PDA

View Full Version : Serb with I1



despot
27-07-14, 07:21
Hello,

I am new to the forum and got my results back last week. i am I1 and I know this is rare in Serbia proper. I come from a small town in central serbia where supposedly Saxon miners settled. Could it be from them or another source?

Thank you

sparkey
27-07-14, 07:37
Serbian I1 does tend to be Germanic in origin, although there were indeed multiple Germanic peoples who passed through, including Saxons and Ostrogoths. Do you have anything more specific than "I1," like STRs or additional SNP testing? That might help narrow the source down more, or at least give a more informed guess. West Germanic peoples tend to have more I1-Z58 and East Germanic peoples are usually thought to have had more I1-Z63.

despot
27-07-14, 20:02
Serbian I1 does tend to be Germanic in origin, although there were indeed multiple Germanic peoples who passed through, including Saxons and Ostrogoths. Do you have anything more specific than "I1," like STRs or additional SNP testing? That might help narrow the source down more, or at least give a more informed guess. West Germanic peoples tend to have more I1-Z58 and East Germanic peoples are usually thought to have had more I1-Z63.
Thanks for the reply, unfortunately I don't. Just a straight I1, notI1* or I1 a etc

FrankN
28-07-14, 02:38
You might want to check out this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heruli

Marcellinus comes recorded that the Romans (meaning the East Romans or in modern naming the Byzantines) allowed them to resettle depopulated "lands and cities" near Singidunum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singidunum) (modern Belgrade (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgrade)); this was done "by order of Anastasius Caesar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anastasius_I_(emperor))" sometime between June 29 and August 31, 512.
I don't know where exactly you are from, but that, rather short-lived but nevertheless sizeable settlement is another possible source of I1 inflow into central Serbia.

despot
28-07-14, 03:21
You might want to check out this:


I don't know where exactly you are from, but that, rather short-lived but nevertheless sizeable settlement is another possible source of I1 inflow into central Serbia.

Yes I am from "Moesia Superior" how sizable do you think it was?

despot
28-07-14, 03:23
By the way i am from a region where many men were Hajduks or guerilla fighters against the Ottomans

FrankN
29-07-14, 07:39
Yes I am from "Moesia Superior" how sizable do you think it was?
Difficult to say. The Herulian kingdom stretched somewhere between Ostrava in the north, Vienna in the west, the Danube to the south and the Tisza to the east. That's quite an area. Not all Herulians resettled from there, and not all (probably not even the majority) of those who resettled were genetically Herulian, i.e. of the old Scandinavia / East Germanic stock - they surely picked up a lot of other people on their way. However, I guess the old Herulian elite was more likely to resettle, while the traditional inhabitants of north Danubian lands didn't mind that much whether their rulers were Goths, Herulians, Lombards, Gepids or whichever other Germanic tribe happened to establish a kingdom there. In any case, that was old Marcomannic lands, some "locals" that joined the Herulians, e.g. for family reasons, may also have been Germanic.

Sigidinum seems to have been quite a large city (you actually should be able better than I to find out how large, I suppose some Yugoslavian / Serbian archaeologists have researched on it). Moreover, the East Roman document speaks about cities - i.e. more than just one or two. In the 510 peace treaty with the Ostrogoths, East Rome had gained the easternmost part of Pannonia, the Bassiana civitas (near to today's Putinci, see map below), while Sirmium (Sremska Mitrovica) remained with the Ostrogoths. It is commonly assumed that the Heruli colony included Bassiana, so it formed a buffer against the Ostrogoths to the west, and the Gepids to the north. It surely also included Tauruno (Zemun). As such, the western extent of their settlement would have gone to a line that runs from somewhere west of Cusum (Novi Sad - Petrovaradin) southward to the Sava.
http://bassiana.com/sremkarta.jpg

The eastern extent of the settlement is more difficult to estimate. The next larger Roman city on the Danube was Viminacium (Stari Kostolac). Being the capital of Moesia Superior, a transfer to the Herulians would surely have been explicitly listed, which it wasn't. As such, their realm must have ended somewhere west of Viminacium. The Tabula Peutingerania (picture below) displays two towns between Singidinum and Viminacium: Tricornio (Ritopek) and Monte Aureo (Seone near Smederevo). The Great Morava is just indicated as river 13 miles east of Monte Aureo (Margum fluvium), without a town being located there. Geographically, it would have made sense to select the Great Morava / Jezava as eastern border of the Herulian territory. If the new federates proved a bit less reliable then expected, East Rome would still have a well-defendable border of apparently uninhabited swampland at the mouth of the Morava, and a strong garrison placed in Viminacium. However, East Rome might also have chosen to maintain control over the Great Morava, probably a relevant transport route, and end Herulian lands somewhere between Tricornio and Monte Aureo, e.g. at the Danube bend near Grocka.
http://www.tabula-peutingeriana.de/tp/tp6.1_1.jpghttp://www.tabula-peutingeriana.de/tp/tp6.2_1.jpg

There weren't any major Roman settlements in the hills south of Belgrade. Furthermore, the East Roman historian Priskus reports that Attila had demanded Rome to depopulate all lands south of the Danube between Sirmium and Novae (near Svistov in Bulgaria) over a width of five day marches (~100 km) as a precondition to peace. Whether that just referred to military settlements, or to all the population, is unclear. However, with the soldiers' protection and purchasing power gone, many civilians should have left as well. As such, one can assume that at least the northern part of this 100 km wide depopulated stretch was given to the Herulians. I think the minimum southward extent was to the Ralja river, and then some line from the Ralja's source to the Sava around Baric. The theoretical maximum would be to the Western Morava, from there to the Drina, and then up north along the border with the Ostrogoths, corresponding to the western part of Diokletian's Moesia Prima. [I suppose the East Roman acquisition of Bassanae was part of a general border adjustment, so the new border may have run more or less straight north-southward from Sabac to Roganica.] A southern & western border along the rivers Belica, Jasenica, Ljig and Kolubara would correspond well to the 100 km wide depopulated zone south of the Danube. It also reflects the assumed extent of the Tricornienses subdivision within Moesia Superior that was created by Emperor Trajan with initially Tricornio, later Singidunum as administrative capital.
How relevant such borders were in practice is another question - you will need to check with local archaeologists whether there is any indication of new settlement during 510-537 AD, or the area remained as sparsely settled as it was before. It could also make sense to check out Mt. Rudnik - if mining was still on-going there in the early 6th century, East Rome might have preferred direct control.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d3/Gepid_kingdom_6th_century.png/461px-Gepid_kingdom_6th_century.png
By 537 BC, the Gepids took over many areas along the Danube, and relocated their capital to Sirmium. This may have been part of a deal between with East Rome, which at that time was fighting the Ostrogoths in Dalmatia and Italy and needed a stable northern border. Since many of those Herulians that didn't relocate to Moesia Superior had searched refuge with the Gepids, I could imagine that transfer to Gepid rule (possibly more nominal than de facto) met little resistance. As such, the Wikipedia map above (as reliable as such maps are!) may also help to assess the southward extent of the previous Herulian colony. Gepid rule lasted until 567. Then, the lands south of the Danube briefly returned to East Rome, possibly as part of a deal with the Avars who had received East Roman financial support for their war against the Gepids. In 582, the alliance with the Avars broke. Sirmium and Singidunum changed hands several times before ultimately falling under Avar rule around 625 AD. East Roman historians attest the presence of a sizeable number of Gepids among the Avars by 630 AD, where exactly is unclear though.

FrankN
30-07-14, 09:21
A few links that might be interesting:
Mining and territorial organisation of Moesia Superior: http://books.google.de/books?id=NtgB6KeOSA8C&pg=PA343&lpg=PA343&dq=Army+mining+Moesia+superior&source=bl&ots=IZgpoEvhEa&sig=0CVd0G6GRV4f10sCK482Ai6Nepo&hl=de&sa=X&ei=WunWU_KzCOPnywOApIGICQ&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Army%20mining%20Moesia%20superior&f=false
Anitque mining on Mt. Rudnik: http://www.academia.edu/2100294/Eneolithic_mine_Prljusa_-_Mali_Sturac_archaeological_and_geophysical_invest igations

despot
30-07-14, 16:20
A few links that might be interesting:
Mining and territorial organisation of Moesia Superior:

thanks guys, these are my final results from 23andm me anyways:


















99.8%

European



Southern European

65.8% Balkan



0.5% Italian



8.1% Broadly Southern European






16.3% Eastern European





Northern European

0.1% French & German



3.9% Broadly Northern European





5.1% Broadly European






0.2% East Asian & Native American

LeBrok
30-07-14, 17:09
thanks guys, these are my final results from 23andm me anyways:


















99.8%

European



Southern European

65.8% Balkan



0.5% Italian



8.1% Broadly Southern European






16.3% Eastern European





Northern European

0.1% French & German



3.9% Broadly Northern European





5.1% Broadly European






0.2% East Asian & Native American
It always surprises me how little genetic connection is between Yugoslavia/Iliria area in balkans to Italians. It is fairly easy to walk around or cross Adriatic in a boat. And yet there is some sort of invisible barrier.

kamani
30-07-14, 18:50
It always surprises me how little genetic connection is between Yugoslavia/Iliria area in balkans to Italians. It is fairly easy to walk around or cross Adriatic in a boat. And yet there is some sort of invisible barrier.

I have a feeling the admixture "Balkan" is very close to the admixture "Italian" on 23AndMe. His result is typical ex-Yugoslavian; if you take out his 16% admixture "Eastern European" and add it to "Balkan", his numbers would be close to Albanian or Greek.

despot
30-07-14, 21:23
I have a feeling the admixture "Balkan" is very close to the admixture "Italian" on 23AndMe. His result is typical ex-Yugoslavian; if you take out his 16% admixture "Eastern European" and add it to "Balkan", his numbers would be close to Albanian or Greek.

They should separate Balkanic and add Illyrian, Greco-roman, south slavic or something to that effect instead of grouping everyone together, even Slovenes are Balkanic on 23andme.

despot
30-07-14, 21:29
Serbian I1 does tend to be Germanic in origin, although there were indeed multiple Germanic peoples who passed through, including Saxons and Ostrogoths. Do you have anything more specific than "I1," like STRs or additional SNP testing? That might help narrow the source down more, or at least give a more informed guess. West Germanic peoples tend to have more I1-Z58 and East Germanic peoples are usually thought to have had more I1-Z63.

Does this help? I'm still trying to understand all of this


I1 defining mutations


variant
call

der




(P30)



A


(P40)



T


(M307)



A


(M450)



A


(M253)


T



This is my "conservative" results from 23 and me












96.6% European





12.2% Balkan
6.4% Broadly Southern European



0.2% Eastern European



77.7% Broadly European





3.4% Unassigned

sparkey
31-07-14, 00:18
Does this help? I'm still trying to understand all of this

I'm not a 23andMe expert, but it seems that they're just giving you several different SNPs that all mean I1. They don't give STRs like FTDNA or downstream subclade SNPs like Geno 2.0. That means that you're likely stuck with "probably Germanic of some kind" as the story of your patriline, unless you also test somewhere else.

despot
31-07-14, 00:24
I'm not a 23andMe expert, but it seems that they're just giving you several different SNPs that all mean I1. They don't give STRs like FTDNA or downstream subclade SNPs like Geno 2.0. That means that you're likely stuck with "probably Germanic of some kind" as the story of your patriline, unless you also test somewhere else.

Thanks, I know others that got I1* on 23andme were of a different subclade than just I1 and had to test it again like at FTDNA

despot
07-08-14, 00:51
I checked my SNPs with Dr. Ken Nordtvedt via email. I am L22- P109- M227- but DF29+ so that leaves Z58 and Z63 but impossible to check on 23andme. What a ripoff. Either can be I1-ASgen considering there are vast amounts of Z63+ in England as well according to him.

Skerdilaidas
16-08-14, 10:22
They should separate Balkanic and add Illyrian, Greco-roman, south slavic or something to that effect instead of grouping everyone together, even Slovenes are Balkanic on 23andme.
They defenitely should, and they might in the future once they have enough samples from all Balkanic groups. Anyways, this is what the "Balkan" is composed of at 23andme:
Balkan
Located in the southeastern corner of Europe, the mountainous Balkans are rich in both cultural and linguistic diversity.


Population
Source
Sample Size


Greece
23andMe
147


Romania
23andMe
129


Bulgaria
23andMe
75


Croatia
23andMe
51


Bosnia and Herzegovina
23andMe
25


Serbia
23andMe
17


Macedonia
23andMe
12


Albania
23andMe
8


Malta
23andMe
6


Montenegro
23andMe
6

despot
29-08-14, 04:37
Apparently I'm I1 z63+, I think Alaric and the Thervingian goths sowed their seeds big time in Serbia/Moesia after they settled south of the Danube en masse.

sparkey
29-08-14, 07:17
Of course we can't be certain, but I would agree that the Goths are a good best guess for a Serb with I1-Z63.

Golja izwis!

despot
29-08-14, 15:23
Of course we can't be certain, but I would agree that the Goths are a good best guess for a Serb with I1-Z63.

Golja izwis!
No of course not, I was kidding but it is interesting that the Thervingians settled south of Danube in large numbers thanks to the huns. I doubt they all got up and left to become Visigoths with Alaric and ramsack Rome with their women and children. I might be wrong but I think there is more I1 in Serbia than Poland, doubt I1 in Serbia is all from Slavic migrations, I have a lot of Polish relatives on 23andme and they are all R1a1a.

Aberdeen
29-08-14, 16:14
No of course not, I was kidding but it is interesting that the Thervingians settled south of Danube in large numbers thanks to the huns. I doubt they all got up and left to become Visigoths with Alaric and ramsack Rome with their women and children. I might be wrong but I think there is more I1 in Serbia than Poland, doubt I1 in Serbia is all from Slavic migrations, I have a lot of Polish relatives on 23andme and they are all R1a1a.

You are wrong. Serbs and Poles have the same amount of I1. The big genetic difference between the two populations is that Serbs have a lot more I2 and Poles have a lot more R1a. So the Serbs have more of a haplotype that some people see as possibly having survived the last glacial maximum in the Balkans. If to be "Slavic" in a genetic sense is to be R1a, the Poles are more Slavic and the Serbs are more Balkan.

despot
29-08-14, 16:30
You are wrong. Serbs and Poles have the same amount of I1. The big genetic difference between the two populations is that Serbs have a lot more I2 and Poles have a lot more R1a. So the Serbs have more of a haplotype that some people see as possibly having survived the last glacial maximum in the Balkans. If to be "Slavic" in a genetic sense is to be R1a, the Poles are more Slavic and the Serbs are more Balkan.I see, still interesting considering Poles have always been historically closer to I1 folk than people from Balkans.

Tomenable
07-09-14, 16:01
If to be "Slavic" in a genetic sense is to be R1a, the Poles are more Slavic and the Serbs are more Balkan.

Not sure why people associate Slavs only with R1a. First of all, certainly Proto-Slavs (before expansion) were not 100% R1a people. Secondly, most probably not all R1a subclades were present among Proto-Slavs (or at least not in high frequencies). Out of all R1a subclades, Z280 (and its subclade Z92) seems to be "the most Slavic" one. But it is also Baltic. So it appears to be Balto-Slavic, i.e. common already among the Balto-Slavic community before they split into Proto-Balts and Proto-Slavs. Also I2a1b seems to be a very Slavic Y HG:

http://s18.postimg.org/4qixwqdax/Subclades_R1a.png

On the other hand, M458 and one of its subclades - L260 - appears to be either Proto-West Slavic (i.e. common among this branch of Slavs which migrated westward and became ancestors of modern West Slavs), or Pre-West Slavic (i.e. common among Non-Slavic people - maybe hypothetical Venedic-speaking populations or speakers of other extinct IE language - absorbed by Proto West Slavs):

http://s16.postimg.org/f6grrbsdh/CE_and_WS.png

LeBrok
07-09-14, 18:31
First of all welcome to Eupedia Tomenable


Out of all R1a subclades, Z280 (and its subclade Z92) seems to be "the most Slavic" one. But it is also Baltic.


Judging by lack of other major R1a subclades in Croats, Z280 minus Z92 is the prime candidate for Slavic ethos, if I may say so. Having said that the waters are still very muddy. We need to wait for ancient DNA to finally get this puzzle right.

Tomenable
09-09-14, 23:02
Hi there, it's nice to be here, I've discovered a great forum. ;)

I googled "R1a M458 among Croats" and found that they have around 3% of M458 (not sure how much of L260 among this 3%):

https://www.google.pl/search?q=R1a+M458+among+Croats&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:pl:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb&gfe_rd=cr&ei=ZGYPVNuXFISh8wen7YGgCQ

So probably that chart above could also look like this:

http://s11.postimg.org/khn67kfjn/R1a_Slavs_2.png

LeBrok
10-09-14, 01:19
Hi there, it's nice to be here, I've discovered a great forum. ;)

I googled "R1a M458 among Croats" and found that they have around 3% of M458 (not sure how much of L260 among this 3%):

https://www.google.pl/search?q=R1a+M458+among+Croats&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:pl:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb&gfe_rd=cr&ei=ZGYPVNuXFISh8wen7YGgCQ

So probably that chart above could also look like this:


Probably it won't change much, as it is hard to believe that 3% of ruling class could change language and culture to Slavic. Looks like something more ancient mixed into other cultures.

Tomenable
10-09-14, 23:36
Sure but nobody says that all Proto-Slavs were M458 or that all of them were Z280. Or do you think that 100% of them had just one subclade?

When you discuss for example Germanic haplogroups and subclades, which of them do you think belonged to original Proto-Germanics? For example I1 is not an originally Germanic haplogroup. It did not belong to Indo-European rulling class which changed language and culture to Germanic.

Surely it was R1 (either a or b, or both), but of course only some subclades (and probably more than just one).

When it comes to R1b U106 - it isn't sure if it was originally Germanic, or assimilated later. R1a Z284 was probably Proto-Germanic. But only this?

sparkey
11-09-14, 00:15
When you discuss for example Germanic haplogroups and subclades, which of them do you think belonged to original Proto-Germanics? For example I1 is not an originally Germanic haplogroup. It did not belong to Indo-European rulling class which changed language and culture to Germanic.

What makes you think this? I1 has a youngish TMRCA, but not younger than the ethnogenesis of Germanic peoples, unless you put that event well before the Nordic Bronze Age. I don't see anything contradictory in supposing that I1 could have been one of the markers present in the early Proto-Germanic peoples.

That said, if you're looking for potential Proto-Germanic haplogroups, have you considered I2-M223>Z76?

Aberdeen
11-09-14, 02:32
Sure but nobody says that all Proto-Slavs were M458 or that all of them were Z280. Or do you think that 100% of them had just one subclade?

When you discuss for example Germanic haplogroups and subclades, which of them do you think belonged to original Proto-Germanics? For example I1 is not an originally Germanic haplogroup. It did not belong to Indo-European rulling class which changed language and culture to Germanic.

Surely it was R1 (either a or b, or both), but of course only some subclades (and probably more than just one).

When it comes to R1b U106 - it isn't sure if it was originally Germanic, or assimilated later. R1a Z284 was probably Proto-Germanic. But only this?

Maybe you could define what you mean by proto-Germanic. German has more non-IE words than any other European language (except for Basque, obviously), and German seems to have taken form later than other IE languages in Europe, so the IE pastoralists possibly conquered Germany later than many other parts of Europe. And Germans have a real mixture of Y haplotypes -you could almost say that Germans re the mongrels of Europe, although on a national level R1b is huge, and I1 and R1a are about equal in being a distant second. If you look at the regions, R1b is strongest in the south and I1 and R1a are stronger in the north and east, although still lagging behind R1b. What interpretation do you put on those facts?

Tomenable
12-09-14, 00:19
Which facts? There is no any single country in Europe where I1 is in majority.

Even in Scandinavian countries R1 (combined R1a and R1b) is more numerous than I1.

The highest number of I - but in this case mostly I2, not I1 - is in the Balkans.

Obviously I (both I2 and I1) belongs to pre-Indo-European folks of Europe. But so do few other haplogroups.

In general there is scarcity of data on prehistoric Y-DNA, very small samples. There is more data on mtDNA but it is harder to interpret.

I compiled data on ancient Y-DNA from two websites (Eupedia and Ancestral Journeys), and it still looks quite miserable:

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml

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

http://s27.postimg.org/x3kb619z7/a_DNA_Samples.png

As you can see scarcity of data can lead to wrong conclusions.

For example we know that I haplogroup did not disappear from Europe after the Bronze Age, even though this chart suggests this.

I wonder what was that F* from the Neolithic period - ancestor of which haplogroup or haplogroups?

F is ancestral to G, H, I, J, K (any of these could split from those Neolithic F*s, right?). K is ancestral to R1, but also to several other HGs.

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

Obviously apart from I haplogroup, also for example G haplogroup in Europe is pre-Indo-European:

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_G2a.gif


I don't see anything contradictory in supposing that I1 could have been one of the markers present in the early Proto-Germanic peoples.

Early Proto-Germanic peoples did not live in Scandinavia, but migrated to Scandinavia.

Scholars argue whether we can talk about Germanic language before migration to Scandinavia, or did it emerge in Scandinavia.

Anyway - Germanic is clearly an Indo-European language, despite its large number of loanwords from pre-Indo-European substrate. Vocabulary is not everything - for example English is counted as a Germanic language, even though it has a lot of words from Latin, French and other languages.

So people who brought Indo-European ancestral language of Germanic to Europe (including Scandinavia), were not of I1 haplogroup.

I1 belonged to pre-Indo-European communities of - mostly - hunter-gatherers. So did I2.


German has more non-IE words than any other European language (except for Basque, obviously)

I am sure that Hungarian, Estonian, Finnish, Turkish and several other Non-IE languages of Europe also have more Non-IE words. ;)


you could almost say that Germans are the mongrels of Europe

Yes they are but isn't this due to their historically warlike attitude and assimilation of a lot of Non-Germans?

BTW - when I wrote about Germanic I wrote about all Germanic-speakers, not just Germans.

Of course I1 haplogroup is most numerous in Scandinavia, not in actual Deutschland.

sparkey
12-09-14, 07:16
I wonder what was that F* from the Neolithic period - ancestor of which haplogroup or haplogroups?

F is ancestral to G, H, I, J, K (any of these could split from those Neolithic F*s, right?). K is ancestral to R1, but also to several other HGs.

It doesn't make any sense to suggest that the F* in Neolithic Europe was a direct ancestor to G, H, I, J, or K. Is that what you mean? All of these haplogroups are older than the Neolithic. How could a carrier of F* in the Neolithic be their ancestor?

My best guess for what the Neolithic F*'s actually carried is H2-P96, a nowadays uncommon haplogroup split between Europe and West Asia. There are plenty of other possibilities, though, of course.


Early Proto-Germanic peoples did not live in Scandinavia, but migrated to Scandinavia.

Possibly. But I1 seems to have done that as well.


So people who brought Indo-European ancestral language of Germanic to Europe (including Scandinavia), were not of I1 haplogroup.

I1 belonged to pre-Indo-European communities of - mostly - hunter-gatherers. So did I2.

Your conclusion doesn't follow. What's wrong with this chronological order?:
1. Early Indo-Europeans move into Europe (R1, etc. carriers)
2. Early Indo-Europeans absorb some I1 and I2 carriers into their population
3. Proto-Germanic forms from this Indo-European-speaking mixed group

It's like you're identifying the earliest Indo-European speakers in Europe with Proto-Germanic peoples. That's pushing Proto-Germanic back in time further than I think most would.

Aberdeen
14-09-14, 16:59
I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make, Tomenable. Yes, Uralic and Turkish languages - I'll admit to a western European bias in not bothering to discuss them in the German context, but they didn't contribute to the creation of German, as far as I can tell. And the Uralic languages seem to have moved west from Russia after IE languages arrived in Europe, and Turkish certainly did. My point was that German consists of of mixture of pre-Indo-European words (possibly contributed by I1 folk, although there's no way to know that) and Indo-European speakers who had already been in Europe for quite a while before German emerged. So it makes no sense to talk about proto-German IE invaders, if that's what you were trying to talk about, since German developed fairly late in situ from a fusion of two language groups that were already present in Europe. And if you're talking about proto-Germans in the genetic sense, Germany is a genetic salad, as I said, and quite different from Scandinavia in some respects, so if you want to talk about proto-Germans it does matter whether the Germanic languages developed in Germany or Scandinavia. And I don't think that's clear. So, since the German language was a late bloomer, and since it probably developed in one of two different parts of Europe that have somewhat different genetic profiles, I really think the term "proto-German" is not something you can apply to any of the incoming Indo-Europeans.

I probably shouldn't have bothered with this post. Sparkey covered the subject well with his comments.

Tomenable
17-09-14, 20:04
Ok, Sparkey and Aberdeen, your explanations are quite convincing. ;)

When it comes to Slavic haplogroups, here I wrote about my thoughts on what HGs Slavs could have during the LCS period:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26473-Were-the-Croatians-originally-Slavic?p=439251&viewfull=1#post439251


We notice, that:

1) R1a-Z280 is common for all Slavs & Balts
2) I2a1b is common or quite common for all Slavs
3) M458 is common or quite common for all Slavs
4) L260 is only common for West Slavs
4) Z92 is only common for East Slavs
5) N1c1 is very common only for Balts

Z92 originated from Z280 while L260 originated from M458.

It seems that Z280 existed already among Balto-Slavs, yet before they split into Slavs and Balts.

M458 and I2a1b in my opinion also existed already among LCS people*, but most likely not only among them.

*LCS = Late Common Slavic, speakers of Slavic shortly before the great Slavic migrations and expansion.

Do you think it is possible that Balto-Slavs or Early Slavs / LCS speakers had also some I1?

How to explain almost equal distribution of I1 among Croats, West Ukrainians, Belarusians and Lithuanians (4,5 - 5,6 % each)?

On the other hand Russians and Poles each have few percent more of I1 than the four groups mentioned above.

Power77
10-10-14, 00:15
Maybe I1* came from the Balkans(Late Paleolithic) and spread northward to Scandinavia during the Mesolithic(or later) when it became inhabitable. After all, there is still a lot of similarities between Nordids and Dinarids physically.

Trifud
09-01-15, 20:43
Hello,
My mother's brother is I1-L22, P109-, Z75- with no matches at 67 STRs (closest match on ySearch is at GD of 14). Any thoughts on this? He is Pomak from Bulgaria.

despot
28-10-15, 21:48
I did the Big Y at ftdna. My subclade is I1-Z63+ (Z63+, BY151+, L849+, S2078+ PR683-, V68-, Y6375-) Closest match at zero SNP difference is only one male, a Dutchman. It is I-S2077* at yfull. I-S2077 * FGC9504/Y4102 age: 3397 ybp

despot
28-10-15, 21:50
Hello,
My mother's brother is I1-L22, P109-, Z75- with no matches at 67 STRs (closest match on ySearch is at GD of 14). Any thoughts on this? He is Pomak from Bulgaria.

Could be from the Goths in Bulgaria?

Apsurdistan
13-04-17, 08:21
Bosnian with I1 results from NatGeo geno 2.0
We're there man, kind of endangered in the Balkans but we're there.
I should've emigrated to Sweden instead of the US, better living standard there anyway.

n1tr0dr
20-12-17, 01:12
I am a Serb with I1-M227 result. I found on the Internet that M227 could have been spread by Varangians. Does anyone know something about Varangians in the Balkans, specifically in the medieval Serbia. When did they could get here?

Some also say that we could be from Goths or Herules. Which theory is more likely?

I know that M227 has three subgroups - A11380, Y19809 and Y7213. Are there some information about them, because I couldn't find anything.


Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

Lenab
20-12-17, 02:44
I know a guy from the UK he is English Irish Scottish and Welsh he has J2 so it's possible that a Serb could be I1 his Mt is still H1 lol

Lenab
20-12-17, 02:48
Which facts? There is no any single country in Europe where I1 is in majority.

Even in Scandinavian countries R1 (combined R1a and R1b) is more numerous than I1.

The highest number of I - but in this case mostly I2, not I1 - is in the Balkans.

Obviously I (both I2 and I1) belongs to pre-Indo-European folks of Europe. But so do few other haplogroups.

In general there is scarcity of data on prehistoric Y-DNA, very small samples. There is more data on mtDNA but it is harder to interpret.

I compiled data on ancient Y-DNA from two websites (Eupedia and Ancestral Journeys), and it still looks quite miserable:

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml

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

http://s27.postimg.org/x3kb619z7/a_DNA_Samples.png

As you can see scarcity of data can lead to wrong conclusions.

For example we know that I haplogroup did not disappear from Europe after the Bronze Age, even though this chart suggests this.

I wonder what was that F* from the Neolithic period - ancestor of which haplogroup or haplogroups?

F is ancestral to G, H, I, J, K (any of these could split from those Neolithic F*s, right?). K is ancestral to R1, but also to several other HGs.

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

Obviously apart from I haplogroup, also for example G haplogroup in Europe is pre-Indo-European:

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_G2a.gif



Early Proto-Germanic peoples did not live in Scandinavia, but migrated to Scandinavia.

Scholars argue whether we can talk about Germanic language before migration to Scandinavia, or did it emerge in Scandinavia.

Anyway - Germanic is clearly an Indo-European language, despite its large number of loanwords from pre-Indo-European substrate. Vocabulary is not everything - for example English is counted as a Germanic language, even though it has a lot of words from Latin, French and other languages.

So people who brought Indo-European ancestral language of Germanic to Europe (including Scandinavia), were not of I1 haplogroup.

I1 belonged to pre-Indo-European communities of - mostly - hunter-gatherers. So did I2.



I am sure that Hungarian, Estonian, Finnish, Turkish and several other Non-IE languages of Europe also have more Non-IE words. ;)



Yes they are but isn't this due to their historically warlike attitude and assimilation of a lot of Non-Germans?

BTW - when I wrote about Germanic I wrote about all Germanic-speakers, not just Germans.

Of course I1 haplogroup is most numerous in Scandinavia, not in actual Deutschland.
Thank you I never understand why Serbs and Bosnians claim to be their Viking descendants based on I numbers I am partly English so I am not just I, I am I S24 Saxon that's the subclade of I that makes it Paleolithic

Bachus
20-12-17, 03:27
Almost all Serbian I1 are Z63 and P109.

Z63 come with Goths and Gepids in 5th and 6th century, and P109 is from Normans which tried to conquer Balkan in the late 11th century led by Robert Guiscard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Guiscard#Against_the_Byzantines

eastara
20-12-17, 08:52
I am a Serb with I1-M227 result. I found on the Internet that M227 could have been spread by Varangians. Does anyone know something about Varangians in the Balkans, specifically in the medieval Serbia. When did they could get here?

Some also say that we could be from Goths or Herules. Which theory is more likely?

I know that M227 has three subgroups - A11380, Y19809 and Y7213. Are there some information about them, because I couldn't find anything.


Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

Interesting, I1-M227 seems very rare on the Balkans, I know only of one Romanian on 23andMe.
It looks spread more in Eastern and Central Europe than in Scandinavia. Probably the Viking theory is coming from several I1-M227 found in the Middle east.

Bachus
20-12-17, 09:54
Serbian holders of I1
https://dnk.poreklo.rs/tabela-pojedinacne-grupe/?grp-filter=I1

Branches of I1 which exist among Serbs are P109, Z63, M227 and M253.

I1 haplogroup is around 9% among ethnic Serbs, which is the highest percentage of all Balkan nations.

Vast majority of Serbs which are I1 are from Dinaric Alps or originated from Dinaric Alps.
Serbian tribe Drobnjaci (I1-P109) and Macure (I1-Z63) are from Dinaric Alps, and almost all of Serbs who belongs to these branches are from Drobnjaci and Macure tribe.

n1tr0dr
20-12-17, 11:18
Interesting, I1-M227 seems very rare on the Balkans, I know only of one Romanian on 23andMe.
It looks spread more in Eastern and Central Europe than in Scandinavia. Probably the Viking theory is coming from several I1-M227 found in the Middle east.Yes, it is very rare, currently we make about 0.5% in our serbian project.
I didn't know about M227 in the Middle East, can you please tell me where to find that information?
Thanks for the Romanian. I don't know of any M227 in the Albania, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Greece, so it would be great if someone knows and wants to share.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

Bachus
20-12-17, 11:26
M227 is only around 5% of all I1 which were tested on "Serbian DNA project."

eastara
20-12-17, 13:14
M227 is only around 5% of all I1 which were tested on "Serbian DNA project."

As far as I can see the M227 in the Serbian project are only predicted, and due to the small amount of tested markers could be some other branch as I1 is prone to homoplasmy.

For example, there is a 12 markers Ivanovich in the Serbian project under M227, who is an exact match to the Bulgarian E8047. However, the Bulgarian has an extensive SNP testing and is proven M227-, in fact he is Z58+, Z59-, Z139+, A6397+

Ser 13 22 14 10 14-15 11 14 11 13 11 29
Bul 13 22 14 10 14-15 11 14 11 13 11 29

You can find Middle East Palestinian M227, for example on the YFULL tree, there are others in different I1 projects.

Bachus
20-12-17, 13:46
As far as I can see the M227 in the Serbian project are only predicted, and due to the small amount of tested markers could be some other branch as I1 is prone to homoplasmy.

For example, there is a 12 markers Ivanovich in the Serbian project under M227, who is an exact match to the Bulgarian E8047. However, the Bulgarian has an extensive SNP testing and is proven M227-, in fact he is Z58+, Z59-, Z139+, A6397+

Ser 13 22 14 10 14-15 11 14 11 13 11 29
Bul 13 22 14 10 14-15 11 14 11 13 11 29

You can find Middle East Palestinian M227, for example on the YFULL tree, there are others in different I1 projects.

There are 8 people which are I1-M227 at "Serbian DNA project"

Ђенадић (Đenadić) - Aleksandrovac/central Serbia
Остојић (Ostojić) - Takovo/Šumadija/central Serbia
Миленковић (Milenković) - Kuršumlija/central Serbia
Драча (Drača) - Benkovac/Dalmatia
Крунић (Krunić) - Valjevo/western Serbia
Бојовић (Bojović) - Tutin/southwestern Serbia
Ивановић (Ivanović) - Zvornik/eastern Bosnia
Живковић (Živković) - Šabac/northwestern Serbia

Look here
https://dnk.poreklo.rs/tabela-pojedinacne-grupe/?grp-filter=I1

The total number of I1 at "Serbian DNA project" is 146 and 8 is M227, which means that M227 is 5,5% of Serbian I1.

eastara
20-12-17, 14:00
I know that in Poreklo only those who have something in the field SNP with + are actually tested for it. None of those under M227 seems to be tested , so you can't be sure they are under this branch.

Bachus
20-12-17, 14:14
I know that in Poreklo only those who have something in the field SNP with + are actually tested for it. None of those under M227 seems to be tested , so you can't be sure they are under this branch.

This is the percentage of I1 among Serbs by regions
www.macure.net/Content/Images/Genetika/I1-Srbi.jpg

Which is the percentage of I1 in Bulgaria or among Bulgarians, and which branches are common?

n1tr0dr
20-12-17, 14:51
As far as I can see the M227 in the Serbian project are only predicted, and due to the small amount of tested markers could be some other branch as I1 is prone to homoplasmy. For example, there is a 12 markers Ivanovich in the Serbian project under M227, who is an exact match to the Bulgarian E8047. However, the Bulgarian has an extensive SNP testing and is proven M227-, in fact he is Z58+, Z59-, Z139+, A6397+ Ser 13 22 14 10 14-15 11 14 11 13 11 29 Bul 13 22 14 10 14-15 11 14 11 13 11 29 That's true, but I also have an exact match on 19 markers with a person from Croatia who is proven M227+, so it's very likely that I am M227.
There are 8 people which are I1-M227 at "Serbian DNA project" Ђенадић (Đenadić) - Aleksandrovac/central Serbia Остојић (Ostojić) - Takovo/Šumadija/central Serbia Миленковић (Milenković) - Kuršumlija/central Serbia Драча (Drača) - Benkovac/Dalmatia Крунић (Krunić) - Valjevo/western Serbia Бојовић (Bojović) - Tutin/southwestern Serbia Ивановић (Ivanović) - Zvornik/eastern Bosnia Живковић (Živković) - Šabac/northwestern Serbia Look here
https://dnk.poreklo.rs/tabela-pojedinacne-grupe/?grp-filter=I1 The total number of I1 at "Serbian DNA project" is 146 and 8 is M227, which means that M227 is 5,5% of Serbian I1. I am one of those with the result on 23 markers. With all of them I have a genetic distance of no more than 2 on 23, or with others an exact match on 12 markers. There is also Duraković - Prijepolje/southwestern Serbia (genetic distance of 2 on 23, "Bosnian DNK project"), and one person from Bosnia and Herzegovina only with his first name Ivan (an exact match on 12 markers, found on some ftdna projects). I heard that there is Končar - Končarev kraj/Lika/Croatia who is M227+ from 23andMe. I would like to contact him, Ivan (kit no. 314690) and M227+ person from Croatia (kit no. 41100), but I don't know how.

n1tr0dr
20-12-17, 15:01
As far as I can see the M227 in the Serbian project are only predicted, and due to the small amount of tested markers could be some other branch as I1 is prone to homoplasmy. For example, there is a 12 markers Ivanovich in the Serbian project under M227, who is an exact match to the Bulgarian E8047. However, the Bulgarian has an extensive SNP testing and is proven M227-, in fact he is Z58+, Z59-, Z139+, A6397+ Ser 13 22 14 10 14-15 11 14 11 13 11 29 Bul 13 22 14 10 14-15 11 14 11 13 11 29 That's true, but I also have match on 19 markers with a person from Croatia who is proven M227+, so it's very likely that I am M227 also.
There are 8 people which are I1-M227 at "Serbian DNA project" Ђенадић (Đenadić) - Aleksandrovac/central Serbia Остојић (Ostojić) - Takovo/Šumadija/central Serbia Миленковић (Milenković) - Kuršumlija/central Serbia Драча (Drača) - Benkovac/Dalmatia Крунић (Krunić) - Valjevo/western Serbia Бојовић (Bojović) - Tutin/southwestern Serbia Ивановић (Ivanović) - Zvornik/eastern Bosnia Живковић (Živković) - Šabac/northwestern Serbia I am one of them (with 23 markers). There are also Duraković - Prijepolje/southwestern Serbia (21/23 match, "Bosnian DNA project"), one person from Bosnia and Herzegovina with only his first name Ivan (12/12 match, ftdna kit no. 314690) and Končar - Končarev kraj/Lika who is M227+ from 23andMe.
I would like to contact Ivan, Končar and the M227+ person from Croatia (ftdna kit no. 41100) but I don't know how.

Lenab
20-12-17, 17:27
Almost all Serbian I1 are Z63 and P109.

Z63 come with Goths and Gepids in 5th and 6th century, and P109 is from Normans which tried to conquer Balkan in the late 11th century led by Robert Guiscard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Guiscard#Against_the_Byzantines
Really? Ostrogoths were East Germanic that is Baltic, East Germanics are in some East and South Germans if anything and maybe Central Europeans..

I numbers are just usually Paleolithic. During SNP results to determine haplogroups they will give you your own person subclade this is how a test result should go like

I-S2361: Your Genetic SignatureThis is your Y chromosome genetic signature: a list of all the markers from the chromo2 chip for which you are positive, that is where you differ from Y chromosome Adam. A plus sign indicates that you carry the marker, or as geneticists say you are derived for that marker, e.g. S190+. Markers are named with a letter followed by the number of the marker. The letter is usually one of M, S or P: M is for markers, S is for SNP (the scientific name of the kind of marker being tested) and P is for polymorphism, another word for marker. Other prefixes include the initials of the discoverer (e.g. CTS or PF). If you do not carry the marker it is not listed in your signature, but can be found in the raw data file. In a few cases a marker might arise, for example, by the DNA letter A changing to C, then much later in time in someone with the C it changes back to an A again; this is called back-mutation. One such example is the marker S163: if you carry the ancestral A it is not shown in your signature. If you carry the C, it would be shown as S163(+) and if you carry the back-mutated A, it is shown as S163!. We can tell the back-mutations from the ancestral variants using the other markers you carry.
>CTS10100+, CTS11150+, CTS11575+, CTS11976+, CTS11991+, CTS12057+, CTS12633+, CTS12773+, CTS12861+, CTS2254+, CTS2392+, CTS2480+, CTS2569+, CTS3315+, CTS3326+, CTS3654+, CTS3818+, CTS3844+, CTS3859+, CTS3918+, CTS4293+, CTS4568+, CTS4740+, CTS5139(+), CTS5248+, CTS543+, CTS5650+, CTS616+, CTS6327+, CTS6331+, CTS6376+, CTS6383+, CTS6433+, CTS6445+, CTS674+, CTS7301+, CTS7593+, CTS7762+, CTS7922+, CTS8449+, CTS8876+, CTS9139+, CTS9183+, CTS9482+, CTS9556+, CTS9760+, CTS9782+, L1002+, L1013+, L1053+, L1084+, L1098+, L1105+, L1118+, L1123+, L1129+, L1130+, L1137+, L1143+, L1145+, L1150+, L1179+, L1198+, L1220+, L132+, L181+, L34+, L352+, L35+, L37+, L438+, L440+, L468+, L470+, L498+, L508+, L543+, L59+, L604+, L800+, L882+, L969+, M213+, M223+, M235+, M258+, M294+, M299+, M429+, M42+, M523+, P123+, P126+, P127+, P129+, P130+, P135+, P139+, P140+, P141+, P142+, P143+, P151+, P158+, P159+, P160+, P163+, P212+, P305+, PAGE081+, PF1030+, PF1067+, PF1081+, PF1252+, PF1253+, PF1416+, PF1695+, PF1911+, PF256+, PF2590+, PF2592+, PF2615+, PF2617+, PF2619+, PF2621+, PF2622+, PF2624+, PF2626+, PF2629+, PF2640+, PF2651+, PF2653+, PF2655+, PF2658+, PF2660+, PF2677+, PF2679+, PF2683+, PF2684+, PF2685+, PF2688+, PF2690+, PF2700+, PF2702+, PF2704+, PF2709+, PF2716+, PF2718+, PF2722+, PF2734+, PF2736+, PF2737+, PF2739+, PF2742+, PF2747+, PF2748+, PF2760+, PF2762+, PF2775+, PF3495+, PF3500+, PF3528+, PF3553+, PF3644+, PF3649+, PF3654+, PF3706+, PF3739+, PF3753+, PF3787+, PF3807+, PF3819+, PF626+, PF643+, PF653+, PF679+, PF6895+, PF733+, PF744+, PF825(+), PF834+, PF869+, PF948+, S10441+, S10459+, S11022+, S11330(+), S117+, S118+, S119+, S120+, S12350+, S12547(+), S138+, S14170+, S1572+, S163(+), S1984!, S19862(+), S2006+, S20315+, S2357+, S2358+, S2360+, S2361+, S2363+, S2365+, S2367+, S2368+, S2369+, S2371+, S2378+, S2380+, S2381+, S2384+, S2385+, S238+, S2390+, S2412+, S2425+, S2441+, S24436+, S2445+, S2450+, S2452+, S2456+, S2458+, S2465+, S2471+, S2472+, S2476+, S2478+, S2479+, S24+, S30+, S31+, S32+, S330+, S33+, S390+, S4888!, S5810+, S5817+, S5818+, S5874+, S5875+, S5878+, S5893+, S6378+, S6459+, S6469+, S6498+, S6517+, S6520+, S6527+, S6528+, S8111+, S8235+, S884+, S9158+, S959+, SRY10831(+), V102+, V126+, V168+, V186+, V187+, V218+, V221+, V226+, V241+, V29+, V41+, V52+, V9+, YSC1297+, YSC1311+, Z161+, Z162+, Z164+, Z169+, Z175+, Z179+, Z183+

Lenab
20-12-17, 17:29
So if that's true some Serbians and Croatians are getting a tad confused they're not Viking descendants they're Baltid ones lol these ones with I numbers

Lenab
20-12-17, 17:31
Maybe I1* came from the Balkans(Late Paleolithic) and spread northward to Scandinavia during the Mesolithic(or later) when it became inhabitable. After all, there is still a lot of similarities between Nordids and Dinarids physically.
Yes that's easily possible, exactly thank you.

eastara
21-12-17, 00:37
Which is the percentage of I1 in Bulgaria or among Bulgarians, and which branches are common?

Officially I1 is around 4% among Bulgarians. It seems the most common branches are under Z58, or the old Anglo-Saxon assignment. They are common also among Bulgarian Turks. However we have many P109 and Z63, too. According to me the P109 may have some North Western Bulgarian connection, while the Z63 - Macedonian. Current haplogroup distribution among Bulgarians is not very indicative where the forefathers came from due to the constant migrations in Ottoman times and refugee resettlements after the Balkan wars.
SNP M227 was discovered early in haplogroup I1 history, but it was rare in commercial databases as predominantly Westerners tested. So it may really be not so exotic among Serbs, if there are several proven, there could be more.
The Bulgarian DNA project helped solve the classification another early discovered SNP- P259, which at one time was decided to be private and removed from the tree. Later it was proven to be among the Roma/Gypsy founding lineages and some Bulgarians and ex-Yugoslavians have it, too.
After a Bulgarian Roma was sponsored for the Big Y test, it was discovered he is I-Z141, but negative to all branches below. Where exactly P259 stand on the tree is still unknown, though. Obviously it was a private SNP once, but spread due to the large founder effect among Roma.

Lenab
21-12-17, 00:46
Can you guys help me with my GED match results

I1a3_Young
21-12-17, 01:51
Thank you for the Bulgarian info. Of the 4% who are I1, do you have a breakdown of how many are Z63, Z58, etc?

Do you know which branches of Z63 are the most common?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Lenab
21-12-17, 08:52
thanks guys, these are my final results from 23andm me anyways:


















99.8%

European



Southern European

65.8% Balkan



0.5% Italian



8.1% Broadly Southern European






16.3% Eastern European





Northern European

0.1% French & German



3.9% Broadly Northern European





5.1% Broadly European






0.2% East Asian & Native American
Did you do GED match? Try that

Bachus
21-12-17, 10:46
Origin of Serbian I1-Z63 is still unclear. Maybe came with Slavs, maybe with Goths or Gepids.

Serbian I1-P109 is from Normans whithout doubt.
All Serbian P109 are from Drobnjaci tribe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drobnjaci
Serbian holders of P109 from Drobnaci tribe are close to some Sicilian guy who is P109, they are around 900-950 years genetically distant from him.
Which means that Sicilians guy and Serbian holders of P109 are descendant of Normans which settled in Sicily and southern Italy and in the late 11th century they tried to invade Balkans.

Lenab
21-12-17, 12:31
Origin of Serbian I1-Z63 is still unclear. Maybe came with Slavs, maybe with Goths or Gepids.

Serbian I1-P109 is from Normans whithout doubt.
All Serbian P109 are from Drobnjaci tribe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drobnjaci
Serbian holders of P109 from Drobnaci tribe are close to some Sicilian guy who is P109, they are around 900-950 years genetically distant from him.
Which means that Sicilians guy and Serbian holders of P109 are descendant of Normans which settled in Sicily and southern Italy and in the late 11th century they tried to invade Balkans.

Have you tried GED match Bachus?

Bachus
21-12-17, 14:58
Have you tried GED match Bachus?

I did not tested autosomally.

Bachus
21-12-17, 18:31
Was your main MT haplogroup U4 or U5 or H or H1?

Usually the main Balkan haplogroup is H for women

I know just my Y DNA for now.

Yes, in the Balkans the most common mt DNA is H (but also in whole Europe), in Serbia is 41%
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_mtdna_haplogroups_frequency.shtml

You have some Balkan ancestrors, right?

eastara
21-12-17, 23:29
Thank you for the Bulgarian info. Of the 4% who are I1, do you have a breakdown of how many are Z63, Z58, etc?

Do you know which branches of Z63 are the most common?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Unfortunately we don't have an official breakdown of haplogroup I1, my estimates are from FTDNA and some other testing. For now nobody under Z63 has done a deeper SNP test, but I suppose they must be from the popular branches as they have matches at 37 markers. Sometimes Bulgarians even with the most popular I2a-Dinaric have no matches at any level.

Shetop
22-12-17, 00:09
Serbian I1-P109 is from Normans whithout doubt.Not for me. I have a great doubt regarding your statement.

Bachus
22-12-17, 00:47
Not for me. I have a great doubt regarding your statement.

Why?

Have you heard Jovica Krtinić when he talked about Norman origin of Drobnjaci (I1-P109)?

Shetop
22-12-17, 17:08
Why?Have you heard Jovica Krtinić when he talked about Norman origin of Drobnjaci (I1-P109)?Yes I've heard him. However, I do not remember any convincing argument which would indisputably support connection between the Balkan I-P109 and Normans. The only thing I agree is that their ancestor came from the Northern Europe.

To be precise we are talking about the I-FGC22045 subclade.

Bachus
22-12-17, 21:17
Yes I've heard him. However, I do not remember any convincing argument which would indisputably support connection between the Balkan I-P109 and Normans. The only thing I agree is that their ancestor came from the Northern Europe.

To be precise we are talking about the I-FGC22045 subclade.

What is your opinion about origin of Balkan I1-P109?

I1a3_Young
23-12-17, 00:26
Other than DYS 455=8 for indicating M253, the STR values are extremely difficult for predicting SNPs. Even in the Z63 project the values are all over the place.

If an Ancestry.com or 23andMe test has been performed, you can get more specific SNP results than the companies will reveal.

I wonder if the Serbian results match the ancient Wielbark samples.

Shetop
23-12-17, 14:53
What is your opinion about origin of Balkan I1-P109?I believe I-FGC22045 came to the Balkans between 350 and 650 AD. It could've come with some of the East Germanic tribes, but it could've also come with the Slavs. The point is I believe it went through a continental route. And my main argument is that its closest "brother" clade I-FGC22046(xFGC22045) is today found in Sweden and Bulgaria. Sweden and Bulgaria were not on the way Normans were passing at the time of their expansion.

Finally none of the I-FGC22046 results are today found in any of the regions Normans had under their control.

Zvrk9
05-01-18, 02:22
deleted post

Bachus
06-01-18, 14:03
Haplogroup I1 is 8,4% among Serbs.

On the "Serbian DNA project" there is a total 1742 samples and I1 is 146 which is 8,4%
https://dnk.poreklo.rs/tabela-pojedinacne-grupe/?grp-filter=I1&lang=lat

Zvrk9
06-01-18, 16:55
Hi Bachus, could that be due to the higher testing/activity by Macura and Drobnjak family groups?

Bachus
06-01-18, 18:21
Hi Bachus, could that be due to the higher testing/activity by Macura and Drobnjak family groups?

Maybe partly, but without regard to it I1 is higher among Serbs than among other Balkan nations.

Majority of Serbian I1 came from Drobnjaci and Macura clans, but there are others subclades among Serbs except Z63 an P109, and those are M227 and M253.

Not all Serbian I1-P109 is from Drobnjaci and not all Serbian I1-Z63 is from Macure, but majority it is.

Many families from different regions with different surnames found out that they are close to Macure or Drobnjaci, because Macure and Drobnjaci migrated from Montenegro and Dalmatia for centuries.
Even among Croats, Bosnian and Sanžak Muslims exist subclades of Drobnjaci and Macure, because many Orthodox Serbs in the past were convert to Islam and Catholicism.

Zvrk9
06-01-18, 20:33
Are there any Y-DNA origins established for pockets of I1-M227 among Serbian population tested? Tha Macura map seams to establish the pocket concentrations for I1.
I see in some forums talk about Saxon Miners in the area of Kopaonik, Bor and the mountains of West Bulgaria, but that is not aligning with the Macura I1 map hot spots (Prijepolje, Valjevo-Kragujevac-Uzice triangle and Lika for example). Also, I did not see any reference to the specific Saxon miners' haplogroups if I1. I am probably not very well informed on this.

I see now that Bachus stating conformation of P109 with Sicily testing. The theory of Normans (Normandy Vikings) in south Adriatic 1081-2, 1984-5 the south of Scadar Lake leaves a lot of questions. What is the connection between south Adriatic coast and today's Prijepolje (Drobnaci concentration)? Did anyone try to find any further explanation? Is a few years in the 1080s a sufficient time for this transformation?

Since P109 is common in Rusia, Poland and Sweden from same Viking source, isn't it more logical it arrived in Balkans from the North-East? Austro-Turkish and Rusia-Turkish wars of 1780s were a much more significant event and not that far from today's concentrashen of Serbian Drobnjak P109. The Bulgarian, Serbes and Romanians altogether fought Ottomans as I understand the history. After that, and the Great Plague of 1738 there was a significant move of populations.

Bachus
06-01-18, 21:12
@Zvrk9

Regions where Saxon miners were settled are not sufficiently tested, that regions are Kosovo, area around Kopaonik and northeastern Macedonia.
There is few people from Kosovo and Kopaonik who are probably descendants of Saxons and they have R1b-U106 and I2-M223 haplogroups.
Recently around 300 Serbs from Kosovo was tested and results will come out for the few months, then it will be cleaner about descandants of Saxons among Serbs, maybe some I1 of Saxon origin will appear.

Until now it seems that there is no I1 of Saxons origin among Serbs, and it semms that all Serbian I1 is from Normans or Goths and others eastern Germanic tribes.
Drobnjak cluster of I1-P109 is probably from Normans which tried to conquered southern/central Balkans 1081-1085 led by Robert Guiscard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Guiscard#Against_the_Byzantines
Some guy from Sicily who is I1-P109 and Drobnjaci have common ancestor by male line from 900 years ago. That is very solid proof for Norman origin of Drobnjak I1-P109, because Normans tried to invade the Balkans from Sicily and southern Italy, they were present in Sicily since 1038.
A lot of Drobnjaks were settled in Prijepolje in the past, and because of that 1/4 of male population of Prijepolje are I1-P109.

Macura cluster of I1-Z63 probably came to Balkans with Goths in 5th century
macure.net/en/Home#Istorija_BalkanPeninsula

Zvrk9
06-01-18, 21:42
Sorry Bachus, I was making changes as you were responding. I was editing as I realized some questions were already answered.

Since P109 is common in Rusia, Poland, and Sweden, assuming from the same P109 Viking source, isn't it more logical it arrived in Balkans from the North-East? Austro-Turkish and Rusia-Turkish wars of 1780s were a more significant event and not that far from today's concentration of Serbian Drobnjak P109. The Russians, Bulgarians, Serbs, and Romanians altogether fought Ottomans as I understand the history. After that, and the Great Plague of 1738 there was a significant move of populations. This is the time of formation of the Military Frontier with Ottomans and many migrations.

Yes, Normans were in Sicily and Northern Italy earlier but no evidence of any significant presence in Adriatic earlier or for an extended time. I can't attach web links yet, when you get a chance try on Wikipedia Norman_conquest_of_southern_Italy. Yes, same link as yours.

I1a3_Young
07-01-18, 20:56
Easy explanation is from regular contact with the I1 in Wielbark of Poland circa 300-900 AD, plus Visigoth migrations.

Z63 and P109 both should have been spread from Visigoths.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Wonomyro
08-01-18, 00:28
........................

Garrick
08-01-18, 01:14
Back to topic.

I1a3_Young
10-01-18, 17:23
The Macura clan also matches the Shrkeli clan on SNPs.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Zvrk9
10-01-18, 17:34
Very interesting. Could you tell us more I1a3 Young? Is match all the way to 2659472 (Y 16434)?

I1a3_Young
10-01-18, 17:50
Very interesting. Could you tell us more I1a3 Young? Is match all the way to 2659472 (Y 16434)?https://www.familytreedna.com/public/2121?iframe=ycolorized

Can you check if that is the same Macura bunch as from the Serbian project? See imagehttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180110/a5516d5f4f790a741d8722ac7927182c.jpg

Looks like the last number of the Shrkeli is an 8 instead of a 4. Seems close though, a distant relation.

Zvrk9
11-01-18, 02:21
Two Macura clan members were tested at FTDNA and if I remember earlier comments correctly, they are also in Poreklo.

I typed Shkreli in Google and I can only see Martin Shkreli. Not a very good time to be related to him if he is in this clan. http://fortune.com/2017/09/14/martin-shkreli-jail/

Here is the Poreklo data for Macura.
9614

Zvrk9
11-01-18, 02:36
Bachus, Garrick, Shetop, Wonomyro or others who viewed Poreklo data ... for Z63 groups above Macura's, what is the meaning of "Z63 Opsti rod B" and "Z63 Opsti rod V". Is there equivalent branch number in FTDNA or Yfull? Thanks.

http://dnk.poreklo.rs/tabela-pojedinacne-grupe/?grp-filter=I1&lang=lat

Milan.M
11-01-18, 09:59
As i know I1-Z63 is absent in Scandinavia,the speculation that this clade is "Gothic" east Germanic and so on make no sense.Above all history tell as that Goths originated there.

Contrary to everything oldest I1 was found in Hungary Neolithic as a farmer not in Scandinavia.

Wonomyro
11-01-18, 13:02
@Milan's opinion is probably the most realistic. If an Albanian is the closest relative than it is very likely that the subclade was in the region before Great Migrations. IMO the Roman refugees from Panonia, Dalmatia escaped mostly to present day Albania, Grece and Italy as a result of Avar conquest.

Bachus
11-01-18, 13:38
Bachus, Garrick, Shetop, Wonomyro or others who viewed Poreklo data ... for Z63 groups above Macura's, what is the meaning of "Z63 Opsti rod B" and "Z63 Opsti rod V". Is there equivalent branch number in FTDNA or Yfull? Thanks.

http://dnk.poreklo.rs/tabela-pojedinacne-grupe/?grp-filter=I1&lang=lat

I'm not sure what that means, but I'II try to find out.


This is an traditional meeting of Macura clan in Belgrade, all people on this clip are from Macura which means that all men are I1-Z63.


https://youtu.be/bVNAzP64_z8

Zvrk9
11-01-18, 15:44
I1-Z63 appears to be widely distributed inside Europe and reaching into Asia. The FTDNA y-DNA data shows it is also in Scandinavia. I1a3 Young probably knows more about it since he provided Z63 map in the opening post of Main branch maps by FTDNA (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/35037-Main-branch-maps-by-FTDNA)


Macura clan has its own website in English (among other languages) and provides a lot of information on their research of origin. They are clearly believing to be connected to one of the Gothic migrations and in Balkans before Slavic migration. They use some of the engraved thumb stones of earlier Macura locations in Northern Montenegro. That is the area relatively close to the Serbian border. For some reason, that site (Macura.net ) is down today.

Here is the website that appears to be linked to Croatian links about some of the tribes in that general area. It is interesting that Macura had several different names including Srbljaci. I do not want to go to ethnicity discussions. https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=hr&u=http://illyria.proboards.com/thread/35761/izumrla-vecinom-neslovenska-plemena-crnoj&prev=search

I just looked the 2 levels further on Z63 (finer branches of the tree), some of them are still very widely distributed geographically. Would that indicate a lot of migration in the more recent times?

Milan.M
11-01-18, 15:58
What some Macura's believe is totally irelevant to where this clade originate and it's distribution.Yes I1-Z63 is found all over Europe,but that doesn't mean that it's origin is in Scandinavia,there another clade dominate.
If Goths migrated from Scandinavia to Central Europe then to Balkans,we will find the Scandinavian clade to be predominant in this groups and not I1-Z63,very simple.
If I2 or I2a din is most frequent in Herzegovina doesn't mean the haplogroup or the clade originate there,Nordic countries aren't exception.

I1a3_Young
11-01-18, 16:07
As i know I1-Z63 is absent in Scandinavia,the speculation that this clade is "Gothic" east Germanic and so on make no sense.Above all history tell as that Goths originated there.

Contrary to everything oldest I1 was found in Hungary Neolithic as a farmer not in Scandinavia.It's not absent in Scandinavia. There are small amounts of Z63 in Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and even Volga area Russia. These are almost all S2078+ and L1237+

The Goths clearly carried Z63 but it was present in all Germanic tribes pre-migration. In the UK, Z63 areas are heaviest in Saxon kingdom areas of old England. Z63 is found in good numbers in Belgium and the Netherlands. It would not surprise me if some Franks carried it as well.

BY351 has a grouping that is clearly Iberian but also very closely to the "Yorkshire" group which matches a test from Sweden. This means that the Goths that migrated eventually to Iberia had common ties with Vikings who brought it to Jorvik (York).

As far as I can tell all branches of I1 were blended around in the Germanic tribes for a couple thousand years. L22 clearly had a founder effect in repoplulating South Sweden and northwards. L22 is also found everywhere, just not in the high concentrations as the northern areas.

Figuring out the exact branches of Z63 or any I1 branch within the Germanic tribes is very tough.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Bachus
11-01-18, 16:41
I1-Z63 appears to be widely distributed inside Europe and reaching into Asia. The FTDNA y-DNA data shows it is also in Scandinavia. I1a3 Young probably knows more about it since he provided Z63 map in the opening post of Main branch maps by FTDNA (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/35037-Main-branch-maps-by-FTDNA)


Macura clan has its own website in English (among other languages) and provides a lot of information on their research of origin. They are clearly believing to be connected to one of the Gothic migrations and in Balkans before Slavic migration. They use some of the engraved thumb stones of earlier Macura locations in Northern Montenegro. That is the area relatively close to the Serbian border. For some reason, that site (Macura.net ) is down today.

Here is the website that appears to be linked to Croatian links about some of the tribes in that general area. It is interesting that Macura had several different names including Srbljaci. I do not want to go to ethnicity discussions. https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=hr&u=http://illyria.proboards.com/thread/35761/izumrla-vecinom-neslovenska-plemena-crnoj&prev=search

I just looked the 2 levels further on Z63 (finer branches of the tree), some of them are still very widely distributed geographically. Would that indicate a lot of migration in the more recent times?

Macura clan once lived in northern Montenegro, they were part of Srbljaci.
Srbljaci were group composed of several clans, and Macure were one of them.
Srbljaci were farmers in the Lim valley, they were named Srbljaci by Vasojevići clan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasojevići. Vasojevići were sheperds.
Some historians think that Vasojevići named farmer from Lim valley Srbljaci because Vasojevići were Vlachs and they speak different language than Srbljaci. Srbljaci derivated from Serbs. In Serbian language Serbs is Srbi, and Srbljaci is version of Srbi (Serbs).

Vasojevići were stronger and aggressive and steal the land and women from Srbljaci.
Vasojevići were made some kind of apartheid against Srbljaci. Because of that vast majority of Srbljaci moved out from Lim valley, and minority of them were assimilate by Vasojevići, that happened in second half of 15th century. Majority of Macure migrated from Lim valley to Dalmatia, and some of them were probably assimilated by Vasojevići. Macure left Lim valley about 550 years ago, but many toponyms which associate on Macure still exist in Lim valley.

Macure are probably remains og Goths which settled near Lake Skadar in 5th century
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Skadar
There are historical sources that Goths settled near Lake Skadar and Lake Skadar is not far away from Lim valley where Macure lived until 15th century.

There is also theory that Macure are related Masurians
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macure

Milan.M
11-01-18, 16:48
It's not absent in Scandinavia. There are small amounts of Z63 in Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and even Volga area Russia. These are almost all S2078+ and L1237+

The Goths clearly carried Z63 but it was present in all Germanic tribes pre-migration. In the UK, Z63 areas are heaviest in Saxon kingdom areas of old England. Z63 is found in good numbers in Belgium and the Netherlands. It would not surprise me if some Franks carried it as well.

BY351 has a grouping that is clearly Iberian but also very closely to the "Yorkshire" group which matches a test from Sweden. This means that the Goths that migrated eventually to Iberia had common ties with Vikings who brought it to Jorvik (York).

As far as I can tell all branches of I1 were blended around in the Germanic tribes for a couple thousand years. L22 clearly had a founder effect in repoplulating South Sweden and northwards. L22 is also found everywhere, just not in the high concentrations as the northern areas.

Figuring out the exact branches of Z63 or any I1 branch within the Germanic tribes is very tough.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

I1 was not "Germanic" branch,it was hunter gatherer probably,we found I1 in Neolitic Hungary,nothing Germanic here.
Yes nowadays I1 is the most frequent in Germanic countries,but I1-Z63 clade is found all over Europe that's a difference.
If the Goths came from Scandinavia as I1 carriers,we should see this amount of the norse branch of I1 and not of I1-Z63 which is almost absent there,isn't this obvious.

All right but Saxons and Goths are people with totally different history,we should talk separate about this people,Just like we found some branches of I2a din only among north Slavs and not among Southern,or we found I2 from Sardinia to Malta,Crete,Kurdistan.Well nothing Slavic about this haplogroup! we can talk about this to certain degree only for some clades.


Figuring out the exact branches of Z63 or any I1 branch within the Germanic tribes is very tough.
Here i agree but I1-Z63 might not be Germanic,but Germanized much like it was Slavicized,Romanized etc,could be a old wandering farmer lineage around Europe,ending up in many countries and peoples.

I1a3_Young
11-01-18, 17:49
I1 was not "Germanic" branch,it was hunter gatherer probably,we found I1 in Neolitic Hungary,nothing Germanic here.
Yes nowadays I1 is the most frequent in Germanic countries,but I1-Z63 clade is found all over Europe that's a difference.
If the Goths came from Scandinavia as I1 carriers,we should see this amount of the norse branch of I1 and not of I1-Z63 which is almost absent there,isn't this obvious.

All right but Saxons and Goths are people with totally different history,we should talk separate about this people,Just like we found some branches of I2a din only among north Slavs and not among Southern,or we found I2 from Sardinia to Malta,Crete,Kurdistan.Well nothing Slavic about this haplogroup! we can talk about this to certain degree only for some clades.


Here i agree but I1-Z63 might not be Germanic,but Germanized much like it was Slavicized,Romanized etc,could be a old wandering farmer lineage around Europe,ending up in many countries and peoples.Around 99% of I1 is DF29+ which is very clearly of Germanic origin about 2650 BC (4600 YBP).

The origins of I1 are unclear at this point. The single BAB5 sample from the LBKT culture is the first found. The next are Angmöllen Sweden. One sample can only be used for speculation because anything is possible.

SF11 found on the island of Götland was a historical side branch, only positive for 7 and negative for 10 modern I1 SNPs. SF11 lived about the same time as BAB5. That is a wide distance for what may have been sporadic I* branches, of which only I1 survived.

Even the distribution of DF29- men appears to have Germanic origins.

Now, some people may take offense to my use of "German" and Scandinavian. These are almost the same people in an ancient context. West and South Germans ended up with more Celtic influence.

What I really mean by "Germanic" in the context of modern I1 is probably northern Germanic and Scandinavian, with hardly a line between them.

The climate in Scandinavia is much more sensitive to changes. A cold snap of a few years could cause most people to vacate large areas due to crop failures. There may not be much Visigothic Y-DNA left because many of them migrated in the large group.

There is no way the Goths were only across the water, unless they only picked up tribes with Z63 as they moved farther.

I will post some cool maps when my computer is repaired and I have more time.

The old German tribes were always combing, splitting, and fighting. That is why they all carried all branches of I1, in addition to a probable common heritage to begin with.

The Anglo-Saxon migrations to England also included Jutes and probably some Frisians. The Danelaw area of England closely tracks the greatest concentrations of L22. That was also where the Angles settled originally. So, we have no way of knowing how much L22 was in the Angles to begin with. Jutes also probably had good amounts of L22.

Many cultures called all Germans by one name, usually the largest tribe they had contact with. The Scotti called them Sassanach (Saxons), the Welsh Sassoneg, etc. The French call Germany Alemmania after one tribe, even though they themselves are now named after a German Tribe.

So, the tribes were not separate at all. The labels by which they are known may not be accurate. The Saxons apparently included many smaller tribes like Chauci. There were lots of Suebi and Longobard/Lombard groups too. And of course Goths.

The bottom line is that modern I1 became Germanic and then moved with Germanic tribes into places such as Serbia. There is Irish Z63 of people who test essentially purely Celtic on modern tests.

Pre-modern I1 may have had non-germanic origins to begin with, but we cannot know at this point. Picking exactly the identity of a haplogroup is tricky because the autosomal component can change, see R1.

We call M269 and M417 european today because that is what they became, like modern I1 became Germanic.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Wonomyro
11-01-18, 18:26
Srbljaci derivated from Serbs. In Serbian language Serbs is Srbi, and Srbljaci is version of Srbi (Serbs).

The suffix -aci (plural) means "those from the area of".

"Srblje" is the Church Slavonic name of the medieval Serbia and "Srbljaci" means "those who came from the area of Serbia". When the word is in singular than the suffix is -ak.

Some examples:

Bošnjaci (Bosniaks) - people from Bosnia.
Tuzlaci - people from Tuzla (city)
Duvnjaci - people from Duvno (former name of the city)
...

According to the sources, the territory of medieval Serbia was populated by different ethnic groups, including Arbanasi (later Albanians) therefore the term Srbljaci doesn't neccessarilly mean ethnic Serbs.

Milan.M
11-01-18, 19:04
There is no proof that I1-Z63 is Germanic much less Gothic,i will repeat again,this clade is almost absent where Goths are thought to originate Scandinavia.
It is common in other regions of Europe.

Other clades of I1 are another story for which we can speak of Germanic origin.

I-Z63 formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4000 ybp info




I1-Z63 might not be Germanic,but Germanized much like it was Slavicized,Romanized etc,could be a old wandering farmer lineage around Europe,ending up in many countries and peoples.

Zvrk9
11-01-18, 23:41
It is not just that L22 and Z63 are widely spread and present all the way North, many of their distant branches are very widely spread too. I1A3 Young started with Z63 so I will continue with that haplotype.

Looking at the FTDNA data, I see plenty of Scandinavian and North European countries often mixed with Mediterian Europe in the same Z63 branches. So, it is possible distribution by the sea (like in case of Vikings) for some branches of Z63.
9615
So much talk about I1 and Hungary. So here is Norway-Hungary-Island combo on the same little branch, far out on I1-Z63 tree trunk.
9616

We will not solve this just by looking Balkans and talking about origins of old I1.

Ia13 Young, looking forward to your maps when you get a chance to complete them.

despot
12-01-18, 21:01
Well, this thread is old and anything I've said when i opened it was just speculation. Since then I've done the Big Y and my only match at zero known snp differences is a Spaniard. An ftdna admin told us that it may be from the Suebi and since the Suebi also lived in what used to be White Serbia then it's likely my subclade was assimilated into the original Serbs before they migrated south.

hrvat22
12-01-18, 22:16
Well, this thread is old and anything I've said when i opened it was just speculation. Since then I've done the Big Y and my only match at zero known snp differences is a Spaniard. An ftdna admin told us that it may be from the Suebi and since the Suebi also lived in what used to be White Serbia then it's likely my subclade was assimilated into the original Serbs before they migrated south.

Unfortunately, White Serbia does not exist, there is no history record that mentions White Serbia.

I1a3_Young
13-01-18, 00:01
Germanic Movements
9622

9623

Kingdoms established

9624

Germania by Ptolemy - many of these combined to form the "large" tribes.

9625

Expansion by dates - see what I mean when I said the line between old Germanic people and Scandinavians is very hard to draw.

9626

I forget the date of this map but it's post slavic expansion and after the many tribes combined. The Franks are never even mentioned in very old tribe lists. I posted this to show what the Saxons became eventually.

9627

I1a3_Young
13-01-18, 00:11
There is no proof that I1-Z63 is Germanic much less Gothic,i will repeat again,this clade is almost absent where Goths are thought to originate Scandinavia.
It is common in other regions of Europe.

Other clades of I1 are another story for which we can speak of Germanic origin.

I-Z63 formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4000 ybp info

How about you post the theories or data from which you make your conclusions.

despot
13-01-18, 00:20
Germanic Movements
9622

9623

Kingdoms established

9624

Germania by Ptolemy - many of these combined to form the "large" tribes.

9625

Expansion by dates - see what I mean when I said the line between old Germanic people and Scandinavians is very hard to draw.

9626

I forget the date of this map but it's post slavic expansion and after the many tribes combined. The Franks are never even mentioned in very old tribe lists. I posted this to show what the Saxons became eventually.

9627

interesting.

Milan.M
13-01-18, 00:59
How about you post the theories or data from which you make your conclusions.
Hungary Neolithic-oldest I1 found,from where it dispersed.
I1-Z63 descent from this clade,simple we found it all over Europe.

I1a3_Young
13-01-18, 01:51
Hungary Neolithic-oldest I1 found,from where it dispersed.
I1-Z63 descent from this clade,simple we found it all over Europe.

One data point is not sufficient data for a good conclusion, although I personally believe that I1 was in the Balkans during the Last Glacial Maximum and then spread up the Danube.

However, all of the I1 in the Balkans NOW has come down from Germanic/Scandinavian areas.

I1 has a TMRCA (time to most recent common ancestor) of 4600 ybp. The BAB5 I1 sample in Hungary is 7000 ybp. That means BAB5 is not the MRCA.

There are 305 or more SNPs for I1, of which M253 is only one. M253 is only one of 305 SNPs that all I1 test positive for. Did M253 form 20000 ybp or 7000 ybp? We have no way of knowing due to lack of samples.

But the most recent I1 guy, the one we are descended from, lived only 4600 ybp. That is 2650 BC and it's in the Germanic/Scandinavian population.

If Hungary were the spread out point then the diversity of I1 would be there.

They have begun a Turkish study for 350 people 7000 to 10000 ybp. It will be interesting if they find I1 there and interesting if they don't.

Milan.M
13-01-18, 02:11
But the most recent I1 guy, the one we are descended from, lived only 4600 ybp. That is 2650 BC and it's in the Germanic/Scandinavian population.

How do you know where he lived,also in 2650 B.C hardly was Germanic in that era.

We cleared that this clade has nothing to do with Goths, had it come with them we would find the norse branch in much bigger amount in the Balkans than I1-Z63.
Take a look in Scandinavian clades of I1.
There is no proof that I1-Z63 spread with Germanic people in the Balkans or anywhere else,except in your case Anglo-Saxons perhaps.
I-Z63 formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4000 ybp info
We don't know where it was at this period,and if we find I1-Z63 outside Germanic territories prior migration period we can easy close this discussion.
A 2014 study in Hungary uncovered remains of nine individuals from the Linear Pottery culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_Pottery_culture), one of whom was found to have carried the M253 SNP which defines Haplogroup I1.

I1a3_Young
13-01-18, 15:44
How do you know where he lived,also in 2650 B.C hardly was Germanic in that era.

We cleared that this clade has nothing to do with Goths, had it come with them we would find the norse branch in much bigger amount in the Balkans than I1-Z63.
Take a look in Scandinavian clades of I1.
There is no proof that I1-Z63 spread with Germanic people in the Balkans or anywhere else,except in your case Anglo-Saxons perhaps.
I-Z63 formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4000 ybp info
We don't know where it was at this period,and if we find I1-Z63 outside Germanic territories prior migration period we can easy close this discussion.
A 2014 study in Hungary uncovered remains of nine individuals from the Linear Pottery culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_Pottery_culture), one of whom was found to have carried the M253 SNP which defines Haplogroup I1.

You keep repeating the same things and I suspect that there is a language barrier between us.

Z63 is absolutely moved by Gothic tribes. I'm part of the Z63 FB group and FTDNA project. It's plainly obvious. If you don't want to believe me, believe Maciamo who is the very knowledgeable author of Eupedia.

https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I1_Y-DNA.shtml


Haplogroup I1 is the most common type of haplogroup I in northern Europe. It is found mostly in Scandinavia and Finland, where it typically represent over 35% of the Y chromosomes. Associated with the Norse ethnicity, I1 is found in all places invaded by ancient Germanic tribes and the Vikings. After the core of ancient Germanic civilisation in Scandinavia, the highest frequencies of I1 are observed in other Germanic-speaking regions, such as Germany, Austria, the Low Countries, England and the Scottish Lowlands, which all have between 10% and 20% of I1 lineages.


Germanic migrations

The Germanic migrations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period) dispersed I1 lineages to Britain (Anglo-Saxons), Belgium (Franks, Saxons), France (Franks, Visigoths and Burgundians), South Germany (Franks, Alamanni, Suebi, Marcomanni, Thuringii and others), Switzerland (Alamanni, Suebi, Burgundians), Iberia (Visigoths, Suebi and Vandals), Italy (Goths, Vandals, Lombards), Austria and Slovenia (Ostrogoths, Lombards, Bavarians), Ukraine and Moldova (Goths), as well as around Hungary and northern Serbia (Gepids). The I1 found among the Poles (6%), Czechs (11%), Slovaks (6%) and Hungarians (8%) is also the result of centuries of influence from their German and Austrian neighbours. The relatively high frequency of I1 around Serbia and western Bulgaria (5% to 10%) could be owed to the Goths who settled in the Eastern Roman Empire in the 3rd and 4th centuries.The Danish and Norwegian Vikings brought more I1 to Britain, Ireland, the Isle of Man, Normandy, Flanders, Iberia, Sicily... The Swedish Vikings (Varangians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varangians)) set up colonies in Russia and Ukraine, and outposts as far as the Byzantine Empire, the Caucasus and Persia. The higher frequency of I1 in Northwest Russia (east of the Baltic) hints at had a particularly strong Varangian presence, which is concordant with the establishment of the Kievan Rus' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kievan_Rus%27) by the Swedes.

9632

On the blue underline, I disagree that S2078 is uncommon in those areas. It's almost the only version of Z63 found in Scandinavia and is very common in the British Isles.

Milan.M
13-01-18, 17:13
You keep repeating the same things and I suspect that there is a language barrier between us.

Z63 is absolutely moved by Gothic tribes. I'm part of the Z63 FB group and FTDNA project. It's plainly obvious. If you don't want to believe me, believe Maciamo who is the very knowledgeable author of Eupedia.

https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I1_Y-DNA.shtml





9632

On the blue underline, I disagree that S2078 is uncommon in those areas. It's almost the only version of Z63 found in Scandinavia and is very common in the British Isles.
Yes i suspect that there is indeed language barrier.

For Last time;I1-Z63 is almost absent in Scandinavia where Goths originate,if this clade was spread by Goths from Scandinavia we would expect the Norse clade I1-L22 to be predominant where Goths migrated and not only but also other "Nordic" lineages of R1b U106 and R1a Z284,but we found "Gothic" clade I1-Z63 which is almost absent in Scandinavia that was probably later arrival there from Germany, but nothing else of other "Gothic" clades,absolutely impossible to anyone who can think except the wishful thinkers
.But i guess this is not about wishful thinking.

A look at the phylogenetic tree shows that the Finns, Swedes and Norwegians belong primarily to the northern cluster I1-L22.
R1a Z284 is another haplogroup associated with Scandinavia.
R1b U106 is another haplogroup associated with Scandinavia.

The Goths should had been carriers of this haplogroups and clades and not the almost non existent I1-Z63 in Scandinavia.

Tell me if there is something you don't understand again.

I1a3_Young
14-01-18, 04:43
Yes i suspect that there is indeed language barrier.

For Last time;I1-Z63 is almost absent in Scandinavia where Goths originate,if this clade was spread by Goths from Scandinavia we would expect the Norse clade I1-L22 to be predominant where Goths migrated and not only but also other "Nordic" lineages of R1b U106 and R1a Z284,but we found "Gothic" clade I1-Z63 which is almost absent in Scandinavia that was probably later arrival there from Germany, but nothing else of other "Gothic" clades,absolutely impossible to anyone who can think except the wishful thinkers
.But i guess this is not about wishful thinking.

A look at the phylogenetic tree shows that the Finns, Swedes and Norwegians belong primarily to the northern cluster I1-L22.
R1a Z284 is another haplogroup associated with Scandinavia.
R1b U106 is another haplogroup associated with Scandinavia.

The Goths should had been carriers of this haplogroups and clades and not the almost non existent I1-Z63 in Scandinavia.

Tell me if there is something you don't understand again.

How about you draw a map where you think the Goths came from and present evidence to back up your claim. I hope it doesn't come from Jordane's fantasy tales of magical swords, sons of gods, and battles against Amazon women.

Bachus
26-04-18, 08:47
I1-Z63 among Serbs (not all results are on this table)

https://forum.krstarica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=449336&d=1501081470

eyeswideopen
20-08-18, 17:52
Hello all. New to this forum but curious on your thoughts and data on I1-M253. I'm Serbian from Sumadija and it seems this haplo group is not as common. i've posted my results below in case it helps. Thank you! Hope some light can be shed on this..



DYS393

DYS390

DYS19
DYS391

DYS385
DYS426

DYS388

DYS439

DYS389I

DYS392
DYS389II




13

23
14
10
13-14
11
14
11
12
11
28

n1tr0dr
21-08-18, 00:16
You currently only have 12 markers, it's hard to tell. Have you tried nevgen.org? I suggest you aslo to go to Poreklo forum and ask there. They can say if you have matches on all 12 markers with anyone from 2200+ tested Serbs.

I1 isn't that uncommon in Serbia - we make about 8% here.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

Commander Spock
21-08-18, 19:01
Hello all. New to this forum but curious on your thoughts and data on I1-M253. I'm Serbian from Sumadija and it seems this haplo group is not as common. i've posted my results below in case it helps. Thank you! Hope some light can be shed on this..



DYS393
DYS390
DYS19
DYS391
DYS385
DYS426
DYS388
DYS439
DYS389I
DYS392
DYS389II



13
23
14
10
13-14
11
14
11
12
11
28





Maybe I1>M253>P109>FGC22045, but hard to tell from 12 markers test.