanians!) in the Balkan are I2a carriers in very small extent, and it distinguish them from the rest of Balkan population. And they probably came the latest in the Balkans, probably from North-East (probably they were non-Balkan population before Christ).

...
What is interesting. I think that I2a (and generally I) carriers, had own language once, it had to be pre-IE language! It couldn't be language of R1 carriers. Where we can search this extincit language? In the Balkan? I don't believe in this moment. Maybe we can try others tracks, for example Nuragic language (extinct too, but knowledge exists) in Sardinia.

mihaitzateo
22-03-15, 15:15
Here is a genetic study about Aromanians:
Lowest Y DNA I they have is 17%:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#Genetic_studies
Highest I they got is 42%.
Also,they got plenty of J2 and plenty of R1b.
Also,they have low R1A,some group of Aromanians even have 0% R1A.
So guess again what Y DNA mostly brought the Slavic speakers that moved around 600 AD.
I think it is R1A clades.



Sample population
Sample size
R1b (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_(Y-DNA))
R1a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a_(Y-DNA))
I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_(Y-DNA))
E1b1b (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_E1b1b_(Y-DNA))
E1b1a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_E1b1a_(Y-DNA))
J (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_J_(Y-DNA))
G (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_G_(Y-DNA))
N (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_N_(Y-DNA))
T (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_T_(Y-DNA))
L (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L_(Y-DNA))


Aromanians from Dukasi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fier_County), Albania[62] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#cite_note-Bosch2006-62)
39
2.6
2.6
17.9
17.9
0.0
48.7
10.3
0.0
0.0
0.0


Aromanians from Andon Poci (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gjirokast%C3%ABr_District), Albania[62] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#cite_note-Bosch2006-62)
19
36.8
0.0
42.1
15.8
0.0
5.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0


Aromanians from Kruševo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kru%C5%A1evo), Macedonia[62] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#cite_note-Bosch2006-62)
43
27.9
11.6
20.9
20.9
0.0
11.6
7.0
0.0
0.0
0.0


Aromanians from Štip (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0tip_Municipality), Macedonia[62] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#cite_note-Bosch2006-62)
65
23.1
21.5
16.9
18.5
0.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0


Aromanians in Romania[62] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#cite_note-Bosch2006-62)
42
23.8
2.4
19.0
7.1
0.0
33.3
0.0





(the link to the study :
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2005.00251.x/epdf - Romanians in this study are also high on I1 and R1B but not that high in R1A)
Please note that Aromanians that have highest R1A are those living in Macedonia/FYROM.
Quite clear from where they got the R1A,from Slavic males there.

Tomenable
22-03-15, 15:59
From:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?148889-What-s-the-verdict-on-I2a2-in-the-Balkans/page7

Current names:

http://oi60.tinypic.com/i57omp.jpg


People should really start naming clades after SNPs

mihaitzateo
22-03-15, 19:03
We speak about migration period from about 376 to 800 AD. It is important because different times make confusion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period

The Migration Period, also known as the Völkerwanderung[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period#cite_note-1) ("migration of peoples" in German (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language)) or Barbarian Invasions, was a period of intensified human migration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_migration) in Europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe) often defined, from the period when it seriously impacted the Roman world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_world), as running from about 376 to 800 AD[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period#cite_note-2)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period#cite_note-3) during the transition from Late Antiquity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Antiquity) to the Early Middle Ages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Middle_Ages). This period was marked by profound changes both within the Roman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire) and beyond its "barbarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbarian) frontier". The migrants who came first were Germanic tribes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_peoples) such as the Goths (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goths), Vandals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandals), Angles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angles), Saxons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxons), Lombards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lombards), Suebi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suebi), Frisii (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisii), Jutes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jutes) and Franks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks); they were later pushed westwards by the Huns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns), Avars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Avars), Slavs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs), Bulgars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars) and Alans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alans).[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period#cite_note-4) Later migrations (such as the Arab conquest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquests) and Viking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings), Norman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normans), Hungarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_people), Moorish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moors), Turkic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_peoples), and Mongol invasions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe)) also had significant effects (especially in North Africa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Africa), the Iberian peninsula (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_peninsula), Anatolia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolia) and Central (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Europe) and Eastern Europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Europe)); however, they are outside the scope of the Migration Period.
...

According different sources Goths can be I1, R1b and R1a carriers. I would not about percentages. Of course they could have other haplogroups. However probability that they were significant I2a-Din-S carriers is minimal.

When the Goths and Slavs arrived to Balkans, Balkan population had I2a haplogroup. Slavs couldn't change it significantly. And R1a existed in Balkans when Slavs arrived. Slavs could significantly change the situation only in the Pannonian Plain.

And I2a is probably older than Ken Nordtvedt suggest. Of course Thracians and Illyrians had this haplogroup, probability would be small in opposite case. Slavs didn't overpopulate mountain ares in Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia...

I2a is very significant haplogroup for Balkan, South Slavs and Romanians (division is linguistic-cultural, closeness according to haplogroups is obvious), even in Greece there is significant percentage I2a carriers (North Greece 16%, South Greece 9%!). And this is not due to Slavs (and had nothing to do with the Goths).

And only Geg Albanians (not Tosk Albanians!) in the Balkan are I2a carriers in very small extent, and it distinguish them from the rest of Balkan population. And they probably came the latest in the Balkans, probably from North-East (probably they were non-Balkan population before Christ).

...
What is interesting. I think that I2a (and generally I) carriers, had own language once, it had to be pre-IE language! It couldn't be language of R1 carriers. Where we can search this extincit language? In the Balkan? I don't believe in this moment. Maybe we can try others tracks, for example Nuragic language (extinct too, but knowledge exists) in Sardinia.
Yes,look at Aromanians document,Romanians from near Ploiesti have lower I overall than those from Constanta,same about R1A,same about R1B.
So,I think,a part of I is I1 and was brought by Goths,a part of R1B is from Goths and also a part of R1A.
Talking about this document:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2005.00251.x/epdf
Constanta is near sea side,in South Eastern Romania,Ploiesti,at 30km or less from Mountains,in Central Romania.
I am wondering,how is possible that no Aromanians have E-V13 over 20%?
If what some Albanians are saying that Aromanians and Albanians are almost same people,well that is not supported by Y DNA of Aromanians.
They (Aromanians) were quite hermetic people,marrying only with other Aromanians.
And there is some Aromanians have 41.9% I - from which I guess at least 36% is I2-din.
And they also have a lot of R1b - from which I guess most is R1b-L23.
So,the theory with I2-din coming to Balkans with Slavs is not supported by Aromanian genetics.
Aromanians = Some Romanian dialect speakers,that were living mostly in Albania.

Tomenable
22-03-15, 19:44
P. Heather, "Empires and Barbarians", in chapter 5. "Huns on the Run" claims that in 488 AD ca. 100,000 Goths settled in Italy.

This contradicts the claim that Goths didn't settle there.

There should be a genetic trace of that migration as 100 thousand people = ca. 2% of the population of Italy at that time.

Sile
22-03-15, 20:08
P. Heather, "Empires and Barbarians", in chapter 5. "Huns on the Run" claims that in 488 AD ca. 100,000 Goths settled in Italy.

This contradicts the claim that Goths didn't settle there.

There should be a genetic trace of that migration as 100 thousand people = ca. 2% of the population of Italy at that time.

The goths settled mostly in Northern Italy ............and later these goths where pushed out of the central part of northern italy and replaced by the Lombards. so, North-eat Italy retained most of the goths in Itlay with north-west Italy coming second.

dalmatia, croatia and slovenia in regards to goths settlement is another story

Tomenable
22-03-15, 20:46
According to Romanian historians, Slavic migration was a peaceful move

P. Heather in his "Empires and Barbarians" in chapter 8. "The Creation of Slavic Europe" strongly disagrees with such a notion.

Melancon
26-03-15, 01:39
One of my Hungarian friends says that Croatians are intermixed with Gothic Germans. Don't know how accurate this claim is; but I wonder if it explains the presence of haplogroup Q in the Balkans:

7167

Melancon
26-03-15, 01:55
How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?- Well, that would depend on the definition of Paleolithic continuity - because either Slavs, Illyrians or other Indo-European peoples could have picked up I2a indigenous men and migrated there.

I voted for Paleolithic continuity; though. It is not to say it is indigenous to the region, though. But that is only one possibility. Indo-Europeans could have picked up I2 men and migrated there. That's the second possibility.

Melancon
26-03-15, 03:49
I already told you that Dacians and Thracians could not have carried E-V13.
This was brought by Neolithic people.
Or another clade of E was brought and E-V13 appeared in Balkans,from E.
As for J2,I think was brought by more people,once by Neolithic farmers but also Thracians carried J2.
Anyway,Thracians should have carried mostly R1A and R1B.
Is quite logic,there is some R1B branch that is at high rates in Albania,in Armenia and also extends in other parts of Europe.
Armenians are also speakers of Satem IE language,so is quite clear those people who brought Albanian,were Satem speakers.
Since Albanian is also Satem language.
That haplogroup is called R1b-L23 (HT35) and is present in significant numbers in Albania,Greece,Romania and so on.
Quite clear that Dacians,Thracians were carrying such HG.
I also think Thracians were not speaking a single language,but a group of languages.
And that were not only R1B-L23 carriers,they also carried R1A clades and so on.
Ancestors of the Slavs should have been also included in the Thracians and got their language after Germanic migrations.
But those who brought today Slavic language moved around 600 AD.
Not possible that at 600 Ad I2-din was not already present in high percentages in Romania and Balkans.
Also,R1A should have already been in Romania and Balkans from Thracians when Slavs moved at 600 AD.
I have no idea why some people believe that I2-din just came,with a migration and that were not more people carrying this HG.
Is very simple,people with I2-din were in the area from before Thracians or Slavs moved,so both these people assimilated I2-din people and carried with them,after.
In Romania plenty of Slavs settled but mostly in the plains.Maybe 90% of the Slavs settled in the plains,maybe even more. Slavic speakers were not pastoralists,but were practicing agriculture and raising pigs.
Let me give another clear thing,about how many Slavs settled in Romania,we also have as traditional the welcoming of someone with bread and salt.
Albania do not have such a thing.
And if these Slavic speakers would have been carried lots of I2-din than in the plains we should have a higher concentration of I2-din that in the mountains,in Romania.
However,is not like that,in the mountains there is more I2-din that in the plains.
And in the plains we have more R1A.
Which means Slavic speakers were not carrying too much I2-din.
So,can you please with something more logic at this thread and stop with anti-Slavic propaganda?
The Slavs that settled in Romania,and got assimilated to Romanian language are great citizens of Romania,they are more Romanian than city settlers,especially those city settlers from Muntenia/Wallachia which got Turkish influences.
Slavs are an essential part of the forming of the Romanian people.
So would be interested to make genetic testing of the average Romanian peasant and average Romanian shepherd.
I suppose average Romanian shepherd will have plenty of I2 and few J2 and E-V13,same about R1A,but also a decent percentage of R1B-l23,while average Romanian peasant is a mix of Neolithic and Slavic people,having 20% or more R1A,E-V13,J-2 in higher percentages.
Offtopic:
You will not get from me any sympathy for the independence of Kosovo,we have already two muslim states in Europe,Albania and Bosnia we do not need a third one.
Albania and Bosnia should not be received in EU until they do not sign they will not try to implement Muslim rules in their countries.
If they start to implement Muslim rules,they should leave EU.Actually mihaitzateo might be right here; in the Albanian populations R1b and J2b (Bronze Age immigrants) make up almost half of the Albanian population alone; while Y-DNA E-V13 makes up most of the other half. E-V13 is a Neolithic Y-DNA; which means the original E-V13 people may have not been the proto-Albanian Indo-European speakers. The E-V13 men may have merely assimilated into the Indo-European language brought by the R1b and J2b men.

E-V13 men may have originally spoken a non-IE Neolithic language that later went extinct; being replaced by proto-Albanian speaking Bronze Age Indo-Europeans.

The real origins of the Albanians may lie in MtDNA (female) sources rather than Y-DNA (male) sources. We need to know the most common mtdna haplogroups in the Albanian population; and compare them with other Balkanic and European populations.

Skerdilaidas
26-03-15, 06:33
Actually mihaitzateo might be right here; in the Albanian populations R1b and J2b (Bronze Age immigrants) make up almost half of the Albanian population alone; while Y-DNA E-V13 makes up most of the other half. E-V13 is a Neolithic Y-DNA; which means the original E-V13 people may have not been the proto-Albanian Indo-European speakers. The E-V13 men may have merely assimilated into the Indo-European language brought by the R1b and J2b men.

E-V13 men may have originally spoken a non-IE Neolithic language that later went extinct; being replaced by proto-Albanian speaking Bronze Age Indo-Europeans.

The real origins of the Albanians may lie in MtDNA (female) sources rather than Y-DNA (male) sources. We need to know the most common mtdna haplogroups in the Albanian population; and compare them with other Balkanic and European populations.

Can you elaborate a bit more what you mean with your last paragraph?

Melancon
26-03-15, 07:30
Can you elaborate a bit more what you mean with your last paragraph?The maternal (female) DNA of Albanians may hold the clues to their origins; rather than studying the Y-DNA (male) DNA.

Because indigenous women are usually taken by male invaders; and the indigenous men are usually killed or assimilated. Since Albanians share Neolithic as well as Bronze Age Y-DNA; this suggests (according to theory) that Albanians were originally a Neolithic population that may have been assimilated into a Bronze Age culture. (Indo-European invasion)

If we compare the mtdna haplogroups of Albanian women with those of other Balkanic and European populations; we may better understand who the Albanians are, or where they originated from. For example; if Albanians share mtdna with their Bosnian and Croatian neighbors; as well as Italians or Sardinians (ancient populations) then that would suggest that Albanians are most likely Illyrians or related. If they share more mtdna in common with Romanians and Bulgarians and other Eastern Europeans; then they are most likely of Thracian extraction or related.

Unfortunately; it seems that Maciamo did not give us a good enough sample to make comparisons. I need deeper, more specific mtdna subclades.

Ike
27-03-15, 04:49
Can you elaborate a bit more what you mean with your last paragraph?

He wants to tell you that if E-V13 are remnants of Neolitic continuity, there is no way Albanians as IE people can be derived directly from them.
Once we would dismiss that option, the next one to analyze would be mathernal continuity.

Skerdilaidas
27-03-15, 06:04
The maternal (female) DNA of Albanians may hold the clues to their origins; rather than studying the Y-DNA (male) DNA.

Because indigenous women are usually taken by male invaders; and the indigenous men are usually killed or assimilated. Since Albanians share Neolithic as well as Bronze Age Y-DNA; this suggests (according to theory) that Albanians were originally a Neolithic population that may have been assimilated into a Bronze Age culture. (Indo-European invasion)

If we compare the mtdna haplogroups of Albanian women with those of other Balkanic and European populations; we may better understand who the Albanians are, or where they originated from. For example; if Albanians share mtdna with their Bosnian and Croatian neighbors; as well as Italians or Sardinians (ancient populations) then that would suggest that Albanians are most likely Illyrians or related. If they share more mtdna in common with Romanians and Bulgarians and other Eastern Europeans; then they are most likely of Thracian extraction or related.

Unfortunately; it seems that Maciamo did not give us a good enough sample to make comparisons. I need deeper, more specific mtdna subclades.
I see. I haven't really seen any study done on our mtDNA so far, but I think we sort of are in between just like with y-dna, but lot more diverse. With people I share on 23andme, this is what they have for mtDNA: H, H5a, H7, H9a, H11a, H12, H13a2, J1c, J1c3, J1c2, U5a1a, U4c1, U1a3,, W, W1. I share with another fella that has R0a1a, and I was told that this subclade peaks on Tuscany, Italy.

Skerdilaidas
27-03-15, 06:19
He wants to tell you that if E-V13 are remnants of Neolitic continuity, there is no way Albanians as IE people can be derived directly from them.
Once we would dismiss that option, the next one to analyze would be mathernal continuity.
E-V13 are indigenous Balkan folk, call them Pelasgians or whatever you like, that got absorbed by the Indo-Europeans that brought the Albanian language to the peninsula, that much I think even the elementary school children know by now. So E-V13 is most definitely their marker, and today it peaks on us, but that doesn't mean much, since most definitely the proto Albanian came into the peninsula during late bronze age. Plenty of time for things to shift or a certain y-dna to expand and dominate when one takes in consideration our strict paternal Fis (Clan) traditions, also why we are not as diverse on y-dna, specifically the rural Ghegs.