PDA

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



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7

sparkey
07-10-11, 18:03
So there (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?25801-Sarmatians-Serbs-Croats-and-I2a2) are (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26761-Scythian-Sarmatian-DNA-your-thoughts.) several (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26201-Who-were-and-are-the-Albanians-and-their-DNA) threads (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26473-Were-the-Croatians-originally-Slavic), all recently active, where the focus of the conversation has turned to (often passionate) discussions about how I2a1b1a-Din, the most common Haplogroup I subclade in the Balkans, got to the Balkans. But we seem far from reaching consensus on this forum, so here's a poll to at least put our finger to the wind regarding the direction this forum is leaning.

I've included as options several different possibilities I've read:

Paleolithic continuity: I2a-Din has been in the Balkans since the Paleolithic, and present distribution outside of the Balkans is the result of migrations out of it. There is direct geographic continuity for this clade from Gravettian culture and/or the Balkans Ice Age refuge. Proponents point out the age of Haplogroup I and the frequency distribution of I2a-Din. I've read Maciamo articulate this view, but I'm not sure if he still holds it.

The Early Indo-Europeans: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by the Indo-European migrations. It was part of the "original" collection of Y-DNA of Indo-Europeans. Proponents point out that everywhere that Haplogroup I is dominant nowadays speaks an IE language. How yes no was fond of this theory for a while.

Sea Peoples: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by seafaring groups not otherwise mentioned in this poll. The migration happened before history or early in history. Proponents point to the frequency distribution and the lack of historical verification for later migrations. How yes no explored this idea, and recently Pyrub has advocated it.

The Sarmatians: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by the Sarmatians. Proponents of this view cite the STR dating estimate for the clade, the apparent Asian spillover of it, and the historical attestation to Sarmatians (but not Slavs) in the Balkans. Bodin has been the most vocal advocate of this theory here.

The Slavs: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by expanding Slavs in the 1st millennium CE. Proponents cite the age of the clade, expert STR diversity analysis by people like Nordtvedt and Verenich, and dispute that history doesn't verify the Slavic expansions. I have supported this view, as have a few other posters.

If you believe that multiple expansions resulted in the current I2a-Din distribution in the Balkans, indicate which you feel brought most or had the greatest impact. If you feel that the data is deficient, make your best educated guess.

Maciamo
07-10-11, 19:18
This is a very tough question. So far I would opt for the Paleolithic continuity, although it doesn't really make sense based on the age estimate of this haplogroup (too young).

The Indo-Europeans hypothesis has the problem that the Balkans have far more I2a than R1a and R1b, unlike other IE regions. Ditto for the Slavs. Then, if it was Slavic, where would the previous population (from the Palaeolithic to the Roman era) have gone ? The Aromuns, presumably descended from the Roman-era population of the Balkans, have over 20% of I2a, more than the Slavic-speaking Macedonian neighbours.

Dale Cooper
07-10-11, 19:41
I gave my vote to Paleolithic continuity, as also many other people along with official croatian genetical research... Article from Croatian genetical institute:

The data demonstrate that Croatian human population, as almost
any other European population, represents remarkable
genetic mixture. More than 3/4 of the contemporary
Croatian men are most probably the offspring of Old Europeans
who came here before and after the Last Glacial
Maximum. The rest of the population is the offspring of the
people who were arriving in this part of Europe through
the southeastern route in the last 10 000 years, mostly during
the neolithization process. We believe that the latest
discoveries made with the techniques for whole-genome
typing using the array technology, will help us understand
the structure of Croatian population in more detail, as well
as the aspects of its demographic history.

http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/7418/copyofcro.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/408/copyofcro.jpg/)

It could be concluded that Ychromosome
background may cluster all European men
within two main branches: ‘Old Europeans’ with the parental
lineages Hg I, possibly Hg G and Hg N who had already
been present in Europe before the LGM and who survived
this period in 4 European refugia, and ‘Early Farmers’ (Hg
E3b, Hg J2, some subclades of Hg G) who had still been on
‘summer vacation’ in Asia and Africa during the LGM and
arrived during the neolithization of Europe.
However, while the Wiik study does a reasonably good job
summarizing the earlier literature about Europe, it has recently
become clearer that the previously established model
(4) stating that Hg R dates from the Paleolithic should be
revised. The latest studies in this field (20,21) suggest that
Hg R membership, be it R1a-M17 or R1b-M269, in Europe is
a more recent (post-LGM) event (about ≤15 000 years ago).
According to those recent findings, it is possible that these
Hg R lineages began to spread from Western Asia into Europe
soon after the ice sheets began to retract but before
the arrival of farming in southeast Europe and Crete about
9000 years ago. So, this model suggests that 15 000 -10 000
years ago, Europe was inhabited by Mesolithic people,
some being indigenous Hg I and some being post-glacial
intrusive Hg R from West-Asia. Then, pioneering agriculturalists
came from the Fertile Crescent and acquainted the
local foragers with farming.

http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/4170/copyofcro1.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/690/copyofcro1.jpg/)

Interpretation of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Y-chromosome tree by Marjanović et al (28), according to which the territories of today’s Croatia and Bosnia
and Herzegovina were probably part of the Balkan Last Glacial Maximum refugium

http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/4618/copyofunled.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/843/copyofunled.jpg/)

Croatian Y-chromosome population structure according to data published by Semino et al (4) Approximately 45% of the examined Croatians probably
originated from the Old Europeans who mostly survived the Last Glacial Maximum (LG M) in the Western Balkan refugium. In addition, almost 30% of
them came from the Ukrainian LG M refugium and 10% from postglacial intrusion from Western Asia (20,21), previously described by Semino as Old Europeans
from Iberian refugium (4). The rest of the Croatian men (approximately 15%) originated from Early Farmers who brought agriculture into Europe

Regarding the Old Europeans, additional analysis of more
than 1000 Hg I Y chromosomes from 60 population samples
revealed several subclades in Europe, with divergent
geographic distributions (30). Authors suggested that haplogroup
I provided an excellent record of pre-LGM differentiation
followed by geographic contraction, isolation,
and subsequent post-LGM expansions and spreading. Occurrence
of I1a in Scandinavia is consistent with a post-
LGM recolonization of northwestern Europe from Franco-
Cantabria. The expansion of I1b* in the wider Adriatic
area suggested demographic processes that started from
a refugium located in that region, whereas, I1c covers a
considerable part of Europe, with the highest frequencies
in northwestern Europe. It is suggested that haplogroup
I originated from a pre-LGM pool of Europeans (28,000-
23 000 years ago). Also, it appears that I1a, I1b, and I1c diverged
from I*, possibly during the post-LGM recolonization
of Europe. Regarding the Old Europeans in this area,
high short tandem repeat diversity within I1b* lineages
in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia supports the view
that the P37 short nucleotide polymorphism may have
been present in the Balkan area before the LGM. This implies
that the territories of these two countries were probably
very attractive for ‘summer vacation’ during the LGM.
from the Middle East.

Here is a full work of Croatian genetical research combined with european:

http://www.cmj.hr/2011/52/3/21674820.htm

Taranis
07-10-11, 20:58
Let me say this, I'm personally quite torn regarding I2a-Din. Generally, the idea that Haplogroup I as a whole is Paleolithic/Mesolithic in Europe is almost certain at this point. However, wether the I2a peak in the western Balkans is ancient or the result of a more recent founder effect, I'm quite divided on and I have come to no conclusion to this for myself.


The latest studies in this field (20,21) suggest that
Hg R membership, be it R1a-M17 or R1b-M269, in Europe is
a more recent (post-LGM) event (about ≤15 000 years ago).
According to those recent findings, it is possible that these
Hg R lineages began to spread from Western Asia into Europe
soon after the ice sheets began to retract but before
the arrival of farming in southeast Europe and Crete about
9000 years ago.

Well Dale, I am terribly sorry, I do not know what your source is, but this view regarding Haplogroups R1a/R1b is hopelessly outdated. We know for sure now that both R1a and R1b entered Europe significantly later than the end of the last ice age. The oldest occurence known thus far of R1a in Europe is from a site near Eulau, Germany, which dates back to the Corded Ware Culture (circa 2600 BC). The oldest find of R1b in Europe (thus far!) is from Lichtenstein Cave in northern Germany, which dates into the Urnfield Culture (1000 BC). Both the Neolithic sites of France (Treilles) and Germany (Derenburg) yielded no R1a or R1b what so ever.

zanipolo
07-10-11, 21:07
The latest I read, although I am sceptical

The very ancient Greek writers state that north of helles where only a people called Thraci. The area they covered was, the balkans and as far north as the baltic sea, incorporating, modern poland as well as czech, slovak, hungarian, bulgarian, rumanian, ex yugoslav area etc etc. The continued to push in a southern direction. The HG I in Balkans originated from these northern lands.

I will state, if you believe in the tales of Homer, you might believe in this.

I voted for paleolithic

sparkey
07-10-11, 22:37
I'm surprised that Paleolithic continuity is getting such a strong hearing so far. I have a strong feeling that an ancestor clade of I2a-Din passed through the Balkans or at least the Carpathian Basin, quite possibly I* or early I2* or I2a* or even IJ. But I2a-Din is waaay down the SNP tree, with none of its cousin clades having their centers of diversity in the Balkans. Looking at Nordtvedt's tree (http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/Tree%20and%20Map%20for%20Hg%20I.pdf) makes it clear how young the clade is. And the "S" cluster, which is more common in the Balkans than the "N" cluster, is even younger than the clade as a whole.

So Paleolithic continuity requires either: (1) The STR dating is unreliable to the point of being junk, and the date is wrong nearly tenfold. Or (2) a massive bottleneck down to clusters N and S by ca. 2500 years ago, followed by an expansion of only N outside of the Balkans, followed by another bottleneck of S, which then expanded in the Classical Age or later (maybe with the Illyrians)? (1) seems very unlikely to me and (2) doesn't seem to fit what we know about the history of the region or the other haplogroups in the region.

What migration pattern does fit the cluster dating? Well, an expansion out of a small subset of an expanding population from the North during the 1st millennium CE would fit it. Sounds like the Slavs, or at least a Southerly subset of them that mixed with I2a-Din people who could have been there well before the R1a carriers.

Asturrulumbo
07-10-11, 23:12
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:

In the Western Balkans there are few remains to connect with these bronze-using "proto-Illyrians", except in western Serbia and eastern Bosnia.
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.

...a Southerly subset of them that mixed with I2a-Din people who could have been there well before the R1a carriers.
This may be possible, but in my opinion only for some (perhaps most, certainly not all) of the I2a.

Shetop
08-10-11, 00:05
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.

I don't understand this. Is R1a Slavic by default? What you wrote is not an argument but stereotype.
Do you know that Slavic language was not spoken in any part of Poland territory 1600 years ago? And today in Poland R1a has frequency of more than 50%. So what happened there? Did this people migrate to Poland or something else happened? If they did migrate I don't see why similar thing could not have happened with I2a-Din - they migrated to Balkans.

There is one thing I liked about your post - you tried to point out an evidence against each of those options.

From what I read from the beginning of this topic - there is no credible argument which would point out that "The Slavs" theory doesn't hold.
On the other side age of the clade is strong argument against paleolithic continuity.

Sile
08-10-11, 00:07
interesting read
English version commences at half way
http://www.dacia.org/regalion

http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi35.htm


"A number of Baltic terms for bodies of water (especially rivers) stem from the most ancient stratum of Indo-European hydronymy. These terms occupy an important position for resolution of questions regarding the pre-history of Indo-European peoples, including their mutual relations, their place of origin, their ancient migrations, etc." "In the last several decades, it has been frequently noted in linguistic writings that Baltic toponymy in many respects embraces the ambit of Central Europe, particularly to the relation between Baltic and Illyrian (as well as to the Eastern neighbors of the latter, the Thracians and Dacians). The archaeologist T Sulimirski and the linguists I Duridanov and W Porzig are of the opinion that the Baltic, Thracian, and Dacian peoples were long neighbors to each other in the pre-Christian era."

http://www.v-stetsyuk.name/en/Iron/Migration.html

Sile
08-10-11, 00:16
I don't understand this. Is R1a Slavic by default? What you wrote is not an argument but stereotype.
Do you know that Slavic language was not spoken in any part of Poland territory 1600 years ago? And today in Poland R1a has frequency of more than 50%. So what happened there? Did this people migrate to Poland or something else happened? If they did migrate I don't see why similar thing could not have happened with I2a-Din - they migrated to Balkans.

There is one thing I liked about your post - you tried to point out an evidence against each of those options.

From what I read from the beginning of this topic - there is no credible argument which would point out that "The Slavs" theory doesn't hold.
On the other side age of the clade is strong argument against paleolithic continuity.

The "east germanic " tribes migrated en-masse to the west and left empty lands in polish areas. east german tribes that left, longobards, burgundians, goths, vandals, heruli, and many many more

Asturrulumbo
08-10-11, 00:21
I don't understand this. Is R1a Slavic by default? What you wrote is not an argument but stereotype.
Do you know that Slavic language was not spoken in any part of Poland territory 1600 years ago? And today in Poland R1a has frequency of more than 50%. So what happened there? Did this people migrate to Poland or something else happened? If they did migrate I don't see why similar thing could not have happened with I2a-Din - they migrated to Balkans.
I never mentioned R1a was exclusively Slavic, but if Proto-Slavs (the ancestors of all Slavs) had it in their majority, then by extension a population with a low amount of R1a is unlikely to have Slavs among their main ancestors.
If I2a is not Palaeolithic, then it may well be Mesolithic, and in my opinion an undervalued possibility is that some (or perhaps all...) came to the Balkans with the Neolithic expansion.
Edit: Yes, I have analyzed this and it would seem to me that there are at least legitimate possibilities that either I2a came during the Mesolithic from the Mediterranean or from the Middle East during the Neolithic, maybe both. I* may be Paleolithic...

LeBrok
08-10-11, 02:24
The "east germanic " tribes migrated en-masse to the west and left empty lands in polish areas. east german tribes that left, longobards, burgundians, goths, vandals, heruli, and many many more
That's true, from archeology we know that current territory of Poland was greatly depopulated just before Slavic expansion.
However, some indigenous people had survived there. We know that, because big number of toponyms and hydronyms is not of Slavic origin with Vistula river on top of the list.

A. Tamar Chabadi
08-10-11, 13:54
I posted this in DNA Forums sometime ago in a similar discussion...I hope this helps.

"What do any of you think of this from Ken Nordtvedt?

From: "Ken Nordtvedt"
Subject: [DNA] Did Dinaric I2a2 MRCA ancestors move southeast rather thannorthwest?
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 12:00:57 -0600

I want to describe a growing oddity --- at least to me --- concerning the haplogroup I2a2-Dinaric. This is the clade which the early academics in European population studies said originated in southeast Europe just after the LGM, because, I assume, that's where today it is found at highest frequency (Bosnia, Croatia....).

1. First oddity is the very youthfulness of I2a2-Dinaric. It's MRCA looks to be only about 3000 years old by standard age estimates. I1, by comparison, seems 4000 years old; I2a1-M26+ looks 8000 years old; some clades of haplogroup I found in the British Isles look 6000 years old, etc.

2. Second oddity is the nature of the three nearest cousin clades to I2a2-Dinaric in the tree of haplogroup I

Closest cousin is I2a2-Disles which at the moment is not separated from I2a2-Disles by a snp. Disles clade is found primarily in the British Isles. The node where branches to Disles and to Dinaric part ways looks to be at least 5000 years ago.

Next closest cousin is I2a2-Isles separated from I2a2-Dinaric by two snps. I2a2-Isles is found mainly in the British Isles, although some evidence of presence in France and north German plain exists for the older two of the four clades of I2a2-Isles. I2a2-Isles clades started to branch apart from each other at least 6000 years ago, while the node where I2a2-Dinaric branch line and I2a2-Isles branch line parted ways occured 12,000 years ago.

Next closest cousin is I2a-F whose ancestral line branched off even earlier than 12,000 years ago, and prior to the M423 snp which shows derived for both I2a2-Dinaric and I2a2-Isles. I2a-F is found mainly in France and British Isles (Scotland)

Although I'm very willing to consider luck a big factor where the single ancestral lines of the old y tree roamed between their nodes, or deciding which branch lines survived and which went extinct, I here start to see a trend (or just patterns in the clouds?); it seems the ancestral line going back from the I2a2-Dinaric MRCA may have lived in more northwesterly Europe for thousands of years and then later wandered back to the Balkans before its Dinaric MRCA came onto the scene? We really have no reason to put I2a2-Dinaric in southeast Europe earlier than about 3000 years ago.

The nodes where I2a-Western (also of northwest Europe) and western Mediterranean's I2a1 M26+ branch lines parted from the branch line leading to the previously mentioned clades are far back in time --- at the beginning of the LGM.

Ken"

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2009-08/1249581657

sparkey
08-10-11, 23:01
I posted this in DNA Forums sometime ago in a similar discussion...I hope this helps.

Yes, very helpful. As I mentioned, Nordtvedt's analysis tends to support "The Slavs" as the answer, and Nordtvedt himself finds the Slavs as a best-guess. The possibility that I2a-Din is a backmigration to Southeast Europe is very high. And I wonder if the fact that so many still favor Paleolithic continuity is due to confusion between I2a and I2a-Din.

Sile
08-10-11, 23:16
Yes, very helpful. As I mentioned, Nordtvedt's analysis tends to support "The Slavs" as the answer, and Nordtvedt himself finds the Slavs as a best-guess. The possibility that I2a-Din is a backmigration to Southeast Europe is very high. And I wonder if the fact that so many still favor Paleolithic continuity is due to confusion between I2a and I2a-Din.

I do not favour your slavic argument due to the fact , that modern areas of Dalmatia, croatia, slovenia, slavonia in the ancient times would have been what???........... was it an old I2* from the east germans and unassociatied with the slavs, was it r1a1a , maybe a g2a in the dinaric alps.
As i stated before , the E is too far south to have been a central and northern "illyrian" HG.

It ok to say one thing, but if logically you leave a void on what is historically known, then the new logic is askew

razor
08-10-11, 23:37
Well, another way of looking at it is this. Assuming that Nortdvedt is right, there was no I2a-Din N/S before the very end of the first millennium BCE. (The previous populations and haplogroup subclades don't matter, since the present populations do not derive from them except via I2a-Din N/S). If we just look at absolute numbers rather than percentages (and also keep in mind the uncertain nature of ALL testings we blandly use in these arguments) there are FAR MORE I2a-Din N/S individuals today in the North than in the South). For instance (just for the sake of argument and without nitpicking) the 50% Maciamo table for Bosnia-Herzegovina represents 2 million people, whereas the 21% for Ukraine represents 10 million... We can far more easily explain how Slavs (partly I2a-Din) moved en masse to B/H on the basis of historical records than we can explain the reverse movement. Remember that we are talking about events post-CE. As Verenic correctly stated, the case is closed (until new SNP's are discovered, or a better mathematician than Nortdverdt emerges (don't hold your breath (:=)).

Shetop
08-10-11, 23:40
As i stated before , the E is too far south to have been a central and northern "illyrian" HG.

What was predominant haplogroup in western Europe before R1b came? And where are descendants of those people now?
The same answer can be used when explaining arrival of I2a-Din.

I can also say that I support what sparkey said about Albanians that their gene pool is probably closest to the one from pre-Slavic central and western Balkans. I would just add that western Croatia and Slovenia probably had high frequency of R-U152 in antiquity.

zanipolo
09-10-11, 02:07
What was predominant haplogroup in western Europe before R1b came? And where are descendants of those people now?
The same answer can be used when explaining arrival of I2a-Din.

I can also say that I support what sparkey said about Albanians that their gene pool is probably closest to the one from pre-Slavic central and western Balkans. I would just add that western Croatia and Slovenia probably had high frequency of R-U152 in antiquity.

Albanians? ....even though the Albani tribe did not arrive in the area until 100AD . Roman historians have no knowledge of albanians until 100AD ( Albani)
These Albani people is what the albanians want to associate with the illyrians

from the net
Again, speculating, it appears that the Illyrians can be associated closely with I1b*, the Thracians with E3b1a2, and the Greeks with a later
immigration, primarily of J2.

if you look at this link, then you see that Albanians are new to the balkans
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2008/07/expansion-of-e-v13-explained.html

On the Y Chromosome Haplotype of the First Farmers in the ... (http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=35&ved=0CDkQFjAEOB4&url=http%3A%2F%2Fhrcak.srce.hr%2Ffile%2F2797&rct=j&q=pannonian%20haplotype&ei=zOSQTuPeN4SaiAfL4aT4DQ&usg=AFQjCNFuwD79IfUmzDj8ZcBtCw9ENWnK9A)

hrcak.srce.hr/file/2797
nice map on this link

Goga
09-10-11, 03:32
Maybe there was just another 'lost' Indo-European (proto-Balkanic) group that has been assimilated by Slavic group (Slavic tribes included this group and 'Slavinised' them). I mean a separated Indo-European group that lived between Germanic and Slavic tribes in Europe.

Not Slavic, nor Germanic but something different and an extinct group that didn't survived Slavic attacks from the east.

sparkey
09-10-11, 04:17
Maybe there was just another 'lost' Indo-European (proto-Balkanic) group that has been assimilated by Slavic group (Slavic tribes included this group and 'Slavinised' them). I mean a separated Indo-European group that lived between Germanic and Slavic tribes in Europe.

Not Slavic, nor Germanic but something different and an extinct group that didn't survived Slavic attacks from the east.

And they would have been I2a-Din dominant?

I2a-Din in the area near Belarus probably predated the R1a in the area, which probably came over with Corded Ware, which probably brought IE. I know that's a lot of "probably"s, but follow me here. If you accept all that, then we can say that there was probably a "lost" ethnicity from that area that was I2a-Din dominant, but it wasn't IE. Its culture would have been absorbed into the expanding proto-Balto-Slavs and, together with their R1a peoples, made the Slavs. That could explain why Baltic is thought to be more similar to proto-Balto-Slavic than Slavic... it's the influence of a lost non-IE group.

Of course, by the time they expanded on the Balkans, they would have "become" Slavs already. Any opinions on my speculation?

razor
09-10-11, 04:50
Well for starters I2a-Din apparently didn't exist when the IE's expanded into this area. Perhaps some antecedent I2a did (Verenic alias Heimdale reported elsewhere that he has had an "unofficial" communication from a Ukrainian archaeologist that aDna tests on a late Trypilian (non-IE) gravesite has revealed the presence of M-170-->P 37.2 there (nothing more specific). That would be interesting but not that conclusive. After all we know that the closest I2a to I2a-Din (I2a-Disles, now located principally in the British Isles) separated from their MCRA about 4,600 BCE We don't know where (it could easily have been in Germany). And we have no idea where the clade immediately ancestral to I2a-Din was when "Papa" was born. People should really try to grasp the elementary fact that all those millions and millions of contemporary I2a-Din got started from this Papa. Two Papas actually Papa-N who initiated his family ca. 300 BCE and Papa-S who did the same when Augustus ruled the Roman Empire. And it takes a while for families to expand. They don't "assimilate" others: that is a cultural/linguistic phenomenon. We're talking about genetic expansion.

Sile
09-10-11, 10:26
And they would have been I2a-Din dominant?

I2a-Din in the area near Belarus probably predated the R1a in the area, which probably came over with Corded Ware, which probably brought IE. I know that's a lot of "probably"s, but follow me here. If you accept all that, then we can say that there was probably a "lost" ethnicity from that area that was I2a-Din dominant, but it wasn't IE. Its culture would have been absorbed into the expanding proto-Balto-Slavs and, together with their R1a peoples, made the Slavs. That could explain why Baltic is thought to be more similar to proto-Balto-Slavic than Slavic... it's the influence of a lost non-IE group.

Of course, by the time they expanded on the Balkans, they would have "become" Slavs already. Any opinions on my speculation?


Thats a possibility.
But you d mean slavic linguistically and not purely genetically. correct?

I looked at your theory and eliminated the y-dna of the "slavs" and looked at northern croatia, slovenia and pannonian areas and was left with this
R1b (U-106 ) = 15% to 23% .........could be from the austrians or a celtic branch
I1 = 9% to 10% ..............Old german marker
E1b1b = 3%
J2 = 3%
G2a = 3%
I2b = 2%
J1 = 1%

Total = less than 50 % ..........remainder was R1a1a at 37% , remainder was I2a-din

So, to conclude , it seems doubtful that I2a-din was brought to the balkans by the slavs ( unless R1a1a is not purely slavic and this was illyrian )

Shetop
09-10-11, 11:04
Again, speculating, it appears that the Illyrians can be associated closely with I1b*, the Thracians with E3b1a2, and the Greeks with a later
immigration, primarily of J2.

if you look at this link, then you see that Albanians are new to the balkans
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2008/07/expansion-of-e-v13-explained.html

What makes my words a speculation and words of Dienekes a fact?
Why do you choose to believe what Dienekes says and not believe what Nordtvedt says?

Anyway there is still not any argument on this topic which would speak against arrival of I2a-Din with Slavs.
All those who voted for paleolithic continuity please try to agree on such argument and present it here.

mrikë
09-10-11, 12:54
I am yet unsure on my final opinion regarding this issue, however I cannot agree that I2a-Din is of Slavic origin.
It is interesting to note that I2a-din is most frequent in Croatia and Bosnia, for whose Slavic origins we cannot entirely account for. We first encounter "kroat't" written before the VIth century, however they did swamp the Balkans en masse with other barbaric tribes during the VI-VIIth century, throughout which period they embraced a Slavic language, but preserving their name original name (which in their native language is hrvat), as recent theories explain.
Regarding Bosnians, their history begins a little later. We first encounter the name Bosnia around the Xth century in Byzantine archives, in which it is stated that the region was partly ruled by Croatians and partly by Servs. Regarding their origins, I am unaware of any document that could seal all the flowing theories, however their unorthodox Christian cults account for a different folkloric perception than those of Slavs in general.

Most of the time I don't entirely agree with racial studies in the Balkans, because I believe they are incomplete and not thorough enough. Seeing that it is a very delicate topic, I believe one should approach it in that manner as well.
Since I am not able to provide complete anthropological facts, I shall only inform you that intermarriages between Croatians and Albanians are very common, as are those between Bosnians and Albanians, because Albanians consider them to be racially more alike with themselves.


pour fin:
"I am unaware whether the linguists have agreed upon an origin of the Albanian language, but I believe that anthropologists agree on classifying Albanians as one of the modern day European races, this being Dinaric." (L'es Races et l'historie", Pittards, pg.362)

Taranis
09-10-11, 13:22
pour fin:
"I am unaware whether the linguists have agreed upon an origin of the Albanian language, but I believe that anthropologists agree on classifying Albanians as one of the modern day European races, this being Dinaric." (L'es Races et l'historie", Pittards, pg.362)

I'm personally somewhat wary of any attempts of racial classification (since the concept of 'race' is in itself rather flawed), but I would like to add something on the origin of the Albanian language: the first and foremost is that Albanian is obviously an Indo-European language and that today, it represents it's own branch amongst the language family. The general consensus is also that Albanian is descended from one of the so-called Paleo-Balkan languages (eg. Illyrian, Dacian, Thracian, etc.), but which of these was the ancestor of Albanian is contested. The problem is that all of these languages are rather scarcely attested, whereas Albanian literature itself is only attested from the 14th century onward. This means it's very difficult to connect Albanian with a specific Paleo Balkan language with absolute certainty.

mrikë
09-10-11, 13:58
I'm personally somewhat wary of any attempts of racial classification (since the concept of 'race' is in itself rather flawed), but I would like to add something on the origin of the Albanian language: the first and foremost is that Albanian is obviously an Indo-European language and that today, it represents it's own branch amongst the language family. The general consensus is also that Albanian is descended from one of the so-called Paleo-Balkan languages (eg. Illyrian, Dacian, Thracian, etc.), but which of these was the ancestor of Albanian is contested. The problem is that all of these languages are rather scarcely attested, whereas Albanian literature itself is only attested from the 14th century onward. This means it's very difficult to connect Albanian with a specific Paleo Balkan language with absolute certainty.
Linguistically speaking I agree that it is rather difficult to prove an implicit connection between particularly Illyrian language and Albanian language, but if you are interested to read further on this topic I would suggest the works of Eqrem Çabej, who has worked out some very thorough and interesting arguments.

Goga
09-10-11, 23:41
And they would have been I2a-Din dominant?

I2a-Din in the area near Belarus probably predated the R1a in the area, which probably came over with Corded Ware, which probably brought IE. I know that's a lot of "probably"s, but follow me here. If you accept all that, then we can say that there was probably a "lost" ethnicity from that area that was I2a-Din dominant, but it wasn't IE. Its culture would have been absorbed into the expanding proto-Balto-Slavs and, together with their R1a peoples, made the Slavs. That could explain why Baltic is thought to be more similar to proto-Balto-Slavic than Slavic... it's the influence of a lost non-IE group.

Of course, by the time they expanded on the Balkans, they would have "become" Slavs already. Any opinions on my speculation?
Yes, I don't think it's a Slavic subclade. But I think it is possible that it was carried by Slavic people (maybe an other Indo-Eruopean speaking group?) into the Balkans. but I'm still not sure who were the original I2a-din folks.

I think they were native Europeans from somewhere around the northern shores of the Black Sea. So it's a combination of paleolithic continuity and the Slavs.

sparkey
09-10-11, 23:44
Thats a possibility.
But you d mean slavic linguistically and not purely genetically. correct?

Well think about it this way: Proto-Germanic probably didn't form until we got a mix that included something like R1a, R1b-U106, I1, and I2a2. In parallel, proto-Slavic could have formed as a mix of R1a and I2a-Din. We know that the closest linguistic group to the Slavs are the Balts, and they lack I2a-Din, so it's not inconceivable that Slavic wouldn't be "really" Slavic without the I2a-Din influence.

Razor brought up a great point, though... we shouldn't overstate I2a-Din's influence on anything prior to its expansion, since its TMRCA is so recent. Its carriers could have been normal Slavs within an R1a-dominant group who didn't know they were expanding a Paleolithic relic that barely survived. They just happened to do so due to drift.

sparkey
09-10-11, 23:50
Yes, I don't think it's a Slavic subclade. But I think it is possible that it was carried by Slavic people (maybe an other Indo-Eruopean speaking group?) into the Balkans. but I'm still not sure who were the original I2a-din folks.

I think they were native Europeans from somewhere around the northern shores of the Black Sea. So it's a combination of paleolithic continuity and the Slavs.

Well feel free to tick "other" in the poll.

I think that the only reason an answer of "none of the above" would surprise me is that the expansion is so recent, we should expect it to be something covered by, or inferred by, history.

Goga
09-10-11, 23:57
Well feel free to tick "other" in the poll.

I think that the only reason an answer of "none of the above" would surprise me is that the expansion is so recent, we should expect it to be something covered by, or inferred by, history.
I don't dare backstabbing Bodin who spend so much time on the Sarmatians origin of I2a-din. And he made some very good points! If I must choose, I will choose for the Sarmatians.

I just don't understand how I2a-Din also ended up in the Middle East. As far as I know there weren't 'Slavic' migrations into the Middle East. This is one of the biggest reasons why I don't think that I2a-din is 'Slavic'.

Goga
10-10-11, 00:08
I've a question, which people in Europe were at that time so magnificent & powerfull that they could spread I2a-din in so much areas and so fast?

Time and space are almost unreal. You must be almost supernatural to be able to do this. Or a great warrior like Genghis Khan or something...

Taranis
10-10-11, 00:45
Linguistically speaking I agree that it is rather difficult to prove an implicit connection between particularly Illyrian language and Albanian language, but if you are interested to read further on this topic I would suggest the works of Eqrem Çabej, who has worked out some very thorough and interesting arguments.

In my opinion, the most promising arguments come from reconstructed Proto-Albanian (thanks to the abundance of Albanian loans from Greek and Latin), even though the term "Proto-Albanian" is a bit confusing as we are talking about what the Albanian language would have looked in the 1st century BC or so. I must also add that while there is a lot support for the Illyrian hypothesis, I think that the other hypotheses (Dacian and Thracian) should not be readily dismissed.

Regarding I2a-Din, I personally think that the hypothesis that it originates from an unknown culture who's Y-lineages accidentally happened to survive amongst the Proto-Slavs is quite a plausible one. We can think perhaps of this as analoguous to how I1 may have survived in Scandinavia.



I've a question, which people in Europe were at that time so magnificent & powerfull that they could spread I2a-din in so much areas and so fast?

Time and space are almost unreal. You must be almost supernatural to be able to do this. Or a great warrior like Genghis Khan or something...

Actually, the Slavic migrations fit this scenario pretty well.

zanipolo
10-10-11, 07:05
Well think about it this way: Proto-Germanic probably didn't form until we got a mix that included something like R1a, R1b-U106, I1, and I2a2. In parallel, proto-Slavic could have formed as a mix of R1a and I2a-Din. We know that the closest linguistic group to the Slavs are the Balts, and they lack I2a-Din, so it's not inconceivable that Slavic wouldn't be "really" Slavic without the I2a-Din influence.

Razor brought up a great point, though... we shouldn't overstate I2a-Din's influence on anything prior to its expansion, since its TMRCA is so recent. Its carriers could have been normal Slavs within an R1a-dominant group who didn't know they were expanding a Paleolithic relic that barely survived. They just happened to do so due to drift.

As per link below where KenN has said that I1a ( I1) has 2 indigenous areas. one in germany where it migrated to Sweden and the other in Slovenia
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-08/1156297440

It seems reasonable then that this I1a marker is the "illyrian" marker. If you remove the "slavic" migration markers of R1a and I2a-din and you convert the remainder as a percentage of 100% , then I1a will be over 55%.

If you then use maciano y-dna country figures of I1 we have the following
northeast italy = 3.7%
Slovenia = 9.5%
Hungary ( pannonia) = 8%
serbia = 6.5%
Macedonia = 10%
North greece = 5.5%
croatia = 8%
bosnia = 2.5%
albania = 2%

granted the bigger the number of migrants the smaller the I1a % for that area

Since slav historians have said many a time that the heart of the slavic migration in the balkans was on the borders of bosnia, albania and montengro , this will explain the low percentage of I1a in those areas and the very high I2a-din

I wonder why maciano has NO montengro stats in his y-dna country....maybe because it formed only in 2007.

Anyway, if this is heading in the correct direction, your theory on I2a-din in the western balkans would be correct.

sparkey
10-10-11, 17:37
As per link below where KenN has said that I1a ( I1) has 2 indigenous areas. one in germany where it migrated to Sweden and the other in Slovenia
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-08/1156297440

First of all, that link is from 2006, before much research had been done into I1 STR diversity. Secondly, read it more closely:


As pertains to Slovenia, it is much more likely
> that the I1a originates from the native ``I`` already found there which
> later moved north from the slavic regions into Scandinavia (instead of the
> other way around, which is ludicrous). Exactly one of the suggestions of
> this thread, although I would not rule out historic era spread of the
> Germans.

If this is true (I1a originated in or near Slovenia) and that this indigneous I1a was not later swamped by the spread of more northerly Germanics spreading to the south and bringing the I1a from north Germany,
then a detailed study of Slovenian I1a should show its uniqueness and lack of forms only later developed further north. In fact, that was the relevance of pointing out the absence of DYS462 = 13 I1a (found primarily in Scandinavia) in the Slovenian collection. Austria is also called Ostmark (east frontier) in some language, and that is a reminder that Germanic peoples in the post-Roman era pushed their settlement to the east and south.

Basically he's saying that based on what he knew at the time (back in 2006) it seemed more likely that the migration pattern was Slovenia to Scandinavia rather than Scandinavia to Slovenia, but he refused to rule out a Germanic migration into the Balkans.

But a Germanic migration into the Balkans is what seems more likely now. Take a look at Slovenian samples in the I1 Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/yDNA_I1/default.aspx?vgroup=yDNA_I1). None stretch their STR patterns outside of existing, principally Germanic clusters like AS-gen and T2. The best explanation for them now is likely East Germanic origin.

Nordtvedt has since placed (http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I/2010-11/1288883900) the center of diversity of I1 around Schleswig-Holstein.


It seems reasonable then that this I1a marker is the "illyrian" marker. If you remove the "slavic" migration markers of R1a and I2a-din and you convert the remainder as a percentage of 100% , then I1a will be over 55%.

Why can't the "Illyrian" marker(s) be R1b and Neolithic or Bronze Age markers like J2, E1b, G2a? Why does there have to have been Paleolithic remnants? Maybe they all drifted away.

If I had to pick an existing haplogroup to be "the" Paleolithic remnant in the Balkans, I would guess I2b-ADR, which hasn't been found there yet AFAIK, but has been found in Italy, and could be a chunk of that "I2*" without I2b-ADR or I2c SNPs tested that's been found in the Balkans.

Asturrulumbo
10-10-11, 18:45
Well Sparkey, you may have been right about me confusing I2a as a whole with I2a-Din. If the MRCA for I2a-Din is 3000 years, then it is quite
reasonable to think the Slavic migrations were responsible for it, even if I2a-Din was not a proto-Slavic haplogroup. However, I would like to know about a map comparing I2a as a whole and I2a-Din. Is there such thing? The reason for this is that I do find strange that I2a predominates in the mountainous areas, where one would expect the older haplogroups to survive... But maybe those are other kinds of I2a

Shetop
10-10-11, 19:03
However, I would like to know about a map comparing I2a as a whole and I2a-Din. Is there such thing?

There is this wikipedia I2a1b1-Din map (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/HaplogroupI2.png).
And there is Balanovsky I2a1b map (http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/7519/yi1b.jpg), where you have to exclude Great Britain because subclade found there is mostly not Dinaric.

sparkey
10-10-11, 19:06
Well Sparkey, you may have been right about me confusing I2a as a whole with I2a-Din. If the MRCA for I2a-Din is 3000 years, then it is quite
reasonable to think the Slavic migrations were responsible for it, even if I2a-Din was not a proto-Slavic haplogroup. However, I would like to know about a map comparing I2a as a whole and I2a-Din. Is there such thing? The reason for this is that I do find strange that I2a predominates in the mountainous areas, where one would expect the older haplogroups to survive... But maybe those are other kinds of I2a

As far as I know, nearly 100% of all I2a in the Balkans is I2a-Din. All other I2a subclades are west of it, except maybe I2a2a2-Cont3, which is geographically all around the Balkans, but mostly north of it. A bit of the I2a we see may be I2a2a2-Cont3, which is older than I2a1b1a-Din, but I doubt much of it is based on the respective FTDNA projects. And I2a2a2 will be tested as "I2b" in most studies, because it's only recently had its hierarchical name changed, and it's P37-.

Asturrulumbo
10-10-11, 20:04
As far as I know, nearly 100% of all I2a in the Balkans is I2a-Din.
Really, almost 100%? That's problematic from any point of view, then (especially with the recent dating for the MRCA). What about Albania and Greece, for example? I simply can't see so much Slavic influence there (especially in places such as the Peloponnese).

sparkey
10-10-11, 20:20
Really, almost 100%? That's problematic from any point of view, then. What about Albania and Greece, for example? I simply can't see so much Slavic influence there (especially in places such as the Peloponnese).

Greek I2a people are mostly I2a-Din-N, which is the cluster of I2a-Din with higher presence in Ukraine, Poland, Belarus, Russia, etc., and is older than I2a-Din-S. See the I2a Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?vgroup=I2aHapGroup&section=yresults). I'm not sure what that means.

Where have we seen I2a in significant amounts in the Peloponnese? As far as I'm aware, most I2 in the Peloponnese and Crete is I2c-B, not I2a-Din.

Asturrulumbo
10-10-11, 20:22
Where have we seen I2a in significant amounts in the Peloponnese? As far as I'm aware, most I2 in the Peloponnese and Crete is I2c-B, not I2a-Din.
Right now I'm using the Eupedia map Maciamo made
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

Shetop
10-10-11, 20:25
Really, almost 100%? That's problematic from any point of view, then. What about Albania and Greece, for example? I simply can't see so much Slavic influence there (especially in places such as the Peloponnese).

List of medieval Slavic tribes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_medieval_Slavic_tribes#South_Slavs)
Vaiunites (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=bg&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fbg.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F%25D0%259 2%25D0%25B0%25D1%258E%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D1%258 2%25D0%25B8)

Asturrulumbo
10-10-11, 20:39
You may be right, you may be right... I'm afraid I largely lose my historical compass of the Balkans during the Slavic migrations. I'll be sure to read about them soon

sparkey
10-10-11, 20:39
Right now I'm using the Eupedia map Maciamo made

I'm pretty sure that Maciamo is using Martinez et al 2007 there, and now that I look at it, there is significant I2a, probably mostly I2a-Din-N, in the Peloponnese, although I2*, probably I2c-B is much higher in Crete. King et al 2008 is another good study I've seen of Crete, and that one is pretty explicit that the I2 in Crete is "I2*" (probably I2c-B because that's all we've found there so far and they didn't test the SNPs that define I2c).

It looks like there was a pretty direct Slavic influence in Greece based on this, more than I expected, unless some of the I2a-Din-N predated the Slavic expansion. The N cluster is nearly 2500 years old, after all.

Maciamo
10-10-11, 21:10
Really, almost 100%? That's problematic from any point of view, then (especially with the recent dating for the MRCA). What about Albania and Greece, for example? I simply can't see so much Slavic influence there (especially in places such as the Peloponnese).

I agree that this is problematic. The I2a2 in the Balkans cannot be Slavic or Sarmatian if it is so different from the I2a found in other parts of Eastern Europe.

When I say I favour the hypothesis of the Paleolithic continuity, I don't mean that I2a2-Din already existed in the Paleolithic, but that I2* was all over Europe in the Paleolithic, then only became I2a around the Mesolithic, I2a2 perhaps in the late Mesolithic or early Neolithic, and eventually I2a2-Din in the Chalcolithic or Bronze Age. It doesn't mean that the ancestors of the modern I2a-Din were already in the Balkans in the Paleolithic. However I look at it, I can't see how I2a-Din could have been in the Balkans before the Neolithic. A hypothesis that I like is that the I2a2 people from the Danube region were pushed away by Neolithic farmers (G2a) and moved to the Balkans and the Carpathians, where they evolved into different subclades.

Another possibility is that I2a2 came from Eastern Anatolia along with G2a during the Neolithic, and each variety of I2a2 developed once Neolithic farmers had settled permanently in one place.

razor
10-10-11, 21:30
Well I suppose we need better I2a testing in Greece (:=)). It wouldn't surprise me one bit to discover a lot of Greek-speaking I2a-Din there. After all the Slavs literally swamped Greece in the late 6th and (especially) early 7th century. In the context of the Byzantine reconquista, a tremendous number of them were captured and sold into slavery outside of Greece (hence the birth of the relevant "esclave"->"slave" term). But numbers will tell, and genes would have been left behind.

Shetop
10-10-11, 21:38
For me, ftdna results were enough to conclude that vast majority of I2a in Balkans is the same variety as the one found in other parts of eastern Europe: Y-Haplogroup I2a Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=ymap)

sparkey
10-10-11, 21:40
I agree that this is problematic. The I2a2 in the Balkans cannot be Slavic or Sarmatian if it is so different from the I2a found in other parts of Eastern Europe.

But it isn't "so different"... the large majority of I2a in Eastern Europe as a whole is I2a-Din.


When I say I favour the hypothesis of the Paleolithic continuity, I don't mean that I2a2-Din already existed in the Paleolithic, but that I2* was all over Europe in the Paleolithic, then only became I2a around the Mesolithic, I2a2 perhaps in the late Mesolithic or early Neolithic, and eventually I2a2-Din in the Chalcolithic or Bronze Age. It doesn't mean that the ancestors of the modern I2a-Din were already in the Balkans in the Paleolithic. However I look at it, I can't see how I2a-Din could have been in the Balkans before the Neolithic. A hypothesis that I like is that the I2a2 people from the Danube region were pushed away by Neolithic farmers (G2a) and moved to the Balkans and the Carpathians, where they evolved into different subclades.

Then why do we see only one very young I2a clade in the Balkans, with the older STR cluster of that clade outside of the Balkans? Like I said, you'd need a weird double-bottleneck for this pattern to occur, not to mention an inexplicably recent migration out of the Balkans.


Another possibility is that I2a2 came from Eastern Anatolia along with G2a during the Neolithic, and each variety of I2a2 developed once Neolithic farmers had settled permanently in one place.

The fact that the two closest clades to I2a-Din both have their centers of diversity in the British Isles, and the fact that outlier clades of I2a, like I2a1*-Rassette and I2a1*-F are very European and even Western European, lends poorly to this theory.

zanipolo
10-10-11, 22:19
First of all, that link is from 2006, before much research had been done into I1 STR diversity. Secondly, read it more closely:



Basically he's saying that based on what he knew at the time (back in 2006) it seemed more likely that the migration pattern was Slovenia to Scandinavia rather than Scandinavia to Slovenia, but he refused to rule out a Germanic migration into the Balkans.

But a Germanic migration into the Balkans is what seems more likely now. Take a look at Slovenian samples in the I1 Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/yDNA_I1/default.aspx?vgroup=yDNA_I1). None stretch their STR patterns outside of existing, principally Germanic clusters like AS-gen and T2. The best explanation for them now is likely East Germanic origin.

Yes the link is 2006 , far younger than the link you provided as the 2 that are newer has no reference to our discussion

I read it that the german I1a went to sweden and not the slovenian one.

If you think the slovenian I1a HG is east germanic, then lets assume that R1a and I2a-din never arrived in western Balkans. Are you saying then, this germanic I1a reached northern greece and all of the western balkans in the great % that is there now.




Nordtvedt has since placed (http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I/2010-11/1288883900) the center of diversity of I1 around Schleswig-Holstein.


Ok, but not part of this discussion



Why can't the "Illyrian" marker(s) be R1b and Neolithic or Bronze Age markers like J2, E1b, G2a? Why does there have to have been Paleolithic remnants? Maybe they all drifted away.

because the percentages are not significant once you eliminate the R1a and I2a-din


If I had to pick an existing haplogroup to be "the" Paleolithic remnant in the Balkans, I would guess I2b-ADR, which hasn't been found there yet AFAIK, but has been found in Italy, and could be a chunk of that "I2*" without I2b-ADR or I2c SNPs tested that's been found in the Balkans.

If I recall an earlier KenN note saying the western I2a1 went from spain to venice and directly a line north of venice. I think he called it an anti R1a HG.

[[ I would not be so cowardly to guess such a broad upstream haplogroup
category as Hg I. I guess I2b-ADR L415+ L416+ L417+ found today on the
shores of the northern Adriatic Sea. Ken ]]
You refer to this comment above for I2b-ADR

http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/Tree%20and%20Map%20for%20Hg%20I.pdf

I guess this I2b-ADR was a made up HG to catecorize Otzi in September 2011, prior to finding he was G2a

sparkey
10-10-11, 23:27
Yes the link is 2006 , far younger than the link you provided as the 2 that are newer has no reference to our discussion

Huh? Yours is older, and the links I provided are relevant to I1 analysis, which is what we were talking about.


I read it that the german I1a went to sweden and not the slovenian one.

No, he's not saying that there are different I1a's, he's wondering which direction it went with respect to Slovenia.


If you think the slovenian I1a HG is east germanic, then lets assume that R1a and I2a-din never arrived in western Balkans. Are you saying then, this germanic I1a reached northern greece and all of the western balkans in the great % that is there now.

I'm not sure if I1 is old enough to have some pre-Germanic Eastern European components; if it does, they are possibly in the T2 STR cluster, but I doubt that the members in the AS clusters are anything other than East Germanic. That seems to place I1 as at least largely East Germanic in origin for its distribution in the Balkans and Greece. I don't see a "great percentage" to discount this, anyway... there's mostly single-digit I1 in the region.


Ok, but not part of this discussion

Oh, but it is. If the origin of I1 is Schleswig-Holstein, and the TMRCA of it is really as young as Nordtvedt calculates, then we should expect a tight coupling of I1 carriers and Germanic ancestry. That's my point.


because the percentages are not significant once you eliminate the R1a and I2a-din

So? Why can't the R1a and I2a-Din be largely recent introductions? And why couldn't the Neolithic haplogroups have displaced the Paleolithic ones? Two major displacements could have resulted in practically no Paleolithic remnants in the region.


If I recall an earlier KenN note saying the western I2a1 went from spain to venice and directly a line north of venice. I think he called it an anti R1a HG.

That's old I2a1, or current I2a1a, not that closely related to I2a1b1a-Din.


[[ I would not be so cowardly to guess such a broad upstream haplogroup
category as Hg I. I guess I2b-ADR L415+ L416+ L417+ found today on the
shores of the northern Adriatic Sea. Ken ]]
You refer to this comment above for I2b-ADR

http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/Tree%20and%20Map%20for%20Hg%20I.pdf

I guess this I2b-ADR was a made up HG to catecorize Otzi in September 2011, prior to finding he was G2a

I2b-ADR isn't a made up clade, living people have it, just not very many. Nordtvedt guessed Ötzi to be I2b-ADR and was wrong... I suspect that I2b-ADR was generally more Southern during Ötzi's time, but the data on that clade is badly deficient. Maybe that's why we're all guessing it to be a missing link for any particular problem that pops up.

zanipolo
11-10-11, 00:04
Huh? Yours is older, and the links I provided are relevant to I1 analysis, which is what we were talking about.


Which is the one to read ?

i see 2001, 2005 etc etc




I'm not sure if I1 is old enough to have some pre-Germanic Eastern European components; if it does, they are possibly in the T2 STR cluster, but I doubt that the members in the AS clusters are anything other than East Germanic. That seems to place I1 as at least largely East Germanic in origin for its distribution in the Balkans and Greece. I don't see a "great percentage" to discount this, anyway... there's mostly single-digit I1 in the region.
Are you trying to say they are gothic and vandal HG in western balkans ,

In regards to percentages, they are single digit because the R1a and i2a-din makes them so.
You are smart enough to realise that percentage numbers are different based on the different number of foreigners in the area. so, if area A had 100 of I1a and area B likewise, if R1a entered areas A and B but, in A went 300 and in B went 500, then the percentage of I1a in area A is greater then in area B
So, they would not be single digit numbers for any region in the western balkans if you remove R1a and i2a-din

As an example, by using Maciano's y-dna country numbers for albania and removing the R1a and I2a
the following percentages occur once reconfigured
I1 - 3
I2b = 2
R1b = 21
G = 3
J2 = 25.5
J1 = 3
E1b1b = 37.5
T = 2



Oh, but it is. If the origin of I1 is Schleswig-Holstein, and the TMRCA of it is really as young as Nordtvedt calculates, then we should expect a tight coupling of I1 carriers and Germanic ancestry. That's my point.

true if its only 1 sub-clade of I1a ( I1) exists


So? Why can't the R1a and I2a-Din be largely recent introductions? And why couldn't the Neolithic haplogroups have displaced the Paleolithic ones? Two major displacements could have resulted in practically no Paleolithic remnants in the region.
thats what we are discussing, for your theory to work , another Hg had to be in the western balkans. I am trying to figure out if I1a is that HG






I2b-ADR isn't a made up clade, living people have it, just not very many. Nordtvedt guessed Ötzi to be I2b-ADR and was wrong... I suspect that I2b-ADR was generally more Southern during Ötzi's time, but the data on that clade is badly deficient. Maybe that's why we're all guessing it to be a missing link for any particular problem that pops up.irrelevant at this time to have any impact on this discussion

sparkey
11-10-11, 00:45
Which is the one to read ?

i see 2001, 2005 etc etc

Oh you mean the I1 Project? I thought you meant my link to Nordtvedt. For the I1 Project, I was referring to the raw data, not the studies they refer to on their homepage.


Are you trying to say they are gothic and vandal HG in western balkans ,

Yes, principally Ostrogothic, at least that's my best guess.


In regards to percentages, they are single digit because the R1a and i2a-din makes them so.
You are smart enough to realise that percentage numbers are different based on the different number of foreigners in the area. so, if area A had 100 of I1a and area B likewise, if R1a entered areas A and B but, in A went 300 and in B went 500, then the percentage of I1a in area A is greater then in area B
So, they would not be single digit numbers for any region in the western balkans if you remove R1a and i2a-din

Good point, I1 may be higher than we might expect, but it's not impossible that they could have expanded due to cultural selection. As usual, Y-DNA magnifies the effect of migration.


As an example, by using Maciano's y-dna country numbers for albania and removing the R1a and I2a
the following percentages occur once reconfigured
I1 - 3
I2b = 2
R1b = 21
G = 3
J2 = 25.5
J1 = 3
E1b1b = 37.5
T = 2

That looks about like what I would expect, although E1b may also have a bit of a founder effect itself... my guess is that R1b, J2, and E1b would have been dominant together, with G2a an interesting Neolithic marker and I1 mostly Germanic. That "I2b" is probably dominated by I2a2a2-Cont3, which I have already brought up.


true if its only 1 sub-clade of I1a ( I1) exists

Multiple subclades exist, but there's no special Balkans subclade... I1 in the Balkans has so far fit neatly into existing "Germanic" subclades of I1.


thats what we are discussing, for your theory to work , another Hg had to be in the western balkans. I am trying to figure out if I1a is that HG

To me, it's odd that you're targeting I1... that seems the least likely to be Illyrian of the remaining markers once you subtract R1a and I2a-Din.

zanipolo
11-10-11, 02:02
Yes, principally Ostrogothic, at least that's my best guess.


You do realise that the 200 year of ostrogothic rule for western balkans would apply to italy as well in the issue of I1a ......you want to go down this line?



Good point, I1 may be higher than we might expect, but it's not impossible that they could have expanded due to cultural selection. As usual, Y-DNA magnifies the effect of migration.



That looks about like what I would expect, although E1b may also have a bit of a founder effect itself... my guess is that R1b, J2, and E1b would have been dominant together, with G2a an interesting Neolithic marker and I1 mostly Germanic. That "I2b" is probably dominated by I2a2a2-Cont3, which I have already brought up.
I ran some numbers from Y-dna country in regards to eliminating the R1a and I2a and got these numbers for I1a ( I1) ...rounded to nearest half %

AUStria = 29.5
NEItaly = 10
SLOvenia = 31.5
CROtia = 28.5
HUNgary = 23
SERbia = 19
BOSnia = 9
ALBania = 4.5
MACedonia = 24.5
NGreece = 13.5

Montenegro is missing ...maybe its a mix of BOS and ALB

Clearly the very high E Hg for albania and bosnia dominate these areas and could indicate a different tribe , maybe the thracians

Maciamo
11-10-11, 08:58
But it isn't "so different"... the large majority of I2a in Eastern Europe as a whole is I2a-Din.

You are probably right about that. But I am still sceptical about I2a-Din coming from the steppes with the Indo-Europeans, the Sarmatians or the Slavs. If it was PIE, we would find much more of it in Siberia, Central Asia and South Asia. If it was Sarmatian, there would also be more in Central Asia, because that is where the Sarmatians originally came from before moving to the Pontic Steppe. It cannot be Proto-Slavic if it wasn't PIE to start with.

Then, there are other subclades of I2a2 in Western Europe (I2a-Isles), which surely have nothing to do with the Slavs and point at a common origin in continental Europe (somewhere between France and Ukraine). So I still think that I2a2 was in Europe before the Indo-Europeans. This is further corroborated by the fact that I2a1 was found in Neolithic France. Yet, until then it was thought that I2a1 was also fairly young* like I2a2. That's why you can't trust STR dating.


* In 2004, Rootsi et al. (http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/DNA.RootsiHaplogroupISpread.pdf)estimated the age of I2a* between 4000 and 8000 years old. This is almost impossible if its subclade I2a1 already existed 5000 years ago (Treilles site).

Knovas
11-10-11, 10:42
I agree with Maciamo here. There's probably an exception in the I subclades (¿I2c?), but the rest seem to be in the continental Europe since the beginning.

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 13:48
I voted for the paleolithic continuity hypothesis and would add a founder effect in the Dinaric Alpine region.

Strong levels are found throughout the Balkans with 4% in modern-day Turkey but what is more significant to me is its 'Slavic' presence in Russia. This suggests strongly a link to the paleolithic Balkans as haplogroup I is definitely not a West Asian/Caucasian marker. The spread to Russia and Sarmatian lands followed the Balkan Refugium repopulation of Eurasia.

The weakness in this theory is based on the assumption that related subclades would have to be found throughout the region as well. I believe this assumption is generally valid however I would not place too much emphasis on it in this context as most I subclades would have been wiped out during the severe climactic events that overwhelmed Europe circa 10 000ybp. In addition one could add that the various I haplgroup subclades would have left the Balkan Refugium many thousands of years ago and would have been thinned out by then.

My social anthropological view of I in the Balkans is based on an erratic diffusion model between 10 and 5 thousand ybp following a period of entrapment (refuge) within the southern extremities of Europe. The pre-LGM period would have most certainly shown a Europe-wide distribution that was severely disrupted and abruptly cut short by the big freeze.

Sardinia and Iberia back up the continuity of this haplogroup from a pre-Glacial period. The difference concerning the Balkans is that repopulation spread further and wider in a Northeasterly direction as the Balkans were much less conducive to agriculture with its rocky landscape. The fertile plains of West Sarmatia and the mild climate of the North Balkan coastline share many parallels.

Shetop
11-10-11, 13:51
It cannot be Proto-Slavic if it wasn't PIE to start with.

I think he is not arguing I2a-Din was Proto-Slavic but that it came to Balkans with Slavs. It wasn't there before Slavic expansion.

Personally, I could stand behind Proto-Slavic hypothesis also.



So I still think that I2a2 was in Europe before the Indo-Europeans.

No one is saying it wasn't.
The problem is following - if two very close varieties like I2a2-Din and I2a2-Isles are completely geographically separated why would there have to be geographical continuity for two more distant subclades as I2a2 and I2a2-Din are?

razor
11-10-11, 14:54
What Maciamo and Knovas et al. seem to be completely ignoring is the age of I2a-Din as a subclade. We don't know where its ancestral Daddy roamed. But we do know that the specific I2a-Din subclade did not begin to exist until ca. 300 BCE. On the basis of current historical and archaeological knowledge, an assumption of the Balkans as roaming grounds cannot explain its expansion. Unless you have Daddy migrate northward very soon after 300 BCE (with progeny). But what in the archaeology or documented historical facts can support this? On the other hand, the Nordtvedt/Verenic computations not only point to a 2340/2040 BP founding age for Din N+S but also to ca. 1200-1500 BP as its age of "expansion" (which also fits in very well with historical events), I think they have made their case, for the time being at any rate. But the issue of the whereabouts of Granddaddy whence Daddy Din mutated is still very much open. My favourite scenario is a migration southeastward of Daddy with the Bastarnians (in the 3rd c. BCE) from the area of the Yastorf culture, and eventual participation of his progeny in Slavic ethnogenesis with associated R1a's and others. That would make Daddy a Germanic fellow traveller. And would explain some very early Germanic borrowings into the Slavic languages (especially in the area of military and political terminology) as well as the nearly complete Germanic character of the recorded names of the leadership of the Antes and Sclavini in the 6th century as per Byzantine chroniclers. It would also explain the mysterious Dulibians (Dud-Leiba). But this is obviously a different issue.

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 15:23
The fact that the two closest clades to I2a-Din both have their centers of diversity in the British Isles, and the fact that outlier clades of I2a, like I2a1*-Rassette and I2a1*-F are very European and even Western European, lends poorly to this theory.

The R1a and I2a subclades have a poor classification system which has hindered progress IMO. I assume the classifications used such as Rassette and F and Din are based on STR values, right? If so then there is a very real problem here as one will need to test many more individuals in the Balkans to do an STR analysis than would otherwise be the case with ydna SNP testing. Either way I think you are not able to compare STR values from the Balkans as the sample sizes are limited.

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 15:39
What Maciamo and Knovas et al. seem to be completely ignoring is the age of I2a-Din as a subclade. We don't know where its ancestral Daddy roamed. But we do know that the specific I2a-Din subclade did not begin to exist until ca. 300 BCE.

I => 25,000 years ago (in the Balkans)
I2 => 17,000 years ago (in the Balkans)
I2b => 13,000 years ago (in Central Europe)
I2a => 11,000 years ago (in the Balkans)
I2a1 => 8,000 years ago (in Sardinia)
I2a2 => 7,500 years ago (in the Dinaric Alps)
I2b1 => 9,000 years ago (in Germany)
I1 => 5,000 years ago (in Scandinavia)
I2b1a => less than 3,000 years ago (in Britain)

Shetop
11-10-11, 17:16
I2a2 => 7,500 years ago (in the Dinaric Alps)

And what is the age of I2a1b1?
For poor classification se here (http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpI.html).

razor
11-10-11, 17:24
Cf. http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/Tree%20and%20Map%20for%20Hg%20I.pdf for the Nordtvedt I tree

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 17:35
And what is the age of I2a1b1?
For poor classification se here (http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpI.html).

I2a1b1 [L69.2/S163.2] (formerly known as I2a2a) is younger than its paternal clade which is estimated at 7500 ybp. I don't agree with the estimated TMRCA used by Nordtvedt. I view him as somewhat controversial in this respect, however his work more than makes up for this IMO.

The multiple effect of a genetically fit progenitor's descendants, especially if the group is somewhat isolated, will depict a false variance unsuitable for TMRCA calculation without the necessary adjustment. I squeezed in a lot of info in my previous sentence but the point is it is older than it looks, and E in the Balkans is also older than it looks.

The classifications used to depict STR clusters are not on the ISOGG site as they are experimental STR categories. Both R1a and I haplogroups alike continue to remain poorly defined compared to R1b-L11+ subclades where numerous SNP's make classification much easier.

sparkey
11-10-11, 17:37
That isn't very helpful, Dorianfinder. I'll fix it for you:

I => 23,000 years ago (maybe in Southern Europe somewhere)
I2 => 22,000 years ago (maybe in Southern Europe somewhere)
I2a2 => 13,000 years ago (somewhere in Europe, probably Eastern or Central)
I2a1 => 20,000 years ago (somewhere in Europe, not sure but maybe the Carpathian Basin)
I2a1a => 8,000 years ago (probably Iberia, definitely not Sardinia)
I2a1b => 13,000 years ago (somewhere in Europe, too dispersed to narrow down, probably not the Balkans)
I1 => 5,000 years ago (around Schleswig-Holstein)
I2a2a1 => 5,000 years ago (in Britain)

And I'll add another one:
I2a1b1a-Din => 2,500 years ago (somewhere around Belarus)

sparkey
11-10-11, 17:44
The R1a and I2a subclades have a poor classification system which has hindered progress IMO. I assume the classifications used such as Rassette and F and Din are based on STR values, right? If so then there is a very real problem here as one will need to test many more individuals in the Balkans to do an STR analysis than would otherwise be the case with ydna SNP testing. Either way I think you are not able to compare STR values from the Balkans as the sample sizes are limited.

The SNP tree for I2a has gotten better lately, although there are still some I2a1*'s, like Rassette and F. Sample sizes are fine for I2a-Din. At the FTDNA Project alone, you have hundreds, plus additional STR values from other sources. We do need more for Rassette (2 samples) and F (7 samples), but those are useful for comparing against other STR clusters.

Where I2a-Din is in the SNP tree is well established.

sparkey
11-10-11, 17:53
I agree with Maciamo here. There's probably an exception in the I subclades (¿I2c?), but the rest seem to be in the continental Europe since the beginning.

I think every I subclade has been in Europe since their beginning, including I2c (see my I2c diversity map (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26803-I2c-frequency-and-diversity-maps)... based on the STR data available so far, it's showing a center of diversity in Western or Central Europe, maybe around Germany).

But as Shetop summarizes my argument, I'm not saying that "I2a-Din was Proto-Slavic but that it came to Balkans with Slavs. It wasn't there before Slavic expansion."

If we say things like "Germanic peoples spread I1," even though I1 is clearly from a pre-IE European lineage, why can't we say "Slavic peoples spread I2a-Din"?

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 17:56
The SNP tree for I2a has gotten better lately, although there are still some I2a1*'s, like Rassette and F. Sample sizes are fine for I2a-Din. At the FTDNA Project alone, you have hundreds, plus additional STR values from other sources. We do need more for Rassette (2 samples) and F (7 samples), but those are useful for comparing against other STR clusters.

Where I2a-Din is in the SNP tree is well established.

I was thinking more along the lines of those subclades immediately downstream of I2a-Din.

Shetop
11-10-11, 17:59
I was thinking more along the lines of those subclades immediately downstream of I2a-Din.

Maybe you could explain this, because there are no subclades downstream I2a-Din.

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 18:01
That isn't very helpful, Dorianfinder. I'll fix it for you:

I => 23,000 years ago (maybe in Southern Europe somewhere)
I2 => 22,000 years ago (maybe in Southern Europe somewhere)
I2a2 => 13,000 years ago (somewhere in Europe, probably Eastern or Central)
I2a1 => 20,000 years ago (somewhere in Europe, not sure but maybe the Carpathian Basin)
I2a1a => 8,000 years ago (probably Iberia, definitely not Sardinia)
I2a1b => 13,000 years ago (somewhere in Europe, too dispersed to narrow down, probably not the Balkans)
I1 => 5,000 years ago (around Schleswig-Holstein)
I2a2a1 => 5,000 years ago (in Britain)

And I'll add another one:
I2a1b1a-Din => 2,500 years ago (somewhere around Belarus)

I could save you the trouble and say that no clear ancient distribution patterns are forthcoming from modern sample testing alone.

sparkey
11-10-11, 18:02
I was thinking more along the lines of those subclades immediately downstream of I2a-Din.

...well there are a couple of British ones upstream per SNP testing (all L343+), and thanks to the fact that British-origin people test with FTDNA more than anybody, their sample sizes are about as good as we can hope for. I2a-Disles is a particularly rare clade, so it's the smallest by quite a bit, but I2a-Isles is very well attested.

What's downstream?

sparkey
11-10-11, 18:05
I could save you the trouble and say that no clear ancient distribution patterns are forthcoming from modern sample testing alone.

Then why were you using it as evidence for your point? It's not clear, and there is evidence otherwise, that the ancestors of I2a-Din have been in the Balkans through their existence.

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 18:11
Maybe you could explain this, because there are no subclades downstream I2a-Din.

I am not on the team looking specifically at the I haplogroup so please take what I am saying with a pinch of salt. Generally, the more SNPs are allocated to the phylogeny of a haplogroup the easier it becomes to pinpoint suitable candidates for a y-dna walk through. When one is swimming too far upstream this cannot be done efficiently without taking too much of a risk and not having enough skeleton to add to. Haplogroup I has got some ways to go before many more SNPs will begin rolling in ... until then clusters need to be formed using slow-moving STR markers, in some cases these can be as good as an SNP, however only SNP's can be allocated to a position making it essential in phylogeny development.

Knovas
11-10-11, 18:12
I think every I subclade has been in Europe since their beginning, including I2c (see my I2c diversity map (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26803-I2c-frequency-and-diversity-maps)... based on the STR data available so far, it's showing a center of diversity in Western or Central Europe, maybe around Germany).

But as Shetop summarizes my argument, I'm not saying that "I2a-Din was Proto-Slavic but that it came to Balkans with Slavs. It wasn't there before Slavic expansion."

If we say things like "Germanic peoples spread I1," even though I1 is clearly from a pre-IE European lineage, why can't we say "Slavic peoples spread I2a-Din"?
I see sparkey. Your explanation makes sense, it's perfectly possible. I can't deny it ;)

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 18:18
Then why were you using it as evidence for your point? It's not clear, and there is evidence otherwise, that the ancestors of I2a-Din have been in the Balkans through their existence.

My point was about the estimated age to the TMRCA. I only highlighted the Balkans for I2a to accentuate the paternal link to the Dinaric Alps and I2a2.

sparkey
11-10-11, 18:31
My point was about the estimated age to the TMRCA. I only highlighted the Balkans for I2a to accentuate the paternal link to the Dinaric Alps and I2a2.

OK. I think the value of the point dries up once it's clear that I2a-Din's ancestor clades were more likely not from the Balkans, than from the Balkans. Because then we can't look and say, "Hey, its ancestor was in the Balkans 11,000 years ago, and 7,500 years ago." If that changes to "Well actually it looks more like it was somewhere in Europe, maybe close-ish to the Balkans 20,000 years ago, and maybe even further away from the Balkans 13,000 years ago" then the usefulness of the whole thing goes away.

Point taken about the unreliability of STR dating, though... Nordtvedt's estimate does have fairly large error bars, which is why I resist saying things like "I2a-Din's MRCA lived in 300BCE." But suppose we pushed I2a-Din's TMRCA back all the way to its parent clade (I2a1b1). Then it's still less than 6,000 years old... and still has a diversity gradient coming down from the North. So Paleolithic continuity still fails.

Shetop
11-10-11, 18:43
But suppose we pushed I2a-Din's TMRCA back all the way to its parent clade (I2a1b1). Then it's still less than 6,000 years old... and still has a diversity gradient coming down from the North. So Paleolithic continuity still fails.

Great point.

razor
11-10-11, 18:54
Point taken about the unreliability of STR dating, though...
Nordtvedt's estimate does have fairly large error bars, which is why I resist saying things like "I2a-Din's MRCA lived in 300BCE." But suppose we pushed I2a-Din's TMRCA back all the way to its parent clade (I2a1b1). Then it's still less than 6,000 years old... and still has a diversity gradient coming down from the North. So Paleolithic continuity still fails.

What I like about Nordtvedt is his strict and cautious scientific approach to all this. He operates with SNP's even more than with STR's. He keeps retesting and refining. His latest surmise for TMRCA of I2a-Din is interesting in that the more he tests and refines the "younger" the subclade gets (not by much but some). I have no idea of how Dorianfinder gets his dates and the "I don't care for N's analysis" approach is of course not particularly persuasive. It would help to have something more precise. It's Nordtvedt who discovered the British Disles older brother to Din. As for Verenic's adaptations cf. the thread here, esp. from posts 113 ff. http://dna-forums.org/index.php?/topic/11805-is-i2a2-dinaric-slavic/page__st__100__p__221867__hl__heimdale__fromsearch __1#entry221867

Unfortunately we can't get aDNA from the Slavic homeland area because of the cremation ritual. But the possibility of checking exists for some of the Wielbark and Chernyakhiv gravesites, once the Ukrainans get their act together. We could see if there is any I2a1b1 there.

sparkey
11-10-11, 19:14
As for Verenic's adaptations cf. the thread here, esp. from posts 113 ff. http://dna-forums.org/index.php?/topic/11805-is-i2a2-dinaric-slavic/page__st__100__p__221867__hl__heimdale__fromsearch __1#entry221867

Vadim Verenich's analysis is great. The diversity charts are very helpful... For those who aren't DNA Forums members, his maps indicate diversity spikes outside the Balkans, namely in Ukraine/Moldova (probably close to the expansion point of I2a-Din-N) and Austria, except one around Bosnia/Serbia, which looks to me like the expansion point of I2a-Din-S. There are also interesting "isolates" in Belarus, Greece, and a few other places, and a general molecular diversity pattern that spans Eastern Europe (but not most of the Balkans outside of that Bosnia/Serbia point). He compares these maps favorably to "Slavic expansion" maps.

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 19:27
OK. I think the value of the point dries up once it's clear that I2a-Din's ancestor clades were more likely not from the Balkans, than from the Balkans. Because then we can't look and say, "Hey, its ancestor was in the Balkans 11,000 years ago, and 7,500 years ago." If that changes to "Well actually it looks more like it was somewhere in Europe, maybe close-ish to the Balkans 20,000 years ago, and maybe even further away from the Balkans 13,000 years ago" then the usefulness of the whole thing goes away.

Point taken about the unreliability of STR dating, though... Nordtvedt's estimate does have fairly large error bars, which is why I resist saying things like "I2a-Din's MRCA lived in 300BCE." But suppose we pushed I2a-Din's TMRCA back all the way to its parent clade (I2a1b1). Then it's still less than 6,000 years old... and still has a diversity gradient coming down from the North. So Paleolithic continuity still fails.

Have you managed to figure out the route-relationship between the east European 'Dinaric' forms of I2a and the north-western forms such as L161 'Isles' and the tiny 'Disles' clade? What are the frequency distributions suggesting? If the Balto-Slavic hypothesis is studied in depth I think one will find Southern European countries share the up-stream clades and the north the down-stream ones.

sparkey
11-10-11, 19:44
Have you managed to figure out the route-relationship between the east European 'Dinaric' forms of I2a and the north-western forms such as L161 'Isles' and the tiny 'Disles' clade? What are the frequency distributions suggesting? If the Balto-Slavic hypothesis is studied in depth I think one will find Southern European countries share the up-stream clades and the north the down-stream ones.

The different I2a1b clades have their modern centers of diversity too dispersed to figure out a route-relationship. The modern frequency distributions aren't going to help much, either. It's quite clear that both Disles and Isles have their centers of diversity in Britain, so it's appropriate to assume that both formed there. Does that mean that Dinaric came out of Britain, since 2 clades being in Britain and 1 being out means that the highest place of diversity of I2a1b as a whole is in Britain? Not necessarily, of course... but I suspect that it may be closer to the right place than the Balkans.

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 20:05
The different I2a1b clades have their modern centers of diversity too dispersed to figure out a route-relationship. The modern frequency distributions aren't going to help much, either. It's quite clear that both Disles and Isles have their centers of diversity in Britain, so it's appropriate to assume that both formed there. Does that mean that Dinaric came out of Britain, since 2 clades being in Britain and 1 being out means that the highest place of diversity of I2a1b as a whole is in Britain? Not necessarily, of course... but I suspect that it may be closer to the right place than the Balkans.

Disles and Isles may be more diverse in Britain but they are parallel to Dinaric. All Disles and Isles have the SNPs common to Dinaric however the inverse is not true.

Edited: correction, downstream should be parallel. Please read #83 for explanation.

terranova
11-10-11, 20:09
Disles and Isles may be more diverse in Britain but they are downstream of Dinaric.

They are not downstream of Dinaric.

Has anyone thought about Cucuteni-Trypillian culture as the location of the I2a1b1 founder? Disles could have been carried to Britain by the advancing Indo-Europeans and Dinaric eventually became a part of the Proto-Slavic community.

Shetop
11-10-11, 20:13
Disles and Isles may be more diverse in Britain but they are downstream of Dinaric. All Disles and Isles have the SNPs common to Dinaric however the inverse is not true.

Then we have basic misunderstanding what I2a-Din is, because I think your interpretation is not correct. Nordtvedt gave the name "Dinaric" so you should check his work related to this issue.

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 20:18
They are not downstream of Dinaric.

Has anyone thought about Cucuteni-Trypillian culture as the location of the I2a1b1 founder? Disles could have been carried to Britain by the advancing Indo-Europeans and Dinaric eventually became a part of the Proto-Slavic community.

Post #83

My mistake, they are parallel not downstream sorry I meant that Dinaric was formed well before Disles and Isles not that it was the parent clade. I think what may have given sparkey the idea that Disles and Isles may have formed during a similar time-frame or even preceded the formation of I2a1b1a Dinaric is that I2a1b1 Disles and I2a1b2 Isles are shorter designations (written in a shorter form).

I agree with Kenneth Nordtvedt on most everything but have reservations regarding his interclade estimation method for TMRCA approximations regarding I2a-Din. I believe the mutation rate and random aspect of crossover within isolated populations with a founder-type distribution pattern (definite hotspot) are prone to younger estimates. My estimates only differ wrt I2a-Din as this clade suggests founder effect and multiple effect within several Balkan populations.

The distribution of I2a-Din is indicative of an older subclade than Disles and Isles. I strongly suspect too that Disles and Isles have a few more SNPs in common with Dinaric in effect making them likely branches of a descendant of one of Dinaric's relative clades; not Dinaric itself. I would not be surprised if within Dinaric there are a number of subclades waiting to be discovered and that within one of those lies a parent clade of Disles and Isles.

terranova
11-10-11, 20:26
I meant that Dinaric was formed well before Disles and Isles

Where do you get that? Dinaric is younger than Isles for sure.
TMRCA(Din-N) = 2340 years
TMRCA(Din-S) = 2040 years
TMRCA(interclade node) = 2820 years

sparkey
11-10-11, 21:06
The distribution of I2a-Din is indicative of a significantly older (approx.1000yrs) subclade than Disles and Isles. I strongly suspect too that Disles and Isles have a few more SNPs in common with Dinaric in effect making them likely branches of a descendant of one of Dinaric's relative clades; not Dinaric itself. I would not be surprised if within Dinaric there are a number of subclades waiting to be discovered and that within one of those lies a parent clade of Disles and Isles.

Well so far we have I2a-Din and I2a-Disles as L621+ L161- but I2a-Isles as L161+ L621-. The distinction between I2a-Din and I2a-Disles is L147, with I2a-Din being L147+ and I2a-Disles being L147-. The only one of these that is particularly volatile AFAIK is L147. So I2a-Din has no chance of being a parent of I2a-Isles, and only a particularly unlikely chance of being a parent of I2a-Disles (it would have to have switched L147 back to - right after it had gained it, and the existing STR diversity analysis would have to be junk).

sparkey
11-10-11, 21:11
Has anyone thought about Cucuteni-Trypillian culture as the location of the I2a1b1 founder? Disles could have been carried to Britain by the advancing Indo-Europeans and Dinaric eventually became a part of the Proto-Slavic community.

It's within range, and wouldn't surprise me. I still wonder about its parent I2a1b, though, and whether it's just a coincidence that both I2a1b2-Isles and I2a1b1*-Disles ended up confined to Britain. Maybe there are other outliers like Disles that we just haven't found yet that will clue us in.

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 23:40
@ terranova

In the estimates you supply Ken Nordtvedt clearly states that he used L147+ individuals and L147+ is a downstream SNP in the I2a-Din subclade used to distinguish the Disles from the continental Dinaric. All this TMCRA suggests is the age of L147, an SNP that formed after the split of Disles from its continental I2a parent clade. In fact, L147 may not be Dinaric it is most likely only a branch within Dinaric that formed relatively recently.

Dorianfinder
11-10-11, 23:47
Well so far we have I2a-Din and I2a-Disles as L621+ L161- but I2a-Isles as L161+ L621-. The distinction between I2a-Din and I2a-Disles is L147, with I2a-Din being L147+ and I2a-Disles being L147-. The only one of these that is particularly volatile AFAIK is L147. So I2a-Din has no chance of being a parent of I2a-Isles, and only a particularly unlikely chance of being a parent of I2a-Disles (it would have to have switched L147 back to - right after it had gained it, and the existing STR diversity analysis would have to be junk).

L147 is currently being used to separate Disles from Dinaric as you say, I do not see why Dinaric is younger than Disles and Isles if it carries L147 as you seem to suggest. It's a red herring really, L147 is simply an SNP that may have formed after Disles left the continent.

terranova
12-10-11, 00:10
In the estimates you supply Ken Nordtvedt clearly states that he used L147+ individuals and L147+ is a downstream SNP in the I2a-Din subclade used to distinguish the Disles from the continental Dinaric. All this TMCRA suggests is the age of L147, an SNP that formed after the split of Disles from its continental I2a parent clade. In fact, L147 may not be Dinaric it is most likely only a branch within Dinaric that formed relatively recently.

No, all Dinaric is L147+ AFAIK.

zanipolo
12-10-11, 08:04
With historians and genetic historians claiming that Roman-illyrian troops served in britain during the Roman occupation, does it not make sense to see if I2a-din is present there.
If it is not , then we can assume that it came to the Balkans after the Roman empire died in the west. If it is present, then this i2a-din was present in the west balkans prior to Roman occupation of Illyricum

razor
12-10-11, 15:30
No, all Dinaric is L147+ AFAIK.

I notice that Ken prefers to use DYS 565 as the main distinguisher between Disles and Dinaric. It's 9 in Dinaric and 11 in Disles. Though he occasionally mentions L147 also. For more particulars cf.

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=results

Dorianfinder
12-10-11, 16:05
OK. I think the value of the point dries up once it's clear that I2a-Din's ancestor clades were more likely not from the Balkans, than from the Balkans.

@ Sparkey

Please explain what ancestor clades you are referring to here. Where do you believe these ancestral clades were originally from?

sparkey
12-10-11, 17:31
@ Sparkey

Please explain what ancestor clades you are referring to here. Where do you believe these ancestral clades were originally from?

I2a1b1 => evidence is against being from the Balkans because no I2a1b1 subclade has its center of diversity there (currently 1 in the British Isles and 1 in Eastern Europe outside of the Balkans)
I2a1b => evidence is against being from the Balkans because no I2a1b subclade has its center of diversity there (currently 1 in the British Isles and 1 split between the British Isles and Eastern Europe outside of the Balkans)
I2a1 => evidence is against being from the Balkans because no I2a1 subclade has its center of diversity there (currently 1 in Western Europe and 1 split between the British Isles and Eastern Europe outside of the Balkans)

etc...

terranova
12-10-11, 20:06
With historians and genetic historians claiming that Roman-illyrian troops served in britain during the Roman occupation, does it not make sense to see if I2a-din is present there.
If it is not , then we can assume that it came to the Balkans after the Roman empire died in the west. If it is present, then this i2a-din was present in the west balkans prior to Roman occupation of Illyricum

Good point. I2a-din is not present in Britain, nor anywhere else where the Romans went. I2a-disles is found mainly in Scotland which was not a part of Roman Britain. I think it's highly unlikely that any of the I2a1b clades were Illyrian.

EDIT Another interesting thing is that the Arbereshe from Italy were found to have almost no I2a-din compared to Albanians who have a much higher percentage, but this I2a-din appears to be a late introduction.

Dorianfinder
13-10-11, 01:48
I2a1b1 => evidence is against being from the Balkans because no I2a1b1 subclade has its center of diversity there (currently 1 in the British Isles and 1 in Eastern Europe outside of the Balkans)
I2a1b => evidence is against being from the Balkans because no I2a1b subclade has its center of diversity there (currently 1 in the British Isles and 1 split between the British Isles and Eastern Europe outside of the Balkans)
I2a1 => evidence is against being from the Balkans because no I2a1 subclade has its center of diversity there (currently 1 in Western Europe and 1 split between the British Isles and Eastern Europe outside of the Balkans)

etc...

Thanks for replying, I cannot reply to you as I do not have the comparison of variance between the various European regions in front of me. But if you have seen the figures and the variance within the Balkans is comparatively lower then why not place a reference to the figures here so that people can make an informed opinion? After all you are the one who asked the question and now claim to have STR variance figures that suggest the I2a1b1 subclades are older outside the Balkans. If you know the answer why ask the question Sparkey?

sparkey
13-10-11, 02:12
Thanks for replying, I cannot reply to you as I do not have the comparison of variance between the various European regions in front of me. But if you have seen the figures and the variance within the Balkans is comparatively lower then why not place a reference to the figures here so that people can make an informed opinion? After all you are the one who asked the question and now claim to have STR variance figures that suggest the I2a1b1 subclades are older outside the Balkans. If you know the answer why ask the question Sparkey?

Razor already linked to Vadim Verenich's analysis (http://dna-forums.org/index.php?/topic/11805-is-i2a2-dinaric-slavic/page__st__100__p__221867__hl__heimdale__fromsearch __1#entry221867), that is probably the best out there. Sorry that it does require DNA Forums registration to view, I have summarized it a little here already, but it's best to view the original.

For interclade analysis, Nordtvedt (http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/) is the best, as usual.

Or try your hand with the raw data... the largest collection I know of is at the I2a Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=yresults).

I don't claim to have the answer to my own question... Hopefully, I've been able to communicate what I know, what I don't know, why I made the choice in my own poll that I did, and what it would take to swing me to another choice. I want to hear what others have to say. To be honest, I was expecting more to defend the Sarmatians, and fewer to defend Paleolithic continuity.

Maybe it would be best to rank the choices from most to least likely. I would put them like this:

(1) The Slavs (best based on what we know about history and I2a-Din)
--gap--
(2) The Sarmatians (also fits history, I suppose, but poorer correlation to I2a-Din so far... we'll need more Eastern I2a-Din to lend credence to this theory)
--gap--
(3) Paleolithic continuity (I think that dating it back this far is impossible, so this needs a demonstration of a recent double-bottleneck in the Balkans to explain modern I2a-Din... discovering close, native Balkan relative clades of I2a-Din would help this one)
(4) Sea Peoples (would explain the distribution relatively cleanly, but needs some actual archaeological accounting and a badly wrong date estimate based on STRs, or a double-bottleneck)
--gap--
(5) The Early Indo-Europeans (can be safely discarded IMHO... wrong everything)

Dorianfinder
13-10-11, 12:00
Razor already linked to Vadim Verenich's analysis (http://dna-forums.org/index.php?/topic/11805-is-i2a2-dinaric-slavic/page__st__100__p__221867__hl__heimdale__fromsearch __1#entry221867), that is probably the best out there. Sorry that it does require DNA Forums registration to view, I have summarized it a little here already, but it's best to view the original.

For interclade analysis, Nordtvedt (http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/) is the best, as usual.

Or try your hand with the raw data... the largest collection I know of is at the I2a Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=yresults).

I don't claim to have the answer to my own question... Hopefully, I've been able to communicate what I know, what I don't know, why I made the choice in my own poll that I did, and what it would take to swing me to another choice. I want to hear what others have to say. To be honest, I was expecting more to defend the Sarmatians, and fewer to defend Paleolithic continuity.

Maybe it would be best to rank the choices from most to least likely. I would put them like this:

(1) The Slavs (best based on what we know about history and I2a-Din)
--gap--
(2) The Sarmatians (also fits history, I suppose, but poorer correlation to I2a-Din so far... we'll need more Eastern I2a-Din to lend credence to this theory)
--gap--
(3) Paleolithic continuity (I think that dating it back this far is impossible, so this needs a demonstration of a recent double-bottleneck in the Balkans to explain modern I2a-Din... discovering close, native Balkan relative clades of I2a-Din would help this one)
(4) Sea Peoples (would explain the distribution relatively cleanly, but needs some actual archaeological accounting and a badly wrong date estimate based on STRs, or a double-bottleneck)
--gap--
(5) The Early Indo-Europeans (can be safely discarded IMHO... wrong everything)

I had a look at the data and find the difference in variance a moot point considering its spread and the poor interclade definition as I have mentioned previously. You are not wrong for looking at the variance but I feel you have been swayed somewhat by the pan-slavists who frequent forum discussions. I would be very cautious linking the Sarmatians and/or Slavs with Dinaric for a couple of reasons.

1. The distribution within the Balkans is reminiscent of a much older migration, that is if one did take place, than the Slavic expansion of the 6th-7th cent. AD.
2. Montenegrins, Croatians, Serbians and Bosniaks are three distinct peoples, despite what some panslavists want us to believe. I believe the Serb and Bosniak communities are early Balkan.
3. Greek and Armenian I2a puts the Slav and Sarmatian theories in the realm of fantasy.
4. No links have been found linking Disles and Isles to Sarmatia or the Baltoslavic regions.

I agree wholeheartedly regarding the Sea Peoples and believe we simply do not know enough about them, however it remains a possibility and is not mutually exclusive to a Balkan Paleolithic continuity thesis, in fact they fit rather well.

Haustor
13-10-11, 13:23
I voted for Other.
I think that I2a-Dinarics got to Balkan as Ostrogoths. This would also explain presence of I2* in Georgia, Armenia and Turkey as those would be people who did not complete their voyage to Balkan and NW Italy. TMRCA for Dinarics would be older as it probably belonged to clan chiefs while TMRCA for Ia*s would be younger branches that remained behind.
Second option would be Gepids who lived little bit north of Balkan and have joined Huns later on. This aliance with Huns allowed them to spread into areas where I2a-Ds are found today.
This option may not be liked by many and is based on observation that there is not much (if any) genetic footprint left by Huns or Magyars in Europe which lead me to believe that people in old times might have commited infanticide against Asian babies while Gepid's babies lived on.

I do not think Dinarics lived in Balkan during Roman Empire as their dna were not found in graves of Roman soldiers from Illyria (graves from Wales seem to indicate hg E as Illyrian).
They are too young for Paleolithic continuity and even if they were not again they were not part of Roman armies so they would have not lived in Balkan.

I think that early Indo-Europeans were more of R1a and R1b folks.
I do not think we were Sea people as we don't have much of seafaring experience. During medivial times Bosnian Kingdom waged wars against both Raguscan and Venetian and took most of land in east Adriatic but those Bosnians had no navy at all.

There is very little R1a in parts of Balkan for it to be mainly Slavic migration.
Don't know much about Sarmatians to make any comments.

Shetop
13-10-11, 13:23
1. The distribution within the Balkans is reminiscent of a much older migration, that is if one did take place, than the Slavic expansion of the 6th-7th cent. AD.

Why is that? What about distribution within the Balkans is reminiscent of a much older migration?

Dorianfinder
13-10-11, 14:17
Why is that? What about distribution within the Balkans is reminiscent of a much older migration?

The frequency in isolated populations of primarily non-Slavic communities strongly suggests that it would have had to have been introduced in pre-Slavic times. Armenian levels of I2a and Greek I2a1* suggests that I2a may have been part of an early Illyro/Phrygian exchange, Phrygian being the Armenian I2a so prominent today.

The King paper showed significantly higher levels of I2a in the Peloponnese compared to North Greece. The King paper found I2a2a (Former I2b1 in the Y2010 tree) at relatively low frequencies throughout Greece from the North to the isolated Lasithi Plateau on Crete. The Battaglia study found a sturdy 17.5% of Greek Macedonian men to be I2a1*. Despite the complex variation of Turkey's genetic make-up and the relevant insignificance of Armenian I2a within the broader Anatolian context, it still reaches 4% in the Turkish population.

razor
13-10-11, 15:29
The frequency in isolated populations of primarily non-Slavic communities strongly suggests that it would have had to have been introduced in pre-Slavic times. Armenian levels of I2a and Greek I2a1* suggests that I2a may have been part of an early Illyro/Phrygian exchange, Phrygian being the Armenian I2a so prominent today.

The King paper showed significantly higher levels of I2a in the Peloponnese compared to North Greece. The King paper found I2a2a (Former I2b1 in the Y2010 tree) at relatively low frequencies throughout Greece from the North to the isolated Lasithi Plateau on Crete. The Battaglia study found a sturdy 17.5% of Greek Macedonian men to be I2a1*.

(1) One should not confuse I2a-Din with I2a
(2) The Slavs absolutely swamped Greece in the late 6th and 7th cs. From top to bottom. The non-Slav population was pushed back to meager coastal areas and a few large cities. The Byzantine reconquista which began later in the 7th c. was largely successful as we know (due to Slavic disorganization), but their earlier massive presence explains the current level of I2a1b1 in Greece with no difficulty at all.
(3) Ditto re the large amounts of I2a-Din among Romanians, some Albanians, Vlachs, and Moldavians. All the result of the Slavic deluge. These early Slavs were not impressive state builders, but Jordanes already noted their impressive numbers. They settled in the Balkans both compactly and amongst other populations. The fate of these myriad little communities was subsequently determined by internal processes. Slavs assimilated non-Slavs linguistically, or the reverse. But the genes remained.

sparkey
13-10-11, 17:48
One by one vs. Dorian's latest points... these are some of his best so far, I'll admit...


You are not wrong for looking at the variance but I feel you have been swayed somewhat by the pan-slavists who frequent forum discussions.

I hope not. I'm rather influenced by Ken Nordtvedt, but I doubt he's a pan-slavist. I can't think of any other biases I'm coming into this with, and I tend to be self-critical.


1. The distribution within the Balkans is reminiscent of a much older migration, that is if one did take place, than the Slavic expansion of the 6th-7th cent. AD.

As I've mentioned, modern frequency distributions can be misleading. If we look for a distribution that's an exact match with where incoming Slavs settled, and find a mismatch with I2a-Din frequencies, it doesn't disprove the link.


2. Montenegrins, Croatians, Serbians and Bosniaks are three distinct peoples, despite what some panslavists want us to believe. I believe the Serb and Bosniak communities are early Balkan.

How early are Serbs and Bosniaks? Because they have the highest diversity of I2a-Din in the Balkans per Verenich, indicating that they have the oldest Slavic input if the Slavic input theories are correct. Maybe this is more consistent with your thinking than you expect?

Besides, I could also say that the Welsh, Cornish, and Bretons are three distinct peoples, "as opposed to what the pancelticists want us to believe," and be correct. But that doesn't mean that they weren't contiguous culturally, linguistically, and genetically to a large degree back in the 1st millennium CE.


3. Greek and Armenian I2a puts the Slav and Sarmatian theories in the realm of fantasy.

Three points: (1) Greeks have a nontrivial Slavic input, (2) The Greek Slavic input is of a generally different flavor than the Balkan Slavic input (N instead of S), (3) Armenians do not have I2a-Din, they have a good amount of I2c-B and low levels of I2a2a2-Cont3 (which has an older spread than I2a-Din).


4. No links have been found linking Disles and Isles to Sarmatia or the Baltoslavic regions.

Yes, I know. That doesn't rule out wide dispersion, near-total bottleneck, and subsequent getting "picked up" by certain expanding groups. In fact, it makes that the most likely explanation.


I agree wholeheartedly regarding the Sea Peoples and believe we simply do not know enough about them, however it remains a possibility and is not mutually exclusive to a Balkan Paleolithic continuity thesis, in fact they fit rather well.

Sea Peoples run into the same difficulty as Paleolithic continuity (the double-bottleneck problem), which is why I have them listed as nearly equally unlikely. If you find them equally likely, at least we're seeing eye-to-eye here.

sparkey
13-10-11, 19:07
I voted for Other.
I think that I2a-Dinarics got to Balkan as Ostrogoths. This would also explain presence of I2* in Georgia, Armenia and Turkey as those would be people who did not complete their voyage to Balkan and NW Italy. TMRCA for Dinarics would be older as it probably belonged to clan chiefs while TMRCA for Ia*s would be younger branches that remained behind.

A Germanic spread of I2a-Din (and I2c-B!) is certainly not one I've thought about yet. It would explain the youngness of both. I feel like the center of diversity of I2a-Din is too far East for that theory to work, though... there is no spike of diversity, or even significant presence, of I2a-Din in traditional proposals for the Ostrogothic launching points. The closest diversity spike is Austria, which I admit I don't have an immediate answer for. I2c, meanwhile, has no detectable presence anywhere near the Ostrogothic launching points, the closest being the extra-diverse but very low-frequency bit in Germany, or maybe the extra-young (in fact, too young) Jewish bit in Eastern Europe. So I'm inclined to dismiss both proposals.


Second option would be Gepids who lived little bit north of Balkan and have joined Huns later on. This aliance with Huns allowed them to spread into areas where I2a-Ds are found today.

The Gepids run into the same problems as the Ostrogoths.

I still think that most I1 in the Balkans (and it's not totally insignificant) is Ostrogothic in origin, though.

The rest of your arguments are solid, Haustor. I think you're too quick to dismiss the presence of I2a-Din throughout the modern Slavs, including North Slavs, though (around 10% in Russians, for example).

razor
13-10-11, 20:07
I still think that most I1 in the Balkans (and it's not totally insignificant) is Ostrogothic in origin, though.



The most recent (and quite comprehensive) work on the Chernyakhiv culture by Boris Mahomedov, now acknowledged as Gothic, indicates that it was constructed from very heterogeneous elements: B.M. has traced no less than 8 (!!) distinct "Germanic" sub-elements in it, from today's Poland, Germany, Baltic islands, and Scandinavia, along with "Scythian" (yes, descendants of the Skilur complex, with their specific burial poses) and distinct "Sarmato-Alan" elements {we could have guessed this from some of Ammianus Marcellinus' "Gothic" names). Most of this vanished after ca. 430 CE, towards the Balkans. Good luck with the haplogroups. Luckily a substantial number of gravesites are biritual (inhumations + cremations) so there is some hope at recovery of data.

terranova
13-10-11, 20:09
I see a linguistic problem there as well. Why would Germanic tribes adopt a Slavic language upon settling in the Balkans? It seems unlikely.

Shetop
13-10-11, 21:57
I think that I2a-Dinarics got to Balkan as Ostrogoths.

I couldn't agree with that, and here is an interesting reading related to your assumption:
Goths in the Roman Balkans c.350–500 (www.proc.britac.ac.uk/tfiles//141p163.pdf)

Goga
13-10-11, 22:15
At the time when I2a-din rose the Huns raided Europe. It's well known that the Sarmatians/Alans were their allies. Also at that time there was no significant sight of Slavic tribes.
So I believe to cluster I2a-din to Slavic tribes is giving them way to much credit. According to me Slavic tribes were composed of two main haplogroups N1c1 and R1a!

The Huns and the Sarmatians (Alans) are fitting very well in this theory and according to me it is the best suggestion so far!

"The 5th century Armenian historian Moses of Khorene, in his "History of Armenia," introduces the Hunni near the Sarmatians and describes their capture of the city of Balkh ("Kush" in Armenian) sometime between 194 and 214, which explains why the Greeks call that city Hunuk. ...

... the Huns maintained the loyalties of a number of tributary tribes including elements of the Gepids, Scirii, Rugians, Sarmatians, and Ostrogoths."

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

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/8853/800pxhunnenwanderung.jpg

Goga
13-10-11, 22:24
I came to the conclusion that Sarmatians (Alans) spread I2a-din in Europe with help of the Huns. And this makes a lot sense to me! Bodin - I don't know where he is - is right after all....

Sile
14-10-11, 08:53
A Germanic spread of I2a-Din (and I2c-B!) is certainly not one I've thought about yet. It would explain the youngness of both. I feel like the center of diversity of I2a-Din is too far East for that theory to work, though... there is no spike of diversity, or even significant presence, of I2a-Din in traditional proposals for the Ostrogothic launching points. The closest diversity spike is Austria, which I admit I don't have an immediate answer for. I2c, meanwhile, has no detectable presence anywhere near the Ostrogothic launching points, the closest being the extra-diverse but very low-frequency bit in Germany, or maybe the extra-young (in fact, too young) Jewish bit in Eastern Europe. So I'm inclined to dismiss both proposals.



The Gepids run into the same problems as the Ostrogoths.

I still think that most I1 in the Balkans (and it's not totally insignificant) is Ostrogothic in origin, though.

The rest of your arguments are solid, Haustor. I think you're too quick to dismiss the presence of I2a-Din throughout the modern Slavs, including North Slavs, though (around 10% in Russians, for example).

If the ostrogoths brought the I2a-din , they would have also brought it to Italy , especially Lombardy, Veneto and friuli, but all they gave to these areas was the architecture ( venetian-gothic)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venetian_Gothic_architecture

You still have not answered this in my opinion

sparkey
14-10-11, 17:35
If the ostrogoths brought the I2a-din , they would have also brought it to Italy , especially Lombardy, Veneto and friuli, but all they gave to these areas was the architecture ( venetian-gothic)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venetian_Gothic_architecture

You still have not answered this in my opinion

I don't think that Ostrogoths brought I2a-Din anywhere. Do you mean I1? Italy does have I1, probably not insignificant amounts coming from East Germanic peoples (although North Italy in particular probably has some from West Germanic peoples).

Dale Cooper
21-10-11, 12:46
Illyrians were not homogenus people... those "Illyrian" tribes living in area of present day croatia and bosnia, didn't had same genetic as those Illyrians from south montenegro and epirus (today albania), is that so hard to understand?

Illyrians of Epirus had dominant haplogroup E1b1b, like today Albanians, but "Illyrians" from present day Bosnia, Montenegro and parts of Serbia had I2a2 as their dominant haplogroup, and because of slavic mixing with them in 7th century, we have that haplogroup as dominant in Croatia, Bosnia and Serbia even today...

CASE CLOSED.

Bodin
23-10-11, 22:44
Goga Bodin is back
And no Dale Coper case is not closed : Illyrians from Albania and Illyrians from Bosnia , Serbia and Croatia couldnt be diferent , they wouldnt even be diferent from Thracians from Bulgaria - because after rebelions of Illyrian and Panonian tribes in 6-9 AD Romans mixed Thracians , Illyrians and Panones moving parts of tribes and creating new tribes . And again I2a1b is to young to be Illyrian you should realy close that case. Also populations of Balkans were prety much destroyed by Huns , Avars and great plague in VI century -so it is realy inplausible for them to make 90% of gene contribution to today Serbs and Croats .
Goths ( Visigoths were also on Balkans not only Ostrogoths) : They camed from Sweden and there is no I2a1b - mainly I1 , R1b and R1a , but I believe they bring some of I2a1b with them - and they get it via mixing with Sarmathians ( lot of Goths have Sarmathian names )
Slavs there is no prove that any Slavic tribe settled on Balkans west of Morava river( Slavs lived in today Walachia in VI century , and aeria west of Morava was in Avar khaganate before coming of Serbs and Croats - Croats beated Avars and take teritory ). Croats and Serbs have Iranic names and diferent archeology than Slavs , only thing that conect them with Slavs is languague .
If I2a1b is brought by Slavs than WHY SERBS DONT HAVE MORE OF SLAVIC R1A ? They have only like 5% of R1a that is not 11.000 years old ( Illyrian - nonSlavic ) and that number is even more decreased , because part of R1a is certainly from Goths and Sasi miners

Shetop
23-10-11, 23:15
If I2a1b is brought by Slavs than WHY SERBS DONT HAVE MORE OF SLAVIC R1A ?
Why would they have to have it, if I2a1b which came were Slavs themselves?



They have only like 5% of R1a that is not 11.000 years old ( Illyrian - nonSlavic ) and that number is even more decreased , because part of R1a is certainly from Goths and Sasi miners
Where is this data from?

zanipolo
24-10-11, 07:05
The goths came from sweden and the baltic lands next to the sea, If they brought hg I they would have brought R1a. Its illogical to assume the goths selected people with only HG I to go to the black sea and then through balkans , italy, spain and north Africa

http://www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/European_Haplogroup_locations_circa_5,000BC.jpg

the goths path
http://www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/y-Haplogroup_I1_and_Ancient_European_Migrations.pdf

since the goths came from sweden and sweden has R1a , is it not logical?

sparkey
24-10-11, 17:38
If I2a1b is brought by Slavs than WHY SERBS DONT HAVE MORE OF SLAVIC R1A ? They have only like 5% of R1a that is not 11.000 years old ( Illyrian - nonSlavic ) and that number is even more decreased , because part of R1a is certainly from Goths and Sasi miners

Your numbers don't sound too far off... but I think it is still totally plausible for it to be the Slavs anyway. All we need is some combination of: (1) The migrating population was an I2a-Din-heavy and R1a-light subset of the Slavs, (2) There was genetic drift, (3) There was cultural selection. My best guess is a combination of (1) and (2) in this case.

Besides, you run into a similar problem with the Sarmatians: Where is all the Iranian R1a? The Sarmatians would have to have been an I2a-Din-heavy and R1a-light subset of Iranians and/or have genetic drift and/or have cultural selection, very much parallel to what I'm proposing for the Slavs. So you see, there's no difficulty here.

Bodin
25-10-11, 03:25
No there is no problem, with Iranian R1a , if Sarmathians are descendants of Medes and carriers of I2a1b , while Slavs would be descendants of Scyth ploughers and carriers of R1a . I2a1b in Russia would be from Roxolans ( Russians get they name after them ) and from mixing with Sarmathians ( it is well known that Avars use to spend every summer with Slavic wifes , and probably Saramathians to ) . What I trying to say is : Slavs are from Pripyat marshes - that aeria is in center of R1a LGM refugee , even today that aeria have over 60% of R1a , so any slavic nation would have to have significant percent of R1a . That mean I2a1b comming from other place and I propose Sarmathians because it fits they movements . All scientist noticed significant genetical differences betwen South Slavs (linguisticaly ) and rest of Slavs , and that could be due to the different origins . Archeology also shows significant differences betwen Slavic and Serbs , Croats and Bulgars . That is little to much differences for coincidence

Bodin
25-10-11, 03:28
Why would they have to have it, if I2a1b which came were Slavs themselves?



Where is this data from?
How could Slavs be I2a1b , they are from Pripyat valey and there is over 60% of R1a ( one of the strongest ) , and there was no newcoming nations after Slav movement
Check Klyosov

Bodin
25-10-11, 03:30
The goths came from sweden and the baltic lands next to the sea, If they brought hg I they would have brought R1a. Its illogical to assume the goths selected people with only HG I to go to the black sea and then through balkans , italy, spain and north Africa

http://www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/European_Haplogroup_locations_circa_5,000BC.jpg

the goths path
http://www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/y-Haplogroup_I1_and_Ancient_European_Migrations.pdf

since the goths came from sweden and sweden has R1a , is it not logical?
I dont know is this question for me , but I said Goths were R1a and I with some R1b and I2a1b from mixing with Sarmathians north of Black sea

razor
25-10-11, 04:46
This seems to be the third thread in which the proverbial bad penny is driving out the good IMHO. Well, Mathew 7:1 and all that (:=)) Arrivederci and hasta la vista.

Bodin
25-10-11, 21:38
Retreat is best solution for you isnt it :)

Shetop
25-10-11, 22:19
How could Slavs be I2a1b , they are from Pripyat valey and there is over 60% of R1a ( one of the strongest ) , and there was no newcoming nations after Slav movement
Check Klyosov

Your statement isn't correct but I'll skip that and ask you - where from is I2a1b? And what is the frequency of different haplogroups in that region today?

Bottom line is - so many former Iranian speakers in different parts of Eastern Europe today and all of them, no matter where they were, lost their language!? I would say that it is impossible.

Goga
28-10-11, 05:43
From the Sarmatians!

Iranic tribes were the real power around the Black Sea and North of the Balkans at that time !

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/811/95704057.jpg

I took this from page 50 from this book:
http://books.google.nl/books?id=yVwsxl_OI18C&lpg=PA51&ots=Xpe38vgBg5&dq=iazyges%20chester&hl=nl&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Bodin
02-11-11, 17:23
I voted for Other.
I think that I2a-Dinarics got to Balkan as Ostrogoths. This would also explain presence of I2* in Georgia, Armenia and Turkey as those would be people who did not complete their voyage to Balkan and NW Italy. TMRCA for Dinarics would be older as it probably belonged to clan chiefs while TMRCA for Ia*s would be younger branches that remained behind.
Second option would be Gepids who lived little bit north of Balkan and have joined Huns later on. This aliance with Huns allowed them to spread into areas where I2a-Ds are found today.
This option may not be liked by many and is based on observation that there is not much (if any) genetic footprint left by Huns or Magyars in Europe which lead me to believe that people in old times might have commited infanticide against Asian babies while Gepid's babies lived on.

I do not think Dinarics lived in Balkan during Roman Empire as their dna were not found in graves of Roman soldiers from Illyria (graves from Wales seem to indicate hg E as Illyrian).
They are too young for Paleolithic continuity and even if they were not again they were not part of Roman armies so they would have not lived in Balkan.

I think that early Indo-Europeans were more of R1a and R1b folks.
I do not think we were Sea people as we don't have much of seafaring experience. During medivial times Bosnian Kingdom waged wars against both Raguscan and Venetian and took most of land in east Adriatic but those Bosnians had no navy at all.

There is very little R1a in parts of Balkan for it to be mainly Slavic migration.
Don't know much about Sarmatians to make any comments.

Have you consider Sarmathian origins ? Because Gepids had only Semberia and Srem on Balkans .

Bodin
02-11-11, 17:28
I see a linguistic problem there as well. Why would Germanic tribes adopt a Slavic language upon settling in the Balkans? It seems unlikely.
Why would Bulgarians - turkoIranic nation accepted Slavic languague ?

Bodin
02-11-11, 17:30
Your statement isn't correct but I'll skip that and ask you - where from is I2a1b? And what is the frequency of different haplogroups in that region today?

Bottom line is - so many former Iranian speakers in different parts of Eastern Europe today and all of them, no matter where they were, lost their language!? I would say that it is impossible.
Why would it be imposible ? If they were all subdued by Huns and they all had a lot of Slavic speacking subjects - limigantes

Yetos
02-11-11, 19:47
Well personally I might remind you all that Iapetoc sugested that I2a is Thracian who expand to expand to Ucraine even to North of Caucas, (massageate) and return,

Iapetoc believe that Goths primary land was Dacia and from there moved to Scan and return some of them mainly the vikings in Ucraine,

considering the runic alphabet we find almost none in Balkan penisnsula,
that means that runic must be brought by another culture,

now we all know that elves move west, as also the druids,
by Greek tragedy we learn that elven (elafos) worshippers center was Crimaia
so by what understand N Thracians moved west to Germany and Scan while their lands passed to slavic,
remember that satemization is early in south Balkans,

for me the I2a is a double added,
1 is after old thracian before the moves, part of it went east like massagetae maybe even to samara
there took satemization of language and return
2 a quite big % that added at slavic movements to south of Istrios (Donau)

PS I had read the other days about a nation called Hrpt an avaric nation, if someone has info about that plz share,

PS2 has anyone idea where the queen tomaris kingdom was?

sparkey
02-11-11, 21:10
Yetos,

It's an interesting perspective you present. I assume that you believe that (1) is the "N" cluster and (2) is the "S" cluster. I think you've got (2) right, but you might be overcomplicating (1). For one, it doesn't look like the diversity of "N" is high enough so far south for it to be the Thracians, unless you're suspecting that they not only advanced on Ukraine, but were nearly totally removed from their origin point. If that indeed happened, you may be right, since the diversity of I2a-Din is very high in the Ukraine area. But the youth of I2a-Din as a whole doesn't lend itself well to being part of a well-established group during the early Classical Age like the Thracians IMHO. I'd look more closely at more Northern, isolated cultures, outside the realm of Rome's records. A more Northern, isolated culture would also better explain the close relationship to I2a-Disles.

Yetos
02-11-11, 21:20
Yetos,

It's an interesting perspective you present. I assume that you believe that (1) is the "N" cluster and (2) is the "S" cluster. I think you've got (2) right, but you might be overcomplicating (1). For one, it doesn't look like the diversity of "N" is high enough so far south for it to be the Thracians, unless you're suspecting that they not only advanced on Ukraine, but were nearly totally removed from their origin point. If that indeed happened, you may be right, since the diversity of I2a-Din is very high in the Ukraine area. But the youth of I2a-Din as a whole doesn't lend itself well to being part of a well-established group during the early Classical Age like the Thracians IMHO. I'd look more closely at more Northern, isolated cultures, outside the realm of Rome's records. A more Northern, isolated culture would also better explain the close relationship to I2a-Disles.

sorry I ment N = Norh S = South,

North thracians = getae = goths
South thracians = the known thracians (bulgaria Serbia Fyrom parts of Bosna and parts of Greece and Turkey,)

the story goes like this North Thracians Dacians or Getae moved from area to North and return via Volga river to ucraine,
a part of them moved east to sammara and return as Slavic population with a satemized IE language like the Iranian populations,
the rest Gothic moved west as ostrogoth vissigoth etc

meaning that I2 goth people moved west leaving area to I2 south slavic wich added to the non movable I2a of the mountains

razor
02-11-11, 21:41
Yetos,

It's an interesting perspective you present. I assume that you believe that (1) is the "N" cluster and (2) is the "S" cluster. I think you've got (2) right, but you might be overcomplicating (1). For one, it doesn't look like the diversity of "N" is high enough so far south for it to be the Thracians, unless you're suspecting that they not only advanced on Ukraine, but were nearly totally removed from their origin point. If that indeed happened, you may be right, since the diversity of I2a-Din is very high in the Ukraine area. But the youth of I2a-Din as a whole doesn't lend itself well to being part of a well-established group during the early Classical Age like the Thracians IMHO. I'd look more closely at more Northern, isolated cultures, outside the realm of Rome's records. A more Northern, isolated culture would also better explain the close relationship to I2a-Disles.

As a matter of fact. I had been musing some such similar possibility prior to becoming acquainted with the Nordtvedt dates. Here are some facts (the question is: would this be enough, and would it be compatible with other data?)
(1) An ancient "Thrakoid" presence in Ukrainian territory is indubitable. We have the remnants of Thracian-type hydronyms (very few but enough) stretching north of the Carpathians as far as the border between forest-steppe and forest, where they abut on Baltic ones)
(2) The BCE archaeological cultures which used to be attributed to proto-Slavs, esp. the Bilohrudivska culture and the "Scythian-farmer" culture could easily have been Thrakoid. Interestingly, there are no certainly Iranic topo/hydronyms west of the Dnipro, and linguists have admitted that the dan- dana- root could also be Thracian.
(3) We know (both from archaeology and from Strabo) that in the early 3rd c. BCE there was a large scale migration of "Scythians" from the area west of the Dnipro into the Dobrudja (subsequently known as "Scythia Minor"). Some of these were certainly Iranic or Iranized royalty/aristocrats. But if (1) and (2) is correct, then the bulk would have been a Thrakoid population, which afterwards blended in with the Getans south of the Danube, so much so that by the time of Ovid, he found no genuine Scythians there...
(4) Since we know of no historical countermoves from the south, we would have to assume that enough people remained behind (but then why so few Thrakoid top/hydronyms?) or that there was a big "Slavic" reflux from the Danube in the 7th/8th cs. which would explain the big I2a-Din numbers today.
Right now, I still prefer the Nordvedt/Verenic scenario.

sparkey
02-11-11, 21:53
Right now, I still prefer the Nordvedt/Verenic scenario.

Ditto; but as you outline, Yetos' proposal isn't impossible, and it's fairly clear what will help establish it. Basically, we need old branches of I2a-Din (ancient or modern samples; ancient preferred) to be found in former Thrace.

MOESAN
11-11-11, 23:30
not a reply but a question
was it said about the age of the Y-I2a2 of the carpathians mountains of Romania and surroundings - because human settlements are old there, during the LGM and before, and are seldom or inexistant when we speak about Dinaric and Dalmatia regions - and the nearest regions (which knows the Thrakians) has allways been the center of exchanges Westward and Eastward, a very good place for cultural fusions and subsequent expansion (proto-Indo-Eur. and differenciation Kentum-Satem???)

MOESAN
23-12-11, 20:05
just a mottley of facts and believings
- For I know paleolithic or early post-ice-age settlements are very very seldom in the Dinaric Alps (West Balkans), even in Greece and the remnant of the Balkans - there would be some ones in the Eastern parts of the Carpathes and more in Hungary or Czechoslovakia -
- even if it has to be taken with caution the dinaric phénotype is very common today in Hercegovina and in Yougoslavia as a whole AND TOO in the Carpathian Mountains of Romania - what 's more, dinaric types are present (even if less) in all the Carpathian Chain until South Poland, Slovakia, AND TOO in Western Ukraina all regions where Y-I2a1b-din is concerned -
- it's not so ridiculous to imagine that the great Cucuteni-Tripolje period could have helped to some exchanges of population between Northern Greece and Ukraina (and further North-East when one sees to the Tripolje influence) - I can easily imagine that the rising and success of this culture (proto-I-E or not) had an effect on demography and could have multipied the population there favoring the diversity of I2a1b on more thant 1000 years (?) -
- for I believe previous Slavs was as previous Scythes Y-R1a as a majority - what is reliable is that they can have mixed with this population of Southern-Western Ukraina where was found a lot of Y-I2a1b-din and some others (Y-J2? Y-G2?)- it's not sure at all the Slavs was the first I-Eans there; a lot passed before them -
- so Y-I2a1b could have been carried westward by different tribes, Illyrians and others before Slavs, and after that slavized "Ukrainians" bringing Y-I2a1 but also along with some more Y-R1a - but even some of the Y-R1a could have been brought in the Western Balkans before the Slavs - it's discuted (always the problem of diversity of HGs and HTs) -
- the argument of absolute numbers has some worth : but even if the bulk of I2a1b-din is not native of the Western Balkans, it doesn't signify they arrived ONLY with Slavs and so late
- concerning the Albanians, some linguists said that the most of the latin loan words in their language showed a phonetic evolution typical or Eastern Balkans (as the latinized Romanians?) - their dinaric phenotypes tendancy could be based on females heritage (and yet: Kosovars had less 'alpine' types' and more 'dinaric' types but show also a dolichocephalic influence heavier than the Tosques of South Albania do ) -
- I hold that there were a lot of movements in the Balkans on every side, and that today Albanians are a mix of "autochtones" and "aliens" : very inextricable- their original language is drown by foreign loan words of every kind if I rely on my readings - but concerning the geographical origin of the speakers of previous albanian I see them further East and without an evident link with the Illyrians -

to come back to Y-I2a1b-din its recent demographic boom could have been between Carpathes and Ukraina, born by a upstream Y-I2a1 of Carpathian or Central-Europe origin more than one of the Dinaric Alps - the historical events can easily explain that a successful branch that took profit from several cultures, pre-I-E and I-E, could have populated Western Balkans
at the time of the slavic invasions BUT also before them in more than a wave - present genetics data can hardly say more I think -

sparkey
23-12-11, 20:32
- it's not so ridiculous to imagine that the great Cucuteni-Tripolje period could have helped to some exchanges of population between Northern Greece and Ukraina (and further North-East when one sees to the Tripolje influence) - I can easily imagine that the rising and success of this culture (proto-I-E or not) had an effect on demography and could have multipied the population there favoring the diversity of I2a1b on more thant 1000 years (?) -

I still think that Cucuteni-Tripolye is a slight mismatch, as I explain here (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?25801-Sarmatians-Serbs-Croats-and-I2a2&p=389821&viewfull=1#post389821). At least, the diversification of I2a1b1a appears to have happened later (other I2a1b's are native to Northwestern Europe and are not really being considered here).


- for I believe previous Slavs was as previous Scythes Y-R1a as a majority - what is reliable is that they can have mixed with this population of Southern-Western Ukraina where was found a lot of Y-I2a1b-din and some others (Y-J2? Y-G2?)- it's not sure at all the Slavs was the first I-Eans there; a lot passed before them -

I follow you here, but with a question: When do you think that proto-Slavic differentiated from proto-Balto-Slavic? Did it really happen long enough ago as to have happened before I2a-Din became an important part of the population's haplogroups? Because if not, then it's appropriate to assume that there was never such universal R1a dominance in the Slavs, just in the proto-Balto-Slavs, who form only a component of the ancestry of the Slavs.


- so Y-I2a1b could have been carried westward by different tribes, Illyrians and others before Slavs, and after that slavized "Ukrainians" bringing Y-I2a1 but also along with some more Y-R1a - but even some of the Y-R1a could have been brought in the Western Balkans before the Slavs - it's discuted (always the problem of diversity of HGs and HTs) -
- the argument of absolute numbers has some worth : but even if the bulk of I2a1b-din is not native of the Western Balkans, it doesn't signify they arrived ONLY with Slavs and so late

Please be more specific. Are you saying that you find the S cluster to be Slavic but the N cluster to be non-Slavic? If so, then why is the N cluster so omnipresent among the North Slavs? If it's the other way around, then why is S so much younger? I have trouble fitting what we know about the diversity patterns of I2a-Din into a multi-ethnicity pooling point model.


to come back to Y-I2a1b-din its recent demographic boom could have been between Carpathes and Ukraina, born by a upstream Y-I2a1 of Carpathian or Central-Europe origin more than one of the Dinaric Alps - the historical events can easily explain that a successful branch that took profit from several cultures, pre-I-E and I-E, could have populated Western Balkans
at the time of the slavic invasions BUT also before them in more than a wave - present genetics data can hardly say more I think -

Actually, other than the part about it likely being from many waves (I still suspect that the Slavic migrations was the only important wave), I basically agree with this. I think Central Europe is more likely than Carpathian due to the distribution of the rest of I2a1b.

zanipolo
23-12-11, 21:05
I believe this I21ab to be from Noricum area and moved south, part of both the late Bronze Age (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age) Laugen-Melaun culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Laugen-Melaun/Luco-Meluno&action=edit&redlink=1) and Iron Age (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Age) Fritzens-Sanzeno culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fritzens-Sanzeno&action=edit&redlink=1) cultures.

how yes no 2
31-12-11, 02:05
So there (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?25801-Sarmatians-Serbs-Croats-and-I2a2) are (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26761-Scythian-Sarmatian-DNA-your-thoughts.) several (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26201-Who-were-and-are-the-Albanians-and-their-DNA) threads (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26473-Were-the-Croatians-originally-Slavic), all recently active, where the focus of the conversation has turned to (often passionate) discussions about how I2a1b1a-Din, the most common Haplogroup I subclade in the Balkans, got to the Balkans. But we seem far from reaching consensus on this forum, so here's a poll to at least put our finger to the wind regarding the direction this forum is leaning.

I've included as options several different possibilities I've read:

Paleolithic continuity: I2a-Din has been in the Balkans since the Paleolithic, and present distribution outside of the Balkans is the result of migrations out of it. There is direct geographic continuity for this clade from Gravettian culture and/or the Balkans Ice Age refuge. Proponents point out the age of Haplogroup I and the frequency distribution of I2a-Din. I've read Maciamo articulate this view, but I'm not sure if he still holds it.

The Early Indo-Europeans: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by the Indo-European migrations. It was part of the "original" collection of Y-DNA of Indo-Europeans. Proponents point out that everywhere that Haplogroup I is dominant nowadays speaks an IE language. How yes no was fond of this theory for a while.

Sea Peoples: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by seafaring groups not otherwise mentioned in this poll. The migration happened before history or early in history. Proponents point to the frequency distribution and the lack of historical verification for later migrations. How yes no explored this idea, and recently Pyrub has advocated it.

The Sarmatians: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by the Sarmatians. Proponents of this view cite the STR dating estimate for the clade, the apparent Asian spillover of it, and the historical attestation to Sarmatians (but not Slavs) in the Balkans. Bodin has been the most vocal advocate of this theory here.

The Slavs: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by expanding Slavs in the 1st millennium CE. Proponents cite the age of the clade, expert STR diversity analysis by people like Nordtvedt and Verenich, and dispute that history doesn't verify the Slavic expansions. I have supported this view, as have a few other posters.

If you believe that multiple expansions resulted in the current I2a-Din distribution in the Balkans, indicate which you feel brought most or had the greatest impact. If you feel that the data is deficient, make your best educated guess.

let me explain why sea people are listed there


all we know is this map:

http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/Tree and Map for Hg I.pdf

I2a-Din is estimated to spread from Poland towards Ukraine, Russia and Balkan...
Balkan was settled with movement of Serbs and Croats.... and I2a-Din being common factor for all south Slavs that distinguish them from surrounding while other haplogroups widely differ is clearly speaking that much of it came with south Slavs, probably with Serbs and Croats.... there are some historical data that list tribes with names such as Serbs and Croats among Sarmatians.....


in my opinion, I2a-Din was already in Danube basin before Roman spread to north...
Russian primary chronicle speaks of Danubian Slavs pushed out of Danube basin towards their relatives Liakhs on north by Vlakhs (Romans)....


Over a long period the Slavs settled beside the Danube, where the Hungarian and Bulgarian lands now lie. From among these Slavs, parties scattered throughout the country and were known
by appropriate names, according to the places where they settled. Thus some came and settled by
the river Morava, and were named Moravians, while others were called Czechs. Among these
same Slavs are included the White Croats, the Serbs, and the Carinthians. For when the Vlakhs
attacked the Danubian Slavs, settled among them, and did them violence, the latter came and
made their homes by the Vistula, and were then called Lyakhs. Of these same Lyakhs some were
called Polyanians, some Lutichians, some Mazovians, and still others Pomorians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Primary_Chronicle
http://www.utoronto.ca/elul/English/218/PVL-selections.pdf

Lyakhs are no other than Lechs or Poles of today...

this Danubian Slavs were based on description of their location given in russian primary chronicle in fact same people as Celtic Scordisci...

Morava is Celtic river name, and it exist in Serbia where Scordisci lived and in Czech republic which is roughly area where Danubian Slavs settled... Serb related toponyms we find in west part of Czech republic
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srby_(Domažlice_District) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srby_(Plzeň-South_District) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srbská_Kamenice and in west part of neigbouring Bavaria as Sorviodurum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straubing) and small nation of Sorbs (who call themselves Serbya on northwest of Chezh republic)

worth noting is that Sorviodurum was one of the town of Raetia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raetia and that alternative name of Serbs was Rascians

Rascians (Serbian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_language): Raci or Раци, also Rascijani or Расцијани; Hungarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_language): Rác, (pl.) Rácok; German (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language): Ratzen, Raize, (pl.) Raizen; also Ratzians, Rasciani and Natio Rasciana) was a name used to designate Serbs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbs), or sometimes, in a wider perspective, all South Slavs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Slavs)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rascians

I do not say that Serbs were Raetians... I think they were partly living in Raetia (e.g. in Sorviodurum) and we know that

At first Raetia formed a distinct province, but towards the end of the 1st century AD Vindelicia was added to it; hence Tacitus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaius_Cornelius_Tacitus) (Germania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germania_(book)), 41) could speak of Augusta Vindelicorum (Augsburg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augsburg)) as "a colony (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony) of the province of Raetia".
Vindelici... = white

for Serbs we know that they came to Balkan from land of Boiki where they were (same as Croats) called "white"
http://books.google.nl/books?id=3al15wpFWiMC&lpg=PP1&dq=porphyrogenitus de administrando imperio&hl=nl&pg=PA153#v=onepage&q&f=false

worth noting is that white is designation for west, e.g. Belarus = bela (white) + Rus = white Russians = west Russians

now why Scordisci....
because they lived in Danube basin prior to Roman conquest... note both the Danube and Morava river being in their area....

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/47/Scordisci_state.png/250px-Scordisci_state.png

note that from area of Scordisci, a tribe named Serdi entered Thrace and was Thracanized...
in fact in my opinion Serdi and Scordisci are just Celtic and Thracian versions of same tribal name...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/ThracianTribes.jpg/300px-ThracianTribes.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serdi


I believe Scordisci were I2a-Din, and that their ancestors were Sherdana sea peoples...let me explain...


Shar mountain (Shar Dagh in turkish) on border of FYR Macedonia and break away Serbia province of Kosovo...

In Antiquity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_history), the mountains were known as Scardus, Scodrus, or Scordus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Šar_Mountains


Their tribal name may be connected to the name of the Scordus[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scordisci#cite_note-3) mountain (Šar mountain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Šar_mountain)) which was located between the regions of Illyria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyria)and Paionia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paionia).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scordisci

Scordisci have tribal name preserved in Scordus mountain, which is Shar Dagh in turkish...

I argue that Scordisci were further in past known as Sherdana sea peoples and were I2a-Din
why I argue that?

Sherdana who came from north and via seas (Black sea according to my interpretation of what is written about order of conquest of sea peoples - for more details see http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26076-sea-peoples) settled in their conquest the area that is matching exactly the areas where Kurds live now.... and Kurds carry I2a-Din that by all means must have originated in Europe

Kurdi is name derived from Sherdana, same as Scord on Balkan, which with Celtic ending gave Scordisci and with Thracian ending gave Serdi...

I2a-Din is not spread only along Balkan, among Kurds, and in west Slavs... in fact, it is also widely spread in Ukraine and south Russia...this can indeed perhaps be related to Sarmatians.....

if you look at Nordvedt map, from Poland I2a-Din has spread in tri directions: northeast, east and southeast...
except south and west Balkan which was settled by I2a-Din only with early Slavs, this is Danube basin and area on north and east shores of Black sea.... and according to my projections this is where Sherdana started conquest.... from Danube basin and north shores of Black sea....

note that cultures and languages of tribes change at much faster pace than genetics.... but tribal names are often following genetics...

how yes no 2
01-01-12, 15:05
maybe we should first focus on I2a-Din- south as it is younger and less wide spread.... so it should give us better clue of more recent history of I2a-Din that is present on Balkan

5435
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup,I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=ymap

what we see besides Balkan, is settlement around Krakov in south Poland, which is most likely about white Croatia, we see line from Leipzig via Bohemia towards Vienna, which is likely about white Serbia, we see area in north Poland which corresponds to location of Germanic Scirii in times 1AD-200AD

http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1/entity_3837.html (http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1/entity_3837.html)http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1/entity_3837.jpgnote that Germanic Scirii are often coupled with Germanic Hirri, in same way as Serbs and Croats are coupled...we also see a line that goes from Hamburg, via Hanover to Frankfurt and Zurich, which is hard to explain....perhaps Helvetii...


it is possible that I2a-Din south came to existence among Germanic people around Hamburg and from there it took two routes: one going southwards towards Zurich and the other went towards east and settled in north Poland e.g. under name Scirii(which is in my opinion of same origin as tribal names Serian, Zeruiani, Sherdana...)

Scirii moved a lot accross east Europe and it is plausible that eventually they became Slavic speakers....

I2a-Din North on other hand seems to have been already present in Balkans in distant past, so I think this is about Scordisci and much earlier about Sherdana sea peoples...

so I expect that I2a-Din North in Kurds is North variant...

I also think that I2a-Din North might have been Celtic people in historic times.... here Scordisci and Helvetii come to my mind... Scordisci who lived along Danube are likely Serians of Seneca who cross frozen Danube on bare foot.. while Scirii might be Serians of Seneca who rule over scattered Scythians....


Scordisci fits with Russian primary chronicle speaking of Serbs among Danubian Slavs who were pushed out to north by Vlakhs (Romans)... Russian primary chronicle records collective memory of past, but those memories would probably skip language transitions, leaving possibility that those so called Danubian Slavs were not yet Slavic speaking at the time they lived around Danube... note that Scordisci lived mixed with Illyrians and thus must have incorporated significant E-V13 and also some of J haplogroups... that would explain why spread of E-V13 is relatively homogenous in Serb settled areas and much higher than in Croats ...

Scordisci just lived and moved along Danube basin... so when pushed from Serbia they would naturally end up in Bohemia which is where they probably also originally came from... end Bohemia is land Boiki (that neighbours Frankia on west and white Cratia on east) from where white (west) Serbs came to Balkan to make Serbs of today....

http://books.google.nl/books?id=3al15wpFWiMC&lpg=PP1&dq=de administrando imperio&hl=nl&pg=PA153#v=onepage&q&f=false

note that historic record states Serbs come to Balkan from land of Boiki where they have also originally dwellt... such statement implies there was no continuity, it implies they originally dwellt in Boiki than spread elsewhere, returned to it, and only than came to Balkan...

note that according to some sources molecular diversity of I2a-Din seems to be much higher in Serb settled areas, Bohemia, and Ukraine than e.g. in Croatia indicating much earlier presence in these regions... this if correct, excludes I2a-Din being Illyrian genetics and points out that expansion of I2a-Din to Croatia happened only with Slavs, while I2a-Din in Serbia was also present before Slavs... thus, Scordisci...

zanipolo
02-01-12, 04:21
maybe we should first focus on I2a-Din- south as it is younger and less wide spread.... so it should give us better clue of more recent history of I2a-Din that is present on Balkan

5435
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup,I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=ymap

what we see besides Balkan, is settlement around Krakov in south Poland, which is most likely about white Croatia, we see line from Leipzig via Bohemia towards Vienna, which is likely about white Serbia, we see area in north Poland which corresponds to location of Germanic Scirii in times 1AD-200AD

http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1/entity_3837.html (http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1/entity_3837.html)http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1/entity_3837.jpgnote that Germanic Scirii are often coupled with Germanic Hirri, in same way as Serbs and Croats are coupled...we also see a line that goes from Hamburg, via Hanover to Frankfurt and Zurich, which is hard to explain....perhaps Helvetii...


it is possible that I2a-Din south came to existence among Germanic people around Hamburg and from there it took two routes: one going southwards towards Zurich and the other went towards east and settled in north Poland e.g. under name Scirii(which is in my opinion of same origin as tribal names Serian, Zeruiani, Sherdana...)

Scirii moved a lot accross east Europe and it is plausible that eventually they became Slavic speakers....

I2a-Din North on other hand seems to have been already present in Balkans in distant past, so I think this is about Scordisci and much earlier about Sherdana sea peoples...

so I expect that I2a-Din North in Kurds is North variant...

I also think that I2a-Din North might have been Celtic people in historic times.... here Scordisci and Helvetii come to my mind... Scordisci who lived along Danube are likely Serians of Seneca who cross frozen Danube on bare foot.. while Scirii might be Serians of Seneca who rule over scattered Scythians....


Scordisci fits with Russian primary chronicle speaking of Serbs among Danubian Slavs who were pushed out to north by Vlakhs (Romans)... Russian primary chronicle records collective memory of past, but those memories would probably skip language transitions, leaving possibility that those so called Danubian Slavs were not yet Slavic speaking at the time they lived around Danube... note that Scordisci lived mixed with Illyrians and thus must have incorporated significant E-V13 and also some of J haplogroups... that would explain why spread of E-V13 is relatively homogenous in Serb settled areas and much higher than in Croats ...

Scordisci just lived and moved along Danube basin... so when pushed from Serbia they would naturally end up in Bohemia which is where they probably also originally came from... end Bohemia is land Boiki (that neighbours Frankia on west and white Cratia on east) from where white (west) Serbs came to Balkan to make Serbs of today....

http://books.google.nl/books?id=3al15wpFWiMC&lpg=PP1&dq=de administrando imperio&hl=nl&pg=PA153#v=onepage&q&f=false

note that historic record states Serbs come to Balkan from land of Boiki where they have also originally dwellt... such statement implies there was no continuity, it implies they originally dwellt in Boiki than spread elsewhere, returned to it, and only than came to Balkan...

note that according to some sources molecular diversity of I2a-Din seems to be much higher in Serb settled areas, Bohemia, and Ukraine than e.g. in Croatia indicating much earlier presence in these regions... this if correct, excludes I2a-Din being Illyrian genetics and points out that expansion of I2a-Din to Croatia happened only with Slavs, while I2a-Din in Serbia was also present before Slavs... thus, Scordisci...

the Scordisci where celtic/illyrian mix and got there name from the failed celtic enterprise to take greece. Actually they where pure celtic when they attacked greece and mixed with illyrians later.

the scirii went to the carpathians mountains ( montes bastanae) and mixed with the germanic bastanae, and later went with them to moden day kosovo on the request of philip V of macedonia around 200BC, over 60000 went there. The I2a would have come into the balkans at that time.
thats what I read
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=6L49AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA12&dq=scordisci+tribe&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nxUBT-P_J_GamQXqqd2nAg&ved=0CFMQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=scordisci tribe&f=false

BTW, what are the dotted lines on your map, I2a areas?

MOESAN
03-01-12, 00:35
I still think that Cucuteni-Tripolye is a slight mismatch, as I explain here (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?25801-Sarmatians-Serbs-Croats-and-I2a2&p=389821&viewfull=1#post389821). At least, the diversification of I2a1b1a appears to have happened later (other I2a1b's are native to Northwestern Europe and are not really being considered here).



I follow you here, but with a question: When do you think that proto-Slavic differentiated from proto-Balto-Slavic? Did it really happen long enough ago as to have happened before I2a-Din became an important part of the population's haplogroups? Because if not, then it's appropriate to assume that there was never such universal R1a dominance in the Slavs, just in the proto-Balto-Slavs, who form only a component of the ancestry of the Slavs.



Please be more specific. Are you saying that you find the S cluster to be Slavic but the N cluster to be non-Slavic? If so, then why is the N cluster so omnipresent among the North Slavs? If it's the other way around, then why is S so much younger? I have trouble fitting what we know about the diversity patterns of I2a-Din into a multi-ethnicity pooling point model.



Actually, other than the part about it likely being from many waves (I still suspect that the Slavic migrations was the only important wave), I basically agree with this. I think Central Europe is more likely than Carpathian due to the distribution of the rest of I2a1b.

I'm not documented enough on the last HTs of I2a1b and I'm tempted to agree with your point of view - sure slavic colonization in South did the most or the work - but I have yet some questions?
- what HTs are the commonest ones in present day Carpathians? (of Romania, say) -
- if Y-I2a1b of Romania turns up to be the 'dinaric' one, why a slavic dominant people would have a highland repartition in Romania: the previous masters pushed back in mountains by a former vainquished population returning home?

sparkey
03-01-12, 18:54
I2a-Din is estimated to spread from Poland towards Ukraine, Russia and Balkan...

It's important to understand that Nordtvedt estimates Poland only because it is in between the Dinaric diversity hotspots and the non-Dinaric diversity hotspots of I2a1b1. But since there is such a huge geographic disparity, Poland is really only a wild guess.

The recent finding of an out member of I2a1b2-Isles in Iraq might shed a bit more light on I2a1b as a whole... or just muddy the waters further.


I2a-Din is not spread only along Balkan, among Kurds, and in west Slavs... in fact, it is also widely spread in Ukraine and south Russia...this can indeed perhaps be related to Sarmatians.....

Has there finally been proven I2a-Din found in Kurds? I recall Alan pointing out that we only have 3 tested Haplogroup I Kurds who we know the subclade for sure, and they've been I1, I2c, and I2a2a (old I2b1, not related to I2a-Din). The sample size is only in the low double digits for all Kurds who have been so thoroughly tested, though.


if you look at Nordvedt map, from Poland I2a-Din has spread in tri directions: northeast, east and southeast...

Don't read too much into the Nordtvedt map, it doesn't represent the temporal aspect and the branches may not be splitting at the right time/places. I find the Verenich maps for I2a-Din more informative, have you seen those?


it is possible that I2a-Din south came to existence among Germanic people around Hamburg and from there it took two routes: one going southwards towards Zurich and the other went towards east and settled in north Poland e.g. under name Scirii(which is in my opinion of same origin as tribal names Serian, Zeruiani, Sherdana...)

This doesn't seem geographically correct at all. I admit that there is a curious diversity spike of I2a-Din in Austria (which I've generally assumed to be a pooling point), but nothing anywhere near Hamburg, or anything to suggest an East Germanic origin.


Scirii moved a lot accross east Europe and it is plausible that eventually they became Slavic speakers....

Yeah but I assume that they contributed mostly I1 and some I2a2a (old I2b1) in terms of I subclades, probably accounting for some of the interesting high I1 we see east of I1's higher divesity areas near Denmark and Northern Germany.


I2a-Din North on other hand seems to have been already present in Balkans in distant past, so I think this is about Scordisci and much earlier about Sherdana sea peoples...

so I expect that I2a-Din North in Kurds is North variant...

What's the evidence for I2a-Din-N being ancient in the Balkans though? I admit that the fact that N is more common that S in places like Greece and Romania (no evidence of it in Kurds yet though...) is a curious fact that any analysis must grapple with. But we just don't see a lot of diversity of I2a-Din as a whole in the Balkans, except maybe a little in Bosnia... certainly, it looks like I2a-Din is a later introduction there.


I also think that I2a-Din North might have been Celtic people in historic times.... here Scordisci and Helvetii come to my mind... Scordisci who lived along Danube are likely Serians of Seneca who cross frozen Danube on bare foot.. while Scirii might be Serians of Seneca who rule over scattered Scythians....

It seems like a geographic mismatch to me, unless we're talking relatively late (like late Iron Age) introduction of Celtic culture and language to some population that had I2a-Din present. Tribes like the Helvetii seem certainly too western.

sparkey
03-01-12, 18:56
I'm not documented enough on the last HTs of I2a1b and I'm tempted to agree with your point of view - sure slavic colonization in South did the most or the work - but I have yet some questions?
- what HTs are the commonest ones in present day Carpathians? (of Romania, say) -
- if Y-I2a1b of Romania turns up to be the 'dinaric' one, why a slavic dominant people would have a highland repartition in Romania: the previous masters pushed back in mountains by a former vainquished population returning home?

Romanian I2a is I2a1b1a-Din-N dominant from what I can tell.

Diurpaneus
04-01-12, 13:39
The Dacians formed in the Linear Poterry culture area(Cucuteni-Tripilye culture is also a Linear Pottery culture).So i think they had Haplogroup I2a1b.
Cassius Dio says that the Dacians were'Getae or Thracians of Dacian race'.
So they speak a language similar to Thracians but they don't look like them.
According to Ptolemey Dacia's borders were: Bohemia in the west,Dnepr river in the east,Pripyat, Vistula and Oder rivers in the north and north west.
Cesar and Strabo says that the border between the Germanic tribes and the Dacians was Hercynian forest(southern Germany).
Agrippa says that the Dacians lived till Baltic sea in the north and Vistula river, in the west.
Dacian tribes like Buri, Piegetae, Biessi, Carpians, Arsitae, Racatae and Costobocae lived in Slovakia and parts of Poland.
There were three known Dacians davae in Poland: Setidava(north of today Kalisz),Gildova(near Vistula river) ans Susudava.
From 2nd century AD Germanic tribes pushed the Dacians eastward.The largest Dacian burial sites are by far those from Malaia Kopania(Ukraine) and Zemplen(Slovakia).So many of them lived in those lands.
There is Chernyakhov culture where a majority of Dacians and a minority of Sarmatians and Slavs led by a Gothic elite.
In Hungary Sarmatians serfs were Limigantes(Dacians or majority Dacians).Then the Slavs settled in those lands.I don't think they were too many.There's no decent density in the Venedi lands and they spread on a vast area.
Lots of them stayed in the northern lands.I think that the Sclaveni and Antes were a mix people(a Dacian majority ,some Sarmatinas and a Slavic elite).
The Slavs (also the Sarmatians) brought in the Balkans some of HG R1a not HG I2a1b.
Florin Curta in his book 'The Making of the Slavs ' says that the Sclaveni was a umbrella term used by the Byzantines for those barbarians who came from north of the Danube.
Theophylact Simocatta says about a Sclaveni tribe who raided southern Danube lands 'we called them Getae in the past'.
There are many common words considered of Slavic origin in South Slavic,Romanian also Albanian, but you don't find them in North Slavic.

sparkey
04-01-12, 20:04
The Slavs (also the Sarmatians) brought in the Balkans some of HG R1a not HG I2a1b.

So is the reverse true, that the Dacians are responsible for the I2a1b in Russia, Belarus, and Poland? I suppose somewhere like Northeastern Dacia is within range for the launching point of I2a-Din (although personally I think it's a poorer match than areas further north), but I'm unaware of any important expansion of Dacians on these sorts of places.

Mikewww
04-01-12, 20:47
I posted this in DNA Forums sometime ago in a similar discussion...I hope this helps. "What do any of you think of this from Ken Nordtvedt?


From: "Ken Nordtvedt"....
2. Second oddity is the nature of the three nearest cousin clades to I2a2-Dinaric in the tree of haplogroup I

Closest cousin is I2a2-Disles which at the moment is not separated from I2a2-Disles by a snp. Disles clade is found primarily in the British Isles. The node where branches to Disles and to Dinaric part ways looks to be at least 5000 years ago.

Next closest cousin is I2a2-Isles separated from I2a2-Dinaric by two snps. I2a2-Isles is found mainly in the British Isles, although some evidence of presence in France and north German plain exists for the older two of the four clades of I2a2-Isles. I2a2-Isles clades started to branch apart from each other at least 6000 years ago, while the node where I2a2-Dinaric branch line and I2a2-Isles branch line parted ways occured 12,000 years ago.

Next closest cousin is I2a-F whose ancestral line branched off even earlier than 12,000 years ago, and prior to the M423 snp which shows derived for both I2a2-Dinaric and I2a2-Isles. I2a-F is found mainly in France and British Isles (Scotland)

... We really have no reason to put I2a2-Dinaric in southeast Europe earlier than about 3000 years ago.
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2009-08/1249581657
Ken's a brilliant guy with access to a lot of data so I recognize that to disagree with his interpretations is something to think twice about.

However, this specific issue is just speculative given the data available.

Where Ken sees the SE Europe glass as "half empty" I see it as "half full" in this case. There are a number archaeologically attested cultural movements from SE Europe to the west and north. SE Europe truly is a hotbed of ancient activity. Remember, Ken said "Disles and to Dinaric part ways looks to be at least 5000 years ago." We don't know where I2a2's MRCA was 5000 years ago. If you had to look for a place for this man to be 3000 BC from where he could spread all over Europe, SE Europe would be a good launch pad, just in time for the Bronze Age to spread from SE to NW.

As a hotbed of activity, SE Europe's early I2a2 may have had a tough time surviving, all except the Dinaric subclade. The rest may have had to move on to safer or greener pastures to the NW, or die.

Does anyone know this - is I2a2-Dinaric found in NW Europe and does it have more diversity there than in SE Europe? If it is more diverse in NW Europe, I'd have to go with Ken's interpretation. If not, I'd go with the SE Europe is home interpretation.

Taranis
04-01-12, 20:51
So is the reverse true, that the Dacians are responsible for the I2a1b in Russia, Belarus, and Poland? I suppose somewhere like Northeastern Dacia is within range for the launching point of I2a-Din (although personally I think it's a poorer match than areas further north), but I'm unaware of any important expansion of Dacians on these sorts of places.

Well, it is known that the Dacians expanded into the Pannonian basin and the western Carpathians and that they subjugated the Celtic tribes living there (Strabo states that they expanded to the edge of the Hercynian Forest), and it's also almost that there was Dacian presence beyond the Carpathians (as recorded by Ptolemy with "Setidava", which Diurpaneous mentioned), but it's unclear how dense Dacian presence in these areas was and how long-lasting it was. It's also unclear what happened with the "free" Dacians after the Roman conquest and later during the Migration period.

razor
04-01-12, 21:13
Ukrainian linguists have pointed to ca. 5 surviving "Thrakoid" hydronyms in the territory between the northern Carpathians and the Polessia, the northernmost being just south of the boundary between forest-steppe and forest zones. No toponyms however. It is possible that a very ancient population, related to, but not identical to the Getae and Thracians existed there in the times of the classical Scythian state. They were politically "Scythians" but would have spoken their own language. We know from Strabo that sometime in the early 3rd c. BCE there was a big outmigration from this area to "Little Scythia" in the Dobrudja. Perhaps the closeness of their dialects facilitated the assimilation of the newcomers to the Getae, certainly by the time of Ovid. There were no "Dacians" there (north of the Carpathians in Ukraine) until the in-migration of the representatives of the Lypetsk culture in the 1rst c. AD. These eventually fused with the local Peucini and were a part of the classical Gothic Chernyakhiv culture. If one wishes to see I2a1b-Din as related to this more ancient population (not the historical Dacians), there may be a case. Nordtvedt's dates would intimate that the Patriarch would have been someone left behind at the time of their outmigration to Dobrudja.

sparkey
04-01-12, 21:26
Where Ken sees the SE Europe glass as "half empty" I see it as "half full" in this case. There are a number archaeologically attested cultural movements from SE Europe to the west and north. SE Europe truly is a hotbed of ancient activity. Remember, Ken said "Disles and to Dinaric part ways looks to be at least 5000 years ago." We don't know where I2a2's MRCA was 5000 years ago. If you had to look for a place for this man to be 3000 BC from where he could spread all over Europe, SE Europe would be a good launch pad, just in time for the Bronze Age to spread from SE to NW.

I think that the takeaway point for I2a1b (old I2a2) as a whole is indeed that it's an enigma. I've been leaning toward Nordtvedt's early interpretation for it as a whole, especially considering that I2a1a, I2a1c, and I2a1* are all either Western or Central European (see my Paleolithic Remnants map (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26944-The-Paleolithic-Remnants-a-map)). But the recently found out member of I2a1b2-Isles in Iraq may make me reconsider.

But I don't think that extant I2a1b1a-Din specifically is so much of an enigma. It is obviously a rapid expansion from a rather recent founder from Eastern Europe, but probably not Southeastern Europe, more like Ukraine. The trouble is figuring out what population that founder came out of, and what population(s) spread his marker.


Does anyone know this - is I2a2-Dinaric found in NW Europe and does it have more diversity there than in SE Europe? If it is more diverse in NW Europe, I'd have to go with Ken's interpretation. If not, I'd go with the SE Europe is home interpretation.

It's basically totally absent from NW Europe aside from likely Eastern European migrants. Its diversity peaks are split between Ukraine, Moldova, and (slightly lesser peaks) Eastern Bosnia and Austria, see Verenich (http://dna-forums.org/index.php?/topic/11805-is-i2a2-dinaric-slavic/page__view__findpost__p__223931). Its cousin clades Disles and Isles are most diverse in NW Europe, pending analysis of Iraqi I2a-Isles.

zanipolo
04-01-12, 21:34
Well, it is known that the Dacians expanded into the Pannonian basin and the western Carpathians and that they subjugated the Celtic tribes living there (Strabo states that they expanded to the edge of the Hercynian Forest), and it's also almost that there was Dacian presence beyond the Carpathians (as recorded by Ptolemy with "Setidava", which Diurpaneous mentioned), but it's unclear how dense Dacian presence in these areas was and how long-lasting it was. It's also unclear what happened with the "free" Dacians after the Roman conquest and later during the Migration period.

all greek and roman historians placed tribes on a map based on there locations, so there is a degree of error by mixing historians up

herodous was in constantinople
ptolemy in alexandria
strabo from rome
livy in NE italy
tacticus from the rhine

Taranis
04-01-12, 21:40
all greek and roman historians placed tribes on a map based on there locations, so there is a degree of error by mixing historians up

herodous was in constantinople
ptolemy in alexandria
strabo from rome
livy in NE italy
tacticus from the rhine

With the exception of Herodotus, who was also significantly earlier than the others, the informations they provide are fairly consistent with each other. Also, Ptolemy differs from all of the others you mentioned by the fact that he deployed a rather modern coordinate system (with degrees for longitude and latitude) for major geographical features (coastlines, rivers, mountain chains) and towns.

Diurpaneus
05-01-12, 19:56
The samples from Piatra Neamt(Romania) have 46% I2a1b.


Piatra Neamt is an isolated city surrounded by mountains.
There are 150 Cucuteni-Tripilye sites in the Neamt county.
The ruins of the large Petrodava are just outside the city.
I think that HG I2a1b came in Ukraine as a later expansion from west.
Because there were endless migrations from the east( Kurgan people, Scythians, Sarmatians, Turkic people) in this area.
And they couldn't have this HG.
Some Dacian peasants could be moved to east and northeast by the Goths after the Sarmatians were defetead(the expansion of Chernyakhov culture).
Later migrations and Kievan Rus state spread this HG.


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

sparkey
05-01-12, 20:54
The samples from Piatra Neamt(Romania) have 46% I2a1b.


Piatra Neamt is an isolated city surrounded by mountains.
There are 150 Cucuteni-Tripilye sites in the Neamt county.
The ruins of the large Petrodava are just outside the city.
I think that HG I2a1b came in Ukraine as a later expansion from west.
Because there were endless migrations from the east( Kurgan people, Scythians, Sarmatians, Turkic people) in this area.
And they couldn't have this HG.
Some Dacian peasants could be moved to east and northeast by the Goths after the Sarmatians were defetead(the expansion of Chernyakhov culture).
Later migrations and Kievan Rus state spread this HG.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piatra_Neamț (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piatra_Neam%C8%9B)

I'm not so sure. Verenich maps the expansion of I2a-Din-N through Romania and into Bulgaria to the Slavs, which matches his observed diversity cline. Certainly, there is no evidence of a West-to-East cline into Ukraine. Rather, Moldavian I2a-Din-N appears contiguous with, and nearly as diverse as, Ukrainian I2a-Din-N, suggesting an expansion into modern Romania from Ukraine shortly after its initial expansion, which actually does not date back so far.

razor
05-01-12, 21:53
And the archaeology of Chernyakhiv does not support the theory of Dacian peasant movement into Ukraine. As I mentioned the only such discernible is the appearance and subsequent assimilation of the Lypetsk people (a small minority BTW). The work of Boris Mahomedov (published in 2001) has proved conclusively that the Dacian origin components of Chernyakhiv were principally those of Moldova + the small Lypetsk contribution. In any case one must also remember that the "Goths" in the sense of the denizens of Chernyakhiv, moved out massively in the 5th century, and were replaced by Slavs (who assimilated the meager remnants: this too is traceable archaeologically).

how yes no 2
05-01-12, 22:00
Piatra Neamt is an isolated city surrounded by mountains.
There are 150 Cucuteni-Tripilye sites in the Neamt county.
The ruins of the large Petrodava are just outside the city.
I think that HG I2a1b came in Ukraine as a later expansion from west.
Because there were endless migrations from the east( Kurgan people, Scythians, Sarmatians, Turkic people) in this area.
And they couldn't have this HG.
Some Dacian peasants could be moved to east and northeast by the Goths after the Sarmatians were defetead(the expansion of Chernyakhov culture).
Later migrations and Kievan Rus state spread this HG.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piatra_Neamț (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piatra_Neam%C8%9B)

why do you not mention that Piatra Neamt means German rock and that it is in county named Neamt = Germans

this is perfectly aligned with my assumption that Germanic Scirii were also I2a-Din people...
last mentions of Scirii are in teritory of Romania....

Here are last known locations where Scirii were mentioned in historical accounts...

year 300 AD
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/300/entity_3837.jpg
year 400 AD
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/400/entity_3837.jpg
year 500 AD
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/entity_3837.jpg
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/entity_3837.html

Diurpaneus
06-01-12, 10:11
why do you not mention that Piatra Neamt means German rock and that it is in county named Neamt = Germans

this is perfectly aligned with my assumption that Germanic Scirii were also I2a-Din people...
last mentions of Scirii are in teritory of Romania....

Here are last known locations where Scirii were mentioned in historical accounts...

year 300 AD
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/300/entity_3837.jpg
year 400 AD
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/400/entity_3837.jpg
year 500 AD
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/entity_3837.jpg
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/entity_3837.html



Well' Neamt 'term came from the Teutonic knights who build a fortress in this area.
They would soon leave because Hungarian king who was their master didn't like them anymore.
They settled near the Baltic Sea.
I think that Bastarna and Goths much better candidate for your theory than Scirii.

how yes no 2
06-01-12, 22:10
Well' Neamt 'term came from the Teutonic knights who build a fortress in this area.They would soon leave because Hungarian king who was their master didn't like them anymore.They settled near the Baltic Sea.actually there is no single proof for connection between county name and Teutonic knoights...nor that the Teutonic knoights ever were there...it is how some Romanian historians tried to explain name related to Germans... but its just assumption
Some Romanian historians, including B. P. Haşdeu consider that Târgu Neamţ was probably a Teutonic settlement from the 13th century, when the Teutonic Order made incursions from Transylvania against the Cumanic peoples that were living in Moldavia..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A2rgu_Neam%C5%A3#History
I think that Bastarna and Goths much better candidate for your theory than Scirii.well, Goths were not I2a-din carriers - that is clear from lack of it in the countries they invaded and settled..Scirii are pretty good theory because it is very likely tribal name of same origin as Serians, Zeruiani, Scordisci/Serdi, Shedana (Serbonian bog is a lake in Egypt named after them), Sardinia, Sart and location names such as Sard, Serdica, Serrai/Serres......I2a relates locations of all these people in past...I do not say that modern Serbs origin from Scirii (though it is a thought that should not be completely ignored), I say that tribal name and part of its genetics has same distant roots... I say that tribal name is related originally to I2a people..... and that from part of those people many Serbs and Croats origin....and just one small idea that at first may look far fetched: Note that Scirri are paired with Hirri...same language, adjascent locations...some historians considered that Hirri and Scirri are in fact same tribal name in different dialects..this maps exactly to what we have with Serbs and Croats...related tribes in adjascent teritories and with argued by some interchangable Srb/Hrv root of tribal names... same thing is with Helvetti and Scordisci as related Celtic tribes with adjascent teritories... do not you see a pattern there? it was I2a way of giving tribal names.... besides if all group I haplogroups except I2a-Din are Germanic, and if I2a-Din is estimated by leading researcher to have spread from Germany or north Poland (Germanic land in past), why would not it be logical that I2a-Din was originally Germanic...I have shown elsewhere that there are very strong indications that Serians = Cimmerians and Cimmerians are thought to be Gomer = original tribal name of Germans... so for me this is solid theory...it is only question when did ancestors of modern Serbs split from the rest and were they in historic times before mention in history considered Slavic, Sarmatian, Germanic or Celtic, or perhaps even Turkic.. and genetics will show us that, if there is good will to investigate the issue..

MOESAN
07-01-12, 00:16
Serians = Cimmerians + Scordisci/Serbi/Shedana (Shardana?)/ and so on... Are you sure of the correlations you seam put between these tribes names ? - No offense but it seam to me alike to the links assumed by someones about the Cimbri and Cymru (Combrogi) - I wait more details about the links between all these names and the time they appeared -
for DNA, I don't see Y-I2a1 having a big weight among fully evolved German cultures and tribes (maybe among some of their far 'pre-proto-ancestors'???)

zanipolo
07-01-12, 00:51
read , goths in ukraine in link, second post, 2 weeks old

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/

David faux noted the goths as east germanic tribe with R1b3 , picked up I haplotype in scandza and gotland sweden, picked up N1c1 in vistula lands of the venedi and aestii , picked up further I haplotype and R1a1 from the germanic Peucini and Bastanae as they went to the black sea.

Who was eliminated from the "world" as tribes after gothic victories, Scrii, venedi, heruli, aestii, peucini and Bastanae from what I read , and there must be more tribes

Gothic strength lay in incorporated conquered people into their ranks.

sparkey
07-01-12, 01:57
for DNA, I don't see Y-I2a1 having a big weight among fully evolved German cultures and tribes (maybe among some of their far 'pre-proto-ancestors'???)

Agreed; the most obviously important I subclades in early Germanic peoples, as evidenced by both diversity patterns and modern frequency distributions, were I1 (all subclades except maybe AS4 and P) and I2a2a (especially Cont). The I2a1 subclade that comes closest to the Germanic peoples is probably I2a1c1-Western, and there may have even been some I2a1b2-Isles... but I don't see I2a1 as important as a whole, and certainly not I2a1b1a, unless we're imagining an unexpected bottleneck of it.

Diurpaneus
07-01-12, 11:19
I'm not so sure. Verenich maps the expansion of I2a-Din-N through Romania and into Bulgaria to the Slavs, which matches his observed diversity cline. Certainly, there is no evidence of a West-to-East cline into Ukraine. Rather, Moldavian I2a-Din-N appears contiguous with, and nearly as diverse as, Ukrainian I2a-Din-N, suggesting an expansion into modern Romania from Ukraine shortly after its initial expansion, which actually does not date back so far.


"R1a" Thracians also Illyrians , Mycenaean Greeks and Macedonians could carry HG I2a1b(1500BC) from Cucuteni-Tripillye area.
"R1b" Thracians would be those from Cotsofeni and Cernavoda-Ezero cultures.

Diurpaneus
07-01-12, 12:18
actually there is no single proof for connection between county name and Teutonic knoights...nor that the Teutonic knoights ever were there...it is how some Romanian historians tried to explain name related to Germans... but its just assumptionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Târgu_Neamţ#Historywell, Goths were not I2a-din carriers - that is clear from lack of it in the countries they invaded and settled..Scirii are pretty good theory because it is very likely tribal name of same origin as Serians, Zeruiani, Scordisci/Serdi, Shedana (Serbonian bog is a lake in Egypt named after them), Sardinia, Sart and location names such as Sard, Serdica, Serrai/Serres......I2a relates locations of all these people in past...I do not say that modern Serbs origin from Scirii (though it is a thought that should not be completely ignored), I say that tribal name and part of its genetics has same distant roots... I say that tribal name is related originally to I2a people..... and that from part of those people many Serbs and Croats origin....and just one small idea that at first may look far fetched: Note that Scirri are paired with Hirri...same language, adjascent locations...some historians considered that Hirri and Scirri are in fact same tribal name in different dialects..this maps exactly to what we have with Serbs and Croats...related tribes in adjascent teritories and with argued by some interchangable Srb/Hrv root of tribal names... same thing is with Helvetti and Scordisci as related Celtic tribes with adjascent teritories... do not you see a pattern there? it was I2a way of giving tribal names.... besides if all group I haplogroups except I2a-Din are Germanic, and if I2a-Din is estimated by leading researcher to have spread from Germany or north Poland (Germanic land in past), why would not it be logical that I2a-Din was originally Germanic...I have shown elsewhere that there are very strong indications that Serians = Cimmerians and Cimmerians are thought to be Gomer = original tribal name of Germans... so for me this is solid theory...it is only question when did ancestors of modern Serbs split from the rest and were they in historic times before mention in history considered Slavic, Sarmatian, Germanic or Celtic, or perhaps even Turkic.. and genetics will show us that, if there is good will to investigate the issue..


The Transylvanian Saxons were the craftsmen and merchants of Romania in the Middle Ages.
Targu Neamt(town)=German marketplace.


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

how yes no 2
07-01-12, 17:33
The Transylvanian Saxons were the craftsmen and merchants of Romania in the Middle Ages.Targu Neamt(town)=German marketplace.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxons_of_Romaniaso now we do not speak of Teutonic knights, but about Saxon craftman...sure there were settlements of Saxon in Transylvania, but neither Targu Neamt, nor Piatra Neamt are in Transylvania (and btw. Transylvania is by far biggest chunk of Romania)compare mapshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piatra_Neam%C8%9Bhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A2rgu_Neam%C5%A3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transylvaniain fact link that you gave provide three maps showing: initial Saxon settlements, remaints in 17th century, and population of counties by nationality in year 1930. Neither of those map have any Saxon or German people in Naemt county

MOESAN
07-01-12, 20:49
so now we do not speak of Teutonic knights, but about Saxon craftman...sure there were settlements of Saxon in Transylvania, but neither Targu Neamt, nor Piatra Neamt are in Transylvania (and btw. Transylvania is by far biggest chunk of Romania)compare mapshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piatra_Neamțhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Târgu_Neamţhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transylvaniain fact link that you gave provide three maps showing: initial Saxon settlements, remaints in 17th century, and population of counties by nationality in year 1930. Neither of those map have any Saxon or German people in Naemt county

about these 'Saxons' workmen there has been a not too old survey about those who claim saxon origins in Romania - this survey concluded that there DNA was close to Germans but also too Belgian people where Y-I2a1b is not very common (even if a litle more common in Bavaria) - nothing to do with the percentages of Pietra Neamt(ç) -
answering to other people on the topic I say that if we speak about late Goths we are no more speaking about genuine previous germanic people and with so a mixture of winners-loosers I believe it 'll not be too easy to link a precise tribe to a precise ancient HG - furthermore, the lineages of Y-I2a was ancient enough yet around the Carpathians highlands, and could concern Illyrians and other I-E(ized) peoples of the region as well - to attribute a well-defined precise cultural identity to the first bearers of Y-I2 'DIn' can be very hard, i believe...

razor
07-01-12, 21:20
One thing you guys need always to remember is that I2-Din did not exist before c. 300 BCE (when its first Patriarch was born). And other I2's could not be "converted" to it: they had to be genetically produced. So a lot of theories are just plain impossible if Nordvedt and Verenich are right (and so far no one has proven them not to be.) But since Slavs cannot be demonstrated to have existed as a definable cultural and linguistic community before the very beginning of our era, there is a window of opportunity here. The first I2-Din would not have been a Slav. Nor his daddy. The closest cousins today are West Europeans. Which may or may not be significant. I think it is, but I don't yet quite know how in terms of recorded history and archaeology.

MOESAN
07-01-12, 23:15
One thing you guys need always to remember is that I2-Din did not exist before c. 300 BCE (when its first Patriarch was born). And other I2's could not be "converted" to it: they had to be genetically produced. So a lot of theories are just plain impossible if Nordvedt and Verenich are right (and so far no one has proven them not to be.) But since Slavs cannot be demonstrated to have existed as a definable cultural and linguistic community before the very beginning of our era, there is a window of opportunity here. The first I2-Din would not have been a Slav. Nor his daddy. The closest cousins today are West Europeans. Which may or may not be significant. I think it is, but I don't yet quite know how in terms of recorded history and archaeology.

your are right in some way (even if I find astonishing enough trusting into so precise results in STRs calculations in a so absolute way)
but: the problems are diverse: and arguments can come to confirm or infirm theories
Slavs are older than their historical coming in sight- I agree it says nothing about their carrying of Y-I2a1b 'Din' neither for nor against (in my mind they was Y-R1a for the most and can have known their final cristallization as Slavs including a lot of Y-I2a1 of previous different origin but living in S-Ukraina
- the presence (a scarce one) of 'cousins' in Western Europe don't prove clearly anything - the great age of their ancestor don't prove they are a long time ago in the regions of their present location (Western Europe) -
- different things: the present day localisation of a HG 'X' (more worth than a HT) >< the place of origin of this HG 'X' >< the population where ONE OF THE carriers of an upstream HG 'Y' underwent the mutation that defines the HG 'X'>< the localisation of this last population - when trying to find out the origin and the process of concretion of a culture we can't exclude the problem of the 'mother' population or 'mother' populationS (HG 'Y')...

said this, which and where is the closest upstream HG (SNP) of I2a1b-'Din' (because I'm not sure to be up-to-date about the very last results about that

thank beforehand

razor
08-01-12, 00:14
Nordvedt has the relevant SNP's here: http://knordvedt.home.bresnan.net Have a look at his haplogroup I tree.

razor
08-01-12, 00:38
http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net

Sorry for the typo/

how yes no 2
08-01-12, 14:52
I2a-din southhttp://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=ymaphotspots in south Poland and north Poland match exactly locations of Scirii on this map showing situation at 200 AD http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110414042534/historyatlas/images/thumb/7/7a/Europe-200ad.jpg/700px-Europe-200ad.jpghttp://historyatlas.wikia.com/wiki/Europe

zanipolo
08-01-12, 19:26
I2a-din southhttp://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=ymaphotspots in south Poland and north Poland match exactly locations of Scirii on this map showing situation at 200 ADhttp://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110414042534/historyatlas/images/thumb/7/7a/Europe-200ad.jpg/700px-Europe-200ad.jpghttp://historyatlas.wikia.com/wiki/Europe

i went into the link, where exactly does it say this as half the links in the link do not work as well as no mention of scirii

razor
08-01-12, 20:52
No one really knows where the Sciri were between the time of Pliny's informant (Pliny's work came out in ca. 75 CE we don't know when his informant wrote-- it could have been considerably earlier) and the 5th century. The map is just an arbitrary guess.

zanipolo
08-03-12, 12:00
some interesting notes on this link below and also the internal links. this is for I2a and others

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/05/24/1100723108.full.pdf

While reading some notes in regards to KN and the I2a-din, it was noted by others that KN states that I2a-din originated south of Masuria ( mazoria) ( Poland) and migrated to the balkans, some say taken by Illyrians as there original home was central europe ( the area of hungary, Poland )...........I am speaking of the bronze age.

I know this has been brought up about 20 years ago by kruhe and earlier Kalinnos, but with latest testing, I can see that it might fit the scenario very well. Even if we take Tery Robb scenario it still fits,

The question is where the illyrians neighbours of the east-germanics or where they also germanic ( before germanic was born ).

some later notes on celtic and germanic union has Illyrian words
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=0109AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA179&dq=illyrians+in+germany&hl=en#v=onepage&q=illyrians%20in%20germany&f=false

Needs more study on the matter

Taranis
08-03-12, 14:24
some later notes on celtic and germanic union has Illyrian words
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=0109AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA179&dq=illyrians+in+germany&hl=en#v=onepage&q=illyrians in germany&f=false

Needs more study on the matter

This is incorrect. The Celtic word for "iron" is not derived from the PIE word for 'metal' (Latin "aes", Sanskrit "ayas"), but from the PIE word for "blood": Latin "aser", Classical Greek "eas", Armenian "aryun" (արյուն), Hittite "esHar", Latvian "asins", Tocharian "ysar" - all which mean blood. The Celtic name almost certainly derives from the color of iron ore. In Antiquity, the Greeks too had the idea too to name iron ore "blood colored" (the Greek word for blood is "haima"), which is where the term "hematite" (the scientific name of iron ore) comes from.

Also, why should the Hallstatt Culture have been Illyrian, as the book suggests? There is absolutely no evidence of Illyrian place names from the former Hallstatt areas in Antiquity.

Diurpaneus
08-03-12, 15:10
some interesting maps here

eliznik/East Europe/History/pre-history

http://www.eliznik.co.uk/

sparkey
08-03-12, 18:30
some interesting notes on this link below and also the internal links. this is for I2a and others

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/05/24/1100723108.full.pdf

The Treilles samples? Those were I2a1a, of course, which is quite distinct from I2a-Din.


While reading some notes in regards to KN and the I2a-din, it was noted by others that KN states that I2a-din originated south of Masuria ( mazoria) ( Poland) and migrated to the balkans, some say taken by Illyrians as there original home was central europe ( the area of hungary, Poland )...........I am speaking of the bronze age.

You're conflating what KN says with what "others" say, and bringing in something (a Bronze Age expansion) that is chronologically well before what KN suggests is possible. Also, a "South of Poland" origin makes a lot of sense for I2a-Din-S, but probably not as much sense for I2a-Din as a whole, per Verenich's more precise analysis, which places it farther east.


Needs more study on the matter

As always. :good_job:

pipinnacanus
09-03-12, 05:06
Ken must be take with great caution for his many mistake.

He has before some SNP placed Ht/STR into 'clade' he 'discover' only to later with new SNP find these are not in any such clade but are different SNP.
Also, Ken makes many claims about predict the age of these clades, and these have fallen to the real science the same way his non-clade falled to science advance.

Only were Ken is useful in truth at all is to mimic and repeat fact about mostly the newest I1 SNP because he make himself informed even before these are released. This is not Ken discovered, but only repeated for the gain of others however.

The claims that Ken discover you cannot often have a long wait until they are shown faulty.

pipinnacanus
09-03-12, 05:15
this is perfectly aligned with my assumption that Germanic Scirii were also I2a-Din people...last mentions of Scirii are in teritory of Romania....

You must answer first what you mean by germanic. There is no question it is proven by ancient DNA that I2 is found in ancient sample in what is today modern 'germany'.

The problem is, there is I2 found in EVERY culture of europe, slav/germ/celt/med.

I2 is not like many other Hg that is some way restrict to one arriving land-conquering people, and its samples in Europe are so old (and not joined by ANY I1) that they may predate of arriving slav/germ/celt/med cultures.

I see very clearly that not one culture or ethnic of europe can claim I2 because it is remnants of a aboriginy that live in europe before these modern culture come in or maybe even exist. Some place like in Balkans they are sheiled by mountain and terrain and more manage to survive, but in places with less protective land or no mountain the I2 aboriginy are mistreate and kill by new cultures who come on to rule over the I2 left in europe.

try to place I2 as being the germ/celt/slav/med is not going to work because they are subjected to all these peoples, and today they are found to some degree among the population of all these peoples they manage to adopt into.

zanipolo
09-03-12, 07:54
The Treilles samples? Those were I2a1a, of course, which is quite distinct from I2a-Din.



You're conflating what KN says with what "others" say, and bringing in something (a Bronze Age expansion) that is chronologically well before what KN suggests is possible. Also, a "South of Poland" origin makes a lot of sense for I2a-Din-S, but probably not as much sense for I2a-Din as a whole, per Verenich's more precise analysis, which places it farther east.



As always. :good_job:

I2a -Din is older than germanic or slavic its older than the Unitice culture in which the illyrians where in the centre of.
Historians tells us, that I2a-din is found south of the Galindian people , these people are west-baltic people of modern masuria.
History also says that the first recorded name of illyrian by Greek historians happened only in the 4th century BC.
History also tells us that Illyrians never came from the east (be it the steppes or anatolia)
History tells us that Alexander the great father, Philip was the first to confront the illyrians.

The only conclusion is that I2a-din came from slovak, hungarian and southern polish area and was brought into the balkans by the Illyrians. prior to this the balkans had E1b in the south and J2 in the north ( I am speaking of the major Haplotype).

What year was I2a - 13000 years BC or earlier?

Q- when did these Sythians and Sarmatians become slavic?

zanipolo
09-03-12, 07:58
You must answer first what you mean by germanic. There is no question it is proven by ancient DNA that I2 is found in ancient sample in what is today modern 'germany'.

The problem is, there is I2 found in EVERY culture of europe, slav/germ/celt/med.

I2 is not like many other Hg that is some way restrict to one arriving land-conquering people, and its samples in Europe are so old (and not joined by ANY I1) that they may predate of arriving slav/germ/celt/med cultures.

I see very clearly that not one culture or ethnic of europe can claim I2 because it is remnants of a aboriginy that live in europe before these modern culture come in or maybe even exist. Some place like in Balkans they are sheiled by mountain and terrain and more manage to survive, but in places with less protective land or no mountain the I2 aboriginy are mistreate and kill by new cultures who come on to rule over the I2 left in europe.

try to place I2 as being the germ/celt/slav/med is not going to work because they are subjected to all these peoples, and today they are found to some degree among the population of all these peoples they manage to adopt into.

I agree that germanic people arrived where they where after the I2a-din arrived in the balkans

Goga
09-03-12, 17:58
Remember that After the Two World Wars Germany lost a lot historic Germanic territory in the east! Poland was located much more to the east!

sparkey
09-03-12, 18:32
The problem is, there is I2 found in EVERY culture of europe, slav/germ/celt/med.

We're not talking about I2, we're talking about its subclade, I2a-Din (I2a1b1a in Nordtvedt's hierarchy).

sparkey
09-03-12, 18:44
I2a -Din is older than germanic or slavic its older than the Unitice culture in which the illyrians where in the centre of.

Maybe for Slavic, but I think that proto-Germanic is likely older or comparable and Unetice Culture is certainly older. Remember that the estimate for its TMRCA is ~2500 YBP, and even if you think that's too young an estimate, you have to acknowledge that it's a young subclade as far as I2 subclades go.


Historians tells us, that I2a-din is found south of the Galindian people , these people are west-baltic people of modern masuria.

Historians don't tell us anything about I2a-Din, what are you talking about?


The only conclusion is that I2a-din came from slovak, hungarian and southern polish area and was brought into the balkans by the Illyrians. prior to this the balkans had E1b in the south and J2 in the north ( I am speaking of the major Haplotype).

Actually, this theory works decently given the diversity, as long as we assume that Nordtvedt's estimates are too young, considering that we're really just talking about I2a-Din-S when we talk about coming down from Poland and nearby. But I don't see a reason to assume an Illyrian migration in the same way that we have a Slavic migration. Why can't they be more ancient in the area, like the Albanians and the Hellenes? In which case, the Illyrians would have been mostly J2, R1b, and E1b themselves.


What year was I2a - 13000 years BC or earlier?

I2a is about 21,000 years old. But we're talking about I2a-Din, which is much, much younger.

Gosh
12-03-12, 15:25
Paleolithic continuity 50% :rolleyes2:

zanipolo
14-03-12, 04:26
Actually, this theory works decently given the diversity, as long as we assume that Nordtvedt's estimates are too young, considering that we're really just talking about I2a-Din-S when we talk about coming down from Poland and nearby. But I don't see a reason to assume an Illyrian migration in the same way that we have a Slavic migration. Why can't they be more ancient in the area, like the Albanians and the Hellenes? In which case, the Illyrians would have been mostly J2, R1b, and E1b themselves.



.

the illyrians had to have migrated into the balkans because the greek historians only have illyrians recorded from the 4th century BC in their history and also the myceneans had outposts as far as Istria.
Who inhabited these "illyrian" lands in the balkans ?. Maybe dorians, thracians, epirotes in the southern illyrian parts and maybe the Norici , raeti and pannonians ( if there is such a people) in the northern part

I get the feeling that illyrians where either related to the east germanics ( before there was germanic ) or very close cultural neighbours.

Yetos
14-03-12, 12:37
the illyrians had to have migrated into the balkans because the greek historians only have illyrians recorded from the 4th century BC in their history and also the myceneans had outposts as far as Istria.
Who inhabited these "illyrian" lands in the balkans ?. Maybe dorians, thracians, epirotes in the southern illyrian parts and maybe the Norici , raeti and pannonians ( if there is such a people) in the northern part

I get the feeling that illyrians where either related to the east germanics ( before there was germanic ) or very close cultural neighbours.

Interesting Idea, although I share it different,

For me Illyrians was a mix of a kind celts (Illyro-Celts?, balkan-Celts?, Pannoni basin celts?) with Cadmeians, and Albanians-Albocense were a east para-Germanic or para-Slavic (considering the exist of Torbesh which maybe is > 15-20% of population) as you propose it, Getae-Dacian or Thracian for me.

Gosh
14-03-12, 21:31
Well.... I've found on a forum this map which shows migrations of Serbs from the central Europe to the south. If I understood it correctly, this movement is related with the I2a1 Dinaric South.

5530

Who can explain this a little bit more?

zanipolo
14-03-12, 21:43
Well.... I've found on a forum this map which shows migrations of Serbs from the central Europe to the south. If I understood it correctly, this movement is related with the I2a1 Dinaric South.

5530

Who can explain this a little bit more?

this refers only to the period after the fall of the roman empire, I am talking about the bronze age which is over 1000 years before the data of the map above

sparkey
14-03-12, 22:19
Well.... I've found on a forum this map which shows migrations of Serbs from the central Europe to the south. If I understood it correctly, this movement is related with the I2a1 Dinaric South.

5530

Who can explain this a little bit more?

That map is from a hobbyist at DNA Forums who took whatever proven I2a-Din-S he could find and attempted to fit its distribution to known Slavic migrations (he explicitly called them "Serb" migrations). IIRC, he relies heavily on the young Nordtvedt estimate of its age, and corresponds the origin to an area of peak diversity of I2a-Din-S observed by Verenich. After that, it's just a best-guess fit.

I actually found it to be a quality analysis, on par with Verenich's, although it has a lot of assumptions built into it, and may give an incorrect picture of how precisely we know things about I2a-Din-S at the moment. At least, it shows the coherence of assuming I2a-Din-S to be a relatively young Western (rather than Southern) branch of I2a-Din.

mihaitzateo
15-03-12, 03:40
Well what if I2A dinaric appeared in Carpathians and Dinaric Alps,from a mutation from another I2 ?
I mean Ken Nortvedt is saying that I2A dinaric is pretty young.
I understood that some Y DNA tests found a large variety of I2A dinaric in these two places mentioned above.

"Former I2a2a in the Y2010 tree. I2a1b1 (L69.2(=T)/S163.2) is typical of the South Slavic populations of south-eastern Europe, being highest in Bosnia-Herzegovina (>50%). Haplogroup I2a1b1 is also commonly found in north-eastern Italians. There is also a high concentration of I2a2a in north-east Romania, Moldova and western Ukraine. In 2010 has Ken Nordtvedt argued that I2a1b1 is too young not to have been a result of a sudden expansion. According to him I2a1b1 arose not earlier than 2500 years ago in Eastern Europe. He has presumed this to be a consequence from the Slavic invasion of the Balkans, from the area north-east of the Carpathians since 500 CE. In 2011 Nordtvedt has confirmed I2a1b1 is not older than 2,800 years. In his last comments about Haplogroup I tree and the conjectured spread map, he locates the start of the I2a1b1 lineage around the middle course of the Vistula."
(according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I2_%28Y-DNA%29#I2a1b1)

I am not agreeing with the part written with italic,those are just supositions,but what is told above with the age of I2A dinaric I think it can be proved scientifically.

Now if you wonder from where the I2 from which I2A dinaric appeared by some mutation is,no ideea,but I doubt is from sarmatians or slavs.

zanipolo
15-03-12, 07:14
Well what if I2A dinaric appeared in Carpathians and Dinaric Alps,from a mutation from another I2 ?
I mean Ken Nortvedt is saying that I2A dinaric is pretty young.
I understood that some Y DNA tests found a large variety of I2A dinaric in these two places mentioned above.

"Former I2a2a in the Y2010 tree. I2a1b1 (L69.2(=T)/S163.2) is typical of the South Slavic populations of south-eastern Europe, being highest in Bosnia-Herzegovina (>50%). Haplogroup I2a1b1 is also commonly found in north-eastern Italians. There is also a high concentration of I2a2a in north-east Romania, Moldova and western Ukraine. In 2010 has Ken Nordtvedt argued that I2a1b1 is too young not to have been a result of a sudden expansion. According to him I2a1b1 arose not earlier than 2500 years ago in Eastern Europe. He has presumed this to be a consequence from the Slavic invasion of the Balkans, from the area north-east of the Carpathians since 500 CE. In 2011 Nordtvedt has confirmed I2a1b1 is not older than 2,800 years. In his last comments about Haplogroup I tree and the conjectured spread map, he locates the start of the I2a1b1 lineage around the middle course of the Vistula."
(according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I2_%28Y-DNA%29#I2a1b1)

I am not agreeing with the part written with italic,those are just supositions,but what is told above with the age of I2A dinaric I think it can be proved scientifically.

Now if you wonder from where the I2 from which I2A dinaric appeared by some mutation is,no ideea,but I doubt is from sarmatians or slavs.

as per your link, the tested northeast Italians are from trento which to this day is 52% german and 48% italian, it only became italian inside the last 100 yeras. Before this it was tyrolese, which was in ancient times Raeti and eugenai. With this knowledge 12a1b1 would have only occurred in trento area during the germanic migration from eastern germany.
2800 years = 700-800 BC which can include the illyrians, raeti, etruscans but not celtic, venetic, norici or ligurians as archeology has them at certain times which do not fit the scenario.

Still my theory should still hold true and I agree with you it was not a sarmatian migration.

KN did state 9 months ago that one I haplotype ranges from the basques to venice, what would be fascinating is checking where these two I groups intermingled and also the germanic I1. A minestrone of I HG in central Austria

Diurpaneus
15-03-12, 10:41
Well what if I2A dinaric appeared in Carpathians and Dinaric Alps,from a mutation from another I2 ?
I mean Ken Nortvedt is saying that I2A dinaric is pretty young.
I understood that some Y DNA tests found a large variety of I2A dinaric in these two places mentioned above.

"Former I2a2a in the Y2010 tree. I2a1b1 (L69.2(=T)/S163.2) is typical of the South Slavic populations of south-eastern Europe, being highest in Bosnia-Herzegovina (>50%). Haplogroup I2a1b1 is also commonly found in north-eastern Italians. There is also a high concentration of I2a2a in north-east Romania, Moldova and western Ukraine. In 2010 has Ken Nordtvedt argued that I2a1b1 is too young not to have been a result of a sudden expansion. According to him I2a1b1 arose not earlier than 2500 years ago in Eastern Europe. He has presumed this to be a consequence from the Slavic invasion of the Balkans, from the area north-east of the Carpathians since 500 CE. In 2011 Nordtvedt has confirmed I2a1b1 is not older than 2,800 years. In his last comments about Haplogroup I tree and the conjectured spread map, he locates the start of the I2a1b1 lineage around the middle course of the Vistula."
(according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I2_%28Y-DNA%29#I2a1b1)

I am not agreeing with the part written with italic,those are just supositions,but what is told above with the age of I2A dinaric I think it can be proved scientifically.

Now if you wonder from where the I2 from which I2A dinaric appeared by some mutation is,no ideea,but I doubt is from sarmatians or slavs.
I don't think that I2a1b is Slavic or Sarmatian.
If it was slavic baltic people should have this haplogroup.
Sarmatians were great warriors but they were'nt so many.For example in hungarian plains they ruled over a Dacian peasantry(Limigantes)
Various Dacian tribes lived in southern Poland,Slovakia and parts of Ukraine.
Aromuns are isolated Balkanic Romance speakers.Their language don't have Slavic borrowings(unlike Romanian).Even now they don't mix with others.But they have 20-40% I2a.
Albanians also have I2a1b.And they are too an isolated group.
In my opinion I2a1b is Paleo-Balkanic(Thracian/Dacian,Illyrian)
It could come from Catacombe culture and those people were a mix of I2a and R1a.

But i think they also kept R1b(from IE people),J2 and E (from indigenous) as well from Cernavoda-Bolleraz.
In fact professor Alexander Rodewald(the one who made the Thracian Ancient DNA study- bones collected from Getic land) said that the Northern Italians are the closest to those Thracians.
Unlike the Dacians who were mostly Dinarics/Alpines, the Getae were Mediterraneans/Atlantic Mediterraneans also.
I'm not saying Balkanic people are entirely autochtonous,but Paleo-Balkanics had many haplogroups.

http://www.hist-europe.fr/Prehistoire/indo-europeen.html

Yetos
15-03-12, 11:02
Diurpaneus

an interesting case, which might help us all to understand who were the Slavs,

Anna Komnene in her books names many times the South Slavic population as Scythians, time is about 1100 Ad 500 years after South Slavic invasion-devastation,
if we understand that, then we can explain why in Romania have some Slavic influence, but not from the 500 AD but from earlier Scythia minor at 400 BC about. in fact maybe toponyms ending as -dava are from Scythian and not from Getae which was -ussa.
in fact I believe that Slavs never existed in ancient times with that name, but with the name Scythians, and Slavs are the production of many years connection of Scythians with Finns- Baltics (Sarmates) and Sarmates have nothing in common with Huns-Tatars etc,

The description Herodotus is giving for Sarmates is Baltic population which lived in wooden tents and breed reindeer, description which fits with Suomi-Lappi N1 HG,
while Huno-Bulgars are mentioned as mounted warriors, leather tents and not reindeer breeders,

Diurpaneus
15-03-12, 13:08
Strabo,Cassius Dio and many others says clearly that Getae and Dacians were Thracians not Scythians.
The Romans and especially the Greeks could make the difference between Thracians and Scythians.
There's no -ussa endig opposite to -dava.Cause you have only one place name Sarmizegetusa who could have -ussa ending.Many Dacian towns doesn't have -dava ending.
The dava it's a special type of town because it's a tribal center.
And Scythians don't have something like it.

Gosh
15-03-12, 15:21
this refers only to the period after the fall of the roman empire, I am talking about the bronze age which is over 1000 years before the data of the map above

How we can speak about "1000 years before" if the estimated TMRCA for Dinaric south is about 2000 years?

Gosh
15-03-12, 15:30
Diurpaneus

an interesting case, which might help us all to understand who were the Slavs,

Anna Komnene in her books names many times the South Slavic population as Scythians, time is about 1100 Ad 500 years after South Slavic invasion-devastation,


Why Byzantine tzar Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos didn't talk about that? I dare to say that he had much better sources and better knowledge about the situation from that time.

BTW your speech about "invasion-devastation" sounds quite in "nazi" manner because Greeks and other nations from that period of time did the same. Moreover, only a part of south Slavs together with Avars invaded that territory.

razor
15-03-12, 15:56
Byzantine historical nomenclature was based on ancient literature, esp. Herodotus. And it wasn't an innovation in the time of Anna Comnena. The 3rd century Greek-scripting historian Deuxippus constantly spoke of the Goths as "Scythians" because they were from the territory of ancient Scythia, even though they had nothing in common with these ancient Scythians. Anna (12th century) also referred to Pechenegs and Cumans as "Scythians"... In fact this Greek oddity was noticed by the Old Kyivan chroniclers. In the Tale of Bygone years (written ca. 1116) Monk Nestor (or his continuator Sylvester( after a lengthy geographical description of the territory and population of the Kyivan Rus state (Slavs, Norse, Balts, Finns et al.) concluded "all these are called 'Great Scythia' by the Greeks". Keep that in mind when speculating about the connection between Slavs and Scythians.

sparkey
15-03-12, 17:28
I don't think that I2a1b is Slavic or Sarmatian.
If it was slavic baltic people should have this haplogroup.

How do you figure? Why can't R1a be the common haplogroup among Balto-Slavs, and I2a1b1a be basically unique to the Slavs?


Aromuns are isolated Balkanic Romance speakers.Their language don't have Slavic borrowings(unlike Romanian).Even now they don't mix with others.But they have 20-40% I2a.

Do we know the subclade or STR diversity of I2a in Aromuns? I know with Greek I2a-Din, it's almost always I2a-Din-N, which I don't discount could have some pre-Slavic connections, as it's the older of the I2a-Din branches (although Slavic incursions into modern Greece did happen, and I consider them a very likely source). But as a whole, even I2a-Din-N is strongly tied to Slavic migrations, as we see with its distribution in places like Belarus and Russia.

Of course, more I2a-Din in the Balkans is I2a-Din-S, which probably has too young an expansion on the Balkans (from the north no less) to be connected to much of anything other than the Slavs.


It could come from Catacombe culture and those people were a mix of I2a and R1a.

I think a Catacombe Culture connection is within range, possibly, but one thing that discounts it is that it appears to have some sort of continuity with Corded Ware Culture. If we accept that, then it's curious how only R1a seems to have expanded with Corded Ware. So, I'm not ready to commit to such an old culture for such a young subclade.

mihaitzateo
15-03-12, 18:14
Most aromuns have a higher or much higher percentage of J2 than usual romanians.
http://www.carswell.com.au/wp-content/documents/homogenous-balkan-analysis.pdf

how yes no 3
15-03-12, 23:07
That map is from a hobbyist at DNA Forums who took whatever proven I2a-Din-S he could find and attempted to fit its distribution to known Slavic migrations (he explicitly called them "Serb" migrations). IIRC, he relies heavily on the young Nordtvedt estimate of its age, and corresponds the origin to an area of peak diversity of I2a-Din-S observed by Verenich. After that, it's just a best-guess fit.

I actually found it to be a quality analysis, on par with Verenich's, although it has a lot of assumptions built into it, and may give an incorrect picture of how precisely we know things about I2a-Din-S at the moment. At least, it shows the coherence of assuming I2a-Din-S to be a relatively young Western (rather than Southern) branch of I2a-Din.

its realistic scenario....
though i still stick to Serians story.....as it fits well with spread of I2a2-Din in both Asia and Europe especially around Danube....

according to "De administrando imperio" Serbs come to Balkan from land Boiki where they have also originally dwellt and where they were called white
http://books.google.nl/books?id=3al15wpFWiMC&lpg=PP1&dq=de%20administrando%20imperio&pg=PA153#v=onepage&q&f=false
hence we can speak of white Serbs

similarly in ancient Kurdish areas, in Cappadocia ancient authors e.g. Strabo speak of white Syrians


according to Seneca, Serians live around Danube, in Serica (northwest China), rule over scathered Scythians and rule over Red sea....
red sea is where Sherdana used to clash with ancient Egypt... a lake in Egypt was named after them - Serbonian bog...


I would add here that Kurds (which is for me same tribal name as Serdi and Sherdana) are people with significant I2a2
note that Kurdish tribes bare names such as Sorani and Garmiani... which may indicate the link to other haplogroup I people

Kurds hold position that fits perfectly into story of expansion of sea peoples.... i did explain this in thread about sea people... order of conquest of sea peoples strongly suggest that conquest started from southwest Black sea coasts made cut to Mediteranian went through south of Asia minor where we later find Lukka / Lycians (Lycians same as Boii and Serbs and Dacians? share link to wolf, Kurt = wolf in turkish indicating that possible origin of word in turkish might come from Kurds self-identifying with wolf... Lycians had several times leader with names Sarpedon which may have just meant ruler of Sarpes)..than conquest went south through what is today called Syria to red sea shores... clearly key areas in such conquest must have been Kurdish lands as they are bridge from Black sea to Mediteranean sea..

Strabo states that both tribes of Cappadocia are white Syrians, in fact he explains they are called white as being whiter than other Syrians..from rest of his talk its clear that for him Syrians = Sumerians as he talks about Semiramis, Ninus...
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/16A*.html

question is the relation of Sumerians and white Sumerians..could white Sumerians be later addition to Sumerian stock from some northern populations... could it be related to expansion of sea peoples? or is this about Gutians who ruled over Sumer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutian_period
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutian_people


further from Kurds haplogroup I spread in Asia fits perfectly spread of Sarbans tribe in Pakistan and Avganistan...

Serians are also written in history as Seres

Pomponius Mela in Asia puts Seres in between Indians and Scythians...which probably boils down to a line from northwest China via Pakistan/Avganistan to Kurds... he clearly states that, starting from east, Asia (or what was called Asia in his time) is inhabited by Indians, Seres and Scythians..no doubt that Seres cannot be Chinese as they never lived west of Indians...west of Indians are areas of Avganistan, Pakistan, Kurdistan...

http://books.google.nl/books?id=6AplSod8IDcC&lpg=PP1&dq=pomponius%20mela&pg=PA36#v=onepage&q=seres&f=false

Serica is northwest China but also arc from China to India...northwest China is where silk was produced....this arc was trade route towards south seas....
both northwest China and arc are clearly seen in spread of haplogroup I in Asia.. (see map bellow...map is now somewhat outdated and needs less of hotspot in north iran and more in kurdish areas) big part of arc is made by Sarbans...(spread of Sarbans is depicted with green areas on the map of Avganistan and Pakistan bellow...compare it with the haplogroup I spread on map above it..its perfect match for arc...)

on Ptolemy map, Serica it is north of Tibet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PtomelyAsiaDetail.jpg

in north west China - area north of Tibet, there is a tribe with somewhat european look..they speak mongolian today and are called Sarta
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dongxiang_people

Sart in mongolian = moon, crescent
Serb coat of arms essentially has 4 "C" signs - crescents

Sarta of northwest China are related to white Sarts - name for people who origin from ancient arabic? trade people in areas such as Uzbekistan, Kyrgizstan...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sart

in fact Sart settled areas are again places with hotspot of haplogroup I
and there is clear sign of continuity with Serica - silk production from ancient times till today...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margelan

5531
https://sites.google.com/site/thelineagesofasia/

http://gulf2000.columbia.edu/images/maps/Pashtun_Confederacies_sm.jpg




in europe I see people like Scirii/Scirrians and Scordisci/Serdi being genetically part of those Serians

those perhaps celto-germanic or east germanic people eventually merged with R1a Scytho-Sarmatians to give Slavs (Sclaveni) of today....

I2a2-Din-South has came to existence more recently among European branch of Serians.... my guess is Scirri and Scordisci did spread it originally... as Baltiic spread of I2a2-Din-South matches supposed locations of Sciri....

Serbs of today may origin from Scirii or Scordisci who merged with Sarmatians/Scythians to give Slavic people...

russian primary chronicle states that Serbs (and other south Slavs) origin from Danubian Slavs who lived in north Serbia around Danube (Hungary and Bulgaria at the time of writing) and went from there to Lyaks (Lechs or Poles) in times when they were pushed out from Danube basin by spreading Roman empire....this description maps Serbs mention in Russian primary chronicle to the position of Scordisci
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_Chronicle
http://www.utoronto.ca/elul/English/218/PVL-selections.pdf



as per your link, the tested northeast Italians are from trento which to this day is 52% german and 48% italian, it only became italian inside the last 100 yeras. Before this it was tyrolese, which was in ancient times Raeti and eugenai. With this knowledge 12a1b1 would have only occurred in trento area during the germanic migration from eastern germany.
2800 years = 700-800 BC which can include the illyrians, raeti, etruscans but not celtic, venetic, norici or ligurians as archeology has them at certain times which do not fit the scenario.

yes, but there were germanic people also entering other areas of italy not just Trento...

what about Boii?
i2a-din has high diversity in Czech republic...

Ser = head in iranic languages, honourable title in germanic languages
Ser Boii = main tribe of Boii

same as there are Scythians and royal Scythians

in that case
from Serboii could have come corruptions like Serdi / Scordisci / Sherdana
and we do know that Scordisci are related or same as Boii...
and that the lake named after Sherdana is called "Serbonian bog"



I don't think that I2a1b is Slavic or Sarmatian.
If it was slavic baltic people should have this haplogroup.
Sarmatians were great warriors but they were'nt so many.For example in hungarian plains they ruled over a Dacian peasantry(Limigantes)
Various Dacian tribes lived in southern Poland,Slovakia and parts of Ukraine.
Aromuns are isolated Balkanic Romance speakers.Their language don't have Slavic borrowings(unlike Romanian).Even now they don't mix with others.But they have 20-40% I2a.


Serians rulled over scattered Scythians....
Scythians and Sarmatians are of same origin - Greek legends relate Sarmatians to origin from group of Scythians that lived with Amazones... in my opinion both Scythians and Sarmatians were dominantly R1a people



Albanians also have I2a1b.And they are too an isolated group.

Albanians in north Albania and on Kosovo and in Macedonia are isolated group they have almost no I2a2-Din...
http://www.bjmg.edu.mk/UploadedImages/pdf/11-18.pdf

Albanians from Albania were ruled by Bulgarians for long time...and area was also heavily settled by Slavic people...in fact lot of toponyms in south Albania are Slavic in origin





Strabo,Cassius Dio and many others says clearly that Getae and Dacians were Thracians not Scythians.
The Romans and especially the Greeks could make the difference between Thracians and Scythians.
There's no -ussa endig opposite to -dava.Cause you have only one place name Sarmizegetusa who could have -ussa ending.Many Dacian towns doesn't have -dava ending.
The dava it's a special type of town because it's a tribal center.
And Scythians don't have something like it.


in south slavic languages

fortress = tvrdjava , tvrdina
hard, strong = tvrd

hence fortress = hard/strong + dava (Dacian) or hard/strong + din (Celtic)


How do you figure? Why can't R1a be the common haplogroup among Balto-Slavs, and I2a1b1a be basically unique to the Slavs?

yes...
Slavs in my opinion only came to existance after merging I2a2-Din with Scythian / Sarmatian / Balto-Slavic R1a


Do we know the subclade or STR diversity of I2a in Aromuns? I know with Greek I2a-Din, it's almost always I2a-Din-N, which I don't discount could have some pre-Slavic connections, as it's the older of the I2a-Din branches (although Slavic incursions into modern Greece did happen, and I consider them a very likely source). But as a whole, even I2a-Din-N is strongly tied to Slavic migrations, as we see with its distribution in places like Belarus and Russia.
Serians ruled over scattered Scythians...
some translations of Seneca state Dacians instead of Scythians...


Of course, more I2a-Din in the Balkans is I2a-Din-S, which probably has too young an expansion on the Balkans (from the north no less) to be connected to much of anything other than the Slavs.

i think its more or less clear that I2a2-din south spread with south Slavs...

Yetos
16-03-12, 00:38
Why Byzantine tzar Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos didn't talk about that? I dare to say that he had much better sources and better knowledge about the situation from that time.

BTW your speech about "invasion-devastation" sounds quite in "nazi" manner because Greeks and other nations from that period of time did the same. Moreover, only a part of south Slavs together with Avars invaded that territory.

You are right, but how can I describe it?
I do agree that Greeks did same as many others,
if you give me a correct description in words I will change it.

Yetos
16-03-12, 00:49
Byzantine historical nomenclature was based on ancient literature, esp. Herodotus. And it wasn't an innovation in the time of Anna Comnena. The 3rd century Greek-scripting historian Deuxippus constantly spoke of the Goths as "Scythians" because they were from the territory of ancient Scythia, even though they had nothing in common with these ancient Scythians. Anna (12th century) also referred to Pechenegs and Cumans as "Scythians"... In fact this Greek oddity was noticed by the Old Kyivan chroniclers. In the Tale of Bygone years (written ca. 1116) Monk Nestor (or his continuator Sylvester( after a lengthy geographical description of the territory and population of the Kyivan Rus state (Slavs, Norse, Balts, Finns et al.) concluded "all these are called 'Great Scythia' by the Greeks". Keep that in mind when speculating about the connection between Slavs and Scythians.

That is the difference, that Scythians are connected with Both Goths, which for me are The Getae and with Slavic population,
while the term Sauromates is abandoned as also the term Getae? so what had happened?
they can not be vanished in thin air? then what,
it seems like Deuxipus as you said names Goths as Scythians Due to minor Scythia
and Anna komnene due to Major Scythia,

Historically we have a time that the land of Getae are under scythians, the minor Scythia,
while major Scythia is more East, beside the Sauromates,
so what had happened?
for me it seems like in Greater Scythia Scythian assimilated sauromates and create Slavic population, much before the arrival of Ros and Huno-Bulgars Tatars etc
while in minor Scythia they were mixed with Getae, before moved west as ostrogoths and Visigoths,

my personal opinion about that gets stronger everyday, if Sparky is correct about the I2a2 Din there it might be correct since we consider Thracian as R1a and R1b

Now about Ros and Rus Ρως are described as Northern non Slavic population, probably Scandinavian, since the Lion in Piraus, the one is 'taken' by Venicians has Scandinavic runic scripts, meaning that Ρως are same with Varangian guard according Byzantine, while people of Kiev are speaking Slavic, that is why they adopted the Cyrillic,

I have said many times
Ρως means North, Ρουσσο means red
Scythians used to paint their clothes RED




Scythia minor as you see is in the land of Getae

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d5/Scythia_Minor_map.jpg


while look at the bellow as Scythia
and exactly the area A
I wonder, is not the area of I population? that sparky Describes? or maybe I am worng?


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8f/ScythianGroups.png



It seems like Scythian and their names like Skiller Atto etc are connected with both Germanic and Slavic language and History, we know that Germanic and Slavic are connected in proto-forms,
I wonder either Germanic is a Thracian+scythian +west Europe language
and Slavic as Scythian+sarmatian+Baltic language,
a good point to that is except Tocharian all Satem languages are in areas near Turkic
populations while all Centum (except tocharian) in areas away from Turkic populations

zanipolo
16-03-12, 08:21
How do you figure? Why can't R1a be the common haplogroup among Balto-Slavs, and I2a1b1a be basically unique to the Slavs?




Because the term Slavic only appeared at its earliest time between 200 and 400AD according to slavic historians.

2 - I2a1b1a according to Ftdna in NOV 2011 found 40% of their tested people with this marker in Iberia. and it comprised of L160

3 - KN stated in DEC 2011 that there are 11 types of I HG and this slavic ones which came from the Antes and sklavians happened after the Roman empire existed. It does not make sense that he lost over 1000 years

Define what a Slav is?................if you read most web sites it designates a group similar to naming a Latin, british, iberian, scandinavian or celtic .........that is many tribes who had different HG and spoke the same tongue

Gosh
16-03-12, 13:47
Zanipolo
you didn't answer my question about I2a1b1 )))

sparkey
16-03-12, 17:17
Because the term Slavic only appeared at its earliest time between 200 and 400AD according to slavic historians.

Right, and I'm arguing that it was mainly a 1st millennium CE expansion, which matches...


2 - I2a1b1a according to Ftdna in NOV 2011 found 40% of their tested people with this marker in Iberia. and it comprised of L160

L160+ is I2a1a1, not I2a1b1a (which is L621+ L147+). Those two clades are separated by nearly 20,000 years.


3 - KN stated in DEC 2011 that there are 11 types of I HG and this slavic ones which came from the Antes and sklavians happened after the Roman empire existed. It does not make sense that he lost over 1000 years

Sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say here.


Define what a Slav is?................if you read most web sites it designates a group similar to naming a Latin, british, iberian, scandinavian or celtic .........that is many tribes who had different HG and spoke the same tongue

A Slav is a speaker of a Slavic language. I fully expect that they had regional variations in their haplogroups, and have said so before.

Diurpaneus
16-03-12, 19:37
here is an interesting view on slavs


http://aleria.info/temp/kijj9p50v5_8692.pdf

alais
16-03-12, 20:23
It was removed.

zanipolo
16-03-12, 20:45
Zanipolo
you didn't answer my question about I2a1b1 )))

?
which question, which post

EDIT - I read it and still do not understand what you are trying to say

zanipolo
16-03-12, 20:55
Right, and I'm arguing that it was mainly a 1st millennium CE expansion, which matches...
Common Era (also Current Era[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era#cite_note-0) or Christian Era[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era#cite_note-1)), abbreviated as CE, is an alternative designation for the calendar era (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calendar_era) originally introduced by Dionysius Exiguus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Exiguus) in the 6th century, traditionally identified with Anno Domini (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anno_Domini) (abbreviated AD)

so you are saying this HG in question arrived in the balkans in the middle ages, thats 300 years after the "slavic migration"





L160+ is I2a1a1, not I2a1b1a (which is L621+ L147+). Those two clades are separated by nearly 20,000 years.

so ftdna are wrong




Sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say here.


I said that KN noted the marker in question came from central europe with the antes and sklavians. I am saying that does this appear to young.
How old is this marker?

It would indicate from what KN and yourself are saying is that its not a european marker , but more likely from the urals area



A Slav is a speaker of a Slavic language. I fully expect that they had regional variations in their haplogroups, and have said so before.

correct, so why do we refer to slavic as a terminology when we do not use this level of terminology elsewhere?

we say galicians , basques, etc etc instead of iberians

By saying slavic we are undermining the level of western tribes and overembelishing the slavic name.
Which brings the point on why do we call these tribes in the east who spoke a slavic tongue a slavic. its also detrimental to our discussions and leads to arguements

sparkey
16-03-12, 23:34
Common Era (also Current Era[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era#cite_note-0) or Christian Era[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era#cite_note-1)), abbreviated as CE, is an alternative designation for the calendar era (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calendar_era) originally introduced by Dionysius Exiguus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Exiguus) in the 6th century, traditionally identified with Anno Domini (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anno_Domini) (abbreviated AD)

so you are saying this HG in question arrived in the balkans in the middle ages, thats 300 years after the "slavic migration"

I don't mean that they arrived in 1000 CE, I mean that most of the migrations occurred between 0 CE and 1000 CE. (Obviously we can probably get more precise than that, but that's what I meant by "first millennium CE.")


so ftdna are wrong

If they said that 40% of L160+ is in Iberia, then they're probably right. But I2a-Din is L160-.


I said that KN noted the marker in question came from central europe with the antes and sklavians. I am saying that does this appear to young.
How old is this marker?

Per Nordtvedt's estimates, I2a-Din is only about 2500 years old (I don't have the precise estimate or error bars handy, but that's what it is, roughly). Its most common subgroup in the Balkans, I2a-Din-S, is probably less than 2000 years old.


It would indicate from what KN and yourself are saying is that its not a european marker , but more likely from the urals area

Why would that follow? Didn't Balto-Slavic diverge into Baltic and Slavic in Europe? At which point, if I'm right that only Slavic picked up I2a-Din, then I2a-Din needs to have been European at that time.


correct, so why do we refer to slavic as a terminology when we do not use this level of terminology elsewhere?

we say galicians , basques, etc etc instead of iberians

By saying slavic we are undermining the level of western tribes and overembelishing the slavic name.
Which brings the point on why do we call these tribes in the east who spoke a slavic tongue a slavic. its also detrimental to our discussions and leads to arguements

I think it's a generally appropriate word to use for this analysis, since there is a relatively tight correlation between Slavic and I2a-Din (probably owing to I2a-Din's youth), and we're really only talking about one particular aspect of I2a-Din's spread ("how it got to the Balkans"). So, did most of the individuals who brought I2a-Din to the Balkans speak a Slavic language? I think so, so I think I can say that I2a-Din got to the Balkans via the Slavs.

zanipolo
17-03-12, 00:11
If they said that 40% of L160+ is in Iberia, then they're probably right. But I2a-Din is L160-.

so the difference between positive and negative is the distance between the balkans and Iberia ..........why did they use the same number L160


Per Nordtvedt's estimates, I2a-Din is only about 2500 years old (I don't have the precise estimate or error bars handy, but that's what it is, roughly). Its most common subgroup in the Balkans, I2a-Din-S, is probably less than 2000 years old.

so which I HG was in illyria, at 500BC 12a-Din but not I2a-Din-S.
seems weird to call something ( HGs) similare and not branching from this same named HG but migrating



Why would that follow? Didn't Balto-Slavic diverge into Baltic and Slavic in Europe? At which point, if I'm right that only Slavic picked up I2a-Din, then I2a-Din needs to have been European at that time.


Again, what is slavic which tribes? . Clearly it was proven recently that the Venedae where modern lithuains which are baltic, the bastanae are germanic same as peuccini and finni are finns

Gosh
17-03-12, 02:17
There's a big problem today in Balkans- nationalism. Every nation claims that they are the eldest, smartest, strongest etc, etc. Therefore they use genetic researches on different ways. Nobody wants to feel themselves as members of some other ethnic groups although all of them are a big (and obvious) mixture of haplogroups.

That's the reason why we have (on this theme) 46% of people which proves that Dinaric South are genuine population there. There is not so many people who understand fundamental principles of mutations and STRs. They prefer to read nationalistic sites and enjoy in lies written there.

Gosh
17-03-12, 02:22
?
which question, which post

EDIT - I read it and still do not understand what you are trying to say

Upssss....... I didn't see your post, sorry )))

If I understood you correctly, you prefer opinion that Illyrians were Din-S population? Right?

I put you a question, how is it possible if we know that Din-S is a young branch of I2a1? According to actual data it is obviously impossible.

zanipolo
17-03-12, 02:31
I

Per Nordtvedt's estimates, I2a-Din is only about 2500 years old (I don't have the precise estimate or error bars handy, but that's what it is, roughly). Its most common subgroup in the Balkans, I2a-Din-S, is probably less than 2000 years old.



Why would that follow? Didn't Balto-Slavic diverge into Baltic and Slavic in Europe? At which point, if I'm right that only Slavic picked up I2a-Din, then I2a-Din needs to have been European at that time.



I think it's a generally appropriate word to use for this analysis, since there is a relatively tight correlation between Slavic and I2a-Din (probably owing to I2a-Din's youth), and we're really only talking about one particular aspect of I2a-Din's spread ("how it got to the Balkans"). So, did most of the individuals who brought I2a-Din to the Balkans speak a Slavic language? I think so, so I think I can say that I2a-Din got to the Balkans via the Slavs.

Then while I2a-Din cannot be "slavic" because it is about 2500 years which makes it 400BC , the I2a-Din-S can only be "slavic" IF and I say IF, it is much less than 2000 years old.

Your analysis contradicts Roman and Greek historians and all other historians of the time, in regards to the slav migration

zanipolo
17-03-12, 02:42
Upssss....... I didn't see your post, sorry )))

If I understood you correctly, you prefer opinion that Illyrians were Din-S population? Right?

I put you a question, how is it possible if we know that Din-S is a young branch of I2a1? According to actual data it is obviously impossible.

the Thread question was concerning I2a-Din and NOT I2a-Din-S

KN says this I2a-Din came from central europe......since its age starts from 400 to 500BC , then its likely that the illyrians ( who inhabited central europe with the celts brought this HG into the balkans.
The greeks have no record of illyrians before 400BC, so where did they come from?

My idea is that these illyrians where pushed southward by the germanic people moving from west to east and the baltic people moving northeast to south west in the years in question.

Other illyric tribes brought other stems of I HG into northern illyrian lands.

Considering the term illyrian only refers to a confederation of tribes use by Roman historians which made up of tribes of dalmatians, pannonians, luburnians, etc etc.............all these tribes had different type of HGs.
If we consider all these tribes where illyrians, they would surely have dominated eastern europe and the balkans as a group ..........but they where not one race

Taranis
17-03-12, 11:53
Why would that follow? Didn't Balto-Slavic diverge into Baltic and Slavic in Europe? At which point, if I'm right that only Slavic picked up I2a-Din, then I2a-Din needs to have been European at that time.

Not sure if that helps, but I'll give you a bit of a background on the Slavic languages:

A common Proto-Balto-Slavic language was probably still spoken in the bronze age (perhaps as late as the early iron age), however due to the fact that the Baltic languages are more different from each other than the Slavic languages are from each other, it stands to reason Proto-Baltic began to fragment significantly earlier, as early as the mid-1st millennium BC.

In contrast, the Proto-Slavic language didn't begin to fragment into it's daughter branches (ie. West Slavic, South Slavic, East Slavic - from which the modern Slavic languages stem) until the Migration Period. There's a wide range of Germanic loanwords into Proto-Slavic, ranging from Proto-Germanic to Gothic, which suggests a time period of multiple centuries of language contact with Germanic tribes (approximately 1st century BC to 4th century AD). So by the time the Slavs show up on the stage of history, they were still probably speaking with a common language that only began to diversify in the following centuries.

So, my opinion is that Nordtvedt's estimates regarding I2a-Din are consistent with the above described scenario.

Gosh
17-03-12, 16:16
@zanipolo


the Thread question was concerning I2a-Din and NOT I2a-Din-S

It is almost the same haplogroup. We're not talking only about the Din-N but about Dinaric in general. Both of them are parts of I2a-Din.



KN says this I2a-Din came from central europe......since its age starts from 400 to 500BC , then its likely that the illyrians ( who inhabited central europe with the celts brought this HG into the balkans.

Where we can find proofs for that? Which historical source says that Illyrians lived in CE?
About which Celts we can speak if we have the lowest European level of R1b in the regions settled with Din-S?



The greeks have no record of illyrians before 400BC, so where did they come from?

I can't answer on that question because I don't have historical documents which talks about that.



My idea is that these illyrians where pushed southward by the germanic people moving from west to east and the baltic people moving northeast to south west in the years in question.

It is just an idea. Not a scientific fact. Do you agree with me?

Even more, a level of Din-N in historical Illyria today is "funny" comparing with Din-S.


rgds

sparkey
18-03-12, 08:45
Then while I2a-Din cannot be "slavic" because it is about 2500 years which makes it 400BC , the I2a-Din-S can only be "slavic" IF and I say IF, it is much less than 2000 years old.

Your analysis contradicts Roman and Greek historians and all other historians of the time, in regards to the slav migration

Obviously, we expect populations to have more than one carrier of a given haplogroup, so TMRCAs should be older than the migrations they're tied to. No contradiction.

Yetos
18-03-12, 16:34
Not sure if that helps, but I'll give you a bit of a background on the Slavic languages:

A common Proto-Balto-Slavic language was probably still spoken in the bronze age (perhaps as late as the early iron age), however due to the fact that the Baltic languages are more different from each other than the Slavic languages are from each other, it stands to reason Proto-Baltic began to fragment significantly earlier, as early as the mid-1st millennium BC.

In contrast, the Proto-Slavic language didn't begin to fragment into it's daughter branches (ie. West Slavic, South Slavic, East Slavic - from which the modern Slavic languages stem) until the Migration Period. There's a wide range of Germanic loanwords into Proto-Slavic, ranging from Proto-Germanic to Gothic, which suggests a time period of multiple centuries of language contact with Germanic tribes (approximately 1st century BC to 4th century AD). So by the time the Slavs show up on the stage of history, they were still probably speaking with a common language that only began to diversify in the following centuries.

So, my opinion is that Nordtvedt's estimates regarding I2a-Din are consistent with the above described scenario.

Indeed that is what I am trynig to express,
But in that family where only these 3 or a few more,
could the connection you describe to be from another language?
I mean could that connection be due to Scythian?

I mean that Scythians R1a gave language to I2 Din who moved south?
or the pass of Scythians- Thracians to West and North left behind these 3 languages?

Diurpaneus
18-03-12, 18:29
Florin Curta's book "The Making of The Slavs" is a much more realistic approach.


http://home.arcor.de/maknews/CurtaCon2.pdf

Gosh
18-03-12, 21:52
Florin Curta's book "The Making of The Slavs" is a much more realistic approach.


http://home.arcor.de/maknews/CurtaCon2.pdf

I've taken a quick look at that document. I couldn't catch a point but I've found an interesting citation:



The greater part of Slavic loans in Romanian seem to be of literary origin (Church literature, charters, and
popular literature). See Nandris 1939. Only fifteen words can be attributed to a Common Slavic influence
on the basis of their phonetical treatment. For a complete list and discussion, see Mihaila 1973:16;
Duridanov 1991:15. All fifteen words appear in all Romanian dialects, both north and south of the Danube
river. See Mihaila 1971:355. One of the earliest loans is schiau (pi. schei), a word derived from the Slavic

It is very interesting if we know how Romanian language looked like 500 years ago. Besides of that, today's Romania is full of Slavic toponymes. That region was settled with so called "7 Slavic tribes" for some period of time.
BTW, contemporary Romanian genetics, similar like Hungarian contain about 50% of R1a/I2a1.

Taranis
18-03-12, 22:11
Florin Curta's book "The Making of The Slavs" is a much more realistic approach.

http://home.arcor.de/maknews/CurtaCon2.pdf

Realistic? I'm not sure I can agree with that. The article takes a heavy opposition to the concept of a Proto-Slavic homeland. But, it fails to realize something: that the Slavic language evidently has a history before the Migrations Period, a history that is clearly spanning centuries. Where, if not in some form of "homeland", did this history of interaction with other ethnic groups take place?

Yetos
18-03-12, 22:59
I've taken a quick look at that document. I couldn't catch a point but I've found an interesting citation:



It is very interesting if we know how Romanian language looked like 500 years ago. Besides of that, today's Romania is full of Slavic toponymes. That region was settled with so called "7 Slavic tribes" for some period of time.
BTW, contemporary Romanian genetics, similar like Hungarian contain about 50% of R1a/I2a1.

Well I do not know about 1500 Ad Romanian language,

But I know from 1750 and after and believe is about same,
remember that Greek revolt started in Romania, and many documents in Latin and in Greek alphabet exist,
it seems like they had 2 major Latin based Dialects with more Greco-Byzantine and Turkish and Russian
the moldo-wallachian and the moesian,

the language seems to be similar Aromani people, closest the type of Moesian Vlachs firstly, then to moschopolis Vlachs, and the farther is kutsuk Vlachs,
it seems like at 1780 Romanian parts as moesia moldavia etc were almost modern Romanian speaking

so the case of slavic toponyms as also Cumans etc it is older,
By what I know romania was speaking latin-romanian much before the Con/polis fall.

I wonder the areas that these Slavic toponyms are?

Yetos
18-03-12, 23:35
The thing that we all are missing is this,

Slavic people are the ones who today speak Slavic language,
Slavic people are the biggest part of Europe today,
Slavic language as mother language also,
so it can't be here in Europe as SLavic and Greeks Romans did not found them so many they are,

so what Happened?
for me the time of roman empire collapse we have the Goths people moving west, probably even before we might had similar,
but sudenly we find the Slavic people,
Slavic people so many millions where were they hiden?

my personal believe is that they had another exonym so geographers to describe them,
they can devastate 200 millions today from Central asia. neither to be so many in North Russia.
so who were they?
the older substractum of Europe as described are Thracian+Getae in Balkans and ucraine until far (almost baltic) and Scythians and Saurmates, could Finland hold all Slavs? surely not could Baltic lands hide all those Slavs? again no,
so they were near, maybe west of Urals already.

so what had happened?
for me it seems like Scythians who enter Romania as Scythia minor etc and Sarmates create a unification movement,
the case of Bulgaria, where Slavic Severi with Huno-Bulgars of Asparuch IS A GOOD EXAMPLE,

seems like cooperation of Scythians with Sarmates, devastate west and South to the Lands that Goths left, and create new kingdoms, in one of them Great-Moravia someone study their language, creates an Alphabet,
The change of Religion and the acceptance of Cyrillic creates the Slavic and the Slavs of Today.
meaning that old alliances, older dialects, are erased and a new era starts,

similar phainomena we find in Greece when majority accepts the Attic in written Speach,
in Germany after Goethe etc

So considering today someone as Slav is mostly after the linguistic determination,

now about the genetics of Slavs, until one year all here would say R1a M17
suddenly we find I2a2 DIN
what does that mean?
Slavic language does not change,
but what change?
the how pure is nation?
or who is older in that land?
Are we starting a new war in Balkans? and start propaganda?
simply not.

then? what?
I2a DIN in primary in ex-Yugoslavia, now if I am I2a what?
I am a Serb? I am a Croat? I am a Bosnian? I am a Cernagoran one? I am ROmanian?

the problem is
IS I2a DIN autochthonus in Dinaric Alps?
IS I2a DIN primary after one or 2 or 3 migrations?
IF I2a DIN is after a devastation then? Starting Land Ucraine? Slovakia? Baltic?

and I wonder? is I2a DIN primary a IE HG mark? or it learn the language? and from which HG?

Dianatomia
19-03-12, 07:18
Let's try this from a different perspective and ask ourselves the following question. If I2a where associated with the Slavic arrival in the Balkans, in which populations would you expect it to reach the highest levels?

I would say the following.
-It should reach maximum level in South Slavs. More so in the north than in the South, because as the Slavs advanced, they absorbed locals.
-Albania and Greece should have some in low levels.
-In Greece it should be highest in Northern Greece, especially among Slavophones and Pomacs. The Greek Islands should have the least I2a.
-Southern Italy should have almost none, because Greeks colonized the region before the south Slavic expansion. (Remember that a considerable number of Byzantine Greeks migrated to Italy also)
-Cyprus should have almost none of it.

In analyzing the data. We can see just that. I2a reaches the maximum in Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia(38-60%). It decreases to around 20% in the FYR of Macedonia and Bulgaria. Northern Greece has 16%. The rest of mainland Greece has something around 8%, while the Aegean Islands have 3%. Southern Italy and Sicily have something like 1-2.5% of I2a. Indicating that the Ancient Greek population may not have had I2a. (Note: Greeks from Magna Graecia came from Southern Greece which now has 9% of I2a)

The deal breaker is Cyprus. It has something like 8% of I2a which is more or less the same with that of mainland Greece.

Yet, most of the data is incomplete. So we can get a better image in the future. There are strong indications though, that there is a clear link between I2a and the medieval expansion of the South Slavs as is described by historical data.

Yetos
19-03-12, 12:08
Let's try this from a different perspective and ask ourselves the following question. If I2a where associated with the Slavic arrival in the Balkans, in which populations would you expect it to reach the highest levels?

I would say the following.
-It should reach maximum level in South Slavs. More so in the north than in the South, because as the Slavs advanced, they absorbed locals.
-Albania and Greece should have some in low levels.
-In Greece it should be highest in Northern Greece, especially among Slavophones and Pomacs. The Greek Islands should have the least I2a.
-Southern Italy should have almost none, because Greeks colonized the region before the south Slavic expansion. (Remember that a considerable number of Byzantine Greeks migrated to Italy also)
-Cyprus should have almost none of it.

In analyzing the data. We can see just that. I2a reaches the maximum in Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia(38-60%). It decreases to around 20% in the FYR of Macedonia and Bulgaria. Northern Greece has 16%. The rest of mainland Greece has something around 8%, while the Aegean Islands have 3%. Southern Italy and Sicily have something like 1-2.5% of I2a. Indicating that the Ancient Greek population may not have had I2a. (Note: Greeks from Magna Graecia came from Southern Greece which now has 9% of I2a)

The deal breaker is Cyprus. It has something like 8% of I2a which is more or less the same with that of mainland Greece.

Yet, most of the data is incomplete. So we can get a better image in the future. There are strong indications though, that there is a clear link between I2a and the medieval expansion of the South Slavs as is described by historical data.

Yes but the same results could have in case that we consider I2a as Thracian, especially the Triballi Thracian

meaning that if I2a was before Slavic expansion to south, then it could be a mark of Triballi Thracians,
and the results in Greece Albania Bulgaria and Cyprus will be the same as also in Italy,

so a better Idea is to find out from where exactly it came if entered, or where did it expand?

if it came from North, from Bohemia East Germany etc, then surely is connected with the movement of Serbs,
But if it came from Romania Ucraine ? then with who? Scythians? Sarmates?

and if it is autochthonus and expand in Romania-ucraine then we might consider it as Thracian

the case that Bosnia Croatia Serbia montenegro today speak Slavic language proves nothing, cause the same I2a Hg people could speak another language before, and accept the Cyrillic.

If I2a Din S is primary Slavic then it should be also high in Bulgaria due to Severi especially in the lands west of Veliko Tyrnovo until Sofia land of Serdi (between Sofia Phillipoupolis Romania Ryce)

except if we enter the theory that primary Slavic R1a entered in greece, slavonising each in it past and become Greek in the end? !!! the R1a of Pindus mountains from Makedonia to Locris,
But then how come Magna Grecia has High R1a? if that R1a in Greece is Slavic?
and Locris never had Slavophones

Gosh
19-03-12, 15:29
Let's try this from a different perspective and ask ourselves the following question. If I2a where associated with the Slavic arrival in the Balkans, in which populations would you expect it to reach the highest levels? I would say the following. -It should reach maximum level in South Slavs. More so in the north than in the South, because as the Slavs advanced, they absorbed locals. -Albania and Greece should have some in low levels. -In Greece it should be highest in Northern Greece, especially among Slavophones and Pomacs. The Greek Islands should have the least I2a. -Southern Italy should have almost none, because Greeks colonized the region before the south Slavic expansion. (Remember that a considerable number of Byzantine Greeks migrated to Italy also) -Cyprus should have almost none of it. In analyzing the data. We can see just that. I2a reaches the maximum in Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia(38-60%). It decreases to around 20% in the FYR of Macedonia and Bulgaria. Northern Greece has 16%. The rest of mainland Greece has something around 8%, while the Aegean Islands have 3%. Southern Italy and Sicily have something like 1-2.5% of I2a. Indicating that the Ancient Greek population may not have had I2a. (Note: Greeks from Magna Graecia came from Southern Greece which now has 9% of I2a) The deal breaker is Cyprus. It has something like 8% of I2a which is more or less the same with that of mainland Greece. Yet, most of the data is incomplete. So we can get a better image in the future. There are strong indications though, that there is a clear link between I2a and the medieval expansion of the South Slavs as is described by historical data.

This is a good way of thinking!!!

Slavic migrations had two main directions and one "semi-direction". Eastern direction went from Carpathian mountains down to the south as a result of movement today's Bulgarian population. Western direction went through today's Austria avoiding Pannonian basin which was under Avarian control. It was the path of Slovenian, Croatian and Serbian tribes. And third, "semi-direction" was the result of Slavic migrations from the region of today's Hungary under the Avarian pressure. This route had main impact on the region of northern Croatia, northern Serbia and northern Bosnia.

how yes no 3
19-03-12, 21:30
Let's try this from a different perspective and ask ourselves the following question. If I2a where associated with the Slavic arrival in the Balkans, in which populations would you expect it to reach the highest levels?

I would say the following.
-It should reach maximum level in South Slavs. More so in the north than in the South, because as the Slavs advanced, they absorbed locals.
-Albania and Greece should have some in low levels.
-In Greece it should be highest in Northern Greece, especially among Slavophones and Pomacs. The Greek Islands should have the least I2a.
-Southern Italy should have almost none, because Greeks colonized the region before the south Slavic expansion. (Remember that a considerable number of Byzantine Greeks migrated to Italy also)
-Cyprus should have almost none of it.

In analyzing the data. We can see just that. I2a reaches the maximum in Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia(38-60%). It decreases to around 20% in the FYR of Macedonia and Bulgaria. Northern Greece has 16%. The rest of mainland Greece has something around 8%, while the Aegean Islands have 3%. Southern Italy and Sicily have something like 1-2.5% of I2a. Indicating that the Ancient Greek population may not have had I2a. (Note: Greeks from Magna Graecia came from Southern Greece which now has 9% of I2a)

The deal breaker is Cyprus. It has something like 8% of I2a which is more or less the same with that of mainland Greece.

Yet, most of the data is incomplete. So we can get a better image in the future. There are strong indications though, that there is a clear link between I2a and the medieval expansion of the South Slavs as is described by historical data.

exactly
it is not R1a that really distinguishes south Slavs from people around them, but I2a-din...
look at this work from Macedonia comparing Albanians and FYR Macedonians
http://www.bjmg.edu.mk/UploadedImages/pdf/11-18.pdf
the two R1a more or less the same and in the level close to the one of Serbia and higher than Montenegro and Herzegovina...

but difference is I2a-Din, Slavic Macedonians have lot of it, FYRM Albanians close to none...



Cypress is probably related to earlier wave of I2a-din from Asia minor...the one in Kurds and the one that I relate to sea people.....

the way I see it, originally I2a-Din people were spread along Danube from Bohemia to Black sea....
a part entered Asia minor via Black sea as part of the sea peoples conquest (that was invasion of northern people largely by land but also by sea - first from Black sea judging by order of conquest) ...those where Sherdana whose name give rise to the name of a lake in Egypt - Serbonian bog.... from those people come to existence Kurds and Pastun Sarbans that both are distinguished from surrounding people by having I2a

Sherdana are responsible for spreads of I2a-Din in Asia minor and in Cypress

on other hand there were I2a-din people still living in Europe along Danube....
from them came Celtic Scordisci....

when pushed by spreading Roman empire, Scordisci (and other people living in Pannonian plane) could do one of the two: go along Danube to Bohemia, go along Danube to Carpatians or both..
no else where to go...Pannonian plane is flat - cannot be defended against better armed and organized armies....

in fact, Russian primary chronicle speaks of Danubian Slavs living originally around Danube from Hungaria to Bulgaria (which is exactly where Scordisci lived), and how they moved to north and settled Vistula (Ukraine) and Morava (Czech republic) river when they were pushed by Vlakhs (read Roman empire)....


Over a long period the Slavs settled beside the Danube, where the Hungarian and Bulgarian lands now lie. From among these Slavs, parties scattered throughout the country and were known by appropriate names, according to the places where they settled. Thus some came and settled by the river Morava, and were named Moravians, while others were called Czechs. Among these same Slavs are included the White Croats, the Serbs, and the Carinthians. For when the Vlakhs attacked the Danubian Slavs, settled among them, and did them violence, the latter came and made their homes by the Vistula, and were then called Lyakhs. Of these same Lyakhs some were called Polyanians, some Lutichians, some Mazovians, and still others Pomorians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_Chronicle
http://www.utoronto.ca/elul/English/218/PVL-selections.pdf

so, who were those Slavs?


taking nto account large R1a in Hungary and I2a-din along Danube
1) R1a Pannonians
among Pannonian tribes are Osseriates which in slavic language just mean lake people, and it means that only in Slavic languages
same tribal name reappears in Slavic settlements in Greece for people also living in area of lakes...



2) Serbs probably origin from I2a-Din Scordisci
3) for Croats a wild guess would be Carpi...or perhaps Heruli..also I2a-Din..

I think this Serb-Croat like tribal names are old... and goes to very start of I2a...
Scirii-Hirri / Heruli
Scordisci (Serdi)/Helvetti
Sardinians
Srbi /Hrvati
and in Asia where they spread with sea peoples invasion
white Syrians (Cappadocia in Strabo's time) - Hurrians (earliier)

essentially this pair of names could have meant - day and night - perhaps originally about the ones living east where sun comes up and others west where it goes down...but later as a duality that makes a whole, like yin and yang...always in battle between themselves and always closest to each other...
interestingly, Hirri did dress in black and attack during night - clear identification with night......
and in Asia minor mythology of Seri and Hurri - sacred bulls with names day and night, who carry the weather god Teshub
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_bull





Serbs appear on Balkan in 7th century and it is recorded in De administrando imperio that they come from land Boiki which in my opinion can be only land of Boii - Bohemia /Bavaria because document says it borders Franks on west and white Croatia on east.... besides it is Bohemia/Bavaria where we do find several toponyms Srby, also town Serviodurum... mention of people with name Sibini by Tacitus... (Serb = Srbin in serbo-croatian).... i2a-din has high molecular diversity in Serbia, Bohemia and part of Ukraine...
.
De administrando imperio says it is also where they originally dwellt... which fits with higher haplogroup diversity in Bohemia, Serbia and part of Ukraine...
http://books.google.nl/books?id=3al15wpFWiMC&lpg=PP1&dq=de%20administrando%20imperio&pg=PA153#v=onepage&q&f=false


i believe also Pelasgians were R1a people related to later Pannonians R1a people
Pelasgians is in fact tribal name of same origin as Poles... field people / flatland people /sea people


Julius Pokorny (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Pokorny) derives Pelasgoi from *pelag-skoi (Flachlandbewohner, or "flatland-inhabitants"); specifically, Bewohner der thessalischen Ebene ("Inhabitants of the Thessalian plain").[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelasgians#cite_note-8) He details a previous derivation, which appears in English at least as early as William Gladstone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Ewart_Gladstone)'s Studies on Homer and the Homeric Age.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelasgians#cite_note-9) If the Pelasgians were not Indo-Europeans, the name in this derivation must have been assigned by the Hellenes.The ancient Greek word for "sea", pelagos, comes from the same root, *plāk-, as the Doric word plagos, "side" (which is flat), appearing in *pelag-skoi. Ernest Klein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Klein) therefore simply interprets the same reconstructed form as "the sea men", where the sea is the flat.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelasgians#cite_note-10)
Klein's interpretation does not require the Indo-Europeans to have had a word for "sea", which living on the inland plains (if they did) they are likely to have lacked. On encountering the sea they simply used the word for plain, "the flat." The flatlanders also could acquire what must have been to the Hellenes a homonym (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homonym), "the sea men". Best of all, if the Egyptians of the Late Bronze Age encountered maritime marauders under this name they would have translated as Sea People (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_People).


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

besides Sherdana, among sea people there are Pelast and Tjekker and Lukka
Pelast are Pelasgians...

so Pelast and Tjekker = same tribal names as Poles and Czechs :)
Lycians or Lukka would map to tribal name of Lech (also Poles)

note that Kurds stand out from environment not only by I2a-din but also by R1a


4) in the end about Russians, contrary to hypothesys about tribal name origin from viking tribe Rus (that in fact did not exist by that name before making a state in Kiev, they were Varnagians not Rus...Rus they became once they organized Russians in a state), Russians like Poles also carry old R1a name... e.g. Etruscans (not saying that Etruscans were Russians but that they had strong or dominant R1a) who left R1a imprint in Italy called themselves Rasena, Thracians were possibly originally R1a people as well... Rašani was alternative Serb name in medieval period and state was named Raška....

if with expansion of Roman empire, Pannonians migrated north to give Poles, than Thracians easily migrated north to gave Russians... old Greeks were stating that Thracians were largest people in numbers after indians....in fact, Pannonians were likely offshoot of Thracians, and Scythians or Saka (note Sakalibe name for Slavic people in middle east) were related or same people....note also that according to myth Sarmatians origin from Scythians...

Pelasgians and Thracians being R1a people - this is all inline with R1a being very old in Balkan and now considered being Paleolithic in that area...

mihaitzateo
19-03-12, 23:02
I saw on another forum pictures with serbs.
A lot of serbs who are looking identical to old dacians statues from the Arch of Constantine.
Novak Djokovic looks like those dacian statues from Arch of Constantine.
I2A could be from old dacians.
A lot of romance speakers said that romanian sound like a latin but that is spoken with slavic sonority.
The dacian names of towns are looking like south slavic,Petrodava,Sucidava and so on.
Is said that after dacians were beaten by Roman Empire in 2nd Roman empire-dacian war,a lot dacians fled to mountains,a lot of them in the mountains from Serbia it seems,others in Greece,so I think this is how a lot of I2A got in north Greece.
Look how crazy are serbians today,like old dacians,they fought with NATO not many years ago.
Romanians are also from dacians,but it seems that serbians have a lot more from dacian warriors.
I think romanians got a lot of words from latin and the gramar from there,but they retained old pronunciation from dacian language.

There are a lot of resemblances between romanians and serbians and croatians,in national costumes and so on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Praha,_Star%C3%A9_M%C4%9Bsto,_Ovocn%C3%BD_trh ,_Pra%C5%BEsk%C3%BD_jarmark,_srbsk%C3%A9_lidov%C3% A9_tance_VI.JPG
Exactly same kind of dance can be found in Romania,almost same costumes and so on.

pipinnacanus
19-03-12, 23:08
Agreed; the most obviously important I subclades in early Germanic peoples, as evidenced by both diversity patterns and modern frequency distributions, were I1 (all subclades except maybe AS4 and P)

This is something that I would like to see any Shred of evidence for, seriously, ha ha ha.

The Hg I1 is the ONLY of current euro Hg that is totally absent from the ancient DNA record on the euro continent. It literally does not exists in ANY samples of ancient euro DNA.

While in the sense that the Svears of central scandinavia are of adopted germanic culture, its 'germanic' in modern times, Hg I1 is not provably in any way the source or origin of germanic paternal ancestry, because it is totally absent in any provable euro samples historically. Given that they took over the germanic Geats they seem to have adopted german culture from the Geats.

Germany loses half its populations during the 30 years war alone, and many more with plagues and wars, so the modern I1 in north europe is coming in likely from the masses of I1 we KNOW were fleeing scandinavia during and after the DARK AGES, not in ancient germanic tribal times.

The modern I1 are most likely descendants of the many poor paternally 'Svear' descent farmers from scandinavia looking to settle father south for better lands freed up by depopulation while their own lands are now too crowded.

They are in no way the historical angles, saxons, or germans like Nortvedt wrongly asserted starting a decade ago.

since that time, over a decade ago, we have many ancient y-dna samples from europe and in germany and the I1/germanic crowd has gotten more and more desperate since their tale has now fallen apart like many warned when Nortvedt started this claims.
Show me one ancient DNA discovery of I1 in europe before the dark ages expansions from Svearish Scandinavians that does come from legitimate source, and we can discuss you claims. For the time being, if they are not gibberish and disproven Nordtvedt is as close as you can get to that. He has made many promise to people who emotionally want to believe this claims, and even as they fail, they still seek to sell with emotions and psueudo-babble, what is failing them in provable science.



We're not talking about I2, we're talking about its subclade, I2a-Din (I2a1b1a in Nordtvedt's hierarchy).

Please. The I2 is isolated pools that were no longer in contact with one another and develop proprietary STR's and SNP in their isolation. They are all still aboriginal peoples who exist before the modern cultures we recognize even come into europe. They are adopted into these varied cultures. I2 exists in every population of europe. It held out against R1b/R1a arrival better in the Balkan because the terrain protected them from the aggression of the arrival R males better than in easy flat or open terrain.

how yes no 3
19-03-12, 23:21
I saw on another forum pictures with serbs.
A lot of serbs who are looking identical to old dacians statues from the Arch of Constantine.
Novak Djokovic looks like those dacian statues from Arch of Constantine.
I2A could be from old dacians.
A lot of romance speakers said that romanian sound like a latin but that is spoken with slavic sonority.
The dacian names of towns are looking like south slavic,Petrodava,Sucidava and so on.
Is said that after dacians were beaten by Roman Empire in 2nd Roman empire-dacian war,a lot dacians fled to mountains,a lot of them in the mountains from Serbia it seems,others in Greece,so I think this is how a lot of I2A got in north Greece.
Look how crazy are serbians today,like old dacians,they fought with NATO not many years ago.
Romanians are also from dacians,but it seems that serbians have a lot more from dacian warriors.
I think romanians got a lot of words from latin and the gramar from there,but they retained old pronunciation from dacian language.

There are a lot of resemblances between romanians and serbians and croatians,in national costumes and so on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Praha,_Staré_Město,_Ovocný_trh,_Pražský_ jarmark,_srbské_lidové_tance_VI.JPG
Exactly same kind of dance can be found in Romania,almost same costumes and so on.

that makes sense....

Romanians cluster typically close to south Slavs in genetic research...
Dacians were related to wolf same as Lycians and Serbs...

Carpathians with name likely related to Dacian tribe Carpi were also known as montes Serrorum - mountains of Serians... Carpathians were also core of white Croatia....

perhaps Carpi = Hrvati? or maybe Heruli = Hrvati? as in more west parts of white Croatia prior to white Croats Heruli are recorded... or both? what if Carpi = Heruli?

that is hard to state though... but personally, I am sure that Heruli = Hirri, and that east Germanic could in fact have been same as west Slavic but am not decided whether Heruli and Scirii were related to Slavic people...






In the Scandinavian Hervarar saga (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hervarar_saga), which describes ancient Germanic legends about battles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hlöðskviða) between Goths (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goths) and Huns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns), the name Karpates appears in the predictable Germanic form as Harvaða fjöllum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpathian_Mountains

hence, Carpi = Hervada = Hrvati? (Croats)
what complicates things is that in same time Carpathians were montes Sarmatici - mountains of Sarmatians...and Serboi were one of the tribes mentioned in Asian Sarmatia (later Siraces come from them probably) and there are links of Croats to Sarmatians as well...

Scirii are sometimes said to be part of Alans (=Sarmatians)...
http://books.google.nl/books?id=pIg9AAAAcAAJ&dq=scirii tribe history&hl=nl&pg=RA1-PR100#v=onepage&q=sciri&f=false
read on mid of the page:

and the Scirii have already been called Alan population

http://books.google.nl/books?id=pIg9AAAAcAAJ&dq=scirii tribe history&hl=nl&pg=RA1-PR98#v=onepage&q=sciri&f=false

on top of same page,


there were Scirii as far east as Bavaria

note that Bavaria/Bohemia is from where Serbs come to Balkan

Sciri /Scirians (?= Serians mentioned by Seneca = I2a-Din?)




[369] Though kings should gather themselves together, both they who vex the scattered Scythians and they who dwell upon the Red Sea’s marge, who hold wide sway o’er the blood-red main with its gleaming pearls, they who leave unguarded26 the Caspian heights to the bold Sarmatians; though he strive against him, who dares on foot to tread the Danube’s waves27 and (whersoe’er they dwell,) theSerians28 for fleeces famous – ‘tis the upright mind that holds true sovereignty. He has no need of horses, none of arms and the coward weapons which the Parthian hurls from far when he feigns flight, no need of engines hurling rocks, stationed to batter cities to the ground. A king is he who has no fear; a king is he who shall naught desire. Such kingdom on himself each man bestows.
Seneca - Thyestes
27. i.e. the frozen surface.
28. The poet here conceives of the Serians as near by Scythia.

http://www.theoi.com/Text/SenecaThyestes.html


what if by origin I2a-Din people living in Europe along Danube and had conquest that spread them further along Black sea into Asia

Hirri = Heruli = Hervada = Carpi = Hrvati (? Helvetti)
and
Scirii = Siraces = Serboi = white Serbs = Serdi / Scordisci = Sherdana = white Syrians = Kurds = Sarbans = white Sarts = Serians = Serres



btw. for Romanian - south Slavic link look at this clustering of Y-DNA samples
5536
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/11/clustering-of-european-y-strs.html


note this
haplogroup I old tribal names

Suebi (Swabians) - Swedes - Srbi - Sarbans - Serdi - Sardinians - Sherdana - Scordisci - Kurds- Scirii / Scirrians- Serians
Dutch/Deutch - Dacians

as I said I2a-Din has spread along Danube from Bohemia to Black sea and than with invading conquests further to Asia (Sherdana, Seres, Serians, Sart, Kurds, Sarbans)

Dacians were one of the tribes around Danube and hence reach in I2a-Din

I think Dacians had dominant haplogroup I (I1?, I2a-Din , I2b ) with significant R1a of Thracians, hence similar mix to Serbs prior to settlement on Balkan, but I do not think they were ancestors of today Serbs...as Serbs are recorded to have settled Balkans from Boiki that neghbours Franks and white Croatia (hence Boiki = land of Boii = Bohemia/Bavaria) ...also I2a-Din south typical for south Slavs is not found in Romania but is found in Germany...

sparkey
19-03-12, 23:52
The Hg I1 is the ONLY of current euro Hg that is totally absent from the ancient DNA record on the euro continent. It literally does not exists in ANY samples of ancient euro DNA.

Do you seriously think that we have enough samples, in the right places, to expect more than that right now? Everyone who has looked at current I1 samples will tell you that it's remarkably young in terms of TMRCA, but quite old in terms of clade age, meaning that we don't expect there to be many ancient I1 samples anywhere prior to its relative late expansions.

The center of diversity of I1 is around Schleswig-Holstein per Nordtvedt, by the way. There are no ancient clades with apparent origins far from that discovered so far.


While in the sense that the Svears of central scandinavia are of adopted germanic culture, its 'germanic' in modern times, Hg I1 is not provably in any way the source or origin of germanic paternal ancestry, because it is totally absent in any provable euro samples historically. Given that they took over the germanic Geats they seem to have adopted german culture from the Geats.

Who do you propose the Svears were, if not Germanic? And you're saying they brought I1 to Scandinavia from where...?

And again, you're reading too much into the lack of ancient DNA.


Germany loses half its populations during the 30 years war alone, and many more with plagues and wars, so the modern I1 in north europe is coming in likely from the masses of I1 we KNOW were fleeing scandinavia during and after the DARK AGES, not in ancient germanic tribal times.

:rolleyes2: Then why is North German I1 of the same subclade as English I1 for the most part? And Scandinavian-type I1 is much rarer there?


The modern I1 are most likely descendants of the many poor paternally 'Svear' descent farmers from scandinavia looking to settle father south for better lands freed up by depopulation while their own lands are now too crowded.

They are in no way the historical angles, saxons, or germans like Nortvedt wrongly asserted starting a decade ago.

And you say my theories have no evidence...


since that time, over a decade ago, we have many ancient y-dna samples from europe and in germany

Wrong.


and the I1/germanic crowd has gotten more and more desperate since their tale has now fallen apart like many warned when Nortvedt started this claims.

Nobody's worried, because we haven't had any samples other than Birger Jarl where I1 was seriously expected.


Show me one ancient DNA discovery of I1 in europe before the dark ages expansions from Svearish Scandinavians that does come from legitimate source, and we can discuss you claims. For the time being, if they are not gibberish and disproven Nordtvedt is as close as you can get to that. He has made many promise to people who emotionally want to believe this claims, and even as they fail, they still seek to sell with emotions and psueudo-babble, what is failing them in provable science.

OK, seriously. Listen up. We only have diversity analysis now. We haven't expected more ancient I1 than we have.

And diversity analysis still indicates strong ties between Haplogroup I1 and Germanic peoples. Your assertions, on the other hand, don't match even a cursory subclade analysis.


Please. The I2 is isolated pools that were no longer in contact with one another and develop proprietary STR's and SNP in their isolation. They are all still aboriginal peoples who exist before the modern cultures we recognize even come into europe. They are adopted into these varied cultures. I2 exists in every population of europe. It held out against R1b/R1a arrival better in the Balkan because the terrain protected them from the aggression of the arrival R males better than in easy flat or open terrain.

You're putting it strangely. STR mutations and SNPs develop linearly, not due to isolation, of course. And I agree that I2 is indigenous to Europe (I even call them Paleolithic Remnants (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26944-The-Paleolithic-Remnants-a-map)), I'm only trying to investigate the reasons for the present distribution of its subclades.

And you indicate that you believe the Paleolithic continuity theory for I2a-Din in the Balkans, but you don't present any evidence. So, I don't see why I should consider your theory. I've presented my theory based on geographic diversity analysis, STR dating, and a related subclade analysis. What do you have?

Gosh
20-03-12, 00:17
but difference is I2a-Din, Slavic Macedonians have lot of it, FYRM Albanians close to none...


Are you sure in that? )))
Take another look on data about Albania. Especially southern Albania.

I like to read your posts because you have a rich imagination but I don't agree with you in many things. Too much speculations without historical sources. Some things which you told are true but many of them aren't.

rgds

MOESAN
20-03-12, 00:25
I see someones on this thread are keeping on making adventurous hypothesis based on possible common origins of tribes names, sometime very possible but the most often without any linguistic basis -
I think we have to take official history as a basis and try to correct it, maybe challenge it when data make it possible, but not begin by building complicated hypothesis that seam to me as 'scoops' or fairy tales...
NO offense...

how yes no 3
20-03-12, 00:27
Are you sure in that? )))
Take another look on data about Albania. Especially southern Albania.

I like to read your posts because you have a rich imagination but I don't agree with you in many things. Too much speculations without historical sources. Some things which you told are true but many of them aren't.

rgds

I am sure, I speak of FYR Macedonia Albanians ..
there were tests done in Macedonia....

south Albania is different story
it was heavily settled by Slavs, plenty of Slavic place names there, it was conquered for long time by Bulgarians (in times when they were also holding Macedonia)

Macedonia albanians have probably settled FYRM from north Albania mountains not so long ago in history...they didnot mix with south Slavs or Bulgar Slavs

how yes no 3
20-03-12, 00:38
I see someones on this thread are keeping on making adventurous hypothesis based on possible common origins of tribes names, sometime very possible but the most often without any linguistic basis -
I think we have to take official history as a basis and try to correct it, maybe challenge it when data make it possible, but not begin by building complicated hypothesis that seam to me as 'scoops' or fairy tales...
NO offense...


your last name is likely to correlate with set of people related to you
tribal name is last name of the nation.... it sometimes passes on even when language and culture change...


theory that i propose links spread of tribal names and quotes from history sources, with genetic findings...
it is pretty good theory if you give it a fair chance...

but mediocre people always by default discard ideas that they did not learn about in schools and hence are never able to discover anything, they just repeat known and will fail to recognize flaws in any school theory regardless of sometimes total lack of proof in it...

e.g. school says Scirii are east Germanic,for mediocre mind that is absolute truth...
but history books in fact discuss about them being Alan nation, being related to Venedi, even being Turkic..

same is for Scordisci..their culture (archeological escavation) indicate Celtic culture, but that doesnot mean they were neccessery celtic speakers... if I wear jeans, am I American?
Scordisci might be bad example as they probably were Celtic speakers as testified e.g. by town names.... but what if elite was Celtic and people not?
point is also that languages of people change.... but genetics stays....

genetics, same as tribal names, speaks about origin, language is about dominant culture or military...it can change very fast - e.g. not so long ago Celtic was spoken in France, latin only in a village called Rome.. people here keep speaking about germanic, slavic, celtic - but those are language groups and may have somewhat different history from genetic history... they are on different time scales as well..haplogroups splits happened much earlier in history, so at times when modern groups of languages are forming many peoples were already mixed genetically.....
... but knowing history, genetics and identifying tribal names of same origin can help interpret history...

Yetos
20-03-12, 01:13
And diversity analysis still indicates strong ties between Haplogroup I1 and Germanic peoples. Your assertions, on the other hand, don't match even a cursory subclade analysis.


when you say Germanic people, you mean as what? as Geographical Area?
As modern Duetsh? as a Nation that existed since when? Before IE expansion or After?

plz it is very important to make that more specific,
cause personally I believe that Germanic Language was more East 3 millenium before,
and Personally I connect I HG with Thracians-Getae substractum which was ruled by R1 than Germanic people ( non Geographical term)

Dianatomia
20-03-12, 02:40
Yes but the same results could have in case that we consider I2a as Thracian, especially the Triballi Thracian

meaning that if I2a was before Slavic expansion to south, then it could be a mark of Triballi Thracians,
and the results in Greece Albania Bulgaria and Cyprus will be the same as also in Italy,



Seems to me like a long shot. If I2a would belong to Triballi Thracians, the epicenter of I2a would have been somewhere between Serbia and Bulgaria. Not Bosnia-Croatia.

Also, notice that the peninsular Greeks, Ionian Greeks, Greek Islanders, Albanians, Albanian Macedonians, Western Anatolians, Cypriots and South Italians have higher rates of E-V13 and J2 than the - in part newly arrived - Slavic peoples. These haplogroups are indigenous to the ancient region and where present in the Balkans before most of the ethnic identities where formed. This means that they had all the time in the world to spread and dominate in the region.

It is important to note that I2b as a rule comes at the expense of E-V13 and J2. It's very hard to see very high J2 + E-V13 as well as high I2a in the same population. This means they are competing haplogroups in that region. A slight indication that it is a new arrival.

mihaitzateo
20-03-12, 03:23
Highest diversity of I2A-din found till now is in croats and also in moldavians from north Romania,from Neamt & Buhusi.
Croats are another dacian tribe,they came there from Carpathians that were in those times in north Moldavia.
Now that land belongs to Ukraine.
As a very curious thing,moldavians from Neamt and Buhusi are more close genetically to croats,than serbs are to croats.
Moldavians from Neamt and Buhusi:
40.7% I2A-din,20% R1A1-M17 ,13% R1B3,7.4% E-V13,5.7% various clades of J2,5.6% G-M201,3.7% I1A-M253,1.9% I1c-M223 ...
Compare this to croatian Y DNA,lol.
There is an ancient population living in Carphatians from Moldavia and Ukraine,they are called hutsuls,they are linked to the mountains,they have a very high percentage of I2A-din and they speak a slavic language,they have the usual popular costume that looks like those posted from those serbians,which is almost identical to some romanians etc.

how yes no 3
20-03-12, 03:38
Highest diversity of I2A-din found till now is in croats and also in moldavians from north Romania,from Neamt & Buhusi.

diversity is not the same as frequency...

actually, from what i have read (not much data yet about diversity of I2a-din in official publications) Moldavians have lowest diversity and Croats relatively low diversity...biggest diversity is in part of Ukraine in Czech republic and Serbia..

Bosnia Croats have high frequency of I2a-Din but not so high diversity...

Croatian origin of big part of this people is disputed as Narentanes/Pagani were by Byzantine historians captured as unbaptized Serbs.... in last centuries people were classified as Serbs/Croats based on religion... catholic = Croat, orthodox = Serb

42% of I2a-Din in Croatia is big lie made by talking half of samples from 3 southern islands that were part of Narentania and where I2aDin is between 60 and 80%...
in reality, Croatia has I2a-Din on same level as Serbia - around 30%





Croats are another dacian tribe,they came there from Carpathians that were in those times in north Moldavia.
Now that land belongs to Ukraine.

well, that is hard to state as we do not know much about Dacians...
but yes, Croats did have state in Carpathians in part that is now Ukraine and south Poland and perhaps even Slovakia...
they may have been same people as Carpi and/or Heruli but there is no real proof for that yet...




As a very curious thing,moldavians from Neamt and Buhusi are more close genetically to croats,than serbs are to croats.Moldavians from Neamt and Buhusi:
40.7% I2A-din,20% R1A1-M17 ,13% R1B3,7.4% E-V13,5.7% various clades of J2,5.6% G-M201,3.7% I1A-M253,1.9% I1c-M223 ...
Compare this to croatian Y DNA,lol.
There is an ancient population living in Carphatians from Moldavia and Ukraine,they are called hutsuls,they are linked to the mountains,they have a very high percentage of I2A-din and they speak a slavic language,they have the usual popular costume that looks like those posted from those serbians,which is almost identical to some romanians etc.
as i said Croats do not have 42% of I2a-Din
its about how to lie with numbers...
i can take half samples from Sweden and half from Sardinia and say there is 25% I2a1 in Sweden, but there is 0%


regarding Neamt and Buhusi, if those counties are very different than rest of Romania, than they are not Dacians in origin..
neamt county is named after a word that means german in Slavic languages which is likely indication of germanic settlement...

sparkey
20-03-12, 06:49
diversity is not the same as frequency...

actually, from what i have read (not much data yet about diversity of I2a-din in official publications) Moldavians have lowest diversity and Croats relatively low diversity...biggest diversity is in part of Ukraine in Czech republic and Serbia..

Bosnia Croats have high frequency of I2a-Din but not so high diversity...

From what I've read, Ukrainians seem to have the highest I2a-Din diversity, with Poles a possible #2 (Poles become #1 if we restrict to I2a-Din-S only, although the Czechs are also important then and may challenge them for that title, as you indicate). Moldavians have a good amount of diversity, maybe #3 or even #2, consistent with the Ukranian diversity spike, but it seems to go down as you get farther from Ukraine, indicating that the origin is farther north than they are. Verenich's analysis is great for this, although I think that the forum he posted it on might be down now...

sparkey
20-03-12, 06:52
when you say Germanic people, you mean as what? as Geographical Area?
As modern Duetsh? as a Nation that existed since when? Before IE expansion or After?

After IE expansion, meaning groups of peoples that spoke languages that would today be classified as "Germanic."

zanipolo
20-03-12, 10:06
diversity is not the same as frequency...

actually, from what i have read (not much data yet about diversity of I2a-din in official publications) Moldavians have lowest diversity and Croats relatively low diversity...biggest diversity is in part of Ukraine in Czech republic and Serbia..

Bosnia Croats have high frequency of I2a-Din but not so high diversity...

Croatian origin of big part of this people is disputed as Narentanes/Pagani were by Byzantine historians captured as unbaptized Serbs.... in last centuries people were classified as Serbs/Croats based on religion... catholic = Croat, orthodox = Serb

42% of I2a-Din in Croatia is big lie made by talking half of samples from 3 southern islands that were part of Narentania and where I2aDin is between 60 and 80%...
in reality, Croatia has I2a-Din on same level as Serbia - around 30%






well, that is hard to state as we do not know much about Dacians...
but yes, Croats did have state in Carpathians in part that is now Ukraine and south Poland and perhaps even Slovakia...
they may have been same people as Carpi and/or Heruli but there is no real proof for that yet...




as i said Croats do not have 42% of I2a-Din
its about how to lie with numbers...
i can take half samples from Sweden and half from Sardinia and say there is 25% I2a1 in Sweden, but there is 0%


regarding Neamt and Buhusi, if those counties are very different than rest of Romania, than they are not Dacians in origin..
neamt county is named after a word that means german in Slavic languages which is likely indication of germanic settlement...

I do not know why you do not take the ancient Serbians as non-slavic , but a thracian race...the Triballi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triballi

most ancient, dark ages and medieval historians say the serbian come from this thracian tribe, that where pushed eastward by the illyrians coming down from the north and later conquered by the gaulish scordisci. The serbs did not bring any I2a into the blakans if they where always in the balkans, they are in majority E HG.
Its one reason to this day the serbs want their ancient homeland of kosovo

Read link and all link at the bottom of the link presented.

The only south slavs that came to the balkans was the bulgars, all the rest where not ancient slavic people.

http://books.google.com.au/books?ei=ETpoT9CvAoTImAWNi5mUCQ&sqi=2&id=6L49AAAAIAAJ&dq=pannonia+moesia+superior&q=triballi#v=snippet&q=triballi&f=false

search inside this book.

BTW , the triballi as some historians claim became the moesians

zanipolo
20-03-12, 10:11
From what I've read, Ukrainians seem to have the highest I2a-Din diversity, with Poles a possible #2 (Poles become #1 if we restrict to I2a-Din-S only, although the Czechs are also important then and may challenge them for that title, as you indicate). Moldavians have a good amount of diversity, maybe #3 or even #2, consistent with the Ukranian diversity spike, but it seems to go down as you get farther from Ukraine, indicating that the origin is farther north than they are. Verenich's analysis is great for this, although I think that the forum he posted it on might be down now...

are czechs south slavs, ....no. Where they slavic in the ancient times ...no. So how can these west slavic people bring I2a-Din into the balkans?

The only people that can bring I2a-din into the balkans was from Central europe. If there was no slavs there at that time, how did it happen

Yetos
20-03-12, 12:30
Seems to me like a long shot. If I2a would belong to Triballi Thracians, the epicenter of I2a would have been somewhere between Serbia and Bulgaria. Not Bosnia-Croatia.

Also, notice that the peninsular Greeks, Ionian Greeks, Greek Islanders, Albanians, Albanian Macedonians, Western Anatolians, Cypriots and South Italians have higher rates of E-V13 and J2 than the - in part newly arrived - Slavic peoples. These haplogroups are indigenous to the ancient region and where present in the Balkans before most of the ethnic identities where formed. This means that they had all the time in the world to spread and dominate in the region.

It is important to note that I2b as a rule comes at the expense of E-V13 and J2. It's very hard to see very high J2 + E-V13 as well as high I2a in the same population. This means they are competing haplogroups in that region. A slight indication that it is a new arrival.


First of all Triballi is not in Bulgaria but in area of today Nis to Belingrad and Bosnia, a triangle area where I2a2 Din is High
Second E-v13 is connected with Arcado-Cypriots and copper or Chalkolithic Era , its expansion in Blakns is about 2000 Bc
Third, Greece
Greece might not Have High I2a2 Din but Has I at a range of >20% and in areas where Slavic population never went Like mountain Crete, nountain Crete has I HG as Also Agrinion and Serres, in Greece I is strong in all areas except peloponese,
In Agrinion I Haplogroup reach >35% as also in mountain Crete 20% and in Serres >30% high concentrations in Makedonia and Sterea
the case of Cyprus is probably after the mycenean colonisation that extend Even to Makedonians
remember that Makedonians occupy the island and build 2 Big cities, Ammohostos Famagusta if I remember was a Makedonian colony, that is why Cyprus has Big I HG instead of other population,
considering Agrinion and king Agrios who was Father of Paion who was Patriarch of Paionians (FyroM)
then surely I Hg existed in Greece much before the arrival of Slavic populations
considering the above we can not Reject I Hg as imported, at medieval times,
but the case of I2a2 only and that one only.

as you the I HG was in Balkans and in Fact could be either half of population once,
Although I2a2 Din is not that High

Now if I2a2 was Slavic then Severi would have Enough, Yet in the lands that Severi settled (Plovdiv area) I2a2 is weak but is Strong in Sofia land of Serdi who were considered Celtic population

on the other Hand we have I2a2 Din samples even to ucraine, but do we have in North of Bohemia were Serbs start to enter?

All I want to say is that the same results with your analysis and way of Thinking give the Thracian case,
Besides The Trballi are considered the 4rth type of south Thracians and their home lands is the triangle Nis Bosnia Donav west of Sofia (Serdi lands)
1 is Odrysse
2 Bryges Paionians
3 Spapeans Ciccones
4 Triballi

how yes no 3
20-03-12, 15:10
From what I've read, Ukrainians seem to have the highest I2a-Din diversity, with Poles a possible #2 (Poles become #1 if we restrict to I2a-Din-S only, although the Czechs are also important then and may challenge them for that title, as you indicate). Moldavians have a good amount of diversity, maybe #3 or even #2, consistent with the Ukranian diversity spike, but it seems to go down as you get farther from Ukraine, indicating that the origin is farther north than they are. Verenich's analysis is great for this, although I think that the forum he posted it on might be down now...
i was actually referring to:
1) old reference about low diversity of I2a-Din in Moldavia
2) Verenich's analysis with a map that according to my memory did show hotspots of diversity to be: Ukraine, Serbia and Czech republic... as far as i remember he has also pinpointed that Serbs have significantly higher diversity of I2a-din than Croats

Yetos
20-03-12, 15:37
After IE expansion, meaning groups of peoples that spoke languages that would today be classified as "Germanic."

it has a big meaning, since if we consider I Hg as Germanic Speaking and from area of Denmark starting point, Then we might Speak of a total different Way of IE expansion,
my point is that if the proto I Hg happened in Denmark, and Denmark was already IE and that I moved and mutate to east until Kurds and Ucraine, then we have a collapse of all our assumptions, cause it seems like all R1 are not IE and the spread of IE is due to I Hg in Europe,
Also we get that I in greece and in Kurds which is a later mutation of Denmark proto I
that means that Germanic population moved even to middle East yet that devastation are not known, except Bryges and Makedonians or some Caucas I Hg
that means that Brygians carrier of I moved to middle east and brought I there, so Brygian were Thracians so Thracian are a relative to Germanic,

All I want to say is that if I Hg is considered as Germanic speaking, then all theories about R1b and r1a collapse or tremble,
and then we might consider to start from a new basis,

That is why I asked, cause if we consider it as Germanic area origin which later get IE and accept later the language of IE carriers (Greek Slavic Germanic etc)
But if the 'mutation' of first I HG happened in a already Germanic speaking Land then we have a totaly different IE expansion

sparkey
20-03-12, 17:29
are czechs south slavs, ....no. Where they slavic in the ancient times ...no. So how can these west slavic people bring I2a-Din into the balkans?

The only people that can bring I2a-din into the balkans was from Central europe. If there was no slavs there at that time, how did it happen

The hobbyist analysis that Gosh cross-posted earlier claimed Prague Culture as the likely source, which seems feasible to me. You present an interesting challenge, though: If the proposal is that South Slavic peoples are more closely related to West than to East Slavic peoples, why do South Slavic languages share more in common with East Slavic? The answer is apparently: since the separation of the South Slavic peoples dates back to the early days of what might be called a "Slavic" culture, probably before the differentiation of the Slavic language, that means that West and South Slavic languages didn't develop their unique characteristics until after they separated. Since they were initially smaller populations than East Slavic, their languages probably evolved more quickly as a result.

Obviously, the above is a lot of speculation on my part, trying to make sense of the pieces of this puzzle that I understand the least, so as always, I'm open to any corrections or counter-analysis.

sparkey
20-03-12, 17:32
it has a big meaning, since if we consider I Hg as Germanic Speaking and from area of Denmark starting point,

...before we go any farther, the proposal is that the large majority of I1 (not all of I) expanded with Germanic peoples, who were mostly R1a+R1b otherwise. And that proposal shouldn't affect our analysis of I2a-Din in the Balkans significantly.

razor
20-03-12, 17:35
A question for Sparkey:

I don't have the exact reference but as I remember, Nordtvedt's calculations for the MRCA of Din-N was ca. 300 BCE and Din-S ca. 30 BCE But as you pointed out earlier this is not quite the same thing as the putative date for the emergence of the clade as such. Again, I vaguely remember that Nordtvedt also calculated that. Do you have the figures handy?

sparkey
20-03-12, 17:47
A question for Sparkey:

I don't have the exact reference but as I remember, Nordtvedt's calculations for the MRCA of Din-N was ca. 300 BCE and Din-S ca. 30 BCE But as you pointed out earlier this is not quite the same thing as the putative date for the emergence of the clade as such. Again, I vaguely remember that Nordtvedt also calculated that. Do you have the figures handy?

I don't have the raw number with error bars handy, but looking at his tree, it looks like I2a-Din and I2a-Disles diverged ca. 6000 YBP. Is that what you're looking for?

razor
20-03-12, 18:06
I don't have the raw number with error bars handy, but looking at his tree, it looks like I2a-Din and I2a-Disles diverged ca. 6000 YBP. Is that what you're looking for?

Partly. You mean the ancestor of I2a-Din presumably (back ca. 4000 BCE). Some continuing I2a1* or I2a1b* type. But what I was wondering about is the actual (not surviving) initiator of I2a-Din as I2a1b1a (Nordt. nomencl.) distinct from the MRCA. Or is that a misunderstanding?

sparkey
20-03-12, 18:17
Partly. You mean the ancestor of I2a-Din presumably (back ca. 4000 BCE). Some continuing I2a1* or I2a1b* type. But what I was wondering about is the actual (not surviving) initiator of I2a-Din as I2a1b1a (Nordt. nomencl.) distinct from the MRCA. Or is that a misunderstanding?

As in, when did the first individual to have the defining SNP of I2a-Din live? That would be between when I2a-Din and I2a-Disles diverged, and the TMRCA of I2a-Din. So, it's a range, not a specific date estimate, that we're looking at for that.

how yes no 3
20-03-12, 22:24
I do not know why you do not take the ancient Serbians as non-slavic , but a thracian race...the Triballi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triballi

most ancient, dark ages and medieval historians say the serbian come from this thracian tribe, that where pushed eastward by the illyrians coming down from the north and later conquered by the gaulish scordisci.
well, only source that talks about arrival of Serbs to Balkan is De administrando imperio, and it states that they have arrived from Boiki (Bavaria/Bohemia) where they have also originally dwellt.. this fits well with I2a -Din south spread among south slavs and to some extent in Germany, but not in east Europe...Bohemia/Bavaria also has place names Srby several times and in part of Bavaria neighbouring Bohemia is town that was known as Serviodurum... Bohemia and Serbia are also 2 of 3 centers of diversity for I2a-Din.. hence Prague culture reconstruction pointed out earlier in this thread makes lot of sense...

btw. it is more or less very clear that I2a-Din has spread went along Danube and further along Black sea and into Asia.....this is in fact perfect match with 3 centers of I2a Din diversity: Bohemia (starting point for voyage down the Danube), Serbia (mid point) and Ukraine (end point) ...

authors that you speak about do not speak about settlement of Serbs, they just call them Triballians...
in same way some authors were using name Scythians for Huns and made similar generalizations by using a barbarian tribe from more distant history to name the one from their reality... its not something that can be 100% trusted... it was often derogatory...like when we say some person is Vandal...

thing is I2a-Din is very typical trace for south Slavs....and I2a is clearly related to tribal names such as Sardinians, Serbs, and in Asia people like Kurds, Sarbans and white Sart... therefore I assume it was in distant past kind of name for a race not for tribes... Serians/Serres

even in Greece there is Serres area and is reach in I2a-Din and is also where ancient Greek history document speaks of Serres/Serians living...

relation between the name and haplogroup is for me more clear as reconstruction of its spread around Danube gives us another related tribal name Scordisci/Serdi...

and reconstruction of sea peoples conquest with Sherdana having same tribal name (and living behind only single place name - of a lake in Egypt called Serbonian bog) again correlates with spread of I2a...sea people conquest, by analysis of order of conquest, clearly must have had actual stronghold in Kurdish area of today....but isn't Kurd in fact same tribal name as Sherdana? and what about Kurds being different from environment due to R1a and I2a genetics?

Pomponius Mela speaks of Asia settled starting from east by Indians, Serres and Scythians... today people who partially originate from those Serres are white Sarts, pashtun Sarbans and Kurds..

Seneca speaks of Serians along Danube, rulling over Scythians, in Serica (north of Tibet) and red sea...
this is again mapped easily to I2a-din...rulling over Scythians = east Europe and north of Black sea... its clear I2a-Din has spread along the Danube, regarding Serica today hotspot of haplogroup I is in that area and in people who were known as Sart and white Sart..only question is red sea... but not all people live genetic impact... we know that red sea was where Sherdana had clashes with Egypt...



essentially, what I claim is that Serb/Serd/Serian was a name of a race of I2a people, like Arabs are race related to J1 and Chinese related people with O... in fact, knowing that Swedes are associated with spread of I1 and Suebi (Swabians) with I2b and I1 we can speak of it being ancient race name for haplogroup I or its part...

Serbs of today are just one small leaf of that tree... and their direct ancestors were not the Sherdana of sea people who gave Kurds, but according to only historic source writing about them some people who have in 7th century come down Danube from Bohemia where they have also originally dwellt (not necessarily continuously)...
it is question whether those were Scordisci who lived along Danube originally from Slovakia to Greece and Bulgaria or Scirri who were recorded in Baltic areas where we can find I2a-Din south and also recorded in Bavaria, and also placed by some authors into Alans, same as Caucasian Serboi were put among Sarmatians /Alans . Or were perhaps Scordisci and Scirri/Scirrians in fact same people or two related branches in tree of I2a-Din?

Triballians also lived along this Danube route, so they probably also had significant I2a-Din...so they were probably also of Serb/Serd/Sard/Serian race, but probably not ancestors of the Serbs who came to Balkans in 7th century...




The serbs did not bring any I2a into the blakans if they where always in the balkans, they are in majority E HG.
Its one reason to this day the serbs want their ancient homeland of kosovo

it is easy to see that I2a-Din was for long time spread along Danube... I2a-Din was probably not originally present in Greece (except for Seres and Macedonia area and Cypress to which it came from sea peoples) and Albania...but was present and in fact very likely dominant along Danube.... for long long time....

I believe that Balkan was originally settled by R1a...those would be Pelasgians or flatland/field/sea people...same tribal name is Poles (Poljaci with Slavic Polje = field)... again poles/pelast/pelasgians is originally about race name not nation or tribe name.. this is a race name for R1a1a7-M458 branch that is dominant in west Slavs... this branch has highest diversity in Serbia where a common ancestor is estimated to have lived 14KYA

another race name for R1a is Rasena/Russians/Thracians/Rašani......in Europe this is related to R1a1a*(xM458) dominant in east Slavs... for samples in Serbia this branch has most distant common ancestor 11 KYA

this all indicates long history of the spread of R1a in Balkan and east Europe prior to arrival of E-V13 and J2 people....

reference about estimated age of R1a in Serbia:
High levels of Paleolithic Y-chromosome lineages characterize Serbia
Maria Regueiro, Luis Rivera, Tatjana Damnjanovic, Ljiljana Lukovic, Jelena Milasin, Rene J. Herrera


when E-V13 and J2 proto-Greek tribes and later Illyrians came to Balkan they have partly assimilated partly pushed out Pelasgians to Pannonia where they are known as Pannonians...with spread of Roman empire they went to Poland.... similarly center of R1a Thracians pushed by Roman empire moves towards Russia




The only south slavs that came to the balkans was the bulgars, all the rest where not ancient slavic people.
i think Bulgars could have been originally same as Serbs and Croats and Macedonians - I2a din people... but part of those who lived in Caucasus....and perhaps became mixed with some turkic people... e.g. Huns...