PDA

View Full Version : I2a-Din came to the Balkans and Dinaric Alps with the Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

gyms
16-06-17, 21:33
[QUOTE=Miroslav;511849][QUOTE=gyms;511847]Why we underestimate the role of women? .../QUOTE]

You should read Father Tongue hypothesis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_Tongue_hypothesis)[FONT=sans

With the exception of Onour-Bulgarians.And Basques.And othes.

Miroslav
16-06-17, 21:46
How am I gonna ask any viable questions when you just say "there is no evidence" what do you mean there's no evidence of what?

That's the issue - the given "answers" which can be read on this or similar sites, at least on the topic of this haplogroup, are not based on anything relevant and confirmed about the haplogroup. There is no ancient sample, was it thousands or several centuries old, was it from e.g. Poland or Bosnia and Herzegovina (preferably both) and so on. Neutrality is not shown as is pushed a specific theory which currently has missing links and is simply too soon to throw it to people as a "fact" or "mainstream" consideration. We are at the stage of theorization, there's nothing relevant enough to snap and say "that's it!". My primary issue is the lack of neutrality, which common people do not know.


What is your major beef with Trojet cuz he claims that I2a1b hasn't been found in ancient Balkans and that the subclade is too young to not be Slavic?

Contradictory logic and premature conclusion ignoring the fact the samples have a strongly isolated locality, period, number tendency, from which according to the I2a1-P37.2 sample list, can not be concluded anything what happened after LGM refugia migration, even that is speculative. The subclade formation age and TMRCA do not correspond with Slavic ethnogenesis formation and much later medieval migration. Its young age does not exclude it was present in the Balkan or broad region from both sides of Danube river.


And it's found in significant percentages only in Slavic countries or semi-Slavic like Romania Hungary. And you think that he's wrong. Why?

That's not a strong argument considering that social-cultural-ethnic identity steadily changed. Instead of cultural, you could use geographical argument.


...why some people from my own neck of the woods just vehemently want to deny any idea of a Slavic expansion and that those are mainly our roots. Is it that important how long our ancestors dwelled in the Balkans and stayed on one patch of dirt? I just don't get what's the fuss.

Ideology. The primary issue with historiography during the Yugoslavian period was in the fact the archeology research could not confirm massive Slavic migration nor that Balkan was uninhabited, while ethnography research conclusion that many Dinaric traditions among both South Slavic, or Vlachian, or Albanian populations have a non-Slavic origin, yet mostly considered Illyrian.

Angela
16-06-17, 21:55
Agreed and great post.

Both R1a and I2a-Slav served as the main components differentiating Slavic-admixed people with the Classic Balkans. They also brought mtdna lineages with them.
Northeastern shift in Balkan Slavs is high compared to the rest of the Balkan inhabitants - except Romanians who also have high I2a-Slav and R1a, still southern shifted compared to South Slavs bar south Bulgarians who have more of the Classic Balkan haplogroups.
This difference is huge even between a Balkan Slav and Classic Balkan neighbor(Albanian, Greek) living next-door with them.

Albanians are basically "Northwestern-shifted mainland Greeks" or "Eastern-shifted Tuscans" in most of the Gedmatch calculators I've seen.

My DNAland:

http://i.imgur.com/oWSGF8z.png Exactly so, particularly the bolded portion, as I 've been saying since the days of the dodecad calculators.

For the members of the "flat earth society", however, that's easily taken care of. Autosomal analysis, which is the focus of the major genetics labs in the world, is irrelevant. :rolleyes2: See, you can believe anything you want as long as you're willing to blind your eyes to science.

MOESAN
16-06-17, 22:09
[QUOTE=gyms;511847]Why we underestimate the role of women? .../QUOTE]

You should read Father Tongue hypothesis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_Tongue_hypothesis)

I agree for the most -
language shift depends on diverse factors (number, social organisation...), I already posted about this (as opposants to my thoughts!); but I 'm tempted to think that a male elite doesn' t change language so easily except in some very unbalanced cases, and I don't put too much credit in the "mother's tongue" myth -

Angela
16-06-17, 22:10
Miroslav, Garrick, Milan and Dinarid, you can down thumb me and anyone else who shows up your illogic until kingdom come. . It's just ultra-nationalistic obfuscation and everyone knows it. Who do you think you're kidding? Everyone else in the amateur community knows that this whole argument is nonsense, and as for the academics, you're not even on their radar.

You keep spamming the same distorted arguments over and over again, and harassing other members, and you're all going to get infractions. Everyone else is tired of being on this merry-go-round.

Angela
16-06-17, 22:32
Autosomal DNA is not of much use if we're discussing for a period older than 300 years. There several possible reasons some populations are more closely related than to others.

I suggest you start reading some dna academic papers rather than the blogs run by ultra-nationalists.

We have and can analyze autosomal dna from 2500 BC and before.

Miroslav
16-06-17, 22:53
I suggest you start reading some dna academic papers rather than the blogs run by ultra-nationalists...

You missed the point.


Miroslav, Garrick, Milan and Dinarid...

Nice, throwing around ultra-nationalistic labels to us (you could have use Fascism or Nazism instead, they are more popular nowadays), calling us illogical spammers of distorted arguments (shameful), yet on this site to people is sold illogical contradictions and biased ignorance as factual reality. Literally, on this last few pages the primary issue was the lack of evidence and neutrality, but according to you nobody should care about it and only biased viewpoint should be interpreted and allowed? The evidence and rationalization are pointless in post-modernist worldview, and anyone who points this issue should be banned. Is this what you support? Ban all those who you do not agree with while befriending those who spam useless cheering posts like we're in elementary school, who don't know the difference between haplogroups nomenclature, history, archeology, whatever as long as they accept the narrative? How convenient.

Milan.M
16-06-17, 23:11
Very little is certain in any aspect of genetics, but as I said before, the academicians and virtually everyone in the hobbyist community except people from the Balkans like Garrick and Miroslav believe that this particular lineage of I2a existed in more northern areas and became part of the Slavic speaking community there, only arriving in the Balkans with the Slavic migrations of early Medieval times.

It seems to an uninterested observer that people who have been pumped with "Slavic" propaganda since the 1800s and maybe even before just want to have it both ways. They want to be "Slavic", despite all the evidence that most of them are at least half and often more definitely not "Slavic", and at the same time they want to be "indigenous", so they go through these contortions trying to show that the only y marker which could possibly be "Slavic" is indigenous, which would mean that the Slavic languages are also "indigenous", which is patently absurd. For one thing, except for some ethnocentrist linguists from the Balkans who are mostly ignored, every linguist in the world knows that Slavic is a relatively recent language, and every archaeologist, anthropologist and geneticist in the world knows that there was a migration by Slavic speaking peoples into the Balkans after the fall of the Western Empire and the weakening of the Eastern Empire. It was just a slightly later later Barbarian invasion.

You can't just look at the arguments for this y lineage being "indigenous". You have to look at the whole pattern or story that is being sold. If this lineage is not "Slavic", where did all the "Slavic" ancestry come from? There's far too little R1a to account for it. So, it has to be "Slavic". It also has to be "indigenous" for some people, but that would require us to believe that it was already in the Balkans before the arrival of Slavic speaking peoples in the Middle Ages. In that case what the heck y dna did those people carry? Simple, for these type of people. We'll just pretend that all the archaeologists relying on data and all the historians relying on actual documents are wrong and that there was no "Slavic" migration.

The whole thing is utterly ridiculous. How even someone who has been brainwashed by an education system and a culture under the control of autocrats and fifty or more years behind the times can believe this illogical and a-scientific narrative is beyond me. Of course, this is the Balkans....

Never wanted to "argue" with you,maybe you had bad day today,but when i do not agree i do not.How many countries have you visited in your lifetime except of Italy or USA,to which country in the Balkans you have been?
I see you're not very tolerant toward anything "east" by your perception,what do you really know of other cultures,be they from Balkans,Eastern Europe or middle East,have you ever visited any? because i doubt.

In reality i was opening threads about Slavs and threads i was interested in,all are signed under my name Milan some from other accounts,anyone can read them,i had debates with Taranis and also some Albanians who were joining from time to time "objective" just like they are on this thread.You was not participating there however.

Your entire post is non-sense.


Miroslav, Garrick, Milan and Dinarid, you can down thumb me and anyone else who shows up your illogic until kingdom come. . It's just ultra-nationalistic obfuscation and everyone knows it. Who do you think you're kidding? Everyone else in the amateur community knows that this whole argument is nonsense, and as for the academics, you're not even on their radar.

You keep spamming the same distorted arguments over and over again, and harassing other members, and you're all going to get infractions. Everyone else is tired of being on this merry-go-round.

Ban is preferable than infraction.

Apsurdistan
16-06-17, 23:25
Apsurdistan:"And it's found in significant percentages only in Slavic countries or semi-Slavic like Romania Hungary."

Are Romania and Hungary "semi-Slavic" ?

You are absurd indeed. Is the Sun "semi-Slavic" too?

Lol even though you misunderstood the terminology I made up and yes it's sloppy, the funny way you replied to it is gonna get the green button approval!

Apsurdistan
16-06-17, 23:35
Very little is certain in any aspect of genetics, but as I said before, the academicians and virtually everyone in the hobbyist community except people from the Balkans like Garrick and Miroslav believe that this particular lineage of I2a existed in more northern areas and became part of the Slavic speaking community there, only arriving in the Balkans with the Slavic migrations of early Medieval times.

It seems to an uninterested observer that people who have been pumped with "Slavic" propaganda since the 1800s and maybe even before just want to have it both ways. They want to be "Slavic", despite all the evidence that most of them are at least half and often more definitely not "Slavic", and at the same time they want to be "indigenous", so they go through these contortions trying to show that the only y marker which could possibly be "Slavic" is indigenous, which would mean that the Slavic languages are also "indigenous", which is patently absurd. For one thing, except for some ethnocentrist linguists from the Balkans who are mostly ignored, every linguist in the world knows that Slavic is a relatively recent language, and every archaeologist, anthropologist and geneticist in the world knows that there was a migration by Slavic speaking peoples into the Balkans after the fall of the Western Empire and the weakening of the Eastern Empire. It was just a slightly later later Barbarian invasion.

You can't just look at the arguments for this y lineage being "indigenous". You have to look at the whole pattern or story that is being sold. If this lineage is not "Slavic", where did all the "Slavic" ancestry come from? There's far too little R1a to account for it. So, it has to be "Slavic". It also has to be "indigenous" for some people, but that would require us to believe that it was already in the Balkans before the arrival of Slavic speaking peoples in the Middle Ages. In that case what the heck y dna did those people carry? Simple, for these type of people. We'll just pretend that all the archaeologists relying on data and all the historians relying on actual documents are wrong and that there was no "Slavic" migration.

The whole thing is utterly ridiculous. How even someone who has been brainwashed by an education system and a culture under the control of autocrats and fifty or more years behind the times can believe this illogical and a-scientific narrative is beyond me. Of course, this is the Balkans....

I love how she pretends to know "cuz she claims to have the academia knowledge" that she knows more about our own history and culture better than us who have lived it. And discriminating against the Balkans on top of it.

Garrick
16-06-17, 23:39
Very little is certain in any aspect of genetics, but as I said before, the academicians and virtually everyone in the hobbyist community except people from the Balkans like Garrick and Miroslav believe that this particular lineage of I2a existed in more northern areas and became part of the Slavic speaking community there, only arriving in the Balkans with the Slavic migrations of early Medieval times.

It seems to an uninterested observer that people who have been pumped with "Slavic" propaganda since the 1800s and maybe even before just want to have it both ways. They want to be "Slavic", despite all the evidence that most of them are at least half and often more definitely not "Slavic", and at the same time they want to be "indigenous", so they go through these contortions trying to show that the only y marker which could possibly be "Slavic" is indigenous, which would mean that the Slavic languages are also "indigenous", which is patently absurd. For one thing, except for some ethnocentrist linguists from the Balkans who are mostly ignored, every linguist in the world knows that Slavic is a relatively recent language, and every archaeologist, anthropologist and geneticist in the world knows that there was a migration by Slavic speaking peoples into the Balkans after the fall of the Western Empire and the weakening of the Eastern Empire. It was just a slightly later later Barbarian invasion.

You can't just look at the arguments for this y lineage being "indigenous". You have to look at the whole pattern or story that is being sold. If this lineage is not "Slavic", where did all the "Slavic" ancestry come from? There's far too little R1a to account for it. So, it has to be "Slavic". It also has to be "indigenous" for some people, but that would require us to believe that it was already in the Balkans before the arrival of Slavic speaking peoples in the Middle Ages. In that case what the heck y dna did those people carry? Simple, for these type of people. We'll just pretend that all the archaeologists relying on data and all the historians relying on actual documents are wrong and that there was no "Slavic" migration.

The whole thing is utterly ridiculous. How even someone who has been brainwashed by an education system and a culture under the control of autocrats and fifty or more years behind the times can believe this illogical and a-scientific narrative is beyond me. Of course, this is the Balkans....

I very appreciate the work of the moderators of the forum that requires a lot of knowledge and a lot of concentration and congratulations.

Moderators can certainly be mistaken. First nobody can know everything which is true postulate and these are topics where there is no final answers because the situation is changing with each following findings.

What we now have from the standpoint of science are four theories:

1. Russian/Pan-Slavic theory

According this theory I-CTS10228 is Slavic marker. His presence in today's high concentration areas is consequence of Slavic expansion (5-7 century).

This theory you support.

2. Thracian theory

According this theory I-CTS10228 is Thracian marker. I-CTS10228 is present in genetic fund of Northern Black sea region/Romanian/Eastern and Central Balkan population before of a mass migration (3-7 century).

3. German/Western European theory

According this theory I-CTS10228 is German marker, the most represented among Goths and Gepids. It had more directions, coming to the Balkans in 3-4 century and spreading to the Eastern Europe where Germans and Slavs was overlapping. In these processes carriers of I-CTS10228 were Slavicized.

4. Illirian/Western Balkan theory

According this theory I-CTS10228 is Illyrian marker, indigenous to the Western Balkan.

Every of these theories has pluses and minuses.

For example one of the minuses of Russian/Pan-Slavic theory is that I-CTS10228 is founded much before Slavs entered the historical stage, Russian/Pan-Slavist scientists have no explanation for this fact. Minus Dacian/Thracian theory is that although no one can doubt that I-CTS10228 could be present in Dacian and Thracian genetic fund before 3 century issue is whether it could be present in large quantities. Minus German/Western European theory is although it can be well-adjusted with the assumption that most probably I-CTS10228 emerged in Central Europe (today's Austria, Germany, Denmark, Western France, Northern Italy, Slovenia, Czech Republic etc.) and it was presented at German people I-CTS10228 didn't spread in all areas where German tribes moved. Minus Illyrian/Western Balkan theory is that could hardly explain strongly presence I-CTS10228 in Northern and Eastern Slavic countries.

What is needed to solve which of these four theories is most appropriate. It is patience. We will see newer findings.

Personaly for me second theory (I-CTS10228 is Thracian marker) could be best adjusted with a numerous dilemmas including language and well geographically connect different areas.

But I don't advocate none of these theories as final. Therefore I have no idea where you concluded which of these four theories I prefer, I only criticized attitudes that due to insufficient evidence one of these theories is winner. No, it is not true. Practically, all of them are in playing.Another thing is how many probabilty, what is very changeable with new evidence.

Balkanite
17-06-17, 00:01
How should I2a-Slavic ever be a Thracian or Illyrian marker? For being a marker it should at least had been a great portion of the Illyrians/Thracians who had this haplogroup, right?

How could it have been a major haplogroup among those peoples if I2a-Slavic was a haplogroup present in only one single man who lived 300 BC(as TMRCA tells us)?
The Illyrians/Thracians were hundreds of thousands and maybe millions of people at that time. In my memory i recall several battles where the Illyrians fought by the thousands and occasionally slaughtered up to 10000 Macedonians or Molossians at a time.
IF I2a-Slavic were really among those Illyrians, he would not have been representative at all, but just a slave or something captured from the central european wilderness of that time.

But what would you rather be then? A slave captured by the Illyrians in antiquity(probably some kind of proto-slav who got Illyrianized), or a real SLAV coming to the balkans in the middle ages?

Always have that in the back of your head: Illyrians and Thracians were maybe hundreds of thousands at the time that I2a-Slavic was just one little person.

Balkanite
17-06-17, 00:15
And the most amazing part of the fairytale is: And somehow the Illyrianized Proto-slav slave from antiquity, actually began talking slavic in the middle ages, just as all other I2a-Slavic around Europe. Just by accident. He could feel in his heart that his real language was slavic, so when the other slavs appeared in the balkans a 1000 years later, all of his thousands of ancestors would agree that they should as the only haplogroup of europe, become a nearly exlusive slavic speaking haplogroup. They could just feel it in their heart. It is not just because they actually arrived in the middle ages.

MarkoZ
17-06-17, 00:29
More interesting than the linguistic Thracians would be the pan-East-European Thraco-Cimmerian phenomenon of unknown affiliation:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Thraco-Cimmerian.png

After the IBD analysis of Kushnarevich (2015) I think significant gene flow into the Balkans from a Slavic source is definitely falsified. Earlier Iron Age movements on the other hand point to Romania and vicinity as an important source. IIRC that's also were I2a-din should be from based on present day hierarchical diversity.

DuPidh
17-06-17, 00:45
I very appreciate the work of the moderators of the forum that requires a lot of knowledge and a lot of concentration and congratulations.

Moderators can certainly be mistaken. First nobody can know everything which is true postulate and these are topics where there is no final answers because the situation is changing with each following findings.

What we now have from the standpoint of science are four theories:

1. Russian/Pan-Slavic theory

According this theory I-CTS10228 is Slavic marker. His presence in today's high concentration areas is consequence of Slavic expansion (5-7 century).

This theory you support.

2. Thracian theory

According this theory I-CTS10228 is Thracian marker. I-CTS10228 is present in genetic fund of Northern Black sea region/Romanian/Eastern and Central Balkan population before of a mass migration (3-7 century).

3. German/Western European theory

According this theory I-CTS10228 is German marker, the most represented among Goths and Gepids. It had more directions, coming to the Balkans in 3-4 century and spreading to the Eastern Europe where Germans and Slavs was overlapping. In these processes carriers of I-CTS10228 were Slavicized.

4. Illirian/Western Balkan theory

According this theory I-CTS10228 is Illyrian marker, indigenous to the Western Balkan.

Every of these theories has pluses and minuses.

For example one of the minuses of Russian/Pan-Slavic theory is that I-CTS10228 is founded much before Slavs entered the historical stage, Russian/Pan-Slavist scientists have no explanation for this fact. Minus Dacian/Thracian theory is that although no one can doubt that I-CTS10228 could be present in Dacian and Thracian genetic fund before 3 century issue is whether it could be present in large quantities. Minus German/Western European theory is although it can be well-adjusted with the assumption that most probably I-CTS10228 emerged in Central Europe (today's Austria, Germany, Denmark, Western France, Northern Italy, Slovenia, Czech Republic etc.) and it was presented at German people I-CTS10228 didn't spread in all areas where German tribes moved. Minus Illyrian/Western Balkan theory is that could hardly explain strongly presence I-CTS10228 in Northern and Eastern Slavic countries.

What is needed to solve which of these four theories is most appropriate. It is patience. We will see newer findings.

Personaly for me second theory (I-CTS10228 is Thracian marker) could be best adjusted with a numerous dilemmas including language and well geographically connect different areas.

But I don't advocate none of these theories as final. Therefore I have no idea where you concluded which of these four theories I prefer, I only criticized attitudes that due to insufficient evidence one of these theories is winner. No, it is not true. Practically, all of them are in playing.Another thing is how many probabilty, what is very changeable with new evidence.

I can offer you some help to understand why I2a can not be Illyrian or Thracian. I2a is a hunter gathers marker. According to evolution theory the savager the hunter the better chances of surviving were. So the wildest among them survived since they were able to kill without remorse anything they faced, even the infant animals or exotic animals. But on the other hand it develops a barbaric psycho on the social side. If you see the countries with more I or I2a haplogroup individuals committed more crimes against people. If you notice the two countries that have killed more people in Europe are Germany and Serbia. They both score high in presence of haplogroup I among their people. As I said it was because of savage and killing habits among the surviving hunter gathers were more pronounced. So as you know crimes that Serbs have committed in Balkan are enormous and barbaric, massive graves all over Bosnia, Kosovo, Croatia etc..,rapes and unspeakable other crimes. All this criminel side on Serbs part is as result of their hunter heritage, which can be explained by high concentration of High I2a haplo. On the other hand because Thracian lacked I2a they were soft people because they did not have I2a. So were Illyrians. You understand now that evidence of who brought I2a is easy to understand.

Balkanite
17-06-17, 00:50
You are giving them way to much credit. They are more vultures than they are hunters.
(hope people know i am joking. I love hunter gatherers. Check my posts about technology and youll see) :grin:

Apsurdistan
17-06-17, 00:53
How should I2a-Slavic ever be a Thracian or Illyrian marker? For being a marker it should at least had been a great portion of the Illyrians/Thracians who had this haplogroup, right?

How could it have been a major haplogroup among those peoples if I2a-Slavic was a haplogroup present in only one single man who lived 300 BC(as TMRCA tells us)?
The Illyrians/Thracians were hundreds of thousands and maybe millions of people at that time. In my memory i recall several battles where the Illyrians fought by the thousands and occasionally slaughtered up to 10000 Macedonians or Molossians at a time.
IF I2a-Slavic were really among those Illyrians, he would not have been representative at all, but just a slave or something captured from the central european wilderness of that time.

But what would you rather be then? A slave captured by the Illyrians in antiquity(probably some kind of proto-slav who got Illyrianized), or a real SLAV coming to the balkans in the middle ages?

Always have that in the back of your head: Illyrians and Thracians were maybe hundreds of thousands at the time that I2a-Slavic was just one little person.

What garbage are you going on about? And stop calling I2a people slaves you friggin lunatic. Yo mods did you forget how to do your job?

Balkanite
17-06-17, 01:08
What garbage are you going on about? And stop calling I2a people slaves you friggin lunatic. Yo mods did you forget how to do your job?
I am not claiming it was in the balkans at that time, so i don't think I2a-Slavic was a slave.

But i am just pointing out the most reasonable scenario which would fit into your "I2a-Slavic was in the Illyrian population" theory. And that is that he was one single person. How did he get there? Was he so strong and beautiful that everyone just let him settle?
Even in highland Albania of 1900 it was hard(if not impossible) to come and settle in their mountains without a fight, so let's not talk about the Illyrians and Thracians of 300 BC, when everything was more barbaric. You would be a dreamer to believe that he could just settle without being enslaved by the local chieftain. A scenario where he was taken as a slave fits more accurately with how the Balkans functioned at the time.

But again, i am not claiming I2a-Slavic was in the balkans at all at that time. I rather think he was in the proto-slavic urheimat making babies fast rate, slowly expanding, until his descendants of the middle ages would be chased all the way down to the danube by the huns or some other asian invader people.

Balkanite
17-06-17, 01:14
What garbage are you going on about? And stop calling I2a people slaves you friggin lunatic. Yo mods did you forget how to do your job?
And i am no lunatic. You should talk with respect to me, after all I2 is just J2's retarded little brother.
Ha ha. Joke. But you shouldn't call people lunatics just for exposing sick theories like the I2a-IllyroThracoSlavian theory you guys are bringing up again and again.

Garrick
17-06-17, 01:14
Miroslav, Garrick, Milan and Dinarid, you can down thumb me and anyone else who shows up your illogic until kingdom come. . It's just ultra-nationalistic obfuscation and everyone knows it. Who do you think you're kidding? Everyone else in the amateur community knows that this whole argument is nonsense, and as for the academics, you're not even on their radar.

You keep spamming the same distorted arguments over and over again, and harassing other members, and you're all going to get infractions. Everyone else is tired of being on this merry-go-round.

Because I criticize Russian/Pan-Slavic theory I am ultra nationalist!?

I could expect from some Russian or Serbian ultra-nationalist to ban me, at the nationalistic forum, because what I say is sacrilege for true Serbian ultra-nationalists because they worship everything Russian.

But honestly I could not even in a dream at a European forum because my European values.

It is absurdity, if any Serbian ultra-nationalist reads this he will laugh at me.

Probably Apsurdistan is right, it is a clear misunderstanding, cultures are different and moderators are humans, they can do from their perspective right but really mistaken and it is one of the options in the forum's world, however always in mind the work of moderator is hard, especially in these forums.

Bergin
17-06-17, 01:17
i can offer you some help to understand why i2a can not be illyrian or thracian. I2a is a hunter gathers marker. According to evolution theory the savager the hunter the better chances of surviving were. So the wildest among them survived since they were able to kill without remorse anything they faced, even the infant animals or exotic animals. But on the other hand it develops a barbaric psycho on the social side. If you see the countries with more i or i2a haplogroup individuals committed more crimes against people. If you notice the two countries that have killed more people in europe are germany and serbia. They both score high in presence of haplogroup i among their people. As i said it was because of savage and killing habits among the surviving hunter gathers were more pronounced. So as you know crimes that serbs have committed in balkan are enormous and barbaric, massive graves all over bosnia, kosovo, croatia etc..,rapes and unspeakable other crimes. All this criminel side on serbs part is as result of their hunter heritage, which can be explained by high concentration of high i2a haplo. On the other hand because thracian lacked i2a they were soft people because they did not have i2a. So were illyrians. You understand now that evidence of who brought i2a is easy to understand.

you are stereotyping millions of people. You have racism problems. You should be banned.

Trojet
17-06-17, 01:19
But again, i am not claiming I2a-Slavic was in the balkans at all at that time. I rather think he was in the proto-slavic urheimat making babies fast rate, slowly expanding, until his descendants of the middle ages would be chased all the way down to the danube by the huns or some other asian invader people.

Makes perfect sense, considering the unusual rapid expansion starting ca. 300 BC of this clade, as can be seen here (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/) <notice all these Balkan samples clustering with Eastern European samples within the last 2300 years all over these I-CTS10228 subclades.

BTW, great idea, in light of all the evidence in recent years, we should start calling it I2a-Slavic instead of I2a-Dinaric.

Balkanite
17-06-17, 01:26
Makes perfect sense, considering the unusual rapid expansion starting ca.300 BC!

BTW, in light of all the evidence in recent years, we should start calling it I2a-Slavic instead of I2a-Dinaric.
Indeed. After all, the "I2a-Din"-label is just a misconception which stuck by. A remnant from the time before TMRCA-method.

Trojet
17-06-17, 01:30
Indeed. After all, the "I2a-Din" is just a misconception which stuck by. A remnant from the time before TMRCA-method.

Exactly! It was labeled as "Dinaric" (North and South) based on STR clustering before we had Next Generation Sequencing and before we had a SNP designation for it (I-CTS10228), due to it being in a high concentration in western Balkans (Dinaric Alps) - the area that was hit pretty hard by Slavic migrations.

Nowadays "Dinaric South" cluster corresponds to I-CTS10228>>PH908+ (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-PH908/)which has an even younger TMRCA at only 1850 ybp, which makes up the majority of south Slavic I-CTS10228 and is also present among East and West Slavs. While the rest that are I-CTS10228+ and PH908- make up "Dinaric North" cluster.

Garrick
17-06-17, 02:09
Makes perfect sense, considering the unusual rapid expansion starting ca. 300 BC of this clade, as can be seen here (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/) <notice all these Balkan samples clustering with Eastern European samples within the last 2300 years all over these I-CTS10228 subclades.

BTW, great idea, in light of all the evidence in recent years, we should start calling it I2a-Slavic instead of I2a-Dinaric.

You are the biggest Pan-Slavist/Russian nationalist in the forum.

First you promote pro-Russian web site, now you are spreading Pan-Slavism.

For you all Albanians, Greeks, Romanians, Hungarians, Germans etc. who have I-CTS10228 are Slavs, you increase Slavic territory and population, Albanian as secret Pan-Slavist, LOL.

Angela
17-06-17, 02:24
T.I.B.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHsrr0JJMbY
(from blood diamonds)

Sorry for the spam but couldn't resist.

I like it. In fact I'll be using it in the future. :)

Trojet
17-06-17, 02:30
The "Dinaric South" cluster corresponds to I-CTS10228>>PH908+ (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-PH908/). It has an even younger TMRCA at only 1850 years as can be seen here (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-PH908/), which makes up the majority of South Slavic I-CTS10228 (hence "Dinaric South"), and is also present among East and West Slavs.

For example the following data is taken from FamilyTreeDNA I2a Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/i-2a-hap-group/about/background). And I-CTS10228>>PH908 (aka Dinaric South) TMRCA 1850 ybp, is spread throughout the Slavic countries (East, West, South) as can be seen in this pic in the red box (members last names are edited out, even though they are public):
http://img.pixady.com/2017/06/704721_iph908.jpg

Yeah, keep up the fairy-tales, such as "no evidence" or "Russian Propaganda", unless you believe FamilyTreeDNA is owned by the Russians...

Fustan
17-06-17, 02:31
Good idea Trojet. I shall from now on call it I2a-Slavic as well.

Angela
17-06-17, 02:40
That's the issue - the given "answers" which can be read on this or similar sites, at least on the topic of this haplogroup, are not based on anything relevant and confirmed about the haplogroup. There is no ancient sample, was it thousands or several centuries old, was it from e.g. Poland or Bosnia and Herzegovina (preferably both) and so on. Neutrality is not shown as is pushed a specific theory which currently has missing links and is simply too soon to throw it to people as a "fact" or "mainstream" consideration. We are at the stage of theorization, there's nothing relevant enough to snap and say "that's it!". My primary issue is the lack of neutrality, which common people do not know.



Contradictory logic and premature conclusion ignoring the fact the samples have a strongly isolated locality, period, number tendency, from which according to the I2a1-P37.2 sample list, can not be concluded anything what happened after LGM refugia migration, even that is speculative. The subclade formation age and TMRCA do not correspond with Slavic ethnogenesis formation and much later medieval migration. Its young age does not exclude it was present in the Balkan or broad region from both sides of Danube river.



That's not a strong argument considering that social-cultural-ethnic identity steadily changed. Instead of cultural, you could use geographical argument.



Ideology. The primary issue with historiography during the Yugoslavian period was in the fact the archeology research could not confirm massive Slavic migration nor that Balkan was uninhabited, while ethnography research conclusion that many Dinaric traditions among both South Slavic, or Vlachian, or Albanian populations have a non-Slavic origin, yet mostly considered Illyrian.

Oh, please, if you have no facts to proffer just charge everyone with bias. Why would I have any vested interest in whether or not this lineage came with the Slavs or was "indigenous"? Why would I care? Why would the whole amateur community care except for you guys in the Balkans? You think the the academics give a darn about this or could even comprehend giving a darn about it?

NO ONE CARES except you people. That's why we're the only ones who can be objective.

As to who ever asked which countries I've visited, in Europe I've been to Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Croatia, Romania, Hungary and Greece. That's not only for pleasure but for business, but I will concede I've never lived in these countries for long periods of time. I have, however, worked with people from these countries.

I know dozens of Croatians, as there's a big group here who run restaurants and once you know one you know all their friends too. I also know quite a few Poles, because I befriended the au pair who worked in the home next to me, and met a lot of her friends. Since I've had both Portuguese and eastern European au pairs I know a lot of people in those communities too. We have a very large Greek community and I can't count how many of them I know, many of the older generation actually from Greece. My dentist is Greek, as is one of the accountants in the firm I use. My daughter and son have lots of Greek friends.

Then, of course, there's Italy, and in the western hemisphere I have gone to both Canada and Mexico numerous times.

We don't live in the kinds of closed societies which give one tunnel vision and distrust of "the other". One thing I don't have is tunnel vision.

Garrick
17-06-17, 02:49
What garbage are you going on about? And stop calling I2a people slaves you friggin lunatic. Yo mods did you forget how to do your job?

He understood something these four theories which scientists systematized and I only rewrote.

It doesn't matter how many TMCRA is old, it is important where clade emerged and spread.

For example if I-PH908, TMCRA=1850ybp emerged and spread among Illyrians (in today's) Bosnia, it is Illyrian marker, Illyrians lived in Bosnia in 150 AD.

Similar situation is for Thracian, they existed in 150 AD surely.

I spoke about I-CST10228 (TMCRA=250-300 BC) could be Thracian if it emerged among Thracians in that time (they lived in the wider territory from today's Ukraine to Eastern Serbia and Bulgaria).

Balkanite
17-06-17, 02:59
You are the biggest Pan-Slavist/Russian nationalist in the forum.

First you promote pro-Russian web site, now you are spreading Pan-Slavism.

For you all Albanians, Greeks, Romanians, Hungarians, Germans etc. who have I-CTS10228 are Slavs, you increase Slavic territory and population, Albanian as secret Pan-Slavist, LOL.
Ha ha. I love when the desperation fueled by the lack of arguments, drive you guys to write nonsense like this. Please, keep it up. Let everyone see that you are nothing but a spammer.
And NO they are not slavs. Their direct ancestors probably were slavs at some point.
But they probably got absorbed by some other people due to the ever changing borders and aristocracies of the balkans.
The greeks belonging to I2a-Slavic probably were slavs who lived in modern Greece during the formation of the greek state in 1821, but soon all orthodox churches became greek in language, so practically all I2a-Slavic Orthodox's who were fast enough to reach modern Greece before 1821, became Hellenized after 1821 and today, those ex-slavs still call themselves greeks.

The I2a-Slavic in albanians, may have come during the Ottoman Empire, where there were Muslim Gorani(slavs), Muslim Bosnians(slavs) and Muslim Albanians living side by side in many instances. Sometimes an albanian J2b2 would become slavicized if living among a majority of Muslim slavs, within a matter of a generation or two. On the other hand, a muslim I2a-Slavic slav would also be albanized if living among a majority of albanians for a generation or two.

So actually written sources and population demographics of middle age and modern history fits perfectly into the theory that those people you mention actually have small percentages of assimilated slavic Y-DNA.

All of the nationalities you have mentioned above have been in contact with slavs throughout the last 1300 years.
That is well documented in historical sources.

Angela
17-06-17, 03:05
Look, as far as I'm concerned, the fact that the Albanians, the Croatians/Serbians, and even some of the Greeks have whined about me not only on the public board but to the owner tells me I'm doing a fair and impartial job.

I don't know how any of you define your beliefs, and I don't much care, but you all try to use genetics to bolster your grievances against one another or claim territory or just generally vent your hatred of other people in the Balkans.

Sometimes I think one point of view is correct, sometimes the other. I base everything on history, linguistics, archaeology and genetics all analyzed logically. You guys ought to try it sometimes.

Garrick
17-06-17, 03:07
Ha ha. I love when the desperation fueled by the lack of arguments, drive you guys to write nonsense like this. Please, keep it up. Let everyone see that you are nothing but a spammer.
And NO they are not slavs. Their direct ancestors probably were slavs at some point.
But they probably got absorbed by some other people due to the ever changing borders and aristocracies of the balkans.
The greeks belonging to I2a-Slavic probably were slavs who lived in modern Greece during the formation of the greek state in 1821, but soon all orthodox churches became greek in language, so practically all I2a-Slavic Orthodox's who were fast enough to reach modern Greece before 1821, became Hellenized after 1821 and today, those ex-slavs still call themselves greeks.

The I2a-Slavic in albanians, may have come during the Ottoman Empire, where there were Muslim Gorani(slavs), Muslim Bosnians(slavs) and Muslim Albanians living side by side in many instances. Sometimes an albanian J2b2 would become slavicized if living among a majority of Muslim slavs, within a matter of a generation or two. On the other hand, a muslim I2a-Slavic slav would also be albanized if living among a majority of albanians for a generation or two.

So actually written sources and population demographics of middle age and modern history fits perfectly into the theory that those people you mention actually have small percentages of assimilated slavic Y-DNA.

All of the nationalities you have mentioned above have been in contact with slavs throughout the last 1300 years.
That is well documented in historical sources.

No, you are mistaken.

How any Albanian will be sad when he learns that he has marker which is named as Slavic.

And he cannot change it, and his sons will carry it, and their sons, very sad, depression that never ends.

Angela
17-06-17, 03:51
Look, as far as I'm concerned, the fact that the Albanians, the Croatians/Serbians, and even some of the Greeks have whined about me not only on the public board but to the owner tells me I'm doing a fair and impartial job.

I don't know how any of you define your beliefs, and I don't much care, but you all try to use genetics to bolster your grievances against one another or claim territory or just generally vent your hatred of other people in the Balkans.

Sometimes I think one point of view is correct, sometimes the other. I base everything on history, linguistics, archaeology and genetics all analyzed logically. You guys ought to try it sometimes.

The sad fact is that you're all so alike, and no, none of you are "pure" Slavs.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kristiina_Tambets/publication/264985653/figure/fig10/AS:[email protected]/Figure-2-ADMIXTURE-analysis-of-autosomal-SNPs-of-the-Western-Balkan-region-in-a-global.png

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kristiina_Tambets/publication/264985653/figure/fig10/AS:[email protected]/Figure-2-ADMIXTURE-analysis-of-autosomal-SNPs-of-the-Western-Balkan-region-in-a-global.png

Balkanite
17-06-17, 04:32
Look, as far as I'm concerned, the fact that the Albanians, the Croatians/Serbians, and even some of the Greeks have whined about me not only on the public board but to the owner tells me I'm doing a fair and impartial job.

I don't know how any of you define your beliefs, and I don't much care, but you all try to use genetics to bolster your grievances against one another or claim territory or just generally vent your hatred of other people in the Balkans.

Sometimes I think one point of view is correct, sometimes the other. I base everything on history, linguistics, archaeology and genetics all analyzed logically. You guys ought to try it sometimes.
Actually the debates have been going on for hundreds of years. But when a new field pops up, it gets used. That hold true for genetics too.

We are not using genetics to claim territory. Most balkan states have claimed each others territories long before genetic science was born.

- As for the albanian-greek thing, i don't want to go into details, because is digs too deep, and should be settled by the countries before commoners interfere.
- Albanians claim Slavic lands
- Slavs claim albanian lands
- Albanians uses "The demography card" - Which means that it claims territories in which Albanians majorities have been incorporated into other Countries without being able to choose themselves. (Crimea and kosova is an example of land claimed on basis of demography, 90%+ russians, 95% albanians)
- Albanians also use the "Historical right card" - Which basically means "We were here first" (An example can be Israel, who states that history tells us that the Jews had a country there before the arabs, and therefore they were allowed to take the area back)
- Slavs claim land on the basis of historical right too. (Kosovo - cradle of serbs etc. etc.)
- As we see, serbs don't get much support from history, as it is hard for a slavic people to claim that their cradle is in Kosova, and that they were on the balkans before Albanians.
- When claims came about some years ago that a new autochtonous haplogroup(I2a-Slavic) of the balkans emerged, they immediately saw it as an opportunity to revive their old claims.(as it was basically their haplogroup)
- Now, the tables are turning, and as it is turning out, one more of their propagandic claims gets shot down. As it is getting clear that I2a-Slavic is just a slavic marker.
- So yes it is a political battle. But that does not make the albanian claims less true. NO serious historian has claimed that slavs have the historical right over albanians.
- So imagine if you were faced with all these fraud claims everyday. Wouldn't you turn bitter at some point, and drop the mask?

Albanians are claiming the same things as most western scholars. The only place we sometimes get overruled, is on forums like these, because serbs have a huge number of internet spammers, who just repeat the same rubbish over and over again, until people sort of believe their non sense.
Trust me, they also spam the academic stage, but no one takes them seriously, so those papers never reach our eyes.

It should be time to ignore their fake claims on the western forums, just as we do on the western academic stage.
Trust me, it is sad that so many albanian posters like "Trojet" and "Fustan"(which often bring lots of useful insight) should be given less credibility, just because some 3-4 serbs are sitting on over 30 eupedia profiles, just spamming all useful threads which defy their distorted view of the world.

Blaming balkans isn't fair in my eyes either. Because most balkan states get along very well. It is just serbia who doesn't get along with anybody, because in the end they are not even a balkan state, they are just an extension of russian politics situated in the balkans.
At first sight, looking at forums, one will get the impression that Greek-Albanian relations are bad, but officially there are not really any issues beside the cham issue. And the cham issue will be taken up in a Dutch court anyway, so that probably wont lead to a war or anything, as the countries themselves wont really have a say in what will happen.

I think that it is a combination of Serbian, labanian and greek ultra-nationalists who are spamming these forums, and thereby drawing a picture of a totally chaotic balkan, which are making some people see the balkans that way.

You can either see me as a liar, or not. But trust me when i say, that most claims that serbs have tried to make about albanians(using linguistics, archeology and history) have always been seen as political fantasies which no one believes. All have been disapproved. Now they are clinging on to this I2a-Illyro-thing for the same reasons, and we are all just standing and looking, while they are turning the forum less and less serious.
So, are we waiting for some I2s-Slavic person to travel through time and tell us directly that he was a slav before we can begin to see these posts as spam?
Really, don't we have enough proof that I2a-Slavic is slavic and not Illyrian/thracian? In my eyes, those claims are not even believed by the claimers themselves, they just want to drown the useful posts, so they wont get read by as many people.

Balkanite
17-06-17, 04:48
No, you are mistaken.

How any Albanian will be sad when he learns that he has marker which is named as Slavic.

And he cannot change it, and his sons will carry it, and their sons, very sad, depression that never ends.
Better to slaughter one sheep, than to loose the grazing grounds of a 100 sheep.

Sile
17-06-17, 05:31
Exactly! It was labeled as "Dinaric" (North and South) based on STR clustering before we had Next Generation Sequencing and before we had a SNP designation for it (I-CTS10228), due to it being in a high concentration in western Balkans (Dinaric Alps) - the area that was hit pretty hard by Slavic migrations.

Nowadays "Dinaric South" cluster corresponds to I-CTS10228>>PH908+ (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-PH908/)which has an even younger TMRCA at only 1850 ybp, which makes up the majority of south Slavic I-CTS10228 and is also present among East and West Slavs. While the rest that are I-CTS10228+ and PH908- make up "Dinaric North" cluster.

1950-1850 = 100AD ..........clearly before any slavic

Trojet
17-06-17, 05:39
1950-1850 = 100AD ..........clearly before any slavic

You either don't understand what TMRCA means, or are just another delusional spammer. I think it's the latter.

I'm tired of schooling people like you on a constant basis. Anyways I'll do it again, so please read the following carefully:

TMRCA simply means Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor of a subclade or a mutation, and not when the actual migration happened. Therefore the migrations can only happen after the TMRCA lived. In this case after ~100 AD, when the Slavs were already expanding.

Fatherland
17-06-17, 06:58
Good idea Trojet. I shall from now on call it I2a-Slavic as well.
Perfect designation.

Fatherland
17-06-17, 07:00
Look, as far as I'm concerned, the fact that the Albanians, the Croatians/Serbians, and even some of the Greeks have whined about me not only on the public board but to the owner tells me I'm doing a fair and impartial job.

I don't know how any of you define your beliefs, and I don't much care, but you all try to use genetics to bolster your grievances against one another or claim territory or just generally vent your hatred of other people in the Balkans.

Sometimes I think one point of view is correct, sometimes the other. I base everything on history, linguistics, archaeology and genetics all analyzed logically. You guys ought to try it sometimes.
I am a human and I admit my mistakes. I was ignorant at the beginning when posting here.
Now I have opened my mind.

MarkoZ
17-06-17, 07:36
You either don't understand what TMRCA means, or are just another delusional spammer. I think it's the latter.

I'm tired of schooling people like you on a constant basis. Anyways I'll do it again, so please read the following carefully:

TMRCA simply means Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor of a subclade or a mutation, and not when the actual migration happened. Therefore the migrations can only happen after the TMRCA lived. In this case after ~100 AD, when the Slavs were already expanding.

Have you looked into the methodologies employed by commercial/amateur sites like yfull? IMHO it's a bad idea to place too much stock in these.

Yetos
17-06-17, 07:46
Simply

only for those who know true History

http://www.kastra.eu/pics/xilander-georg7.jpg

St George tower
Chiladariou monastery (Chelandar)
who died there?

MarkoZ
17-06-17, 08:18
This is what I meant to post earlier but couldn't find.

(A) Phylogenetic relationships of I-M423 in Ukranians, Romanians and Moldovians:

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=medium&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0053731.g004

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figures?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0053731

It's quite unambiguous in that the movement must have been from Romania into the Ukraine. With the exception of a single branch, the Ukrainian samples tend to sit at the end of the starlike pattern.

Sile
17-06-17, 08:49
You either don't understand what TMRCA means, or are just another delusional spammer. I think it's the latter.

I'm tired of schooling people like you on a constant basis. Anyways I'll do it again, so please read the following carefully:

TMRCA simply means Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor of a subclade or a mutation, and not when the actual migration happened. Therefore the migrations can only happen after the TMRCA lived. In this case after ~100 AD, when the Slavs were already expanding.

I spoke about ybp .............ybp starts from 1950AD
So if you say it is 1850YBP , then it formed ~100AD .................or did you fabricate 1850 ?

ybp means year before present and that is 1950

Where did I say TMRCA ?

You need to stop fabricating issues :annoyed:

I think you are just a ***** fabricating numbers

Sile
17-06-17, 09:07
If Trojet did not fabricate the year 1850 then the marker cannot be slavic, nor albanian

possibilities then are "illyrian/thracian" Dacian or celtic or Roman..........maybe even macedonian

When did the Goths star asking the Romans to let them in the empire ? ....maybe it began at this time

MOESAN
17-06-17, 10:56
[QUOTE=Miroslav;511849]

I agree for the most -
language shift depends on diverse factors (number, social organisation...), I already posted about this (as opposants to my thoughts!); but I 'm tempted to think that a male elite doesn' t change language so easily except in some very unbalanced cases, and I don't put too much credit in the "mother's tongue" myth -

I see my post has been "tackled"! Concerning meetings between two pops, the first result is often (rather than bilinguism), after some time and generations in patrilocal societies, the winner language is the language of (males) elite as a rule (the exceptions exist, but they need very specific context); nurses language rarely becomes the winner -

MOESAN
17-06-17, 11:10
Apsurdistan:"And it's found in significant percentages only in Slavic countries or semi-Slavic like Romania Hungary."

Are Romania and Hungary "semi-Slavic" ?


You are absurd indeed. Is the Sun "semi-Slavic" too?

Concerning Romania the input of Slavs, even if not so strong, can be seen nevertheless in the heavy part slavic words take in the lexicon, I think. As in every country, the real input varies according to regions, evidently - about Hungary, the geographic situation and the haplo's tell us they surely had strong input from Slavs, maybe under or Avars Ugric rules or even Huns rules; but here I need more knowledge than I have.

gyms
17-06-17, 12:01
Language and genetics are diferent issues.

The Romanian Othodox Church used Old Church Slavonic for liturgical purposes up to the 17th Century.

After the Slavic migrations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_migrations), Slavonic became the liturgical language of the Eastern Orthodox Church in present-day Romania, under the influence of the South Slavic feudal states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Church_Slavonic_in_Romania

Garrick
17-06-17, 14:11
1950-1850 = 100AD ..........clearly before any slavic

Yes it is clear.

It is interesting Russian expert gave me a lot of arguments that for I-CTS10228 German and Illyrian theory are not plausible.

But I insisted for Thracian theory and yes he could not give a valid counter argument, even he agreed that I-CTS10228 could be created in Thracian land and be the part of genetic fund of Thracians, but for him Slavic theory is most plausible.

I asked him which Slavic tribes are attested 250-300 years BC, and after mentioned some cultures he told that it is possible that Zarubintsy culture could be related with Slavic.

But Zarubintsy culture is not attested as Slavic culture, moreover there were attested Sarmatian and Thracian elements.

If we see Thracian lands in that time it well correspond with today's I-CTS10228 distribution.

http://romanianhistoryandculture.webs.com/tracian%20tribal%20land.png

This is not significantly distributed in the northern regions Poland, Belarus etc. as in coastal areas where there were Greek colonies.

Therefore Thracian theory can be valid, there are more arguments that I-CTS10228 is Thracian marker.

Younger clades as I-PH908 could be Illyrian because Thracians and Illryan tribes were mixed in many areas.

And I-PH908 could emerge somewhere in Dalmatia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Western Serbia etc in 100-150 AD, much before the Goths and Slavs.

And if this is case, yes, I-PH908 is Illyrian marker.

http://s16.postimg.org/7ttndgt8l/Hg_I_L_621_spatial_frequency_B.jpg

In the picture is todays distribution I-CTS10228 with all clades.

Trojet
17-06-17, 14:49
Sure keep on dreaming, unless you believe that the Thracians originated in Poland and only spread in the Middle Ages throughout the Slavic wrold.

The ancestral clade of I-CTS10228 (I2a-Slavic) is in Poland in I-CTS4002*. In Poland there is also I-CTS10228* as can be seen here:
http://img.pixady.com/2017/06/292889_pol.jpg

So according to you a Thracian tribe originated in Poland or nearby, and then expanded throughout the Slavic world in the Middle Ages, like for example I-CTS10228>>PH908 (Slavic South aka Dinaric South) did:
http://img.pixady.com/2017/06/704721_iph908.jpg

Garrick
17-06-17, 15:01
Sure keep on dreaming, unless you believe that the Thracians originated in Poland and only spread in the Middle Ages throughout the Slavic wrold.

The immediate ancestral clade of I-CTS10228 (I2a-Slavic) is in Poland in I-CTS4002*. In Poland there is also I-CTS20228* as can be seen here:
http://img.pixady.com/2017/06/292889_pol.jpg

So according to you a Thracian tribe originated in Poland or nearby, and then expanded throughout the Slavic world in the Middle Ages, like for example I-CTS10228>>PH908 (Slavic South aka Dinaric South):
http://img.pixady.com/2017/06/704721_iph908.jpg

You even don't know where is Podkarpackie region.

Furthermost Southern-Eastern Poland, and yes, Thracian lived there.

Miroslav
17-06-17, 15:03
How could it have been a major haplogroup among those peoples if I2a-Slavic was a haplogroup present in only one single man who lived 300 BC(as TMRCA tells us)? Illyrians and Thracians were maybe hundreds of thousands at the time that I2a-Slavic was just one little person.

First and foremost - nomenclature: I2a-Slavic and I2a-Dinaric do not mean a thing in the current discussion, it's totally bogus to understand whether you mean I-CTS10228 (formed 5098 YBP; TMRCA 2213 YBP; i.e. 3148-263 BCE) or I-S17250 (formed 2341 YBP; TMRCA 1722 YBP; i.e. 391 BCE-228 CE).

You do not take into account that Illyrians and Thracians were widespread and that at the time of continuous mention of Illyrian tribes since c. 4th century BCE, they were at their downfall. They were not numerous, especially Illyrian tribes. They fought Macedonian, Celtic, Roman and inner Illyrians wars. Afterward happened Hunnic and Gothic invasion and plunder, their number diminished, and you think that a century after century of war and death this "slave" could not be someone from the wider Balkan area? You think that there existed some kind of impassable borders, that people from Illyrian times did not migrate to the north? That during Hunnic invasion some "slaves" could not arrive from Balkan to for e.g. Poland, and hence so many percentages in these parts of Europe?


If you see the countries with more I or I2a haplogroup individuals committed more crimes against people. If you notice the two countries that have killed more people in Europe are Germany and Serbia... On the other hand because Thracian lacked I2a they were soft people because they did not have I2a. So were Illyrians...

This is the most racistic and stereotypical nonsense I read these days. Where are moderators now? Also calling Thracian and Illyrians as soft is showing a total lack of understanding about their history and warfare.


The sad fact is that you're all so alike, and no, none of you are "pure" Slavs.

The image is about autosomal DNA, and as such it does not prove that haplogroup we discuss is Slavic at all.


TMRCA simply means Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor of a subclade or a mutation, and not when the actual migration happened. Therefore the migrations can only happen after the TMRCA lived. In this case after ~100 AD, when the Slavs were already expanding.

TMRCA of I-CTS10228 (263 BCE) is the average number of its subclade formation age, hence I-S17250 has a different formation age compared to TMRCA (391 BCE). From this is clear that I-CTS10228 formation age and TMRCA, as well I-S17250 TMRCA can not be used as an argument for Slavic migration. Even 200 years after I-S17250 TMRCA (228 CE) we are not talking about Slavic migration, yet Hunnic-Gothic invasion throught Eastern Europe, and as such it can be both an argument for indigenous Illyrian&Thracian or Slavic theory. If we take into account all formation ages and TMRCA of these two haplogroups, including formation age of I-CTS10228 (3148 BCE), then Slavic theory (ethnogenesis and migration) clearly can not be unilaterally and empirically supported with these numbers.


The ancestral clade of I-CTS10228 (I2a-Slavic) is in Poland in I-CTS4002*...

I am literally stunned with people's logic - if ancestral clade (moreover with only one sample!) was found somewhere in contemporary population it does not mean it was there in the ancient time period.

Trojet
17-06-17, 15:06
I spoke about ybp .............ybp starts from 1950AD
So if you say it is 1850YBP , then it formed ~100AD .................or did you fabricate 1850 ?

ybp means year before present and that is 1950

Where did I say TMRCA ?

You need to stop fabricating issues :annoyed:

I think you are just a ***** fabricating numbers

I fabricated 1850 ybp for I-PH908 (Slavic South)?
You're embarrassing yourself.

Go get your glasses old man, and take a look at this pic:
http://i65.tinypic.com/13ydmzb.jpg

Miroslav
17-06-17, 15:11
I fabricated 1850 ybp for I-PH908 (Slavic South)...

You only confirmed his thought - if it is 1850 YBP then it can not be Slavic by origin.

To be more specific, the current I-PH908 formation age is listed as 1806 YBP (144 CE) and TMRCA as 1802 YBP (148 CE). So you get the point, with I-PH908, which was relative "recently" found, arguing the Slavic theory is counter-productive. You can only with its subclades, which at the moment have very low number of samples, argue in the near future the Slavic theory. That's the whole fuss from my side - lack of neutrality and objectivity at the current point of data we have.

Garrick
17-06-17, 15:14
I fabricated 1850 ybp for I-PH908 (Slavic South)?
You're embarrassing yourself.

Go get your glasses old man, and take a look at this pic:
http://i65.tinypic.com/13ydmzb.jpg

Yes, you confirmed that I-PH908 can be Illyrian marker.

Trojet
17-06-17, 15:15
You only confirmed his thought - if it is 1850 YBP then it can not be Slavic by origin.

To be more specific, the current I-PH908 formation age is listed as 1806 YBP (144 CE) and TMRCA as 1802 YBP (148 CE). So you get the point - with I-PH908 arguing the Slavic theory is counter-productive.

The Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor of all I-PH908 (Slavic South) people is ~1850 ybp. According to you, there was no Slavs at 1850 ybp, and they only dropped out of the sky during the early Middle Ages. You all are embarrassing yourselves.

Miroslav
17-06-17, 15:18
According to you, there was no Slavs at 1850 ybp, and they only dropped out of the sky during the Middle Ages. You all are embarrassing yourselves...

No, you're with your biased approach. I already mentioned you, the haplogroups formation age and TMRCA are not concordant with Early Slavic ethnogenesis and their later migration.

MarkoZ
17-06-17, 15:21
@Trojet

You'll never get a good idea if you rely on what I presume to be commercial samples that are inevitably skewed in one direction or the other. Only comparisons between representative samples of equal size can reveal the phylogeography of a haplogroup. Single extant basal types are close to meaningless.

Trojet
17-06-17, 15:24
@Trojet

You'll never get a good idea if you rely on what I presume to be commercial samples that are inevitably skewed in one direction or the other. Only comparisons between represrntative samples of equal size can reveal the geographic phylogeny of a haplogroup. Single extant basal types are close to meaningless.

Obviously, it's pretty clear by now that people like you cannot rely on these samples nor the TMRCA figures, if you don't like this evidence. There has to be some king of propaganda by everyone, whether it's FTDNA, YFull, Ken Norvedt, etc.

Miroslav
17-06-17, 15:25
You'll never get a good idea if you rely on what I presume to be commercial samples that are inevitably skewed in one direction or the other...

Impossible to explain to others.

MarkoZ
17-06-17, 15:31
Obviously, people like you cannot rely on these samples nor the TMRCA figures, if you don't like this evidence. There has to be some king of propaganda by all institutions, whether it's FTDNA, YFull, etc.If a visit on yfull was enough to determine the ancient origins of the various haplotypes that would be awesome. R1b from Saudi Arabia or Italy, R1a from UK or Qatar. Though I doubt these conclusions will be very popular :grin:I'd gift you a BitCoin if you defended the origin of R1b in Saudi Arabia on one of the other anthrofora. The ensuing rage would be hilarious.

A. Papadimitriou
17-06-17, 15:41
The Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor of all I-PH908 (Slavic South) people is ~1850 ybp. According to you, there was no Slavs at 1850 ybp, and they only dropped out of the sky during the early Middle Ages. You all are embarrassing yourselves.

Where do you think it was ~1850 ybp and why?

Bergin
17-06-17, 15:47
TMRCA probably is not a sufficient criteria to determine origins. But it probably it is a necessary condition.

Sent from my SM-G903F using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Trojet
17-06-17, 16:02
Where do you think it was ~1850 ybp and why?

I think you mean where the Most Recent Common Ancestor of I-PH908 could have lived at ~1850 ybp.
Given its geographical distribution, as I posted a picture of FTDNA samples, and upstream clades within I-CTS10228 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/) where I-PH908 stems from, the most likely place would be the area of Poland, Ukraine, or somewhere just north of the Carpathians.

Nik
17-06-17, 16:04
Why everyone ignored MarkoZ post about Romanians, Moldovans, and Ukrainians?

Although I'm Albanian, unlike the others I still can't say that I2a-Din came as a Slavic marker. Max I can accept is that Slavs might have forced this haplogroup to the current location.

One reason for this (completely not scientific) is that I know many people from tribes/areas in Montenegro where I2a-Din peaks and they're on average more brown eyed and Mediterranid looking than the others. Same applies to Herzegovinians. Don't roast me on this but I know hundreds and I notice these characteristics a lot coz I find their women very hot lol

Again (non scientific), many of these tribes/clans where I2a-Din are known to have been Vlachs or indigenous so the skepticism builds up.

DuPidh
17-06-17, 16:04
I fabricated 1850 ybp for I-PH908 (Slavic South)?
You're embarrassing yourself.

Go get your glasses old man, and take a look at this pic:
http://i65.tinypic.com/13ydmzb.jpg
You don't know this ***** yet? He is a nasty provocateur that do not use logic or facts to argue for anything. Simply *****. He is very active in Illyrian or Albanian matters and does nothing but litter the topics about matters I mentioned. Look what he writes in language section of these forums:
"Berbers and Albanians, E haplogroup and linguistic similarity





Berber languages are quite suitable for comparison with the Albanian because among the Berbers Ehaplogroup (similar subgroup as Albanians) is prevalent,they belong to North Africa and have preserved their distinctiveness despite the influence of Arabic and French.

I give the example of comparing Albanian words with languages Berbers of Morocco and Algeria (first part) and the language of the Tuareg (part two), the Tuareg language seems more suitable because it had less Arab and French influence, due to the greater isolation of the population."
You can go and see the forum. Its still active.

The only thing he understands is the middle finger. Don't waste your time.

Trojet
17-06-17, 16:19
Why everyone ignored MarkoZ post about Romanians, Moldovans, and Ukrainians?

Although I'm Albanian, unlike the others I still can't say that I2a-Din came as a Slavic marker. Max I can accept is that Slavs might have forced this haplogroup to the current location.

One reason for this (completely not scientific) is that I know many people from tribes/areas in Montenegro where I2a-Din peaks and they're on average more brown eyed and Mediterranid looking than the others. Same applies to Herzegovinians. Don't roast me on this but I know hundreds and I notice these characteristics a lot coz I find their women very hot lol

Again (non scientific), many of these tribes/clans where I2a-Din are known to have been Vlachs or indigenous so the skepticism builds up.

Nik, to be honest with you, as an Albanian myself also, I would be for I2a-Din (or as we call it now I2a-Slavic) to be Pre-Slavic in the Balkans. But trust me bro, in today's age there is just no evidence of that, but to the contrary as I stated in my previous posts.

Trojet
17-06-17, 16:25
@DuPidh,

I was aware of "Sile" and his posts, but somehow I had forgotten about him, since I haven't been very active in this forum lately. Thanks for the reminder.

gyms
17-06-17, 16:26
Trojet:"Obviously, it's pretty clear by now that people like you cannot rely on these samples nor the TMRCA figures, if you don't like this evidence."

Evidence for what?

Fatherland
17-06-17, 16:37
Why everyone ignored MarkoZ post about Romanians, Moldovans, and Ukrainians?

Although I'm Albanian, unlike the others I still can't say that I2a-Din came as a Slavic marker. Max I can accept is that Slavs might have forced this haplogroup to the current location.

One reason for this (completely not scientific) is that I know many people from tribes/areas in Montenegro where I2a-Din peaks and they're on average more brown eyed and Mediterranid looking than the others. Same applies to Herzegovinians. Don't roast me on this but I know hundreds and I notice these characteristics a lot coz I find their women very hot lol

Again (non scientific), many of these tribes/clans where I2a-Din are known to have been Vlachs or indigenous so the skepticism builds up.
The same question can be asked why you ignored the other posts?

Pigmentation has no relevance, blond people existed across the Balkans before the Slavs and Germanic movements. There's no difference in the South Slavs and Albanians when it comes to pigmentation really. No offense, it just seems you haven't paid attention to all this.
I'm blond, blue eyed and pale-skinned myself(and very tall at 198cm) & typical Gheg in autosomal plots/admixture with slight northwestern shift.

Vlachs are similar to the host population of their country so you can't use that as an argument and they do have quite a handful of different haplogroups.
They did infact mingle with Slavs due to common religion of Orthodoxy and so did the Tosks to a lesser extent.
Vlachs R1a frequency is 21.5% in FYROM alone.

Ghegs, especially from the northern tribes are infact the population one should always look at and we see a strong continuity between three main haplogroups since the Classic times; J2b2, R1b-L23 and EV13 with virtually non-existing I2a-Slavic. J2b2-L283 and R1b-L23 frequencies increases the more deeper you get into Gheg tribal territory.


I2a-Slavic and R1a along with some mtDNA are the markers that carried significant North-Eastern admixture into the Balkans.
I've seen many South Slavs, particularily Bosnians and Croats get more than 50% North Slavic on DNA.land and that tells you something.


My DNA.land results are almost purely Balkan, seen some Ghegs get 100%

http://i.imgur.com/QQncJYA.png

gyms
17-06-17, 16:39
Evidence? Trojet,show me one single ancient Slavic I2a1b............!

Trojet
17-06-17, 17:16
Evidence? Trojet,show me one single ancient Slavic I2a1b............!

To date the majority of ancient DNA samples come from before I-CTS10228 aka I2a-Slavic mutation TMRCA of 2300 ybp even existed, hence the chances of finding one are pretty slim.
However, go get your Slavic archeologists and test some remains in the area north of the Carpathians from 0-500 AD and you likely will find plenty of I-CTS10228+ samples there.

We recently had the Genomic History of Southeastern Europe (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/30/135616), and no I2a1-M423 (where I2a-Slavic stems from) was found anywhere in the Balkans which sampled from the Mesolithic all the way to the Iron Age, but to the contrary I2a1-M423 was found all over north of the Balkans. Instead what we had in the heart of Bronze Age Dalmatia (Croatia), is J2b2a-L283 as can be seen here (http://biorxiv.org/highwire/filestream/42639/field_highwire_adjunct_files/1/135616-2.xlsx).

Fatherland
17-06-17, 17:21
Trojet:"Obviously, it's pretty clear by now that people like you cannot rely on these samples nor the TMRCA figures, if you don't like this evidence."

Evidence for what?
You should just accept that you are an Magyarized Slav by the Hungarian conquerors from 900AD and stop coping, since what I gathered you are Hungarian carrying this haplogroup.

Your posts are of low quality really. I am not sure why Trojet is wasting time with you.

gyms
17-06-17, 17:27
Fatherland,show me one single ancient Slavic I2a1b............!

Fustan
17-06-17, 17:29
Gyms, have you done ftDNA? If so, how many markers?

gyms
17-06-17, 17:36
Förresten Fatherland,du är en jävla uppblåst nolla.If you understand me...

Fatherland
17-06-17, 17:37
Förresten Fatherland,du är en jävla uppblåst nolla.If you understand me...
Var bor du?

Fustan
17-06-17, 17:38
The reason I2 is this high in Hungary is because Magyars generally had positive relations with slavs in the Huno-Austrian empire due to them being against Romanians.

gyms
17-06-17, 17:40
Var bor du?

I Kosovo.Var bor du då?

Fatherland
17-06-17, 17:41
Double post.

Miroslav
17-06-17, 17:43
To date the majority of ancient DNA samples come from before I-CTS10228 aka I2a-Slavic mutation even existed, hence the chances of finding one are pretty slim if not zero...

Stop repeating the same thing over and over again: I-CTS10228 is not I2a-Slavic (nonexisting nomenclature); you still did not learn that I-CTS10228 was formed 3148 BCE (late Neolithic, Bronze Age, Iron Age period) and you have a plenty of samples from the period and countries according to Slavic theory yet nowhere is found; one sample from Croatia does not refute and prove anything.


Fatherland,show me one single ancient Slavic I2a1b............!

He, I, anyone can not show you because it does not exist at the moment.

MarkoZ
17-06-17, 17:43
The same question can be asked why you ignored the other posts?

Pigmentation has no relevance, blond people existed across the Balkans before the Slavs and Germanic movements. There's no difference in the South Slavs and Albanians when it comes to pigmentation really. No offense, it just seems you haven't paid attention to all this.
I'm blond, blue eyed and pale-skinned myself(and very tall at 198cm), yet typical Gheg in autosomal plots/admixture with slight northwestern shift.

Vlachs are similar to the host population of their country so you can't use that as an argument and they do have quite a handful of different haplogroups.
They did infact mingle with Slavs due to common religion of Orthodoxy and so did the Tosks to a lesser extent.
Vlachs R1a frequency is 21.5% in FYROM alone.

Ghegs, especially from the northern tribes are infact the population one should always look at and we see a strong continuity between three main haplogroups since the Classic times; J2b2, R1b-L23 and EV13 with virtually non-existing I2a-Slavic. J2b2-L283 and R1b-L23 frequencies increases the more deeper you get into Gheg tribal territory.


I2a-Slavic and R1a along with some mtDNA are the markers that carried significant North-Eastern admixture into the Balkans.
I've seen many South Slavs, particularily Bosnians and Croats get more than 50% North Slavic on DNA.land and that tells you something.


My DNA.land results are almost purely Balkan, seen some Ghegs get 100%

http://i.imgur.com/QQncJYA.png

Kosovars are significantly northern-shifted compared to Greeks,who if we take I2a and R1a to be Slavic should have significant northern influence.i Autosomally however there's a very natural cline towards the south. I suggest everyone read the IBD section of Krushniarevich (2015) to see why this, in fact, has to be the case considering the population history of SE-Europe.

Fatherland
17-06-17, 17:44
Kosovars are significantly northern-shifted compared to Greeks,who if we take I2a and R1a to be Slavic should have significant northern influence.i Autosomally however there's a very natural cline towards the south. I suggest everyone read the IBD section of Krushniarevich (2015) to see why this, in fact, has to be the case considering the population history of SE-Europe.
Wrong. You forgot to add Albanians are NorthWestern-shifted compared to Greeks which implies minimal Slavic ancestry.

Mainland Greeks and Ghegs are similar in terms of admixture, except that the Greeks shift SouthEast and Albanian Ghegs(including Kosovars) shift NorthWest between one-another.
South Slavs compared to Albanians/Mainland Greeks are dramatically very different.

Keep in mind Slavs were flooding South Balkans at a certain point bar the rough highlands.

Miroslav
17-06-17, 17:44
Oh my God, are these Albanians really using a forum instead of private messages?

Fatherland
17-06-17, 17:45
Oh my God, are these Albanians really using a forum instead of private messages?
"Albanians this, Albanians that."

I don't see why you and gyms(for the personal insult at the top of the page) are not banned yet.

Fustan
17-06-17, 17:46
Oh my God, is he really named "slav" in his name but denies that most of his haplogroups are slavic?

Miroslav
17-06-17, 17:49
What your private conversation and someone user name have anything to do with the topic...? Just... no comment.

gyms
17-06-17, 17:56
Var bor du?

Good job,google translate.

MarkoZ
17-06-17, 17:59
Wrong.

Mainland Greeks and Albanians are similar in terms of admixture. South Slavs and Albanians/Mainland Greeks are very different.
Keep in mind Slavs were flooding South Balkans at a certain point bar the rough highlands.

Might want to take a look at the ADMIXTURE run posted by Angela a frw pages earlier. The Serbian -> Macedonian -> Kosovar -> Greek gradient is extremely smooth.

Fatherland
17-06-17, 18:01
Might want to take a look at the ADMIXTURE run posted by Angela a frw pages earlier. The Serbian -> Macedonian -> Kosovar -> Greek gradient is extremely smooth.
Bosniak, Bosnian Serb, Montenegrin and Croat is not, they are literally miles apart from Albanians in admixture. Serbs especially near Kosovo have Albanian-like admixture.

In many calculators, I get closer match with North Italians than with Serbs from Serbia because Ghegs have little Baltic admixture compared to Northwestern admixture(Atlantic & North Sea).

Serbs vary alot in admixture and are not homogenous by any means.

Admixturewise, Albanians are closer to Romanians than to Serbs/Montenegrins/Croats/Bosnians despite not bordering.


Take Eurogenes for instance:

Atlantic+North Sea:Baltic ratio in Gheg Albanians is 5:1
East Euro component varies less, so it seems to have mostly come from Yamnaya/Indo-European input.

Let's take a Bosnian Serb/Croat/Bosniak and we see Atlantic+North Sea:Baltic ratio gets radically different along with the higher East Euro component. North Eastern component ratio gets even much bigger in South Slavs if we combine Baltic with East Euro.

LABERIA
17-06-17, 18:11
Bosniak, Bosnian Serb, Montenegrin and Croat is not, they are literally miles apart from Albanians in admixture. Serbs especially near Kosovo have Albanian-like admixture.

Serbs vary alot in admixture and are not homogenous by any means.

Admixturewise, Albanians are closer to Romanians than to Serbs/Montenegrins/Croats/Bosnians despite not bordering.
In many calculators, I get closer match with North Italians than with Serbs from Serbia.

They also have many Albanian surnames, always with the ic suffix in the end.

Milan.M
17-06-17, 18:18
Slavs, from Sloven* is just another name of one of the most noble Thracian tribe the Getae,so not much fuss about it.Just read Theophylact Simocatta the contemprorary of the Sclavenes,i really care less for opinion of modern day Albanians or some mods here some Russian or modern age propaganda,to steal the glory of our ancestors.
Trajan was building columns when he defeated them,but centuries later they ravaged Rome,the Getae remember this.
So the Getae become the invented "Germanic" Goths while the same Getae become the invented "Slavs" that flooded half of Europe in a century,and we are talking about one and same people all the time.
Everything is hidden in that propaganda,who want to look for truth just look for yourself
Theophylact Simocatta;

Quote one;
"As for the Getae, that is to say the herds of Sclavenes, they were fiercly ravaging the regions of Thrace"


Quote two describing encounter between the Getae(Slavs) and Romans;
These, therefore, encountered six hundred Sclavenes who were escorting a great haul of Romans, for they had ravaged Zaldapa, Aquis, and Scopi, and were herding back these unfortunates as plunder; a large number of wagons held the possessions they had looted. When the barbarians observed the Romans approaching, and were then likewise observed, they turned to the slaughter of the captives. Then the adult male captives from youth upwards were killed. Since the barbarians could not avoid an encounter, they collected the wagons and placed them round as a barricade, depositing the women and youth in the middle of the defence.The Romans drew near to the Getae (for this is the older name for the barbarians) but did not dare to come to grips since they were afraid of the javelins the barbarians were sending against them.
http://romanianhistoryandculture.webs.com/tracian%20tribal%20land.png
To Herodotus Thracian were most numerous people in Europe and second in the world.
To Pliny Thracians were the most powerful people in Europe.
Slavs replaced them in matter of century.
For every ancient author there is no doubt Getae and Gothi are variation of same name and same people.

South Slavs read your sources the priest of Dioclea who say the same,Goths(Getae) or as some call them Slavs.

Milan.M
17-06-17, 18:25
One of the most entertaining members Apsurdistan was banned from this forum for simply saying his opinion,no wonder there is monotony here,and i get infractions for no agreement with one of the mods lol.

Angela
17-06-17, 18:28
Only posting in English is permitted in this forum.

The topic is I2a-Din, not ultra nationalist fables.

Cut it out.

Angela
17-06-17, 18:31
One of the most entertaining members Apsurdistan was banned from this forum for simply saying his opinion,no wonder there is monotony here,and i get infractions for no agreement with one of the mods lol.

He got banned because he got repeated infractions for insulting other people. His last foray was a foul, disgusting, expletive laden pm to a moderator.

Nobody gets an infraction here for stating their opinion, but they do get infractions for insulting members or moderators, for persistently spamming off topic posts, and for resisting moderation. You have done all of the preceding. If you wind up getting banned you have no one but yourself to blame.

Sile
17-06-17, 19:14
I fabricated 1850 ybp for I-PH908 (Slavic South)?
You're embarrassing yourself.

Go get your glasses old man, and take a look at this pic:
http://i65.tinypic.com/13ydmzb.jpg

Then it is as I stated ....year it formed is 100AD

you need then to find a sample of a person/s with negative PH908 and this person is the "founder" of this marker, because negative SNP are always older than positive SNP ..............then you can find the origin

Angela
17-06-17, 19:20
The same question can be asked why you ignored the other posts?

Pigmentation has no relevance, blond people existed across the Balkans before the Slavs and Germanic movements. There's no difference in the South Slavs and Albanians when it comes to pigmentation really. No offense, it just seems you haven't paid attention to all this.
I'm blond, blue eyed and pale-skinned myself(and very tall at 198cm) & typical Gheg in autosomal plots/admixture with slight northwestern shift.

Vlachs are similar to the host population of their country so you can't use that as an argument and they do have quite a handful of different haplogroups.
They did infact mingle with Slavs due to common religion of Orthodoxy and so did the Tosks to a lesser extent.
Vlachs R1a frequency is 21.5% in FYROM alone.

Ghegs, especially from the northern tribes are infact the population one should always look at and we see a strong continuity between three main haplogroups since the Classic times; J2b2, R1b-L23 and EV13 with virtually non-existing I2a-Slavic. J2b2-L283 and R1b-L23 frequencies increases the more deeper you get into Gheg tribal territory.


I2a-Slavic and R1a along with some mtDNA are the markers that carried significant North-Eastern admixture into the Balkans.
I've seen many South Slavs, particularily Bosnians and Croats get more than 50% North Slavic on DNA.land and that tells you something.


My DNA.land results are almost purely Balkan, seen some Ghegs get 100%

http://i.imgur.com/QQncJYA.png

I agree to a great extent. It's not only the southern cline that has to be examined, but also the northwest versus northeast cline. The Croatians and the Bosnians, of whatever religion, lean more northeast Europe than any other Balkan groups.

Do you know the proportions of I2a-Din by country for the Balkans? Does the area being discussed have more of it?

As to the arguments based on the lack of I2a-Din ancient samples, of course nothing is definitive until we get them. In their absence, one clue is the line leading to this lineage, which to my knowledge is found only north of the Carpathians, yes?

Trojet
17-06-17, 19:31
Then it is as I stated ....year it formed is 100AD

you need then to find a sample of a person/s with negative PH908 and this person is the "founder" of this marker, because negative SNP are always older than positive SNP ..............then you can find the origin

Yes, upstream I-PH908 samples are all over Eastern Slavic countries, but they exist in South Slavic countries as well. So a strong correlation of Slavic expansions, as you can see here, starting with I-CTS10228: https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/
And then also with I-S17250, the immediate ancestral clade of I-PH908, there is samples in Belarus, Poland, Ukraine, Russia, Slovakia, etc: https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/


I agree to a great extent. It's not only the southern cline that has to be examined, but also the northwest versus northeast cline. The Croatians and the Bosnians, of whatever religion, lean more northeast Europe than any other Balkan groups.

Do you know the proportions of I2a-Din by country for the Balkans? Does the area being discussed have more of it?

As to the arguments based on the lack of I2a-Din ancient samples, of course nothing is definitive until we get them. In their absence, one clue is the line leading to this lineage, which to my knowledge is found only north of the Carpathians, yes?

Yes, I2a-Slavic (Dinaric) reaches the highest frequency among Bosniaks at over 50%, hence the reason why it was named as "Dinaric" before there was a SNP designation in I-CTS10228. Most of it belongs to I-PH908 ("Dinaric South"), which means it's less diverse than further north in Eastern Slavic countries.
And yes, I2a-M423, the line leading to this lineage has only been found North of the Balkans in an ancient DNA context.

Fatherland
17-06-17, 19:33
I agree to a great extent. It's not only the southern cline that has to be examined, but also the northwest versus northeast cline. The Croatians and the Bosnians, of whatever religion, lean more northeast Europe than any other Balkan groups.

Do you know the proportions of I2a-Din by country for the Balkans? Does the area being discussed have more of it?

As to the arguments based on the lack of I2a-Din ancient samples, of course nothing is definitive until we get them. In their absence, one clue is the line leading to this lineage, which to my knowledge is found only north of the Carpathians, yes?

That's right. It radiates from Bosnia-Dalmatia area at 50-70% and loses frequency rapidly in non-Slavic speaking areas. It sees an increase in Bulgaria and FYROM again.

Much larger number of Belarusians, Ukrainians, Poles and Russians combined carry it than Balkanites do.

I do hope they make a better regional breakdown on Albania as in the far north tribal Gheg areas I2a1b-Din and R1a are virtually non-existent and J2b2 gains a high momentum there(30-35%) + R1b at (20-25%) whilst EV13 keeps at 30-35% unlike in Kosovo where it's much higher.

Albanian Vlachs are similar to Tosks in terms of haplogroups and their northwestern components are lower than Ghegs.

Angela
17-06-17, 19:45
That's right. It radiates from Bosnia-Dalmatia area at 50-70% and loses frequency rapidly in non-Slavic speaking areas. It sees an increase in Bulgaria and FYROM again.

I do hope they make a better regional breakdown on Albania as in the far north tribal Gheg areas I2a1b-Din and R1a are virtually non-existent and J2b2 gains a high momentum there(30-35%) + R1b at (20-25%) whilst EV13 keeps at 30-35% unlike in Kosovo where it's much higher.

Albanian Vlachs are similar to Tosks in terms of haplogroups and their northwestern components are lower than Ghegs.

It's my impression that there is also variation within Croatia and Bosnia, with the island people and Istria being perhaps more "Med" than the others.

I hasten to add that's just an impression. We would need detailed y dna and autosomal dna by region to really know.

Fatherland
17-06-17, 19:54
It's my impression that there is also variation within Croatia and Bosnia, with the island people and Istria being perhaps more "Med" than the others.

I hasten to add that's just an impression. We would need detailed y dna and autosomal dna by region to really know.
I'd make a guess that Dalmatians and the rest of the coast along with Istria has a good chunk of "Meddish" mtDNA.

Fustan
17-06-17, 20:42
A lot of Dalmatians (Croatians) have some type of Mediterranean ancestry (specifically Italian), as Fatherland above pointed out.

MarkoZ
17-06-17, 20:50
Yes, upstream I-PH908 samples are all over Eastern Slavic countries, but they exist in South Slavic countries as well. So a strong correlation of Slavic expansions, as you can see here, starting with I-CTS10228: https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/
And then also with I-S17250, the immediate ancestral clade of I-PH908, there is samples in Belarus, Poland, Ukraine, Russia, Slovakia, etc: https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/



Yes, I2a-Slavic (Dinaric) reaches the highest frequency among Bosniaks at over 50%, hence the reason why it was named as "Dinaric" before there was a SNP designation in I-CTS10228. Most of it belongs to I-PH908 ("Dinaric South"), which means it's less diverse than further north in Eastern Slavic countries.
And yes, I2a-M423, the line leading to this lineage has only been found North of the Balkans in an ancient DNA context.

I'm not trying to speak for everyone, but considering the title of this thread an origin in the Balkans per se was never seriously considered. The phylogeographic star of I-M343 is almost entirely situated in Romania-Moldova, suggesting that this is where its diversification occurred. I-M343 in East Slavic countries is quite shallow.

Trojet
17-06-17, 21:17
I'm not trying to speak for everyone, but considering the title of this thread an origin in the Balkans per se was never seriously considered. The phylogeographic star of I-M343 is almost entirely situated in Romania-Moldova, suggesting that this is where its diversification occurred. I-M343 in East Slavic countries is quite shallow.

Not sure what you mean by "I-M343" as the M343 mutation corresponds to R1b.
If you mean I2a1-M423, I cannot agree with "Romania-Moldova diversification". Ancient DNA always trumps modern distribution. In the Genomic History of Southeastern Europe, they did test some ancient remains from Cucuteni-Tripollie and around, and none turned out I2a1-M423 or related subclades. Instead, I2a1-M423 (and related) is found further north in places like Germany, Sweden, Luxemburg.

MarkoZ
17-06-17, 21:35
Not sure what you mean by "I-M343" as the M343 mutation corresponds to R1b.
If you mean I2a-M423, I cannot agree with "Romania-Moldova" diversification. Ancient DNA always trumps modern distribution. In the Genomic History of Southeastern Europe, they did test some ancient remains from Cucuteni-Tripollie and around, and none turned out I2a-M423. Instead, I2a-M423 is found further north in places like Germany, Sweden, Luxemburg.

Yes, of course I mean M423. I'm tired.

Have you read Varzari et al.? It really leaves no doubt. Not a finding that will fit any of the nationalist agendas, but it's a comparison of representative samples and everything else is mere opinion.

It's quite another matter where the haplogroup arose, but the location where it diversified seems to be the aforementioned area.

DuPidh
17-06-17, 22:10
I'd make a guess that Dalmatians and the rest of the coast along with Istria has a good chunk of "Meddish" mtDNA.

Dalmatian spoke a version of Latin language until 100 years ago. They are supposed to be the last remnants of Illyrians.

Fatherland
17-06-17, 22:18
Dalmatian spoke a version of Latin language until 100 years ago. They are supposed to be the last remnants of Illyrians.
All J2b2-carriers from the Balkans are Illyrian remnants, atleast.

Yetos
17-06-17, 22:20
Yes, of course I mean M423. I'm tired.

Have you read Varzari et al.? It really leaves no doubt. Not a finding that will fit any of the nationalist agendas, but it's a comparison of representative samples and everything else is mere opinion.

It's quite another matter where the haplogroup arose, but the location where it diversified seems to be the aforementioned area.



+1 from me.

diversity gives (is) the origin and not High peak of population



it is time to enter in Discussion the ANTES. Antai Antae
latinised Getae/Thracians or Slavs

Yetos
17-06-17, 22:31
All J2b2-carriers are Illyrian remnants, atleast.


do not be so sure yet.

Fatherland
17-06-17, 22:40
do not be so sure yet.
According to J2b2-L283 Bronze Age find in Ancient Dalmatia, that is the undoubtedly the case.

I don't have time to read through broken English.

LABERIA
17-06-17, 22:47
Dalmatian spoke a version of Latin language until 100 years ago. They are supposed to be the last remnants of Illyrians.

Those Dalmatians who spoke Latin language are descendants of Roman colonies, of course mixed with some locals.

Garrick
17-06-17, 22:48
Yes, of course I mean M423. I'm tired.

Have you read Varzari et al.? It really leaves no doubt. Not a finding that will fit any of the nationalist agendas, but it's a comparison of representative samples and everything else is mere opinion.

It's quite another matter where the haplogroup arose, but the location where it diversified seems to be the aforementioned area.

I-CTS10228 corresponds with Thracian land and younger clades are Illyrians.

It is normal what correspond, not really northeast Europe, but of course today's Ukraine/Romania and beyond of with the North decreases (Southern-Eastern Poland, part of Belarus and small part of Russia).

http://s16.postimg.org/7ttndgt8l/Hg_I_L_621_spatial_frequency_B.jpg

What someones do not understand because they do not know, practically speaking, Slavs did not exist in the 3rd century BC.

Pan-Slavist nationalists and here in forum Albanian nationalists what is unbelievable combination (Albanians promote Pan-Slavism, LOL), think that cultures as Zarubintsy are Slavic but no, these cultures are not Slavic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zarubintsy_culture

The Zarubintsy culture was influenced by the La Tene culture and the nomads of the steppes (the Scytians and the Sarmatians). The Scythian and Sarmatian influence is evident, especially in potterty, weponry and domestic and personal objects. From the 3rd century and onwards, the culture was connected by the Goths and became part of the Chernyakov culture.

I-CTS10228 formed 5500 ybp, TMCRA according Klyosov and Nordtvedt is about 300 BC.

Slavs emerged later.

In third century BC we can speak about Thracians, Sarmatians, Scythians, Goths etc. but not about Slavs.

Objectively I-CTS10228 can be Thracian or German (Gothic) marker but a lack this haplogrup in some areas where Goths moved gives much greater priority of Thracian theory.

Younger clades as PH908 can be Illyrians.

If we analyze who is more Illyrian and Thracian among Balkan people we can see:

Croatians are mostly Illyrians, but in the Eastern parts are more Thracians
Bosnians are more Illyrians than Thracians
Serbs are both, Western Serbs are more Illyrians, Eastern Serbs are more Thracians
Bulgarian are mostly Thracians

Illyrians and Thracians in these area were mixed, and there are experts who claim language was not so different, even according them Illyrians and Thracians could understand each other.

Fatherland
17-06-17, 23:25
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31961-I2a1b2a1-(I-CTS10228)-a-strong-marker-of-Slavic-expansion?p=475460#post475460

DuPidh
17-06-17, 23:43
Those Dalmatians who spoke Latin language are descendants of Roman colonies, of course mixed with some locals.
There were not Roman colonies in Dalmatia. People were romanised by the long presence of Roman outposts in the area. Coastal cities in Albania were also Romanised and Latin were spoken. That's why Albanian language uses Latin words for sea vocabulary. Latin speaking Albanian cites were overrun by mountaineers Albanian people who were more numerous than coastal ones, and were half romanised

Trojet
17-06-17, 23:51
I2a-Slavic:


A subclade of I2a1 called I2a1b2a1, defined by SNP CTS10228, shows a very strong correlation with the distribution of Slavic peoples. Moreover, the time of most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) for males carrying this subclade, is estimated by YFull as just 2200 years ago (ybp), shortly before Christ:

http://yfull.com/tree/I-L621/

http://isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpI.html

https://lundiak.wordpress.com/2015/01/09/i2...aka-i-cts10228/ (https://lundiak.wordpress.com/2015/01/09/i2a1b2a1-aka-i-cts10228/)

I'm not sure what percent of entire I2a1 in Europe belongs to I2a1b2a1 - but surely in Slavic and neighbouring countries it is the majority. I guess, that at over a dozen million males carry this subclade (while in total all subclades of I2a1 are carried in Slavic countries by an estimated 20 million males and in neighbouring countries by another close to 6 million). Some of the most basal subclades of CTS10228 as well as CTS4002 were found in Polish people.

This sample (Y-Full number YF03513) is from Świętokrzyskie Voivodeship (SK) in Poland (PL):

I-CTS4002* - id:YF03513 POL [PL-SK]

In FTDNA this kit has identification number N113464, it belongs to a male from Moskorzew:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moskorzew

Another basal sample from Poland is from Subcarpathian (Podkarpackie = PK) Voivodeship:

I-CTS10228* id:YF01476 POL [PL-PK]

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

The route from haplogroup I2, via I2a, I2a1 (P37), I2a1b2 (L621) up to this very young but very numerous I2a1b2a1 (CTS10228):

http://s13.postimg.org/ossn8zu7r/I2a1b2a1.png

http://s13.postimg.org/ossn8zu7r/I2a1b2a1.png

Here a map showing the distribution of I2a1b2 (L621):

Vast majority of L621 is also under CTS10228, while men with more basal subclades of L621 are relatively few:
The map posted below is courtesy of user Gravetto-Danubian from Anthrogenica:

http://s16.postimg.org/7ttndgt8l/Hg_I_L_621_spatial_frequency_B.jpg

http://s16.postimg.org/7ttndgt8l/Hg_I_L_621_spatial_frequency_B.jpg

For comparison a map showing all of I2a1 (P37):

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

Here an alternative map of I2a1b, but a very old one (from O. Balanovsky 2008):

At that time I1b was the name for what is today known as I2a1b (M423):

http://i.imgur.com/YIV0TQD.jpg


http://i.imgur.com/YIV0TQD.jpg

In Ukraine about 20.5% - 22% of all males are carriers of I2a1 - probably great majority of them belong to subclade I2a1b2a1:

http://s21.postimg.org/ukyhut6pj/Ukraina_Y_DNA.jpg

http://s21.postimg.org/ukyhut6pj/Ukraina_Y_DNA.jpg

According to Kushnierevich 2013, in the region of Polesia (Belarus-Ukraine borderland), 26% of males (56 out of 217) carry I2a1.

In Russia over 1/10 of men carry I2a1. In Slovakia - ca. 1/6. In Czech Rep. - ca. 1/10. In Slovenia - as many as in Ukraine (over 1/5). In Macedonia - up to 1/4. In Serbia - ca. 1/3. This marker correlates with Slavic people just as strongly as R1a, in some regions even more strongly:

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

Trojet
17-06-17, 23:53
For the Slavic readers (the rest can use Google translate), the following well written article comes from the admin of the Serbian DNA Project who analyzes the genetic make up of the Serbs and recent ancient DNA results. In one of the paragraphs he states (translated from Serbian):

The Serbs are predominantly descendants of the Slavs. Y-haplogroups which are genetically of Slavic signature are I2a-CTS10228 (also knows as I2a-Dinaric), R1a-Z280, and R1a-M458, which all together make up over half of Serbian paternal lineages.
Source: http://dnk.poreklo.rs/genetska-slika-lepenskog-vira-vince/

Russian propaganda??? :laughing:

Yetos
17-06-17, 23:54
Ducchy of Carinthia

the first mention ever of Slavic language and people,

Kingdom of Antes
the other first mention of possible Slavs

among them the Havars Αβαροι


What are talking now?

that Slovenes were not Slavs but Illyrians
or that Antes were not Slavs but Germans,

if old I2a2 Din is not Slavic then it might be Gothic,
since we know that Goths lived in Crimaia and Ukraine

considering it as Gothic
then must left marks in the lands that Goths expand.

so either Slovenes or Antes were not Slavs
Either both spot areas are connected and Slovenes and Antes were Slavs

Kingslav
18-06-17, 00:12
Interesting discussion. Lots of info in posts about I2A-Din. Thanks to everyone who posted above. I really appreciate. I will add my info to discussion. I am I2A-Din. Father Polish, Mother Ukrainian. Paternal- Odessa region, Southwestern Ukraine. Maternal- Lviv Region, Western Ukraine.
ANCESTRY DNA- 99% East Europe, >1% Finland/ Northwest Russia. DNALAND- 84% North Slavic, 12.2% Southwestern European, 2.6% Balkan, 1.2% Mediterranean Islander. WEGENE- 63.51% Hungarian, 36.45% Russian, 0.04% Chinese. Also here is Gedmatch Oracle Results.
Serb_Serbia + Serb_Serbia + Estonian + Estonian
Croat_BH + Finn_West + Ukrainian_Center + Ukrainian_Center
Croatian + Estonian + Estonian + Greek_Thessaly
Finnish + Lithuanians + Lithuanians + S_Italian_Sicilian
Pole + Ukrainian_Center + Serb_Serbia + Finn_West

LABERIA
18-06-17, 00:20
There were not Roman colonies in Dalmatia. People were romanised by the long presence of Roman outposts in the area. Coastal cities in Albania were also Romanised and Latin were spoken. That's why Albanian language uses Latin words for sea vocabulary. Latin speaking Albanian cites were overrun by mountaineers Albanian people who were more numerous than coastal ones, and were half romanised

Of course there were Roman colonies. Everywhere there were. With romans the story was different from the greek colonies. The Greeks were a small group of tribes and their genetic influence was insignificant, meanwhile romans were a great Empire. Even the small town of Puka deep in the highlands of North is a Latin toponym from via publica. Because once there passed the road for Dardania.

Garrick
18-06-17, 00:30
For the Slavic readers (the rest can use Google translate), the following well written article comes from the admin of the Serbian DNA Project who analyzes the genetic make up of the Serbs and recent ancient DNA results. In one of the paragraphs he states (translated from Serbian):

Source: http://dnk.poreklo.rs/genetska-slika-lepenskog-vira-vince/

Russian propaganda???

You like to put some Serbian sites but do you like that someone puts Albanian sites. What the human imagination can invent, therefore better not push, this is European forum, cooperation and collaboration is a winning combination, not cheating or something worse.

Even you didn't read what I wrote.

There are a lot good people who participate in this web site including Bosniacs and Croats.

Unfortunately there were wrong activities, someone wanted to increase number of R1a carriers among Serbs and they tested more people belonging one lineage and they were all R1a.

But it is not representative sample.

Things like that lowers the reputation of the site, I hope that editors will lead more care in the future.

For example imagine that someone do tests more members of one lineage in Albania and they are H1a. Does it means that according such test H1a is prevalent in Albania.

Sile
18-06-17, 00:30
I-CTS10228 corresponds with Thracian land and younger clades are Illyrians.

It is normal what correspond, not really northeast Europe, but of course today's Ukraine/Romania and beyond of with the North decreases (Southern-Eastern Poland, part of Belarus and small part of Russia).

http://s16.postimg.org/7ttndgt8l/Hg_I_L_621_spatial_frequency_B.jpg

What someones do not understand because they do not know, practically speaking, Slavs did not exist in the 3rd century BC.

Pan-Slavist nationalists and here in forum Albanian nationalists what is unbelievable combination (Albanians promote Pan-Slavism, LOL), think that cultures as Zarubintsy are Slavic but no, these cultures are not Slavic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zarubintsy_culture

The Zarubintsy culture was influenced by the La Tene culture and the nomads of the steppes (the Scytians and the Sarmatians). The Scythian and Sarmatian influence is evident, especially in potterty, weponry and domestic and personal objects. From the 3rd century and onwards, the culture was connected by the Goths and became part of the Chernyakov culture.

I-CTS10228 formed 5500 ybp, TMCRA according Klyosov and Nordtvedt is about 300 BC.

Slavs emerged later.

In third century BC we can speak about Thracians, Sarmatians, Scythians, Goths etc. but not about Slavs.

Objectively I-CTS10228 can be Thracian or German (Gothic) marker but a lack this haplogrup in some areas where Goths moved gives much greater priority of Thracian theory.

Younger clades as PH908 can be Illyrians.

If we analyze who is more Illyrian and Thracian among Balkan people we can see:

Croatians are mostly Illyrians, but in the Eastern parts are more Thracians
Bosnians are more Illyrians than Thracians
Serbs are both, Western Serbs are more Illyrians, Eastern Serbs are more Thracians
Bulgarian are mostly Thracians

Illyrians and Thracians in these area were mixed, and there are experts who claim language was not so different, even according them Illyrians and Thracians could understand each other.

what do you mean by thracians?..........there are 4 groups
odyrssian from black sea bulgaria ......true thracians
moesians which incorporate some of serbia
dacian .............western romania
Getae which are coastal romanians mixed with Sychthians/sarmatians

Fatherland
18-06-17, 00:37
No Ancient individuals carried I2a-Slav in the Balkans. This is already established and we can now turn to a new page.

Garrick
18-06-17, 00:49
what do you mean by thracians?..........there are 4 groups
odyrssian from black sea bulgaria ......true thracians
moesians which incorporate some of serbia
dacian .............western romania
Getae which are coastal romanians mixed with Sychthians/sarmatians

Yes it is good questions.

Look at this map, 264 BC (it correspond with TMRCA of I-CTS10228 according Klyosov and Nordtvedt):

http://www.emersonkent.com/images/europe_264_180.jpg

http://www.emersonkent.com/map_archive/rome_expansion_264_180.htm

In areas of today's Slovakia, Southern Poland, Western and Sothern Ukraine, Moldavia, Romania etc. you can see Dacian (Thracian) and German tribes plus more eastern and north Sarmatian and Scythian tribes.

I2a was in areas which are Thracian (Dacian) and German.

We can discuss about Thracian theory and German theory, but it is high probability that I-CTS10228 carriers were in both Thracian and German tribes.

Trojet
18-06-17, 01:02
Interesting discussion. Lots of info in posts about I2A-Din. Thanks to everyone who posted above. I really appreciate. I will add my info to discussion. I am I2A-Din. Father Polish, Mother Ukrainian. Paternal- Odessa region, Southwestern Ukraine. Maternal- Lviv Region, Western Ukraine.
ANCESTRY DNA- 99% East Europe, >1% Finland/ Northwest Russia. DNALAND- 84% North Slavic, 12.2% Southwestern European, 2.6% Balkan, 1.2% Mediterranean Islander. WEGENE- 63.51% Hungarian, 36.45% Russian, 0.04% Chinese. Also here is Gedmatch Oracle Results.
Serb_Serbia + Serb_Serbia + Estonian + Estonian
Croat_BH + Finn_West + Ukrainian_Center + Ukrainian_Center
Croatian + Estonian + Estonian + Greek_Thessaly
Finnish + Lithuanians + Lithuanians + S_Italian_Sicilian
Pole + Ukrainian_Center + Serb_Serbia + Finn_West

Welcome :)

According to some of these South Slavic forumers, your paternal line is Thraco-Illyrian in origin from the Balkans. Apparently, by their logic, lots of Thraco-Illyrians settled all the way to Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Russia, etc, during the Middle Ages.

Sile
18-06-17, 01:11
Yes it is good questions.

Look at this map, 264 BC (it correspond with TMRCA of I-CTS10228 according Klyosov and Nordtvedt):

http://www.emersonkent.com/images/europe_264_180.jpg

http://www.emersonkent.com/map_archive/rome_expansion_264_180.htm

In areas of today's Slovakia, Southern Poland, Western and Sothern Ukraine, Moldavia, Romania etc. you can see Dacian (Thracian) and German tribes plus more eastern and north Sarmatian and Scythian tribes.

I2a was in areas which are Thracian (Dacian) and German.

We can discuss about Thracian theory and German theory, but it is high probability that I-CTS10228 carriers were in both Thracian and German tribes.

If you check the recent paper on SE-Europe you will see that Malak Preslavets has only G2a and T1a1 samples from Neolithic times , this Malak Preslavets is in the bulgarian province of razgrad ...........check the modern bulgarian paper of 2014 for DNA , you will still see G2a and T1a1 as a high % ( although there is 2 other haplogroups which has passed these in % ) even today. The point is that haplogroups did not vacate areas in most cases , but left people behind.

Dacia - what did the dacians speak before using Latin?

I- CTS10228 could easily be sarmatian, eventually absorbed into gothic society and later into slavic society

- upper Moesia by the time of that map was already celtinized ( a mix of celts and thracians )

- illyria was only dalmatia and pannonia ............noricum was illyrian but by this stage was nearly all gallic-celtic

Bergin
18-06-17, 01:23
You like to put some Serbian sites but do you like that someone puts Albanian sites. What the human imagination can invent, therefore better not push, this is European forum, cooperation and collaboration is a winning combination, not cheating or something worse.

Even you didn't read what I wrote.

There are a lot good people who participate in this web site including Bosniacs and Croats.

Unfortunately there were wrong activities, someone wanted to increase number of R1a carriers among Serbs and they tested more people belonging one lineage and they were all R1a.

But it is not representative sample.

Things like that lowers the reputation of the site, I hope that editors will lead more care in the future.

For example imagine that someone do tests more members of one lineage in Albania and they are H1a. Does it means that according such test H1a is prevalent in Albania.


Hi Garrick,

I would love to find out that there are still Illyrians or Thracians left. They disappeared from chronicles in the early middle ages. Just because I would love something it doesn't mean that I can make it up.

It is hard to believe that Greek Byzantians did not recognize Thracians or Illyrians. They lived close by for quite some millennia.
Can you really imagine that none would have seen and reported a cross or any religious symbol, Illyrians (Thracian too) were almost christianized at the time. It would have been a game changer for strategy of the byzantine.

I am not saying that there is zero chance that I2a-din might be Thracian or Illyrian, but it is a pretty small chance (5-10%) IMO.
Again this does not mean that all is left is the slavic option (40% IMO), there is also the barbaric option (50-55%) - some germanic tribes that were never touched by romanization and that are not mentioned by roman or greeks. Poor romans and greeks, they could not distinguish well at the time between barbaric slaves and barbaric germans.
(This last option would also explain the pan-slavic propaganda)


I really don't want to offend you or any I2a-din by putting up this option (which might be completely wrong btw). At the end this people almost exterminated Thracian and Illyrians, they deserve that credit. I am trying to shout it out loudly that this almost extermination has left genetic traces that you cannot miss.

Kingslav
18-06-17, 01:31
Welcome :)

According to some of these South Slavic forumers, your paternal line is Thraco-Illyrian in origin from the Balkans. Apparently, by their logic, lots of Thraco-Illyrians settled all the way to Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Russia, etc, during the Middle Ages.
I am not Illyrian descendant IMO, Illyrian is south Balkans. Specifically Albanians. I believe Thracians come from near Black Sea coast ( Romania, Moldova, Ukraine ) where you can find I2A. From there migration happen west also southward. There is old legend in my paternal side we descend from original White Croats. My southern genes showing on DNALAND come from maternal grandfather who was part sephardic and he migrated north to Ukraine. Forsure not Illyrian genes. I descend from Steppe groups mostly.

Garrick
18-06-17, 02:17
Interesting discussion. Lots of info in posts about I2A-Din. Thanks to everyone who posted above. I really appreciate. I will add my info to discussion. I am I2A-Din. Father Polish, Mother Ukrainian. Paternal- Odessa region, Southwestern Ukraine. Maternal- Lviv Region, Western Ukraine.
ANCESTRY DNA- 99% East Europe, >1% Finland/ Northwest Russia. DNALAND- 84% North Slavic, 12.2% Southwestern European, 2.6% Balkan, 1.2% Mediterranean Islander. WEGENE- 63.51% Hungarian, 36.45% Russian, 0.04% Chinese. Also here is Gedmatch Oracle Results.
Serb_Serbia + Serb_Serbia + Estonian + Estonian
Croat_BH + Finn_West + Ukrainian_Center + Ukrainian_Center
Croatian + Estonian + Estonian + Greek_Thessaly
Finnish + Lithuanians + Lithuanians + S_Italian_Sicilian
Pole + Ukrainian_Center + Serb_Serbia + Finn_West

Kingslav, welcome to this thread.

You can see existing of four theories in literature (post #261):

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29041-I2a-Din-came-to-the-Balkans-and-Dinaric-Alps-with-the-Thracians-Dacians-Illyrians/page11?p=511872&viewfull=1#post511872

Slavic theory

Thracian theory

German theory

Illyrian theory

If we take as an established truth that I-CTS10228 is formed 5300 ybp and TMCRA is 2300 ybp in that time and after I-CTS10228 could be the part of genetic fund of Thracian and German tribes. We can round territory on wider areas today's Western and Southern Ukraine, Romania, Moldavia, Southern Poland, Slovakia, even more north, west and east.

Thracians pushed from the north and east brought this haplogroup to the south. As Thracian and Illyrian territories were mixed I-CTS10228 could arrive during 300-400 years in the Illyrian land and new clades could emerge.

German tribes could bring this haplogroup too, with Goths and Gepids especially. German theory is logical and good established too although it failures explain how some other areas where Goths moved have no this haplogroup.

Slavic theory failures explain how haplogroup which emerged among Thracians and Germans could be Slavic marker. I agree with Sile that I-CTS10228 could become part of genetic fund of Sarmatians too. But we should be cautious. Can we equate Sarmatians with Slavs. No, if we know history, archeology etc. So there are serious objections to the Slavic theory. Of course we can suppose that later some tribes (it doesnt matter whose) were assimilated and knowing all above mentioned it is logical that I-CTS10228 is in areas today's Ukraine, Poland, Belarus and other Slavic countries.

Kingslav
18-06-17, 03:17
Of 4 theories, I take Thracian theory for truth. I completely dismiss Illyrian theory and Slavic theory, and I am pure slav 99.5% East Europe on Ancestry DNA lol so i dont want to say this but Thracians could have had small genetic overlap with germans tribe who was in that region Goths for example. I2A still mostly Thracian genetic marker IMO. Originated Northwest Black Sea coast in modern Moldova, Romania, Ukraine then some spread out westward and southward, and some stayed there, my ancestors.

Kingslav
18-06-17, 03:23
Before that descended from nomadic Iranian tribes.

davef
18-06-17, 09:47
I like it. In fact I'll be using it in the future. :)

THIS IS AFRICA??? THIS IS SPAAAAAARRRRTAAAAA!!!!!!!!!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rvYZRskNV3w

Balkanite
18-06-17, 11:06
Of 4 theories, I take Thracian theory for truth. I completely dismiss Illyrian theory and Slavic theory, and I am pure slav 99.5% East Europe on Ancestry DNA lol so i dont want to say this but Thracians could have had small genetic overlap with germans tribe who was in that region Goths for example. I2A still mostly Thracian genetic marker IMO. Originated Northwest Black Sea coast in modern Moldova, Romania, Ukraine then some spread out westward and southward, and some stayed there, my ancestors.

Why would the assumption that I2a-slav originated in the north of the black sea indicate thacian ancestry to you?
Dont you know that Thracia was much further south, all the way down at modern day bulgaria?
The place you are talking about was not a part of Thracia. It was just a brewing pot for barbarians luring at the gates of the Roman balkans.
Wouldn't surprise me if the proto-slavs were forming there too.

And you should not put so much weight on the modern diversity there. Just because the place with the most diverse pool of I2a-slav is located in western Ukraine today, does not mean that the most diversity was there before the slavic migrations. If slavs moved westwards, why shouldnt their core move westwards too? The spot with the most diverse array of I2a-slav could well have been northeast of the black sea.
That would also correlate better with what we know of slavic origins according to historians.

Garrick
18-06-17, 12:07
If you check the recent paper on SE-Europe you will see that Malak Preslavets has only G2a and T1a1 samples from Neolithic times , this Malak Preslavets is in the bulgarian province of razgrad ...........check the modern bulgarian paper of 2014 for DNA , you will still see G2a and T1a1 as a high % ( although there is 2 other haplogroups which has passed these in % ) even today. The point is that haplogroups did not vacate areas in most cases , but left people behind.

Dacia - what did the dacians speak before using Latin?

I- CTS10228 could easily be sarmatian, eventually absorbed into gothic society and later into slavic society

- upper Moesia by the time of that map was already celtinized ( a mix of celts and thracians )

- illyria was only dalmatia and pannonia ............noricum was illyrian but by this stage was nearly all gallic-celtic

Sile if you and I could investigate further we could nail precisely a Thracian or German tribe where I-CTS10228 emerged.

But it is a serious research effort.

You could be right surely that I-CTS10228 was among Sarmatians, but only in western parts, if it was more frequent it spread to more eastern.

LABERIA
18-06-17, 12:16
what do you mean by thracians?..........there are 4 groups
odyrssian from black sea bulgaria ......true thracians
moesians which incorporate some of serbia
dacian .............western romania
Getae which are coastal romanians mixed with Sychthians/sarmatians

Moesians are considered by the majority of modern scholars as Illyrians.

Kingslav
18-06-17, 12:30
Why would the assumption that I2a-slav originated in the north of the black sea indicate thacian ancestry to you?
Dont you know that Thracia was much further south, all the way down at modern day bulgaria?
The place you are talking about was not a part of Thracia. It was just a brewing pot for barbarians luring at the gates of the Roman balkans.
Wouldn't surprise me if the proto-slavs were forming there too.

And you should not put so much weight on the modern diversity there. Just because the place with the most diverse pool of I2a-slav is located in western Ukraine today, does not mean that the most diversity was there before the slavic migrations. If slavs moved westwards, why shouldnt their core move westwards too? The spot with the most diverse array of I2a-slav could well have been northeast of the black sea.
That would also correlate better with what we know of slavic origins according to historians.

You right that Thrace was located around central Bulgaria, but not only there, also Thracians was settled in Moldavia, Romania, Serbia, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Northern Greece, maybe north Turkey. And they were nomadic so what make you think they stuck in one place Bulgaria only? Thracians is Iranian tribe and little mix of Goths. "Proto-Slav" is mix of Iranian tribes and Balts ( Nordicized Slavs ) you can see showing in my gedmatch oracles. Real Thracians and some Proto-Slavs similar they descended partly from Sarmatians. Proto-Slav was forming down there. R1A was forming down there in Bulgarians and Romanians 20% or more. Yes I2A Slav and so is R1A. What wrong with being Slav? Why is I2A 25-30% in Ukraine? Tell me your theory.

Serb_Serbia + Serb_Serbia + Estonian + Estonian
Croat_BH + Finn_West + Ukrainian_Center + Ukrainian_Center
Croatian + Estonian + Estonian + Greek_Thessaly
Finnish + Lithuanians + Lithuanians + S_Italian_Sicilian
Pole + Ukrainian_Center + Serb_Serbia + Finn_West

Garrick
18-06-17, 12:46
Why would the assumption that I2a-slav originated in the north of the black sea indicate thacian ancestry to you?
Dont you know that Thracia was much further south, all the way down at modern day bulgaria?
The place you are talking about was not a part of Thracia. It was just a brewing pot for barbarians luring at the gates of the Roman balkans.
Wouldn't surprise me if the proto-slavs were forming there too.

And you should not put so much weight on the modern diversity there. Just because the place with the most diverse pool of I2a-slav is located in western Ukraine today, does not mean that the most diversity was there before the slavic migrations. If slavs moved westwards, why shouldnt their core move westwards too? The spot with the most diverse array of I2a-slav could well have been northeast of the black sea.
That would also correlate better with what we know of slavic origins according to historians.

You Albanians (here on the forum) unfortunately are marking themselves as pariahs.

You think if "invent" any nonsense as new haplogroup I2a-Slav that you will get some points.

No, it means you marks themselves as pariahs.

You can sing your songs or beating drums or play zurles between you, but externally these activities does not produce a result.

Moderators should not permit such "inventions" as I2a-Slav but maybe it is better because you put yourself in getho.

Generally you know who is poorest in the Balkans, but do you know why.

For example, cooperation and collaboration are a winning combination, in game theory some players can try cheat or something worse but after some time they are losers because others see it and become very competitive.

Balkanite
18-06-17, 12:51
You Albanians (here on the forum) unfortunately are marking themselves as pariahs.

You think if "invent" any nonsense as new haplogroup I2a-Slav that you will get some points.

No, it means you marks themselves as pariahs.

You can sing your songs or beating drums or play zurles between you, but externally these activities does not produce a result.

Moderators should not permit such "inventions" as I2a-Slav but maybe it is better because you put yourself in getho.

Generally you know who is poorest in the Balkans, but do you know why.

For example, cooperation and collaboration are a winning combination, in game theory some players can try cheat or something worse but after some time they are losers because others see it and become very competitive.

I was trying if i could scout one single constructive sentence in you whole post. Unfortunately i found nothing at all, besides some anti-albanian sentiments wrapped in a package of broken english..

Kingslav
18-06-17, 13:14
Why would the assumption that I2a-slav originated in the north of the black sea indicate thacian ancestry to you?
Dont you know that Thracia was much further south, all the way down at modern day bulgaria?
The place you are talking about was not a part of Thracia. It was just a brewing pot for barbarians luring at the gates of the Roman balkans.
Wouldn't surprise me if the proto-slavs were forming there too.

And you should not put so much weight on the modern diversity there. Just because the place with the most diverse pool of I2a-slav is located in western Ukraine today, does not mean that the most diversity was there before the slavic migrations. If slavs moved westwards, why shouldnt their core move westwards too? The spot with the most diverse array of I2a-slav could well have been northeast of the black sea.
That would also correlate better with what we know of slavic origins according to historians.
You right, Thrace was located in central Bulgaria but not only there Thracians settled in Moldavia, Romania, Serbia, Macedonia, Northern Greece, Even North Turkey. Thracians is Iranian Tribes mix with little Goths. "Proto-Slav" is Iranian tribes mix with Balts "Nordicized-Slavs" you can see my gedmatch oracle other pg. Real Thracians and Proto-Slav related both to Sarmatians. Yes there was Proto-Slav in Romania and Bulgaria +20% R1A Proto-Slav. Why is there 25% I2A in Ukraine? Tell me what your theory?

Kingslav
18-06-17, 13:26
balkanite theory off, You right Thrace located in Central Bulgaria, but not only there Thracians settled in Moldavia, Romania, Serbia, Macedonia, Northern Greece, Even North Turkey. Thracians is Iranian Tribes mix with small amount Goths. I2A is modern Thracian marker. " Proto-Slav" is Iranian tribe mix with Balts "Nordicized Slavs" you can check my gedmatch next pg. Proto-Slavs and REAL Thracians is both related with Sarmatians. Yes there was Proto-Slavs in Romania and Bulgaria over 20% R1A. Why there is 25% I2A in Ukraine? Tell me your theory?

Trojet
18-06-17, 13:37
Of 4 theories, I take Thracian theory for truth. I completely dismiss Illyrian theory and Slavic theory, and I am pure slav 99.5% East Europe on Ancestry DNA lol so i dont want to say this but Thracians could have had small genetic overlap with germans tribe who was in that region Goths for example. I2A still mostly Thracian genetic marker IMO. Originated Northwest Black Sea coast in modern Moldova, Romania, Ukraine then some spread out westward and southward, and some stayed there, my ancestors.

While anything is possible, by far the Slavic theory is the most likely, Kingslav.

Everyone who has the I2a-CTS10228 (I2a-Slavic aka Dinaric) mutation descends from the same patrilineal ancestor who lived only 2300 ybp. You can argue how accurate these estimates are, but YFull, Norvedt, etc, are giving the same estimates. Furthermore, ancient DNA has proven that YFull's estimates are pretty much spot on.

So, for the Thracian theory to make sense, you would have to assume they only expanded after 2300 ybp (mostly in the early middles ages) and basically exclusively throughout the Slavic countries. On the other hand, we know the Slavs expanded precisely during that time, and precisely in the areas where I2a-Slavic is found today.

Kingslav
18-06-17, 13:56
I dismiss Slavic Theory Trojet, Proto-Slavs is R1A. I2A is Thracian. Proto-slavs are original Slavs first foremost but Thracians with I2A assimilated wth R1A Proto-Slavs to make modern Slavs. That why R1A and I2A are modern Slav markers. Not anything else.

Trojet
18-06-17, 14:02
I dismiss Slavic Theory Trojet, Proto-Slavs is R1A. I2A is Thracian. Proto-slavs are original Slavs first foremost but Thracians with I2A assimilated wth R1A Proto-Slavs to make modern Slavs. Not anything else.

You have every right to dismiss it, but evidence is heavily pointing in that direction. There has been no I2a1-CTS10228 (Din) or I2a1-M423 (where I2a-Din stems from) found in Thracian remains or anywhere in the Balkans, instead I2a1-M423 has been found in Northern half of Europe.

What we have in Eastern Balkan Bronze Age in multiple remains (among others) was I2a2-M223 which splits from I2a1 during the Paleolithic. So there is absolutely no evidence Thracians carried any I2a1-CTS10228 aka Din.

MarkoZ
18-06-17, 14:18
expanded after 2300 ybp (mostly in the early middles ages) and basically exclusively throughout the Slavic countries

What's the point of repeating the same distortions over and over again? The region with the highest basal diversity is not Slavic speaking.

I don't really understand why you'd have such a strong opinion on this, but it's clouding your judgement. Note that you did not reference as much as a single peer-reviewed paper and when they were cited you chose to ignore their conclusions.

Trojet
18-06-17, 14:27
What's the point of repeating the same distortions over and over again? The region with the highest basal diversity is not Slavic speaking.

I don't really understand why you'd have such a strong opinion on this, but it's clouding your judgement. Note that you did not reference as much as a single peer-reviewed paper and when they were cited you chose to ignore their conclusions.

How many times did I reference the Genomic History of Southeastern Europe. How many times did I reference YFull. How many times did I reference FTDNA. I don't have time to do these things over and over.
It's not my problem that you may not like these facts.

And yes, I have a very strong opinion about this because evidence is pointing in every direction to what I suggest, and absolutely not in the direction of some "lost Thraco-Illyrian tribe".


What's the point of repeating the same distortions over and over again? The region with the highest basal diversity is not Slavic speaking.

You have not pointed a single "distortion" I said. It doesn't really matter where the region "with highest basal diversity" is, but we know it's not anywhere in the Balkans. What matters is that this clade it very young and most likely it expanded as a Slavic speaking marker considering all the evidence. Besides, there is a I-CTS10228* (basal) in Poland.

Kingslav
18-06-17, 14:30
Exactly, they probably wont find remnants in Balkan. They will find forsure in East Europe and Steppes, they migrated from there, they are Sarmatians that mixed with other groups, that is debate. Every race has variation no race is ever pure or something, groups assimilated. They were nomadic and horse was crucial, warriors and especially bow arrow. Meat eaters not farmer types, also mixed with asiatic genes similar to modern Russians but most those genes diffused over centuries. Modern slav like me showing <1 Finland/Northwest Russia. Romanians and Bulgarians showing 1 or 2% asiatic genes and same with Croats and other I2A groups showing asiatic genes. Thats normal for Steppe people. When you drop the balkan stigma you see truth, these Nomadic people Thracians conquer lands of balkan they had to come from somewhere not originate there always that what u believe really why Belarussians have some I2A? Still no explains why 25% I2A-Din in Ukraine ?

Garrick
18-06-17, 14:33
Of 4 theories, I take Thracian theory for truth. I completely dismiss Illyrian theory and Slavic theory, and I am pure slav 99.5% East Europe on Ancestry DNA lol so i dont want to say this but Thracians could have had small genetic overlap with germans tribe who was in that region Goths for example. I2A still mostly Thracian genetic marker IMO. Originated Northwest Black Sea coast in modern Moldova, Romania, Ukraine then some spread out westward and southward, and some stayed there, my ancestors.

Quality of this topic increased after correspondence I had with a Russian scientist.

He explained me four current theories in science and he gave me some evidence.

Yes Illyrian theory is not possible since I-CTS10228 could not emerged in the Balkans but younger clades, primarily I-PH908 could be Illyrian, it is possoble it emerged in Illyrian land somewhere in Dalmatia, Bosnia or Western Serbia.

German theory can be logical, especially Gothic tribes could have this haplogroup. Problem is what in some areas where Gothic tribes moved this haplogroup is not represented. But this doesn't mean proof, German theory can be plausible yet.

Slavic theory failures to explain how I-CTS10228 can be Slavic marker. We can ask where Slavs were in that time, if there were such a entity.

I am very grateful to Russian scientist to help me for understanding of this complex matter.

But honestly, perhaps it's to not fair to say, he didn't impressed me with Slavic theory. According his opinion maybe I-CTS10228 has link with Zarubintsy culture, although it is quite north, but even it has any connection, whose people constituted that culture. Sarmatians? Scythians? Some Slavic precursors? Who.

You can see Europe in Roman times 284 BC. Where are Slavs. Only Thracian, German and Sarmatian tribes.

Thracian theory is plasuable. I-CTS10228 was part of genetic fund of Thracian and it is undeniable fact. And scientist from Russia confirmed this. Now key question is if Thracians brought this haplogroup to the south among their Balkan brothers. What is logical, they could. Especially, whereas they were pushed from the north and east.

German theory is possible, too, although it would be a great irony. For example in two world wars Serbs had 3 million wictims. Is it possible that Germans were against their brothers. But of course in real world many things can be possible.

MarkoZ
18-06-17, 14:43
How many times did I reference the Genomic History of Southeastern Europe. How many times did I reference YFull. How many times did I reference FTDNA. I don't have time to do these things over and over.It's not my problem that you may not like these facts.And yes, I have a very strong opinion about this because evidence is pointing in every direction to what I suggest, and absolutely not in the direction of some "lost Thraco-Illyrian tribe".Only one of those is a paper, and it has little to do with the topic at hand. Why not give Krushniarevich (2015) and Varzari (2013) a shot since they relate directly to issue of contemporary populations in the Balkans?

I don't care for any of the Thraco-Illyrian hypotheses because they are much like your posts: mere conjecture. Unless you address the issue of the phylogeography of I2a we're not getting any closer to the truth. As I see it the facts leave two options: either I2a is not particularly Slavic or the Slavs expanded from Romania and Moldova.

EDIT: Ok I see you're back to picking singles on yfull or some other commercial site. Let's just leave it at that, then.

Fatherland
18-06-17, 14:49
Exactly, they probably wont find remnants in Balkan. They will find forsure in East Europe and Steppes, they migrated from there, they are Sarmatians that mixed with other groups, that is debate. Every race has variation no race is ever pure or something, groups assimilated. They were nomadic and horse was crucial, warriors and especially bow arrow. Meat eaters not farmer types, also mixed with asiatic genes similar to modern Russians but most those genes diffused over centuries. Modern slav like me showing <1 Finland/Northwest Russia. Romanians and Bulgarians showing 1 or 2% asiatic genes and same with Croats and other I2A groups showing asiatic genes. Thats normal for Steppe people. When you drop the balkan stigma you see truth, these Nomadic people Thracians conquer lands of balkan they had to come from somewhere not originate there always that what u believe really why Belarussians have some I2A? Still no explains why 25% I2A-Din in Ukraine ?

Percentages don't really matter much to me. One can always raise the question if R1a was not as strong in Ukraine, how high would I2a1b be?
If we compare ACTUAL numbers to percentages we will see I2a1b reaches a much higher number in Northeast Europe than it does in the Balkans. Still, the TMRCA is young so this clade did expand rapidly, especially during Slavic migrations. Never underestimate founder effects.

You can't just bind Slavs to R1a, while Germanics were a mix of I1, I2a2, R1b and R1a themselves. Slavs who are more of a recent population were R1a, I2a1b-"Din" and some other minor haplogroups.

The same way Illyrians were J2b2, R1b and assimilated EV13.

J2b2 is also from the steppe, during Bronze Age but does not carry Asiatic genes.
What you are saying here is wrong. Most Asiatic genes in Southeastern Europe are actually from medieval Turko-Mongols.

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/East-Asian-admixture.gif

Trojet
18-06-17, 14:59
Only one of those is a paper, and it has little to do with the topic at hand. Why not give Krushniarevich (2015) and Varzari (2013) a shot since they relate directly to issue of contemporary populations in the Balkans?

I don't care for any of the Thraco-Illyrian hypotheses because they are much like your posts: mere conjecture. Unless you address the issue of the phylogeography of I2a we're not getting any closer to the truth. As I see it the facts leave two options: either I2a is not particularly Slavic or the Slavs expanded from Romania and Moldova.

I don't cite the papers you mention because oftentimes are outdated and their conclusions about diversity and such are based on low resolution STRs which can be very misleading.
In today's age of Next Generation Sequencing and ancient DNA, I cite precisely those sources, which trump any STR based "peer reviewed paper".

As I said before, I cannot agree with "Romania-Moldova expansion" of I-M423 or even I-CTS10228. I think you're basing this conclusion on some STR based "peer-reviewed paper", which as I said can be misleading about diversity and oftentimes outdated.

If you look at I-M423 phylogeny here (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-M423/), there is an ancient DNA sample there (I-M423*) from Loschbour, Luxembourg. So this is the clearest evidence that I-M423 was nowhere near Romania-Moldova when it expanded. Furthermore, the sister clade to I-L621, I-L161 has a phylogeographic distribution is NW Europe. And lastly, there have been numerous ancient DNA samples from around Moldova-Romania Bronze Age and earlier, and to date none have turned up I-M423 or related. So as I told you earlier, modern distribution can be very misleading.

MarkoZ
18-06-17, 15:13
I don't cite the papers you mention because oftentimes their conclusions about diversity and such are based on low resolution STRs which can be very misleading and oftentimes outdated. In today's age of Next Generation Sequencing and ancient DNA, I cite precisely those sources, which trump any STR based "peer reviewed paper".As I said before, I cannot agree with "Romania-Moldova expansion" of I-M423 or even I-CTS10228. I think you're basing this conclusion on some STR based "peer-reviewed paper", which as I said can be misleading about diversity and oftentimes outdated.If you look at I-M423 phylogeny here (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-M423/), there is an ancient DNA sample there (I-M423*) from Loschbour, Luxembourg. So this is the clearest evidence that I-M423 was nowhere near Romania-Moldova when it expanded. Furthermore, the sister clade to I-L621, I-L161 has a phylogeographic distribution is NW Europe.I thought it was clear that by I-M423 we mean I2a-din and haplogroups very close to it. The Paleolithic origin of the macrogroup is quite uninteresting in this regard. Must be Franco-Cantabria in any case.If you don't like the methods employed by researchers you might want to offer an actual explanation as to their weaknesses.

Even among amateurs picking singlets is not usually considered a credible methodology, so your evidence just isn't very useful. Are you willing to apply the same methodology to other major haplogroups? I bet not.

Trojet
18-06-17, 15:19
I thought it was clear that by I-M423 we mean I2a-din and haplogroups very close to it. The Paleolithic origin of the macrogroup is quite uninteresting in this regard. Must be Franco-Cantabria in any case.

If you don't like the methods employed by researchers you might want to offer an actual explanation as to their weaknesses. Even among amateurs picking singlets is not usually considered a credible, so your evidence just isn't very useful. Are you willing to apply the same methodology to other major haplogroups? I bet not.


OK, so it seems you're not even familiar with I-M423 phylogeny, and yet you're questioning everything I say. I should not even waste my time then.
Therefore, to understand the more specific I-CTS10228 aka I2a-Slavic, I have discussed its expansion numerous times here, so I suggest you read those posts first since you were not familiar with I-M423 phylogeny up until now.


If you don't like the methods employed by researchers you might want to offer an actual explanation as to their weaknesses.

I already addressed the weaknesses of those outdated "peer-reviewed" papers you mentioned in my previous post.
For example, you had a "peer reviewed" paper in Battaglia et al study from 2009, which suggested I-M423 is a "Mesolithic Balkan marker". In today's age we know that's not true.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19107149

Garrick
18-06-17, 15:22
Only one of those is a paper, and it has little to do with the topic at hand. Why not give Krushniarevich (2015) and Varzari (2013) a shot since they relate directly to issue of contemporary populations in the Balkans?

I don't care for any of the Thraco-Illyrian hypotheses because they are much like your posts: mere conjecture. Unless you address the issue of the phylogeography of I2a we're not getting any closer to the truth. As I see it the facts leave two options: either I2a is not particularly Slavic or the Slavs expanded from Romania and Moldova.

EDIT: Ok I see you're back to picking singles on yfull or some other commercial site. Let's just leave it at that, then.

Yes. Yfull is not scientific evidence, it proves nothing. Other I-CTS10228* found in Alsace. It is today's German-France border. Where will be found next. Who cares.

But even Poland is very specific place: Podkarpackie, it is not real Poland, it is part of Carpathian mountains (doesn't matter, there lived Thracian and German tribes 300 BC).

A. Papadimitriou
18-06-17, 15:22
If you look at I-M423 phylogeny here (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-M423/), there is an ancient DNA sample there (I-M423*) from Loschbour, Luxembourg. So this is the clearest evidence that I-M423 was nowhere near Romania-Moldova when it expanded. Furthermore, the sister clade to I-L621, I-L161 has a phylogeographic distribution is NW Europe. And lastly, there have been numerous ancient DNA samples from around Moldova-Romania Bronze Age and earlier, and to date none have turned up I-M423 or related. So as I told you earlier, modern distribution can be very misleading.
Can you list them?

Yetos
18-06-17, 15:23
@ all

this thread tense to be a tragic comedy,
many people laugh with they hear or read,
and many cry,

Reminds me Sisifos,
a comic or a tragic history?

LABERIA
18-06-17, 15:34
@ all

this thread tense to be a tragic comedy,
many laughs with they hear or read,
and many cry, cause their goal is nit achieved,

Reminds me Sisifos,
a comic or a tragic history?

What is this and what have to do with this thread?

Simply

only for those who know true History

http://www.kastra.eu/pics/xilander-georg7.jpg

St George tower
Chiladariou monastery (Chelandar)
who died there?

Who died there?

MarkoZ
18-06-17, 15:40
OK, so it seems you're not even familiar with I-M423 phylogeny, and yet you're questioning everything I say. I should not even waste my time then.
Therefore to understand the more specific I-CTS10228 aka I2a-Slavic, I have discussed its expansion numerous times here, so I suggest you read those posts first since you were not familiar with I-M423 phylogeny up until now.

Thanks, but I'm familiar enough. When talking about Y-STR diversity between Romania, Moldova and Ukraine what's the point mentioning the specific SNP?


I already addressed the weaknesses of those outdated "peer-reviewed" papers you mentioned in my previous post.

Don't be silly - you only said they were outdated. That's an opinion, not a valid criticism.

Milan.M
18-06-17, 15:47
Gothi were the Getae Thracians ,not Germans.To every ancient author the name and people are same,just variations.Like Sclavus and Sclavenoi for example.Whenever you understand this you can actually grasp certain things or understand the medieval history.Also the thing we found "Slavic" DNA where we should find Germanic Goths,likewise non existent in the Balkans "Germanic" DNA where plenty of Goths settled.

Milan.M
18-06-17, 15:58
Old name of Sclavenes is Getae.Theophylact Simocatta.Chronicle of Dioclea who call them in Latin Goths.Thomas the Archdeacon Croats or Goths in Latin.Our Glagolithic alphabet was called Gothic alphabet by Vatican and many more.This was known to every ancient author,until new people were invented and more modern romanticist history which contradict reality.

Balkanite
18-06-17, 16:13
Old name of Sclavenes is Getae.Theophylact Simocatta.Chronicle of Dioclea who call them in Latin Goths.Thomas the Archdeacon Croats or Goths in Latin.Our Glagolithic alphabet was called Gothic alphabet by Vatican and many more.This was known to every ancient author,until new people were invented and more modern romanticist history which contradict reality.

Hahahhahahhaha. Oh boy, that was seriously the most funny joke i have heard in my life!

Look what Cassius Dio writes in 200 AD:
"I call the people Dacians, the name used by the natives themselves as well as by the Romans, though I am not ignorant that some Greek writers refer to them as Getae, whether that is the right term or not..."

Milan.M
18-06-17, 16:17
[email protected] Romania,Moldova that's the oldest Getae territory so the diversity is there.That's the teritory from where the Slavs (Getae) were liberating their southern brethren from the other side of Danube and Roman yoke.

Milan.M
18-06-17, 16:18
Hahahhahahhaha. Oh boy, that was seriously the most funny joke i have heard in my life!

Look what Cassius Dio writes in 200 AD:
"I call the people Dacians, the name used by the natives themselves as well as by the Romans, though I am not ignorant that some Greek writers refer to them as Getae, whether that is the right term or not..."

Read those authors before you comment, I'll quote the contemporary of the Sclavenes Theophylact,shortly.

Balkanite
18-06-17, 16:19
Seriously mods? Now the Getae are slavs too? Soon all ancient peoples will be slavs if these 3-4 knuckleheads dont stop these distortions


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Garrick
18-06-17, 16:21
Hi Garrick,

I would love to find out that there are still Illyrians or Thracians left. They disappeared from chronicles in the early middle ages. Just because I would love something it doesn't mean that I can make it up.

It is hard to believe that Greek Byzantians did not recognize Thracians or Illyrians. They lived close by for quite some millennia.
Can you really imagine that none would have seen and reported a cross or any religious symbol, Illyrians (Thracian too) were almost christianized at the time. It would have been a game changer for strategy of the byzantine.

I am not saying that there is zero chance that I2a-din might be Thracian or Illyrian, but it is a pretty small chance (5-10%) IMO.
Again this does not mean that all is left is the slavic option (40% IMO), there is also the barbaric option (50-55%) - some germanic tribes that were never touched by romanization and that are not mentioned by roman or greeks. Poor romans and greeks, they could not distinguish well at the time between barbaric slaves and barbaric germans.
(This last option would also explain the pan-slavic propaganda)


I really don't want to offend you or any I2a-din by putting up this option (which might be completely wrong btw). At the end this people almost exterminated Thracian and Illyrians, they deserve that credit. I am trying to shout it out loudly that this almost extermination has left genetic traces that you cannot miss.

But you are talking about losers.

There is another opinion.

It could not be possible if someone sees Greater Illyricum that R1b BY611, PF7563 are nowhere, except something among Albanians (someone can notice several carriers in Bulgaria and Romania yet, and beyond Balkans).

If they were Illyrian markers, today whole Balkans would have significant percent these clades. But no.

It is much logical they came much later, probably from Romania and beyond (any Free Dacian tribe?). Carriers of BY611 and PF7563 are probably speakers of Albanian. If it is true Albanian is young language in the Balkans.

So tales are for nothing. Someone imagined, however, has no basis.

I am not Pan-Slavist. And yes I know that probability exists that I-CTS10228 is German marker. Even if we see older clades, they are mostly in the Western Europe, and of course they are not Slavic.

And Goths could bring I-CTS10228 to the Balkans. And it is possible one part brought Thracians and other part Goths. I told what irony (due to history) that I-CTS10228 is German marker but in real world many things are possible.

Balkanite
18-06-17, 16:31
Read those authors before you comment, I'll quote the contemporary of the Sclavenes Theophylact,shortly.

Hahaha really thermopylact? He was born like 1100 years after Getae was mentioned. For those 1000 years the eastern balkans was practically one big battleground. Are you really suggesting that the same tribes lived there after 1000 years of war? It was not some computer game you play, they were humans including wifes and children. People on the lowlands can only endure a few generations of war before they start to rush to the nearest mountain ranges. If you want to find your beloved lost Getae, look at the Romanian highlanders and at some modern bulgarians(slavicized of course). People migrate away from the problem, not towards it. So when the slavs and asians came and slaughtered Dacians and thracians, the locals didnt run towards the barbarian hordes of northeast europe, but away from it. Some towards the mountains, and some towards the safer big cities of the empire.

Milan.M
18-06-17, 16:32
Seriously mods? Now the Getae are slavs too? Soon all ancient peoples will be slavs if these 3-4 knuckleheads dont stop these distortions


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You quote Casius Dio I'll quote you contemporary of Slavs Theophylact Simocatta. Casius Dio lived in 3th century so no people under name Sclavene yet.Dont ignore this quotes about Getae and Slavs of Theophylact,Quote one;
"As for the Getae, that is to say the herds of Sclavenes, they were fiercly ravaging the regions of Thrace"


Quote two describing encounter between the Getae(Slavs) and Romans;
These, therefore, encountered six hundred Sclavenes who were escorting a great haul of Romans, for they had ravaged Zaldapa, Aquis, and Scopi, and were herding back these unfortunates as plunder; a large number of wagons held the possessions they had looted. When the barbarians observed the Romans approaching, and were then likewise observed, they turned to the slaughter of the captives. Then the adult male captives from youth upwards were killed. Since the barbarians could not avoid an encounter, they collected the wagons and placed them round as a barricade, depositing the women and youth in the middle of the defence.The Romans drew near to the Getae (for this is the older name for the barbarians) but did not dare to come to grips since they were afraid of the javelins the barbarians were sending against them..

Balkanite
18-06-17, 16:32
Theopylact*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Milan.M
18-06-17, 16:42
Yes only Albanians as Illyrians survived and no one else,after the great flood they populated entire earth,I made my comment and anyway is useless talking with you.

Balkanite
18-06-17, 16:52
Try countering my arguments MilanM, maybe it works?
Tell me who is more trustworthy? A writer who lived at the same time as Getae? Or an 1100's orthodox writer who tried to link the orthodox slavs to an ancient balkanic people which lived 1000 years before himself? Please elaborate, because i can not follow the logic :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nik
18-06-17, 18:06
The same question can be asked why you ignored the other posts?

Pigmentation has no relevance, blond people existed across the Balkans before the Slavs and Germanic movements. There's no difference in the South Slavs and Albanians when it comes to pigmentation really. No offense, it just seems you haven't paid attention to all this.
I'm blond, blue eyed and pale-skinned myself(and very tall at 198cm) & typical Gheg in autosomal plots/admixture with slight northwestern shift.
I dont see the relevance of your post as I agree with everything you said. So, did you understand my point?

Anyway, my point is that these I2a predominant areas and tribes tend to have darker/Mediterranid features than Albanians or other Montenegrins. So why would the I2a-Din Slavs specifically the ones who are darker in eye and hair pigmentation?


Vlachs are similar to the host population of their country so you can't use that as an argument and they do have quite a handful of different haplogroups.
They did infact mingle with Slavs due to common religion of Orthodoxy and so did the Tosks to a lesser extent.
Vlachs R1a frequency is 21.5% in FYROM alone.
Again, I don't know what you're arguing about as I agree with everything you're saying. My point is that those Montenegrin/Slav tribes I mentioned are also known to be Vlachs or simply called "indigenous/Illyrians" originally before becoming fully Slavicized in the 15-16th century.


Ghegs, especially from the northern tribes are infact the population one should always look at and we see a strong continuity between three main haplogroups since the Classic times; J2b2, R1b-L23 and EV13 with virtually non-existing I2a-Slavic. J2b2-L283 and R1b-L23 frequencies increases the more deeper you get into Gheg tribal territory.
Yes, I'm aware of that, although I'm not sure about E-V13 decreasing in the Gheg tribal territory. Perhaps we need more testing done.


I2a-Slavic and R1a along with some mtDNA are the markers that carried significant North-Eastern admixture into the Balkans.
I've seen many South Slavs, particularily Bosnians and Croats get more than 50% North Slavic on DNA.land and that tells you something.
Can you provide some links where we can see that particularly Herzegovinian Bosniak and Croats belonging to I2a-Din get more than 50% North Slavic?
I'm sure there are many Bosnians and Croats that have a bigger Slavic admixture as even the appearance is less Balkanic in general, so we gotta be sure we're separating those ones from the I2a-Din highlanders of Dalmatia, Herzegovina, Montenegro, South-Western Serbia, etc.


My DNA.land results are almost purely Balkan, seen some Ghegs get 100%
I believe its the modern genetists that decided who to call pure Balkan and who to call Slavic (in case they actually do, but I doubt it.

My point is that even the Illyrians themselves were different from each other, the Northern ones being more North-Eastern while the Southern ones being more "indigenous" or Mediterranean.

Same goes to Albanians. North Albanians have more North-Eastern admixture than South Albanians, yet we know that historically North has been affected less by the Slavs due to its terrain and culture, whereas the South was more prone to sudden changes as even the Slavic toponymy proves it.

Garrick
18-06-17, 18:15
Gothi were the Getae Thracians ,not Germans.To every ancient author the name and people are same,just variations.Like Sclavus and Sclavenoi for example.Whenever you understand this you can actually grasp certain things or understand the medieval history.Also the thing we found "Slavic" DNA where we should find Germanic Goths,likewise non existent in the Balkans "Germanic" DNA where plenty of Goths settled.


Seriously mods? Now the Getae are slavs too? Soon all ancient peoples will be slavs if these 3-4 knuckleheads dont stop these distortions


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No.

For our discussion about I-CTS10228 can be interesting Chernyakov culture, area Romania/Ukraine.

We can see this culture, emerged in 2nd century AD, orange color (green and red are previous Gothic cultures).

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Chernyakhov.PNG

Several population builded this culture: Germans (Goths), Thracians (Getae-Dacian) and Sarmatians. Russian scientists tried to prove that Slavs were part of this culture too but other scientists rejected it.

What is interesting to me at that time flourished multiculturalism! Only it is not clear which language they used.

We are close to conclude that Thracians and Goths both could be carriers I-CTS10228.

Miroslav
18-06-17, 19:02
...Germans (Goths) ... and Sarmatians ... and Goths both could be carriers I-CTS10228.

Do a better research on Goths and Sarmatians, and think once again for considering them as carriers of I-CTS10228. Along the Turkic theory, proposed by our Albanians friends in related threads, it is a nonsense not worth commenting for anyone who knows anything about the Gothic or Sarmatian origin, culture, even Y-DNA results. Many comments by other editors show a real lack of understanding of the topic they are discussing. You should read many scientific articles or books to not make mistaken assumptions.

You, Garrick, should focus on Thracian&Illyrian theory, with consideration that it was some kind of stratum widespread in Eastern Europe (like your map before; or basal diversity pointed out by MarkoZ) which at one point became more narrowed, and on which followed up Slavic adstratum (whose previously posted maps in this or related threads are very similar to the Thracian map), and since both were mostly of Indo-European origin, it could explain the so-called Eastern European autosomal tendency (more-or-less, South Slavs are autosomally homogenous between themselves, but autosomally are still very heterogeneous). With such complex and dual hypothesis, and in reality the ethnogenesis of population is built that way and usually is not one-sided (pure Illyrian, Slavic, Germanic etc.), could be explained and implemented the I-CTS10228's and its subclades formation age and TMRCA with historical migrations and complex social events of identity assimilation and so on. Maybe you and we find some clue or not, or simply will arouse other questions and issues which will not make it a possible hypothesis and should try to find another one. I think the Thracian&Slavic combination has some potential for a good start, was it even a mere discussion.

Fatherland
18-06-17, 19:39
Same goes to Albanians. North Albanians have more North-Eastern admixture than South Albanians, yet we know that historically North has been affected less by the Slavs due to its terrain and culture, whereas the South was more prone to sudden changes as even the Slavic toponymy proves it.
You are wrong, read what I wrote.

I already explained to you. Ghegs are NW-shifted from Tosks. Shifting is more relevant as it shows proportions.
This includes all Ghegs from Kosovo and elsewhere.

Again, pigmentation has zero relevance so your entire point is refuted.

Croats, Slovenes, Bosnians and many Montenegrins are the most northeast shifted out of all South Slavs.

I'll show you the k15 plotting map when I get back at home.

Typing from phone.

Sile
18-06-17, 20:37
Sile if you and I could investigate further we could nail precisely a Thracian or German tribe where I-CTS10228 emerged.

But it is a serious research effort.

You could be right surely that I-CTS10228 was among Sarmatians, but only in western parts, if it was more frequent it spread to more eastern.

I think the Bastanae could be one of the sources.............moving from south Ukraine to moesia/macedonia ~300BC ..............100000 with women and children is a major number in those days

Sile
18-06-17, 20:43
Moesians are considered by the majority of modern scholars as Illyrians.

The triballi thracian tribe are from Moesia and they make up the bulk of the serbian populace today in regards to ancients

Sile
18-06-17, 20:54
But you are talking about losers.



And Goths could bring I-CTS10228 to the Balkans. And it is possible one part brought Thracians and other part Goths. I told what irony (due to history) that I-CTS10228 is German marker but in real world many things are possible.

They could have as the goths via historians are stated to have absorbed the sarmatians and the bastanae into gothic society.

so , If as I have already stated the bastanae ( not all ) went from south ukraine to moesia/macedonia around ~300BC and then later the bastane that remained where absorbed into gothic society, then we could have found

south-ukraine later became slavic

then we could have found this I-CTS10228 origins

Sile
18-06-17, 20:58
Try countering my arguments MilanM, maybe it works?
Tell me who is more trustworthy? A writer who lived at the same time as Getae? Or an 1100's orthodox writer who tried to link the orthodox slavs to an ancient balkanic people which lived 1000 years before himself? Please elaborate, because i can not follow the logic :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Getae, an ancient people of Thracian origin, inhabiting the banks of the lower Danube region and nearby plains. First appearing in the 6th century bc, the Getae were subjected to Scythian (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Scythian) influence and were known as expert mounted archers and devotees of the deity Zalmoxis.

Sile
18-06-17, 20:59
Gothi were the Getae Thracians ,not Germans.To every ancient author the name and people are same,just variations.Like Sclavus and Sclavenoi for example.Whenever you understand this you can actually grasp certain things or understand the medieval history.Also the thing we found "Slavic" DNA where we should find Germanic Goths,likewise non existent in the Balkans "Germanic" DNA where plenty of Goths settled.

when the Romans had gained control over the lower Danube region, thousands of Getae were displaced, and, not long thereafter, references to the Getae disappeared from history. Later writers wrongly gave the name Getae to the Goths.The Getae and Dacians were closely related; some historians even suggest that these were names applied to a single people by different observers or at different times. Their culture (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture) is sometimes called Geto-Dacian (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Geto-Dacian).

Sile
18-06-17, 21:05
You are wrong, read what I wrote.

I already explained to you. Ghegs are NW-shifted from Tosks. Shifting is more relevant as it shows proportions.
This includes all Ghegs from Kosovo and elsewhere.

Again, pigmentation has zero relevance so your entire point is refuted.

Croats, Slovenes, Bosnians and many Montenegrins are the most northeast shifted out of all South Slavs.

I'll show you the k15 plotting map when I get back at home.

Typing from phone.

IIRC, the albanian government for the last 30 years has decided that Tosk is the official language of Albania and that gheg is a slavic form of albanian ( ie, influenced too heavily from ) ....and all schools will adopt Tosk ............clearly there is a historical reason for this decision

Fatherland
18-06-17, 21:17
IIRC, the albanian government for the last 30 years has decided that Tosk is the official language of Albania and that gheg is a slavic form of albanian ( ie, influenced too heavily from ) ....and all schools will adopt Tosk ............clearly there is a historical reason for this decision

Genetics imply otherwise.

There are many examples of populations speaking languages they are not related to genetically.

Ghegs are northwest of Tosks genetically.
Ghegs have the highest Atlanto_Mediterranean admixture of the entire Eastern Europe. MLDP

Ghegnian is the purest form of Albanian regardless of what communist dictator decided.

LABERIA
18-06-17, 21:29
IIRC, the albanian government for the last 30 years has decided that Tosk is the official language of Albania and that gheg is a slavic form of albanian ( ie, influenced too heavily from ) ....and all schools will adopt Tosk ............clearly there is a historical reason for this decision

This is absolutely not true. Please, avoid to speak about Albanians because just from this sentence it is evident that you don't know nothing. Always the Geg dialect has been considered more pure than Tosk. And i am a Tosk.

LABERIA
18-06-17, 21:34
Genetics imply otherwise.

There are many examples of populations speaking languages they are not related to genetically.

Ghegs are northwest of Tosks genetically.
Ghegs have the highest Atlanto_Mediterranean admixture of the entire Eastern Europe. MLDP

Ghegnian is the purest form of Albanian regardless of what communist dictator decided.

Geg dialect as i said is more pure than Tosk, but Tosks were always more civilised than Gegs and of course this is reflected even in the language. But the standard Albanian is based in the Elbasan dialect that is something in the middle. Of course is influenced much more from the Tosk dialect but things are not black and white.

Fatherland
18-06-17, 21:36
The Slav-with-identity-crisis lobby is very strong in Eupedia and elsewhere, but the Administration has displayed cold logic which I appreciate.

Milan.M
18-06-17, 21:40
when the Romans had gained control over the lower Danube region, thousands of Getae were displaced, and, not long thereafter, references to the Getae disappeared from history. Later writers wrongly gave the name Getae to the Goths.The Getae and Dacians were closely related; some historians even suggest that these were names applied to a single people by different observers or at different times. Their culture (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture) is sometimes called Geto-Dacian (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Geto-Dacian).

They never dissapeared from sources,all authors were writing about them even the Romanticist Germans.Wrongly atributed is just modern myth,the ancient authors and their contemroraries didnt knew they were same people and were Thracians only Romanticists much later get the clue,the mass historical revisionism.The codex of that bible is so called Gothic language,much later piece of paper,which is not original Getic/Gotic language,where is coins, inscriptions etc judging their architecture they left,early churches in Spain entirely Eastern in origin "Byzantine".Some of the wierdest Germans but whatever.

DuPidh
18-06-17, 21:59
Geg dialect as i said is more pure than Tosk, but Tosks were always more civilised than Gegs and of course this is reflected even in the language. But the standard Albanian is based in the Elbasan dialect that is something in the middle. Of course is influenced much more from the Tosk dialect but things are not black and white.
Geg dialect is a treasure. Much has been lost. I am not a linguist but they should have done something to save it. Both dialects should have been taught in school. There is not much difference among them anyway. Geg dialect shows some slavic influence in the last 100 years

Fatherland
18-06-17, 22:21
Facts:

Atlanto-Med admixture, peaks in Ghegs throughout all of Eastern Europe:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uJ3wHmXSLm0/UFtAN2nsPJI/AAAAAAAAD0g/4sIVqH0icsE/s1600/MDLPatlantomed.jpg





North-East Euro admixture:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-UAJRnMeDZnk/UFtHsDPRu6I/AAAAAAAAD2E/pSQOKLMg4lY/s1600/MDLPnortheasteuro.jpg

LABERIA
18-06-17, 22:22
Geg dialect is a treasure. Much has been lost. I am not a linguist but they should have done something to save it. Both dialects should have been taught in school. There is not much difference among them anyway. Geg dialect shows some slavic influence in the last 100 years
In Kosova maybe there are some influences, but among the Geg in Albania, no.

Garrick
18-06-17, 22:24
The Slav-with-identity-crisis lobby is very strong in Eupedia and elsewhere, but the Administration has displayed cold logic which I appreciate.

It is not offense but crisis of identity only Albanians show.

You debate about very different things including languages of Tosks and Ghegs what has nothing to do with topic.

Whether you do consciously or unconsciously but unnecessarily overwhelm the topic

Fatherland
18-06-17, 22:38
It is not offense but crisis of identity only Albanians show.

You debate about very different things including languages of Tosks and Ghegs what has nothing to do with topic.

Whether you do consciously or unconsciously but unnecessarily overwhelm the topic
You are wrong as always.

I replied to Sile since he opened the language subject.

You are not the one to decide what is to be posted or not, considering your own posting history.

Garrick
18-06-17, 23:04
You are wrong as always.

I replied to Sile since he opened the language subject.

You are not the one to decide what is to be posted or not, considering your own posting history.

Why are you frustrate. What Gheg's language has more Slavic words than Tosk's. It doesn't matter and it is not the topic.

LABERIA
18-06-17, 23:09
Why are you frustrate. What Gheg's language has more Slavic words than Tosk's. It doesn't matter and it is not the topic.

Come on let's try to avoid this kind of provocative discussions Garrick and let's try to discuss.
I have a question. I am curious, why the other ethnic groups of ex-Yugoslavia call you serbs, Vlasi, i.e. Vlachs?

Miroslav
18-06-17, 23:24
I have a question. I am curious, why the other ethnic groups of ex-Yugoslavia call you serbs, Vlasi, i.e. Vlachs?

No, really - just stop going off-topic. You do not discuss the topic of the discussion. I proposed you a specific hypothesis which included both Thracian and Slavic theories, but all of you went astray. You can not keep the discussion focused even for one single page. The use of the term Vlachs for Greek Orthodox people is a totally different topic, it has nothing to do with the origin of I2a-Din haplogroup, and trying to answer it is just opening a pandora's box. Actually, I am more than sure that your question was intentionally provocative considering the controversy and debate about the use of the term Vlachs and so on, yet you're the one who said: "let's try to avoid this kind of provocative discussions". C'mon, your intention is transparent... Can we stay on topic, please?

LABERIA
18-06-17, 23:36
No, really - just stop going off-topic. You do not discuss the topic of the discussion. I proposed you a specific hypothesis which included both Thracian and Slavic theories, but all of you went astray. You can not keep the discussion focused even for one single page. The use of the term Vlachs for Greek Orthodox people is a totally different topic, it has nothing to do with the origin of I2a-Din haplogroup, and trying to answer it is just opening a pandora's box. Actually, I am more than sure that your question was intentionally provocative considering the controversy and debate about the use of the term Vlachs and so on, yet you're the one who said: "let's try to avoid this kind of provocative discussions". C'mon, your intention is transparent... Can we stay on topic, please?

But there is the theory that consider Vlachs as Thracians, you know this? If we include in the discussion the Resava school, maybe we can conclude something.

Garrick
19-06-17, 01:45
Do a better research on Goths and Sarmatians, and think once again for considering them as carriers of I-CTS10228. Along the Turkic theory, proposed by our Albanians friends in related threads, it is a nonsense not worth commenting for anyone who knows anything about the Gothic or Sarmatian origin, culture, even Y-DNA results. Many comments by other editors show a real lack of understanding of the topic they are discussing. You should read many scientific articles or books to not make mistaken assumptions.

You, Garrick, should focus on Thracian&Illyrian theory, with consideration that it was some kind of stratum widespread in Eastern Europe (like your map before; or basal diversity pointed out by MarkoZ) which at one point became more narrowed, and on which followed up Slavic adstratum (whose previously posted maps in this or related threads are very similar to the Thracian map), and since both were mostly of Indo-European origin, it could explain the so-called Eastern European autosomal tendency (more-or-less, South Slavs are autosomally homogenous between themselves, but autosomally are still very heterogeneous). With such complex and dual hypothesis, and in reality the ethnogenesis of population is built that way and usually is not one-sided (pure Illyrian, Slavic, Germanic etc.), could be explained and implemented the I-CTS10228's and its subclades formation age and TMRCA with historical migrations and complex social events of identity assimilation and so on. Maybe you and we find some clue or not, or simply will arouse other questions and issues which will not make it a possible hypothesis and should try to find another one. I think the Thracian&Slavic combination has some potential for a good start, was it even a mere discussion.

Yes, it is very good path, but it requires a lot of efforts.

Problem is complex. Older clades were practically only in Western Europe and now we have I-CTS10228 which emerged from nowhere. If it is accurate calculated it is formed 5300 years before. TMRCA according Klyosov and Nordvedt is 2300 years. We have 3000 years of "dark", haplogroup barely survived, we can speak about bottleneck.

But you're right for determining TMRCA. According calculating by other methods and with more data TMRCA is over 3000ybp, what is not little difference (700 years).

Carrier of I-CTS10228 after bottleneck emerged probably somewhere in Eastern Europe today's Slovakia/South of Poland/Ukraine/Romania/Hungary etc. we can speculate.

If we see who lived in that territory there were German, Thracian and Sarmatian (more eastern) tribes. These tribes lived next to each other, and mixed, even build common culture. We can analyze these tribes, even cultures, but in these times we cannot speak about Slavs. Even Zarubintsy culture we cannot treat as Slavic, and later Chernyakov culture, etc.

Tecnically speaking I-CTS10228 really can be emerged after bottleneck in any German tribe, but after that he began spreading through Thracians or (mixed Tracians/Germans), toward the South, and through Sarmatians and other populations toward the Eastern and Northern areas where could live Proto Slavs and Balts.

For us it is most interesting Southern direction. According period since 400 years (or more if TMCRA is higher than 2300 ybp) I-CTS10228 bearers reached Balkans most probably in 1st century. It is very important detail, about 5 centuries before Slavic expansion to the Balkans. Theoreticaly younger clade I-PH908 could emerged somewhere in Illyricum and it is Illyrian marker.

In the South (Balkans) I-CTS10228 was Thracian and Illyrian some time. It was enough time for spreading this haplogroup on the Balkans before Slavs. Especially because these areas were quite depopulated due to constant wars between Romans and barbarians.

Bergin
19-06-17, 02:39
I forgot that eupedia is a well documented place.
Thracian Y-Dna. Briefly discussed. and links

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31540-Thracian-E-V13

(there is also a paper from the Bustamante lab regarding the archaeological and autosomal description of those samples).

Kingslav
19-06-17, 03:50
Thanks again for Slavic people acknowledging facts in this forum. Thracians originated Northeastern Balkans not Albania. Not worried about single sample of E1B1B1 was found as Thracian remains. Thracian remains could have E1B1B1 it makes sense Thracians was expanding and is documented women was expanding also. The truth is there still genetic pool of I2A in NORTHEAST Balkan that no Albanian explain only response "dont make much of modern diverse gene pool in Ukraine". That is your argument. Lol. Everything else off-topic rambling about nothing. We know Thracians as nomads who conquer large territory of Eurasian-Steppe and Balkans so if remains of I2A was found in luxembourg licstenstein it possible as they travel nomadically and conquer. J2 people is not indo-europeans, they farmers. I mean Albanians showing 10% R1A and 20% I2A. Slavic markers 30%. But they are NOT Slavs. How did some Albanians get there 190cm+ height? Not from J2. Not E1B1B1. Not R1B. Small % even Albanian have blonde hair. These physical characteristic need be account for, not wiki articles and gedmatch map propaganda. I myself over years have been mistaken by Albanian and non-Albanian if Im Albanian? I quickly correct them I am Slav. Why be Crypto-Slav? Why ashamed of minor mixing with goths or bastarnae 2300-5000 years ago? Them goldilocks come from somewhere. I am Pole and Ukrainian trust me, i am last who wants admit submission to german mixing. Critical thinking isnt for everyone though.

Kingslav
19-06-17, 04:05
Albanian 10% R1A and 20% I2A. 30% Slav markers. But they NOT Slav.

Nik
19-06-17, 08:25
You are wrong, read what I wrote.

I already explained to you. Ghegs are NW-shifted from Tosks. Shifting is more relevant as it shows proportions.
This includes all Ghegs from Kosovo and elsewhere.

Again, pigmentation has zero relevance so your entire point is refuted.

Croats, Slovenes, Bosnians and many Montenegrins are the most northeast shifted out of all South Slavs.

I'll show you the k15 plotting map when I get back at home.

Typing from phone.
Actually based on Eupedia's map on ANE admixture, Albania has more than Montenegro. As for the Eastern European admixture, Montenegro has the same levels as Kosovo.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/autosomal_maps_dodecad.shtml

I tried to find another admixture thread (I believe made by Tomenable) but I wasn't able. If someone knows what I'm talking about, please share.

Are you saying that Montenegrins are more North East shifted than Serbians?

Kingslav
19-06-17, 08:47
What you mean good assumption?

A. Papadimitriou
19-06-17, 08:53
@Fatherland

And what does the higher Atlanto-Med means? Anything to do with Normans? Because the name 'Albanian' refers to Normans in some sources.

Fatherland
19-06-17, 13:13
Actually based on Eupedia's map on ANE admixture, Albania has more than Montenegro. As for the Eastern European admixture, Montenegro has the same levels as Kosovo.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/autosomal_maps_dodecad.shtml

I tried to find another admixture thread (I believe made by Tomenable) but I wasn't able. If someone knows what I'm talking about, please share.

Are you saying that Montenegrins are more North East shifted than Serbians?
Alot of those Eupedia maps based on Dodecad, Eurogenes and so on need some updating.

The "East Euro" in the link you posted is based off 23andme results and they only go back 300 years, it only shows external admixture from Eastern Europe heatpoints in the last 300 years.


ANE doesn't directly imply North Eastern admixture, look where it peaks in the map. Not all Eupedia admixture maps are correct in terms of frequency. Montenegrins have alot of North Eastern admixture while in contrast, Albanians preserved Atlanto-Med admixture.


Check this post for a moment:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29041-I2a-Din-came-to-the-Balkans-and-Dinaric-Alps-with-the-Thracians-Dacians-Illyrians/page18?p=512134&viewfull=1#post512134




and this: Ghegs(marked in red) and Tosks(marked in purple) plotting based on Gheg and Tosk Eurogenes K15 results.
Montenegrins are often closer to Bosniaks and Croats than they are to Serbs admixturewise.
Southern Serbs are the closest to Albanians autosomally, especially those around Kosovo. Serbs from north, Bosnia etc are similar to Croats(and Bosnians) admixturewise.

http://i.imgur.com/jWnq9b9.png





Take a look at Eupedia maps.

Mine from Eurogenes K15:
http://i.imgur.com/leYtLh2.png

Seen many other Albanians get above 20% which is TWO steps above than what the map below shows:

It only shows 10-15% Atlantic in Albanians which is nonsense, while a strong number have way above that.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Atlantic-admixture.png

Fustan
19-06-17, 13:49
I near 20% as well. http://puu.sh/wolQa/03718b185e.png

Nik
19-06-17, 15:08
Ok, noted. Perhaps they are indeed old and need updating.

What about Tomenables maps? Anyone knows what I'm talking about? I saw them a month back and they were all very informative. If I'm not mistaken he collaborated with other Albanians (perhaps Trojet is among them) to get the results and apply them.

In those maps the difference between Albania and Montenegro was minimal as it's to be expected the more North you go.

Just in case, I'm not refuting any of your claims, I just can't come to a conclusion without hard evidence yet. Although I'm 100% sure that Eastern European mix doesn't mean Slavic admixture. If you believe that Bronze Age North-Western Balkanites (Dacians for instance) had minimal to 0 Eastern European admixture then we'd need tests to prove that.

That is the reason I tend to connect genetics with anthropology and history when we lack evidence. My point about the Northern Montenegrin clansmen is that if Slavs are more fair than indigenous Balkanites, then why would a Slav mixed with indigenous Balkanites end up darker? It's common sense right?

Then again, why its specifically the South Slavs the group with a lot of giants and not the rest? To me that points out a local extreme tallness.

To conclude with, I'm not saying that these are the reasons why I believe I2a-Din is not Slavic, but if I have to give it a number I'd say these make up maybe 20-30% of the reasons. I know more hard evidence is needed.

Angela
19-06-17, 16:37
There is a dedicated thread for the relationship between y dna and height, specifically, indeed, between yDna "I" and height. Use it.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33940-Why-are-men-of-the-Dinaric-Highlands-so-tall?highlight=height

Get back on topic.


This is like herding cats.

Yetos
19-06-17, 18:06
@Fatherland

And what does the higher Atlanto-Med means? Anything to do with Normans? Because the name 'Albanian' refers to Normans in some sources.

nahh

I believe it is mark left from Roman Army,
some legions from Atlantic populations stayed as legions there, making it a peak,

Fatherland
19-06-17, 19:13
nahh

I believe it is mark left from Roman Army,
some legions from Atlantic populations stayed as legions there, making it a peak,

Wrong.
It's most likely native to the area, Ghegs were not Romanized and I don't see any Roman y-dna there, so it's Ancient.
Ghegnian highlands was a refugium for these Ancient populations.

People are giving little credit to the Gheg Highlands which compose of rougher mountains and valleys than the rest of the Dinaric Mountainchain.
There's a place there called "Accursed Mountains" where no Slavs set foot, where many Albanian tribes dwelled.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokletije

So let's not make hasty assumptions.

Yetos
19-06-17, 20:10
Wrong.
It's most likely native to the area, Ghegs were not Romanized and I don't see any Roman y-dna there, so it's Ancient.
Ghegnian highlands was a refugium for these Ancient populations.

People are giving little credit to the Gheg Highlands which compose of rougher mountains and valleys than the rest of the Dinaric Mountainchain.
There's a place there called "Accursed Mountains" where no Slavs set foot, where many Albanian tribes dwelled.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokletije

So let's not make hasty assumptions.


I agree with your last word,

but if it was ancient, then it should follow the expand of other DNA Hgs,
but does it?
NO,
so surely has nothing to do with antique, and ancient world,
rather with medieval or modern times,

the diaspora (scattered peaks) is not same with other Hgs,
so something else is happening, and surely is not the explanation you give I believe,

maybe a Roman army,
maybe crusaders settle there,
maybe Normands and Anjou

who knows,
maybe you know better,
but surely is not ancient

Fatherland
19-06-17, 20:12
I agree with your last word,

but if it was ancient, then it should follow the expand of other DNA Hgs,
but does it?
NO,
so surely has nothing to do with antique, and ancient world,
rather with medieval or modern times,

the diaspora (scattered peaks) is not same with other Hgs,
so something else is happening, and surely is not the explanation you give I believe,

maybe a Roman army,
maybe crusaders settle there,
maybe Normands and Anjou

who knows,
maybe you know better,
but surely is not ancient
Wrong again.

It is Ancient preserved Atlanto-Med admixture, it peaks in Ghegs across Eastern Europe.

It is no transplant or anything like you are trying to make it just because many Greeks have higher Near-Eastern and West-Asian admixture than Albanians do, which lowers your Atlanto-Med.

You have a clear agenda to reduce Albanian significance of the Classic times, I put you in my ignore list.

Fustan
19-06-17, 21:11
So my comments were removed because I spoke about Getae,Thracians,just as the thread is saying but same moderator allowed Albanian ethnogenesis to be disussed.Not only but what we see is group of Albanians on I2a din thread,trying to "proof" is Huno Avqr,Slav,whatever only Albanian DNA is old and in Balkans since dinosaurs.


You seem to be projecting here. Let's get a few things sorted here.

My haplogroup, J2b2-L283 has been found in Bronze Age Dalmatia (1800 B.C), your I2a-Slav hasn't been found anywhere in the ancient Balkans.

These are facts. You have however, not proven otherwise, and that is simply because you can't.

Garrick
19-06-17, 21:12
I think the Bastanae could be one of the sources.............moving from south Ukraine to moesia/macedonia ~300BC ..............100000 with women and children is a major number in those days

Yes, Bastarnae can be appropriate candidate.

They were German tribe with Samartian influences, someone calls larger area in that time Germano-Samartia. Southern parts of tribes were with Thracian elements. Although there are opinions that Bastarnae could be Celtic.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/48966/48966-h/images/im_393.jpg

We can see they were from river Vistula and Subcarpathian (Podkarpackie) area in Polland through the territory present-day Ukraine and Romania until north to Danube Delta. They were mixed with Thracian Getae and they were allies. And they came to the Balkans in Thracian land several times. According to historical data and areas where I-CTS10228 emerged after bottleneck Bastarnae can be tribe with the carriers of this haplogroup.

Fatherland
19-06-17, 21:22
The Eupedia administration has been doing an excellent job, just because most people don't agree with your absurd agenda (seriously, no one outside of Eupedia takes anything you say seriously, not even the Serbian DNA Project), doesn't mean people are after you.
Agreed with this 100%.

LABERIA
19-06-17, 21:43
I may be freshman on here, but not genetics. Why you choose to never defend your point but instead throw shade and weak disses. Probably because you know you are wrong and cant defend your theory with solid facts. I have NEVER seen true Mediterranean that isnt SLAV who is TALL. You Illyrian Meditids barely tall as my knee. Or should I say "PAPA ITALIANO". I am taking out entire Illyrian army on here 1 by 1. You want to be warrior but first has to be in your bloodline. #THRACIAN #SARMATIAN. This one for NIK.

Excuse me but i honestly don't understand what are you talking. You are a slav and your ancestors arrived in Balkans around 1.500 years ago. This is common knowledge. You don't know this?

Kingslav
19-06-17, 21:46
Fustan, what does upbringing have to do with height? Height is genetically pre-determined.

Fustan
19-06-17, 21:55
Excuse me but i honestly don't understand what are you talking. You are a slav and your ancestors arrived in Balkans around 1.500 years ago. This is common knowledge. You don't know this?

They know this but deny it because they're not satisfied for being slavs, for some reason.

Yetos
19-06-17, 21:55
Wrong again.

It is Ancient preserved Atlanto-Med admixture, it peaks in Ghegs across Eastern Europe.

It is no transplant or anything like you are trying to make it just because many Greeks have higher Near-Eastern and West-Asian admixture than Albanians do, which lowers your Atlanto-Med.

You have a clear agenda to reduce Albanian significance of the Classic times, I put you in my ignore list.

no I have no agenda,
that is why I did not took much posts in this thread,
but the difference is obvious,

it clearly a population that moved from elsewhere to Albania,
and surely not ancient,
rather Roman or medieval Crusades or Normands,
the peak is very high to consider it ancient, as also is not from Anatoolia neither from Alps neither from Yamnaa,
it is from West Europe,

Admit it and do not hide behind finger,
Like it or not,
Atlantic is not a mark that created in Balkans,
but a mark brought to Aimos peninsula.

Fustan
19-06-17, 21:57
Atlantic is not a mark that created in Balkans,




And Near Eastern / West Asian, which Greeks score high in, isn't either. I think most Europeans would argue that Atlantic component has it's place in the Balkans (Europe) more than the Near Eastern / West Asian component.

Yetos
19-06-17, 21:59
And Near Eastern / West Asian, which Greeks score high in, isn't either. I think most Europeans would argue that Atlantic component has it's place in the Balkans (Europe) more than the Near Eastern / West Asian component.


again you attack me, and my country, saying nothing,
only insults without meaning,

You are Not to be taken serious.

Fustan
19-06-17, 22:03
again you attack me, and my country, saying nothing,
only insults without meaning,

You are Not to be taken serious.

What? I did not attack you or your country. Greeks score high in NE and WA components. These are facts.

You're the one here who are trying to attack me and my countrymen by implying that we are newly arrived to the balkans via western europe, while ignoring the fact that it is most likely an Indo-European component of some sorts.

Fatherland
19-06-17, 22:08
And Near Eastern / West Asian, which Greeks score high in, isn't either. I think most Europeans would argue that Atlantic component has it's place in the Balkans (Europe) more than the Near Eastern / West Asian component.
Exactly. This makes Yetos points invalid.

Kingslav
19-06-17, 22:10
Yetos, thank you for making these strong points about Atlanto-Mediterranean admixture.

Balkanite
19-06-17, 22:10
I may be freshman on here, but not genetics. Why you choose to never defend your point but instead throw shade and weak disses. Probably because you know you are wrong and cant defend your theory with solid facts. I have NEVER seen true Mediterranean that isnt SLAV who is TALL. You Illyrian Meditids barely tall as my knee. Or should I say "PAPA ITALIANO". I am taking out entire Illyrian army on here 1 by 1. You want to be warrior but first has to be in your bloodline. #THRACIAN #SARMATIAN. This one for NIK.

Hahaha you arent taking out any illyrians.
Every time i catch you and the 3-4 other slavagandists i slaughter you with words.
The only things you know how to do is spam non sense post and overcrowd threads.

That is not how you win a discussion.

It reminds me of when children hold their ears and yell out loud, because they know the parent is right but wont admit it.

My child, we albanian parents will warm your mouth with a loud verbal slap across the face for pulling off such tactics.

Soon ill make a thread were we can do updates every time you 5-o-slavs-gang come up with new origins theories of the South slavs.
At the end of the year we can watch how long the list of ancient peoples which the slavs descended from will be.
So far we have Illyrians, thracians, Getae, goths, vlachs, bastarnae and many more.

Fatherland
19-06-17, 22:11
Atlantic is not a mark that created in Balkans,
but a mark brought to Aimos peninsula.

Wrong.

West-Asian and Near-Eastern admixture that is higher in Greeks is not native, they are Middle Eastern admixtures.

Atlanto-Med admixture is Proto-Basque that exists in Albanians, preserved since many thousands of years. The oldest languages of Europe.

Ignored once and for all, Yetos.

Yetos
19-06-17, 22:19
@ Fatherland and Fustan

Europe has many waves

Neolithic farmers came from Near East and minor Asia much Before IE entrance,

SO YES GREEKS ARE PREVIOUS THAN THE ATLANTIC ONES IN BALKANS,

IE came also from Anatolia and Yamnaa

BUT YAMNAA HAS VERY LITTLE ATLANTIC MARK
so should early IE,

EUROPE WAS CONQUERED FROM SOUTH (neolithic) AND EAST (IEans),
NOT FROM THE WEST,

the ones who understand the above,
surely understand that Atlantic mark in Balkans is rather new,
with most possible Roman Army legion bringing West Europeans,
or Crusaders, or Normands,
I do not know if Separadim Jews from Spain and Navarra have it,
so I keep my precautions.

and to avoid misunderstandings ATLANTIC mark IS NOT MADE IN AIMOS

Atlantic Mark is created West of Alps,
Gasgones should have it, but not Balkanic people,


LIKE IT OR NOT
THAT IS A FACT,

have a good night gentlemen,

I have to go and celebrate solar Solstice

Kingslav
19-06-17, 22:23
Balkanite finally make appearance. Words dont hurt me nephew. It take much more. Im very proud SLAV. Check my dna results below.

Fatherland
19-06-17, 22:24
@ Fatherland and Fustan

ATLANTIC mark IS NOT MADE IN AIMOS


Wrong, the component is Atlanto-Med, both Mediterranean and Atlantic. That means both WHG and Neolithic.

It is proto-Bell Beaker component. proto-Bell Beaker remnants were found in the Balkans through the Cetina culture.

As you can see, it is called Atlanto-Med as it peaks in both Basque and Sardinia. In the Balkans it is the highest component:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uJ3wHmXSLm0/UFtAN2nsPJI/AAAAAAAAD0g/4sIVqH0icsE/s1600/MDLPatlantomed.jpg


Goodbye and welcome to ignore list.

Kingslav
19-06-17, 22:25
Keep quoting me though. Let the people see the truth.

Fustan
19-06-17, 22:26
I am not reading your posts Yetos. You are better off in my ignore list. You have proven that your posts are all nonsensical.

Bye.

LABERIA
19-06-17, 22:26
SO YES GREEKS ARE PREVIOUS THAN THE ATLANTIC ONES IN BALKANS,


Maybe the ancient greeks, but they are no more, long time ago.

Fatherland
19-06-17, 22:29
Maybe the ancient greeks, but they are no more, long time ago.
The Ancient Greeks were more Atlantic, or Atlanto-Med admixed. Like the map I showed above of Atlanto-Med admixture which peaks in Albanians across Eastern Europe.

Bergin
19-06-17, 22:29
Guys, this is becoming a perpetual machine. You will get nothing out of it.
Clearly there are people that think one way, and those that think in another.

The useful information has been said, discussed and even repeated few times.
People keep their opinions, fair enough.

Yetos
19-06-17, 22:35
Wrong, the component is Atlanto-Med, both Mediterranean and Atlantic. That means both WHG and Neolithic.

It is proto-Bell Beaker component. Bell Beakers remnants were found in the Balkans through the Cetina culture.

As you can see, it is called Atlanto-Med as it peaks in both Basque and Sardinia.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uJ3wHmXSLm0/UFtAN2nsPJI/AAAAAAAAD0g/4sIVqH0icsE/s1600/MDLPatlantomed.jpg


Goodbye and welcome to ignore list.


oh boy

You are making my day

what next?

Albania is a bell Beaker?
Albanians come from Bell beaker?

bell beaker map

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcROWEpuJc74JwAu9dAOkUfuXot8lsLa-5DZ6vEU2z1pRp7wta0c

or another bell beaker map,

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/Bellbeaker_map_europe.jpg



I do not see any Bell Beaker in Balkans,

(hahaha, and you put me in ignore list)

I think it is better to stay with you guys, making my day.

another Bell beaker map

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Beaker_culture.png/250px-Beaker_culture.png


oh I see a little bit of Balkans on the map.

Balkanite
19-06-17, 22:38
Balkanite finally make appearance. Words dont hurt me nephew. It take much more.

Word dont hurt Kingslav, Kingslav hurt word. *gorilla sound*

Words dont hurt you, but it seems like you own origins are keeping you up at night.

Just laying there in your bed, wishing you could someday be an Illyrian or a Thracian. All while thinking these thoughts in the slavic language.

Kingslav
19-06-17, 22:39
Who made Bergin think he in charge, you want to run now when you clearly losing debate? This is good discussion. Please continue...

Yetos
19-06-17, 22:42
The Ancient Greeks were more Atlantic, or Atlanto-Med admixed. Like the map I showed above of Atlanto-Med admixture which peaks in Albanians across Eastern Europe.


ok I keep calm,

I might agree with you,
ancient Greeks came from Iberia bell beaker correct?
not from Anatolia as Neolithic farmers,
Neither Catacomb culture, neither Yamnaa,

AND YOU PUT ME IN IGNORE LIST?

APOLLO , PLZ GIVE ME PEACE AND ARMONY IN MY MIND.

Yetos
19-06-17, 22:45
Guys, this is becoming a perpetual machine. You will get nothing out of it.
Clearly there are people that think one way, and those that think in another.

The useful information has been said, discussed and even repeated few times.
People keep their opinions, fair enough.


@ Bergin,

I liked you before,
I will give another +1,
you can think and see clearly than many others in the forum.

Fatherland
19-06-17, 22:47
oh boy

Look for Cetina, that is why I specifically said Proto-Bell Beaker. Dorics carried this Atlantic-Med admixture among others into Greece.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/24/9d/7d/249d7d396004e2bb99bb2adb136e0579.jpg

http://thewaythetruthandthelife.net/index/2_background/2-5_societal/0-000-043-000-bc-to_2-011-ad_2-5-1_peopling-europe/0-000-043-000-bc-to_2-011-ad_2-5-1-11/BellBeaker.gif

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/88/7c/61/887c61c651a36c3a0824af8e8ca4bd65.jpg

Kingslav
19-06-17, 22:52
Lol balkanite you off topic again. Bring facts. You all my distant nephews. Check my dna results. You quote me, to the end, not selective parts. Noted. Ja jestem TRACKICH #Kingslav. I cant believe mentality of these "Crypto-Slavs". You have all these sources on internet do some research its 2017.

Angela
19-06-17, 22:53
I told you people that a prolonged discussion of height in relation to the Balkans didn't belong here since the topic had its own thread and to post any such discussions there. I even provided you with the darn link.

Since you chose to ignore me I deleted all such posts. I also issued infractions for the most egregious offenders, those who have been warned about their behavior very often in the past.

People also got infractions for insults, and those posts were also removed.

Prolonged discussions of the difference between Gheg and Tosk belong in a thread in the linguistics section. Take it there. All such posts have been deleted. I should have issued infractions, but since some of you seem to have trouble knowing what is off-topic, I refrained. However, now I am making it crystal clear. It is off-topic.

Some people, as a result of an accumulation of infraction points, have been banned. Others are a point or so away from it. You have only yourselves to blame.

Take your Balkan squabbles to the Balkan Disagreements Thread. It was created for you for that express purpose. USE IT.

Keep going, and the infractions will flow. What don't you understand here?

Oh, and I'm at a loss as to how discussions of calculator proportions of clusters based on modern populations illuminates whether or not I2a Din was brought to the Balkans with the Thracians, Dacians, and Illyrians.

Garrick
19-06-17, 22:55
Guys, this is becoming a perpetual machine. You will get nothing out of it.
Clearly there are people that think one way, and those that think in another.

The useful information has been said, discussed and even repeated few times.
People keep their opinions, fair enough.

When I gave 4 theories after correspondence with Russian scientists, expert for genetic genealogy, people begun overwhelmed the thread with unnecessary and pointless things. They do not even respect for Maciamo who opened this greater thread.

Yetos
19-06-17, 22:58
hahaha

Now Cetina culture is Bell Beaker?

the Greek swords found at Coatia now is Bell Beaker?


and is surely after Vucocar and Vatin, possible creation of pre-Myceneans,


I wonder what next?

come on make my day,
give me strong bellbeaker Atlantic component in Balkans

Fatherland
19-06-17, 23:05
hahaha

Now Cetina culture is Bell Beaker?

the Greek swords found at Coatia now is Bell Beaker?


and is surely after Vucocar and Vatin, possible creation of pre-Myceneans,


I wonder what next?

come on make my day,
give me strong bellbeaker Atlantic component in Balkans


Atlanto-Med component was present in the Balkans before the latter admixtures arrived.
It is WHG + Early European Farmers combo.

Basque and Sardinians have this to a great extent, it is Europe without Indo-Europeans and West-Asians + Near-Easterners admixture.

Yetos
19-06-17, 23:07
Atlanto-Med component was present in the Balkans before the latter admixtures arrived.
It is WHG + Early European Farmers combo.


All I want is to give scientific proves that Cetina is a Bell Beaker,
and from a blogger or a science fiction novel.

and how Atlantic is autochthonos in Balkans?
from where they came and when?

Fatherland
19-06-17, 23:08
and how Atlantic is autochthonos in Balkans?
from where they came and when?
From the WHGs who lived there before Farmers.

Albania was a refugium, very mountaineous and rough terrain in the north especially.
I said proto-Bell Beakers/proto-Cetina and not Bell Beakers per se, so you are wrong.

http://www.academia.edu/7174464/From_Copper_to_Bronze._Cultural_and_Social_Transfo rmations_at_the_Turnof_the_3rd_2nd_Millennia_B.C._ in_Central_Europe._Gewidmet_PhDr._V%C3%A1clav_Mouc ha_CSc._anl%C3%A4sslich_seines_80._Geburtstages._H erausgegeben_von_Martin_Bartelheim_Jaroslav_Pe%C5% A1ka_Jan_Turek

Yetos
19-06-17, 23:13
From the WHGs who lived there before Farmers.

Albania was a refugium, very mountaineous and rough terrain in the north especially.


do you know what I find odd,

you claim L283 as IE
you claim V-13 which is old for some, not old for others,
you claim M-23 which is IE

DO you kjnow the HG's which are connected with Bell Beaker?
or with Atlantic mark?
is someone of the above?
are all the above?
or non of the above?

Fatherland
19-06-17, 23:14
do you know what I find odd,

you claim L283 as IE
you claim V-13 which is old for some, not old for others,
you claim M-23 which is IE

DO you kjnow the HG's which are connected with Bell Beaker?
or with Atlantic mark?
is someone of the above?

Are you forgetting mtDNA lineages? Most Ancient male lineages were killed off by Bronze Age invaders.

Garrick
19-06-17, 23:15
Illyrians definitely could not bring I-CTS10228 to the Balkans.

This haplogroup emerged after bottleneck somewhere where lived German and Thracian tribes about 300 BC or earlier (because there are different TMRCA calculations) and they had contacts with Sarmatians.

So I-CTS10228 is most probably Thracian/German marker (while someone determines precisely).

Since 300 BC only Thracians and Germans could bring this haplogroup to the south, Balkans (Sarmatians could bring to the east and north).

But I-PH908 could emerge in the Illyricum in 150 AD and in that case it is Illyrian marker, if emerged among Thracians in the Balkans it is Thracian marker.

Yetos
19-06-17, 23:15
Are you forgetting mtDNA lineages?

ok you wanna play this game?

lets play it,

which mtDNA hg is bell beaker and which is neolithic and which is not Atlantic?

can you tell me the mtDNA of Bell beaker or Atlantic mark carriers?

Fatherland
19-06-17, 23:16
ok you wanna play this game?

lets play it,

which mt DNA hg is bell beaker and which is neolithic and which is not Atlantic?
It is logical many female lineages survived. Male lineages are more expendable.

I'm not gonna count the numerous mtDNA lineages for you.

This is what I found when googling Bell Beaker mtDNA. It seems like I carry this mtDNA, 88% H's in Bell Beaker samples.

https://forwhattheywereweare.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/central-european-bell-beaker-mtdna-88-h/

Kingslav
19-06-17, 23:20
I have already stated Illyrians come from southwest balkans. Specifically Albania. I am quoted for saying this. THRACIANS come from northeast balkans where Thrace was located, and some of the other Slavic members have given solid references to back up this theory.

Angela
19-06-17, 23:21
People, the Iain Mathiesen paper on southeastern Europe indicates that the local WHG in the Balkans, who were extremely few in number to begin with, were absorbed, but they made very little difference in the genome of the farmers. That's at least the story so far.

Unless future samples up end that conclusion, relatively high levels of WHG in the Balkans would come from later migrations.

No one knows what the Doric people were like autosomally. We'll have to wait and see if the upcoming ancient Greek dna paper has any samples. That would clear up quite a few matters.

From what we can see from prior papers but also from the Mathiesen et al paper on the genetics of ancient Southeastern Europe, even up to the Iron Age "steppe" ancestry wasn't very widespread in the Balkans. The highest percentages were about 30%, yes, and very sporadic in the different cultures? The Iron Age samples were even less steppe, I believe, than the Bronze Age ones. Some of those samples were Thracian, to the best of my recollection.

Imo, you'd be much better off studying the composition of those samples than looking at modern clusters based on modern populations.

See:
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/30/135616

Yetos
19-06-17, 23:22
It is logical many female lineages survived. Male lineages are more expendable.

I'm not gonna count the numerous mtDNA lineages for you.

That is because you can not,
Simply you find an eascape from discussion by using mtDNA,

well major mt DNA is haplo H

the maps

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Spatial_frequency_distribution_of_different_sub-lineages_of_mtDNA_haplogroup_H.png/800px-Spatial_frequency_distribution_of_different_sub-lineages_of_mtDNA_haplogroup_H.png

can you find any suitable for your theory that Atlantic is ancient basical mark on Balkans?

maybe you like the daughter of Eve named Jasmine?
the second biggest in Albania

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTuQbB6FB-Ty9_n5ePW1wS4SXrmcpDdCJEvKUpCzks0_sWiL7iN