PDA

View Full Version : Knez Dervan's Serbia and the Ethnogenisis of Balkan Serbs



stoningbull54
25-07-17, 18:03
Today I was looking at a map of the distribution of haplgroup I2a1 in Europe when I made an interesting discovery. According to Serbian legend and the Byzantine Chronicles, the Serbs left an area known as "White Serbia" under the leadership of the Unknown Archon to migrate into the Balkans. This archon was said to be the son of Knez Dervan who ruled over an area of East Germany in the area which is today inhabited by Sorbs. If we examine a map of Dervan's realm and compare it to I2a1 frequency, we can clearly an elevated concentration of I2a1 in the area of his former realm:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Dervan.png
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif
Could the elevated frequency of I2a1 in southeast Germany and western Czech Republic be the result of a Serbian presence in the dark ages? It is quite evident that there is an elevated frequency of I2a1 in the areas ascribed in Byzantine Chronicles as the location from which Serbs migrated to the Balkans.

Kingslav
25-07-17, 21:36
South Slavs you guys had great migration from White Croatia, White Serbia during medieval era. If you want read about this, I belong to this coat of arms and we are I2A-DIN. This people is nobility of Carpatho-Rus. Some of the people who belong to this originated from Saxony, east Germany the region you referencing, but were Slavs. The second option for that spot of I2A-DIN in east Germany, people from Carpatho-Rus rich in I2A-DIN migrated to west Poland after WW2 my family is example, some of them take jobs in Germany, Czech on other side of border for economic reason and just remained there. There is people in my own family did this.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sas_coat_of_arms

stoningbull54
25-07-17, 22:28
Very interesting, I was aware that the old Polish nobility were carriers of I2a. Perhaps this group was the warrior class among the ancient slavs? This would make sense with regard to the slavic expansion into the Balkans, as it was only the warriors who came and not the farmers (R1a dominant). Like you, I am I2a - Din (I2a1b3 - L621).

Kingslav
25-07-17, 22:42
Very interesting, I was aware that the old Polish nobility were carriers of I2a. Perhaps this group was the warrior class among the ancient slavs? This would make sense with regard to the slavic expansion into the Balkans, as it was only the warriors who came and not the farmers (R1a dominant). Like you, I am I2a - Din (I2a1b3 - L621).

Warrior class are certainly I2A-DIN, the Indo-European Invaders from Steppe are R1A. I2A-DIN descend from Thracians, Dacians who were living proximity of Black Sea. These same people were ruling class in modern times until 1945.

I am I2a1b-L621

stoningbull54
25-07-17, 23:37
Interesting, do you trace your descent from the Carpathian mountains? Specifically, among the Ukrainian Boykos/Lemkos? I am aware that these groups of Carpathian Slavs have an elevated frequency of I2a1b-L621.

LeBrok
25-07-17, 23:48
South Slavs you guys had great migration from White Croatia, White Serbia during medieval era. If you want read about this, I belong to this coat of arms and we are I2A-DIN. This people is nobility of Carpatho-Rus. Some of the people who belong to this originated from Saxony, east Germany the region you referencing, but were Slavs. The second option for that spot of I2A-DIN in east Germany, people from Carpatho-Rus rich in I2A-DIN migrated to west Poland after WW2 my family is example, some of them take jobs in Germany, Czech on other side of border for economic reason and just remained there. There is people in my own family did this.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sas_coat_of_arms

Warrior class are certainly I2A-DIN, the Indo-European Invaders from Steppe are R1A. I2A-DIN descend from Thracians, Dacians who were living proximity of Black Sea. These same people were ruling class in modern times until 1945.

I am I2a1b-L621
Do you know less definitive words like: perhaps, maybe, more or less likely, probably, in my opinion, I'm guessing, etc? No?
But of course you figured this all out without doubt, without ancient DNA.

Kingslav
26-07-17, 00:07
Interesting, do you trace your descent from the Carpathian mountains? Specifically, among the Ukrainian Boykos/Lemkos? I am aware that these groups of Carpathian Slavs have an elevated frequency of I2a1b-L621.

My paternal side from Carpathians, we are Hutsuls, from where is now southwestern Ukraine and Northern Romania.

Here is more about Boykos, Lemkos, Hutsuls.

Genetics of Carpatho-Rus

"In terms of haplogroup frequencies, the Hutsuls are more like their non-Rusyn neighbors (especially Ukrainians) than the Boykos or Lemkos. Meanwhile, Boykos and Lemkos are most like Romanians and Czechs, and Hutsuls are most like Croatian mainlanders. The Hutsuls are the easternmost Rusyns, living in Hutsulschyna in easternmost Subcarpathian Rus' in Ukraine and in neighboring northernmost Romania."

Kingslav
26-07-17, 00:20
Do you know less definitive words like: perhaps, maybe, more or less likely, probably, in my opinion, I'm guessing, etc? No?
But of course you figured this all out without doubt, without ancient DNA.

Oh Im sorry, maybe you have better theory why ancestors were in Carpathians?

stoningbull54
26-07-17, 02:14
The Serbian homeland before the migration to "White Serbia" was known as Boyka. There is a theory that the Boykos are the remnants of the Serbs before their western migration to East Germany, while the Hutsuls are the remnants of the Croats before they began their migration westward. Have you done this Eurogenes K36 map before using your gedmatch results? I would be curious to see what results you get. The link you can use to tabulate your results is below as is my map.

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/similitude.htm

8958

LeBrok
26-07-17, 02:37
Oh Im sorry, maybe you have better theory why ancestors were in Carpathians?That's the thing, present them as hypotheses or your educated guesses, not as facts. You might gain some credibility and respect.

Kingslav
26-07-17, 02:58
That's the thing, present them as hypotheses or your educated guesses, not as facts. You might gain some credibility and respect.

I am not looking for respect on here, I am here to discuss the real history.

Kingslav
26-07-17, 03:07
The Serbian homeland before the migration to "White Serbia" was known as Boyka. There is a theory that the Boykos are the remnants of the Serbs before their western migration to East Germany, while the Hutsuls are the remnants of the Croats before they began their migration westward. Have you done this Eurogenes K36 map before using your gedmatch results? I would be curious to see what results you get. The link you can use to tabulate your results is below as is my map.

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/similitude.htm

8958

Yeah I just did it, what does the % suggest?

The countries I score 75 or more,

Croatia 75, Moldova 75, Romania 80, Hungary 79, Slovakia 79, Czech 77, Ukraine 85, Poland 89, Russia 85, Belarus 88, Lithuania 78, Latvia 79, Saxony 75 (East Germany)

I cant see the attachment

LeBrok
26-07-17, 07:30
I am not looking for respect on here, I am here to discuss the real history.How can it be, if you present your hypotheses as real history?

Kingslav
26-07-17, 08:38
How can it be, if you present your hypotheses as real history?

Im not asking you to believe my views, you have all freedoms

Leka
26-07-17, 21:10
Original Serbs were Jatts, they came from India.

stoningbull54
26-07-17, 22:03
What Leka is presenting is a theory, while what I am presenting is history from a Byzantine historical chronicle which stated that the Serbs arrived from "White Serbia". What I am trying to say is this validated by an elevated frequency of I2a1 in their supposed homeland.

LeBrok
26-07-17, 22:04
Original Serbs were Jatts, they came from India.Did you come here to make an arss of yourself? Stupidities like this you can post on your facebook or your own website.

stoningbull54
26-07-17, 22:05
Here's my K36 map. Post yours if you can:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=8958

Vlad82
26-07-17, 22:43
Hi!
This is my first post here.
I am not sure that map of I2a1 is right.
According to some researches there is no high I2a1 frequency in area of Dervan's Serbia.
A global analysis of Y-chromosomal haplotype diversity for 23 STR loci"
LEIPZIG n=302
Results (Nevgen predictor) for R1a and I2a1b:
R1а М417/M458 =21.53
R1a Z93/Z284/L664 =3.97
I2-CTS10228 =3.97

Or with subbranches:
R1a М417 =7.94
CТS3402> YP238, YP951, Y2613
CTS8816>YP315, L1280, Y2910
CTS1211>P278.2, YP4278
Z92>Y4459

R1a M458 =13.57
R1a M458 (xL260) =8.60
R1a L260 =4.96

R1a L644 =0.99
L664>S3479
L664>S2894>YP285

R1a Z284 =1.98
Z284>L448>CTS4179
Z284>6842
R1a Z93 =0.99
Z93>Z94>S23592
.
______
I2a Dinaric =3.97
I-CTS10228 (dinaric north) =3.64
I-PH908 (dinaric south) =0.33

"Contemporary paternal genetic landscape of Polish and German populations: from early medieval Slavic expansion to post-World War II resettlements"
Lusatian Sorbs n=123
R1a-M417 =8.13
CTS8816>YP315, L1280
CTS3402>YP951 или Y2613

R1a-M458 =56.91
R-M458 (xL260) =23.57
R-L260 =33.33
______
R1b-M269 =9.75
R-L48 =4.06
R-P312 =3.25
R-L23 =1.62
R-U106 =0.81
______
I1-M253 =9.75
I-M253 =6.50
I-L22 =2.43
I-M91 =0.81
______
E1b-V13 =4.87
______
I2-CTS10228 (Dinaric North) =2.43
______
G2a-P15 =2.43
______
J2a-M410 =1.62
______
I2-M223 =1.62
______
J2b-M241 =0.81
______
J1-M267 =0.81
______
I2c2 =0.81


"Toward Male Individualization with Rapidly Mutating Y-Chromosomal Short Tandem Repeats"
LEIPZIG n=215
R1a 21.4%
I2a1b 3.72% (din north 2.325%: din south 1.39%)

The highest frequencies of I2a dinaric among West Slavs are in Central Bohemia (Czech Valley)
"Evaluation of 14 Ychromosomal Short TandemRepeat Haplotype with Focuson DYS449, DYS456, andDYS458: Czech Population Sample"
DNA samples were obtained from 50 unrelated healthy Czech Caucasian male participants living in or around Prague (Czech Republic)


R1b
22
44.0%











I2a din
8
16.0%
;449<31
3
6.00%
449=31
3
6.00%
449>31
2
4.0%


R1a
7
14.0%











I1
3
6.0%











I1/G2a
1
2.0%











J2
4
8.0%











N1c
1
2.0%











H1a M82/J2a1
1
2.0%











H1a M82 74%
1
2.0%











I2a2a M223
2
4.0%












Note: because of low number STR markers some predictions might not be accurate.

"Y-Chromosomal Variation in the Czech Republic"
Klatovy I2a-P37 14.6% and Pisek I2a-P37 9.2%


According to Genebaze . cz
Zlin and Olomouc regions have high frequency of I2a dinaric.

Leka
26-07-17, 22:53
Did you come here to make an arss of yourself? Stupidities like this you can post on your facebook or your own website.

Why don't you counter it but you outright insult me? Not very nice of you, for a mod. Calm your le tits, I am just taking a piss - that's what almost everyone seems to be doing here anyway.

Vlad82
26-07-17, 23:12
My paternal side from Carpathians, we are Hutsuls, from where is now southwestern Ukraine and Northern Romania.

Here is more about Boykos, Lemkos, Hutsuls.

Genetics of Carpatho-Rus

"In terms of haplogroup frequencies, the Hutsuls are more like their non-Rusyn neighbors (especially Ukrainians) than the Boykos or Lemkos. Meanwhile, Boykos and Lemkos are most like Romanians and Czechs, and Hutsuls are most like Croatian mainlanders. The Hutsuls are the easternmost Rusyns, living in Hutsulschyna in easternmost Subcarpathian Rus' in Ukraine and in neighboring northernmost Romania."

This is interesting!
Bukovina and Northerneastern Romania have the highest frequencies of I2a dinaric outside Balkan approximately between 30% and 45% .

May I know your kit number in I2a project?

Vlad82
26-07-17, 23:15
I am not sure that map of I2a1 is right.
According to some researches there is no high I2a1 frequency in area of Dervan's Serbia.
A global analysis of Y-chromosomal haplotype diversity for 23 STR loci"
LEIPZIG n=302
Results (Nevgen predictor) for R1a and I2a1b:
R1а М417/M458 =21.53
R1a Z93/Z284/L664 =3.97
I2-CTS10228 =3.97

Or with subbranches:
R1a М417 =7.94
CТS3402> YP238, YP951, Y2613
CTS8816>YP315, L1280, Y2910
CTS1211>P278.2, YP4278
Z92>Y4459

R1a M458 =13.57
R1a M458 (xL260) =8.60
R1a L260 =4.96

R1a L644 =0.99
L664>S3479
L664>S2894>YP285

R1a Z284 =1.98
Z284>L448>CTS4179
Z284>6842
R1a Z93 =0.99
Z93>Z94>S23592
.
______
I2a Dinaric =3.97
I-CTS10228 (dinaric north) =3.64
I-PH908 (dinaric south) =0.33

"Contemporary paternal genetic landscape of Polish and German populations: from early medieval Slavic expansion to post-World War II resettlements"
Lusatian Sorbs n=123
R1a-M417 =8.13
CTS8816>YP315, L1280
CTS3402>YP951 или Y2613

R1a-M458 =56.91
R-M458 (xL260) =23.57
R-L260 =33.33
______
R1b-M269 =9.75
R-L48 =4.06
R-P312 =3.25
R-L23 =1.62
R-U106 =0.81
______
I1-M253 =9.75
I-M253 =6.50
I-L22 =2.43
I-M91 =0.81
______
E1b-V13 =4.87
______
I2-CTS10228 (Dinaric North) =2.43
______
G2a-P15 =2.43
______
J2a-M410 =1.62
______
I2-M223 =1.62
______
J2b-M241 =0.81
______
J1-M267 =0.81
______
I2c2 =0.81


"Toward Male Individualization with Rapidly Mutating Y-Chromosomal Short Tandem Repeats"
LEIPZIG n=215
R1a 21.4%
I2a1b 3.72% (din north 2.325%: din south 1.39%)

The highest frequencies of I2a dinaric among West Slavs are in Central Bohemia (Czech Valley)
"Evaluation of 14 Ychromosomal Short TandemRepeat Haplotype with Focuson DYS449, DYS456, andDYS458: Czech Population Sample"
DNA samples were obtained from 50 unrelated healthy Czech Caucasian male participants living in or around Prague (Czech Republic)


R1b
22
44.0%











I2a din
8
16.0%
;449<31
3
6.00%
449=31
3
6.00%
449>31
2
4.0%


R1a
7
14.0%











I1
3
6.0%











I1/G2a
1
2.0%











J2
4
8.0%











N1c
1
2.0%











H1a M82/J2a1
1
2.0%











H1a M82 74%
1
2.0%











I2a2a M223
2
4.0%












Note: because of low number STR markers some predictions might not be accurate.

"Y-Chromosomal Variation in the Czech Republic"
Klatovy I2a-P37 14.6% and Pisek I2a-P37 9.2%


According to Genebaze . cz
Zlin and Olomouc regions have high frequency of I2a dinaric.

Kingslav
26-07-17, 23:38
This is interesting!
Bukovina and Northerneastern Romania have the highest frequencies of I2a dinaric outside Balkan approximately between 30% and 45% .

May I know your kit number in I2a project?


Here is my Gedmatch Oracles


Eurogenes K15 Oracles- Kingslav


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance


1 80.7% Estonian + 19.3% Greek_Thessaly @ 5.72
2 87.1% Estonian + 12.9% Libyan_Jewish @ 5.8
3 88.7% Estonian + 11.3% Samaritan @ 5.88
4 89% Estonian + 11% Lebanese_Christian @ 5.91
5 70.9% Ukrainian_Lviv + 29.1% Estonian @ 5.94
6 87.9% Estonian + 12.1% Cyprian @ 5.95
7 89% Estonian + 11% Lebanese_Druze @ 5.99
8 77.4% Ukrainian + 22.6% Estonian @ 6.06
9 87% Estonian + 13% Algerian_Jewish @ 6.14
10 86.7% Estonian + 13.3% Italian_Jewish @ 6.15
11 84.7% Estonian + 15.3% Central_Greek @ 6.17
12 85.9% Estonian + 14.1% South_Italian @ 6.18
13 84.2% Estonian + 15.8% Ashkenazi @ 6.18
14 97.9% Ukrainian + 2.1% Yemenite_Jewish @ 6.21
15 85.1% Estonian + 14.9% East_Sicilian @ 6.23
16 89% Estonian + 11% Palestinian @ 6.23
17 89.6% Ukrainian + 10.4% Lithuanian @ 6.26
18 88.8% Estonian + 11.2% Jordanian @ 6.27
19 98.3% Ukrainian + 1.7% Lebanese_Druze @ 6.28
20 84.1% Ukrainian_Lviv + 15.9% Lithuanian @ 6.29


Dodecad K12b Oracle- Kingslav


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance


1 62.7% Hungarians + 37.3% Russian @ 1.4
2 81.3% Mixed_Slav + 18.7% Andalucia @ 1.52
3 73.6% Russian_B + 26.4% Cataluna @ 1.61
4 75.2% Hungarians + 24.8% Finnish @ 1.62
5 74.1% Hungarians + 25.9% Lithuanians @ 1.64
6 74.8% Russian + 25.2% Baleares @ 1.65
7 79.4% Mixed_Slav + 20.6% Baleares @ 1.67
8 74.5% Russian_B + 25.5% Spaniards @ 1.7
9 57.2% Ukranians + 42.8% German @ 1.73
10 71.1% Hungarians + 28.9% Lithuanian @ 1.73
11 56.6% Hungarians + 43.4% Mixed_Slav @ 1.74
12 75.6% Russian_B + 24.4% Castilla_La_Mancha @ 1.75
13 68.2% Ukranians + 31.8% Mixed_Germanic @ 1.79
14 74% Hungarians + 26% FIN30 @ 1.8
15 80.2% Mixed_Slav + 19.8% Spaniards @ 1.81
16 66% Russian_B + 34% French @ 1.82
17 79.4% Mixed_Slav + 20.6% Extremadura @ 1.83
18 83.7% Russian + 16.3% Sardinian @ 1.84
19 74% Russian + 26% North_Italian @ 1.88
20 75.5% Russian_B + 24.5% Valencia @ 1.88


PuntDNAL K15 Oracle- Kingslav


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance


1 52.2% Belarusian + 47.8% Austrian @ 1.47
2 79.8% Belarusian + 20.2% Italian @ 1.51
3 50.9% Belarusian + 49.1% Slovenian @ 1.51
4 66.7% Lithuanian + 33.3% Macedonian @ 1.59
5 68.8% Lithuanian + 31.2% Bulgarian @ 1.6
6 72.1% Lithuanian + 27.9% Italian @ 1.6
7 68.2% Lithuanian + 31.8% Romanian @ 1.61
8 76.7% Belarusian + 23.3% Romanian @ 1.61
9 69.2% Belarusian + 30.8% Serbian @ 1.61
10 78.5% Belarusian + 21.5% Montenegrin @ 1.65
11 54.5% Belarusian + 45.5% Hungarian @ 1.67
12 75.4% Lithuanian + 24.6% Albanian @ 1.67
13 59.8% Slovenian + 40.2% Lithuanian @ 1.68
14 56.2% Hungarian + 43.8% Lithuanian @ 1.68
15 59.4% Lithuanian + 40.6% Serbian @ 1.69
16 70.3% Lithuanian + 29.7% Montenegrin @ 1.69
17 83.1% Belarusian + 16.9% Tuscan @ 1.7
18 82.5% Belarusian + 17.5% Albanian @ 1.72
19 77.2% Belarusian + 22.8% Bulgarian @ 1.74
20 76.2% Lithuanian + 23.8% Tuscan @ 1.74

Vlad82
26-07-17, 23:44
Thank you Kingslav!
I also belong to I2a dinaric. Unfortunately I have not done autosomal test yet.
Do you know your deeper SNP of I2a dinaric?

Kingslav
26-07-17, 23:47
Here is my K36
and also comparison with 54 other Polish samples.


Population- K36 Kingslav


Amerindian -
Arabian -
Armenian -
Basque 0.61 *****
Central_African -
Central_Euro 10.84
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 5.37 *****
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 26.61
East_Med 0.81 *****
Eastern_Euro 16.42
Fennoscandian 11.57
French 6.04
Iberian 7.39 *****
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 1.11 *****
Malayan -
Near_Eastern -
North_African -
North_Atlantic 2.32
North_Caucasian 3.48 *****
North_Sea 7.28
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy 0.09 *****
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African 0.05 *****
West_Caucasian -
West_Med -



vs Average results of 54 Polish samples in Eurogenes K36 calculator:


Admixture present in x/54 Poles (% range) - avg. %


1) East_Central_Euro 54/54 (17.83 - 33.17) - 24.38
2) Eastern_Euro 54/54 (9.24 - 22.15) - 16.05
3) Fennoscandian 54/54 (6.02 - 16.44) - 12.10
4) North_Sea 54/54 (2.74 - 15.89) - 9.73
5) Central_Euro 54/54 (4.92 - 12.94) - 9.31
6) North_Atlantic 54/54 (0.64 - 12.06) - 6.90
7) East_Balkan 53/54 (1.23 - 11.54) - 6.24 ***** Me 5.37 *****


8) Iberian 53/54 (0.06 - 9.0) - 4.57 ***** Me 7.39 *****
9) French 52/54 (1.29 - 7.96) - 4.07
10) Italian 43/54 (0.07 - 11.47) - 3.07 ***** Me 1.11 *****
11) Basque 40/54 (0.14 - 3.5) - 1.13 ***** Me 0.61 *****
12) Volga-Ural 38/54 (0.12 - 4.63) - 1.03
13) North_Caucasian 21/54 (0.05 - 5.73) - 0.60 ***** Me 3.48 *****


14) West_Med 14/54 (0.1 - 2.35) - 0.21
15) West_Caucasian 9/54 (0.19 - 2.68) - 0.21
16) Armenian 8/54 (0.07 - 3.19) - 0.15
17) East_Med 1/54 (3.77) - 0.07 ***** Me 0.81 *****
18) South_Central_Asian 4/54 (0.26 - 1.11) - 0.05
19) Amerindian 5/54 (0.13 - 1.17) - 0.05
20) Oceanian 4/54 (0.06 - 0.67) - 0.02
21) Arabian 1/54 (1.04) - 0.02
22) West_African 2/54 (0.3 - 0.38) - 0.01 ***** Me 0.05 *****
23) Northeast_African 1/54 (0.24) - 0.004


24) Siberian 0/54 - 0.00
25) East_Asian 0/54 - 0.00
26) East_Central_Asian 0/54 - 0.00
27) Indo-Chinese 0/54 - 0.00
28) South_Chinese 0/54 - 0.00
29) South_Asian 0/54 - 0.00
30) Malayan 0/54 - 0.00
31) Near_Eastern 0/54 - 0.00
32) North_African 0/54 - 0.00
33) East_African 0/54 - 0.00
34) Omotic 0/54 - 0.00
35) Central_African 0/54 - 0.00
36) Pygmy 0/54 - 0.00 ***** Me 0.09 *****

Kingslav
26-07-17, 23:51
Thank you Kingslav!
I also belong to I2a dinaric. Unfortunately I have not done autosomal test yet.
Do you know your deeper SNP of I2a dinaric?

I2a1b2-L621

Vlad82
26-07-17, 23:52
I2a1b2-L621

Dinaric south or north?

Kingslav
27-07-17, 00:39
Dinaric south or north?

Dinaric north

Kingslav
27-07-17, 00:47
Here's my K36 map. Post yours if you can:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=8958

I cant see map

Milan.M
27-07-17, 08:24
Original Serbs were Jatts, they came from India.

Did you come here to make an arss of yourself? Stupidities like this you can post on your facebook or your own website.

In reality it is true that they can share common ancestry but the Gets (Getae) the noblest of the Thracians or Jats as they are known in India did not came from India,but rather opposite.Similarities of their names were noted long time ago and for the Jats Scythian origin is determined,this is proven by genetics now.
The Massagetae from written sources and the Dahae (Dacians) that lived near Indo-Aryans were noted long ago,the fact that they speak Indo-Iranian languages today doesn't mean that's their original origin.


Jat People Genetics

A recent study of the people of Indian Punjab, where about 40% or more of the population are Jat people, strongly shows that the Jat people are Indo-Scythians (https://www.jatland.com/home/Indo-Scythians).[102] (https://www.jatland.com/home/Jats#cite_note-102) The study involved a genealogical DNA test which examined single nucleotide polymorphisms (mutations in a single DNA "letter") on the Y chromosome (which occurs only in males). Jats share many common haplotypes with Ukrainian people, Germanic people, Slavic people, Baltic peoples, Iranian people, and Central Asian groups.[103] (https://www.jatland.com/home/Jats#cite_note-103) This strongly indicates they originate from near or in Ukraine (https://www.jatland.com/home/Ukraine).[104] (https://www.jatland.com/home/Jats#cite_note-104) It found Jat people share only two haplotypes, one of which is also shared with the population of present-day Turkish people, and have few matches with neighbouring Pakistani (https://www.jatland.com/home/Pakistan) populations.[105] (https://www.jatland.com/home/Jats#cite_note-105) This haplotype shared between the two Jat groups may be part of an Indo-Aryan (https://www.jatland.com/home/Indo-Aryans) (or Indo-European people) genetic contribution to these populations, where as the haplotypes shared with other Eurasian populations is due to the strong DNA contributions of Indo-European Scythians (https://www.jatland.com/home/Scythian) (Saka (https://www.jatland.com/home/Saka), Massagetae (https://www.jatland.com/home/Massagetae)) and White Huns

The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) female DNA, Jats contain haplogroups typical of Northern India (https://www.jatland.com/home/Northern_India), Pakistan (https://www.jatland.com/home/Pakistan), and West Asia. This indicates that for the female mtDNA, there is very little connection with Central Asian and northwest European populations, even though Jats share many Y-SNP markers with these populations. Therefore, this DNA Study proves that there has been male DNA into the Jat people from Ukrainian (https://www.jatland.com/home/Ukraine) Scythians (https://www.jatland.com/home/Scythians) (Saka (https://www.jatland.com/home/Saka), Massagetae (https://www.jatland.com/home/Massagetae)) and White Huns.[107] (https://www.jatland.com/home/Jats#cite_note-107)
The highlighted DNA Study suggests that there has been male DNA into the Jat people from Ukrainian (https://www.jatland.com/home/Ukraine) Scythians (https://www.jatland.com/home/Scythians) (Saka (https://www.jatland.com/home/Saka), Massagetae (https://www.jatland.com/home/Massagetae)) and White Huns (https://www.jatland.com/home/White_Huns)


Old name of the Sclavenes(Slavs) is Gets,the truth is different,despite we like to turn it upsite down.

hrvat22
09-09-17, 18:02
stoningbull54 (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/members/53422-stoningbull54)


According to Serbian legend and the Byzantine Chronicles, the Serbs left an area known as "White Serbia"

White Serba is not mentioned anywhere in writing, so it's a lie



This archon was said to be the son of Knez Dervan who ruled over an area of East Germany in the area which is today inhabited by Sorbs

Sorbs have nothing to do with Balkan Serbs, so Dervan historically can only be related with Sorbs


Could the elevated frequency of I2a1 in southeast Germany and western Czech Republic be the result of a Serbian presence in the dark ages? It is quite evident that there is an elevated frequency of I2a1 in the areas ascribed in Byzantine Chronicles as the location from which Serbs migrated to the Balkans.

We do not look in Europe where is more or less I2a, we look where is source of the same.
In Germany is certainly not a source of I2a which have Balkan peoples.

hrvat22
09-09-17, 18:09
The Serbian homeland before the migration to "White Serbia" was known as Boyka. There is a theory that the Boykos are the remnants of the Serbs before their western migration to East Germany, while the Hutsuls are the remnants of the Croats before they began their migration westward. Have you done this Eurogenes K36 map before using your gedmatch results? I would be curious to see what results you get. The link you can use to tabulate your results is below as is my map.

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/similitude.htm

8958


The Serbian homeland before the migration to "White Serbia" was known as Boyka.

There is no historical record about it

hrvat22
09-09-17, 19:40
What Leka is presenting is a theory, while what I am presenting is history from a Byzantine historical chronicle which stated that the Serbs arrived from "White Serbia". What I am trying to say is this validated by an elevated frequency of I2a1 in their supposed homeland.


White Serbia is not mentioned anywhere. Serbian history is not based on truth and that's why leads to confusion.

Garrick
12-09-17, 23:27
Serbian history is not based on truth and that's why leads to confusion. This sentence is very offensive and it is wrong. But if you extend view you can see some similarities between Serbian history, Croatian history, Bulgarian history, Hungarian history, and many other European nations history... What Croatian scientist Dr Dzino noticed that different people (nations) feed on similar myths in their own versions. Unfortunately records, especially in further past, are not reliable. They are transcripts of transcripts or oral stories with many changes and additions. You can add myths, biased interpreters etc. And from the time of building of nations (19th century) politics has taken the lead. Here at Eupedia we are trying to find some reliable parameters based on the research of genetic genealogy, it's a giant jigsaw puzzle where we have a few parts for now.
Sorbs have nothing to do with Balkan Serbs, so Dervan historically can only be related with Sorbs Yes. And on another thread already I wrote about it. Dervan's Serbia was country of Lusatuian Sorbs not Balkan Serbs. And Lusatian Sorbs have different genetics. Practically whole thread is on the wrong grounds.

hrvat22
13-09-17, 16:43
This sentence is very offensive and it is wrong. But if you extend view you can see some similarities between Serbian history, Croatian history, Bulgarian history, Hungarian history, and many other European nations history... What Croatian scientist Dr Dzino noticed that different people (nations) feed on similar myths in their own versions. Unfortunately records, especially in further past, are not reliable. They are transcripts of transcripts or oral stories with many changes and additions. You can add myths, biased interpreters etc. And from the time of building of nations (19th century) politics has taken the lead. Here at Eupedia we are trying to find some reliable parameters based on the research of genetic genealogy, it's a giant jigsaw puzzle where we have a few parts for now. Yes. And on another thread already I wrote about it. Dervan's Serbia was country of Lusatuian Sorbs not Balkan Serbs. And Lusatian Sorbs have different genetics. Practically whole thread is on the wrong grounds.

Serbian wiki...White Serbia

https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B0_%D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8% D1%98%D0%B0

If White Serbia does not exist in writing then why in Serbia claim that she exists...

Garrick
30-09-17, 00:41
Serbian wiki...White Serbia

https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B0_%D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8% D1%98%D0%B0

If White Serbia does not exist in writing then why in Serbia claim that she exists...

If you read Pjanovic-Lukovic Olga, Sorbonne PhD, yes, she was linguist, she claims that Bosnia and Slavonia were White Serbia, but she is not Serbian science mainstream.

In Serbia you will never heard "White Serbs" it does not exists in national memory.

Someone can find in Serbia stories and fair tales about Roman period in the Balkans but nowhere and nothing about White Serbs.

hrvat22
30-09-17, 09:41
If you read Pjanovic-Lukovic Olga, Sorbonne PhD, yes, she was linguist, she claims that Bosnia and Slavonia were White Serbia, but she is not Serbian science mainstream.

In Serbia you will never heard "White Serbs" it does not exists in national memory.

Someone can find in Serbia stories and fair tales about Roman period in the Balkans but nowhere and nothing about White Serbs.


Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus said one testimony, which is undoubtedly the Serbo-Croatian origin, and consists in this: that Croats came to the south from White Croatia, and Serbs from White Serbia, Bojke,

It was written by Vladimir Ćorović (1885 (https://bs.wikipedia.org/wiki/1885)-1941 (https://bs.wikipedia.org/wiki/1941)) ..Was a leading 20th-century Serbian historian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_historiography), since 1919 he has been a professor at the Faculty of Philosophy of the University of Belgrade. For the academic of the Serbian Royal Academy (later SANU) was elected in 1922.

https://www.rastko.rs/rastko-bl/istorija/corovic/istorija/1_3_l.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_%C4%86orovi%C4%87


There is no written document that mentione White Serbia, and for White Serbia in Bosnia I hear for the first time.

Garrick
01-10-17, 00:47
There is no written document that mentione White Serbia, and for White Serbia in Bosnia I hear for the first time.

If you like these sources as: Olga Lukovic Pjanic (PhD Sorbonne) "Serbs, the people the oldest" (autochthonous school).

Unfortunately Serbs didn't have good own historians, mostly Serbian history wrote researchers who were not Serbs, what is interesting good Serbian historians mostly dealt with other topics (no national history).

Croats worked much harder on Croatian history.

Two schools shaped Serbian history Slavic school and German school. Third is autochthonous school which has no recognition.

Slavic school tends to see Serbs as part of Slavic group of nations, there were a lot of Slavic historians who explored Serbian history, from the Czechs to the Russians.

Problem is always when someone speaks about history - politics. Where the facts end in favor of politics.

It is a very broad topic, not for this thread.

I don't know where Olga Lukovic-Pjanic found sources about White Serbs, but they are not Serbian.

What is fact is:
Serbs never call themselves White Serbs, it does not exist in national memory, no one story, fair tale, myth, folk poetry, nothing.

Crya
06-11-17, 11:27
Good day everyone, I've been reading lately most of the posts related to I2a haplogroups and i have noticed that a lot of peoples are posting their theories based on weak wikipedia knowledge . Moreover, I am surprised that theory of the great slaves migration to Balkan is still used (very often here) even though it is proven to be wrong. Some of the countries already removed this theory from their curriculum such as Italy, Spain, Netherlands following the modern science and disregarding theories without proof. Yet Serbs and Croats are still referring to falls history made by Austro-Hungerians in 2nd half of 19th century with one purpose: to colonize Balkan, providing others the chance to steal their heritage, and i am not talking only about common people but historians as well. At least it is proven that there was no "great migration" but more likely the opposite. I've seen so many bickering between Serbs and Croats about the origin, neglecting the fact that the Illyrians, our ancestors, were settled in western Balkan long time before so-called the great migration. If someone want to make some conclusion about the origin, it is not easy, and all the DNA data needs to be read in conjunction with the true history facts in order to make clear picture. Wikipedia is unreliable so i strongly recommend not to be used. I've seen many times guys taking some sentences from the books which they have never read completely out of the context. This is the correct way to confuse your self and post complete nonsense.

Bachus
06-11-17, 11:48
Good day everyone, I've been reading lately most of the posts related to I2a haplogroups and i have noticed that a lot of peoples are posting their theories based on weak wikipedia knowledge . Moreover, I am surprised that theory of the great slaves migration to Balkan is still used (very often here) even though it is proven to be wrong. Some of the countries already removed this theory from their curriculum such as Italy, Spain, Netherlands following the modern science and disregarding theories without proof. Yet Serbs and Croats are still referring to falls history made by Austro-Hungerians in 2nd half of 19th century with one purpose: to colonize Balkan, providing others the chance to steal their heritage, and i am not talking only about common people but historians as well. At least it is proven that there was no "great migration" but more likely the opposite. I've seen so many bickering between Serbs and Croats about the origin, neglecting the fact that the Illyrians, our ancestors, were settled in western Balkan long time before so-called the great migration. If someone want to make some conclusion about the origin, it is not easy, and all the DNA data needs to be read in conjunction with the true history facts in order to make clear picture. Wikipedia is unreliable so i strongly recommend not to be used. I've seen many times guys taking some sentences from the books which they have never read completely out of the context. This is the correct way to confuse your self and post complete nonsense.

Novi Pazar is that you?

LABERIA
06-11-17, 13:13
Original Serbs were Jatts, they came from India.
First time i hear this theory. Any source?
My opinion is that they came from Pashtunistan. There are even some toponymus that suggest this region as the original homeland of the Serbs.

Bachus
06-11-17, 13:29
First time i hear this theory. Any source?
My opinion is that they came from Pashtunistan. There are even some toponymus that suggest this region as the original homeland of the Serbs.

Serbs have nothing to do with Pashtuns. Genetically, linguistically neihther in any other sense Sebs are not related with Pashtuns.

Deal with it.

hrvat22
06-11-17, 13:33
Good day everyone, I've been reading lately most of the posts related to I2a haplogroups and i have noticed that a lot of peoples are posting their theories based on weak wikipedia knowledge . Moreover, I am surprised that theory of the great slaves migration to Balkan is still used (very often here) even though it is proven to be wrong. Some of the countries already removed this theory from their curriculum such as Italy, Spain, Netherlands following the modern science and disregarding theories without proof. Yet Serbs and Croats are still referring to falls history made by Austro-Hungerians in 2nd half of 19th century with one purpose: to colonize Balkan, providing others the chance to steal their heritage, and i am not talking only about common people but historians as well. At least it is proven that there was no "great migration" but more likely the opposite. I've seen so many bickering between Serbs and Croats about the origin, neglecting the fact that the Illyrians, our ancestors, were settled in western Balkan long time before so-called the great migration. If someone want to make some conclusion about the origin, it is not easy, and all the DNA data needs to be read in conjunction with the true history facts in order to make clear picture. Wikipedia is unreliable so i strongly recommend not to be used. I've seen many times guys taking some sentences from the books which they have never read completely out of the context. This is the correct way to confuse your self and post complete nonsense.

You have genetics and all you say prove with genetics, till then you talk fairy tales.

LABERIA
06-11-17, 13:42
Serbs have nothing to do with Pashtuns. Genetically, linguistically neihther in any other sense Sebs are not related with Pashtuns.

Deal with it.

In Afghanistan and Pakistan there is a tribal group of Pashtuns called Sarbans / Sarbani. Their name is similar to the name of Caucasian tribe named Sarban (Sarbani), which some researchers connected to Serbs.[6]

If you don't agree with this theory, you have to offer an alternative.

Bachus
06-11-17, 13:47
If you don't agree with this theory, you have to offer an alternative.

I dont't agree for sure, because Pastuns have 55% R1a-Z93 and among Serbs R1a-Z93 does not exist, not a single Serb with R1a-Z93 from the around 3500 tested Serbs.

Serbian R1a are Z280 (around 2/3) and M458 (around 1/3) - both are Slavic, other branches of R1a such as Scandinavian Z284 or "Aryan" Z93 does not exist among Serbs.

LABERIA
06-11-17, 14:10
I dont't agree for sure, because Pastuns have 55% R1a-Z93 and among Serbs R1a-Z93 does not exist, not a single Serb with R1a-Z93 from the around 3500 tested Serbs.

Serbian R1a are Z280 (around 2/3) and M458 (around 1/3) - both are Slavic, other branches of R1a such as Scandinavian Z284 or "Aryan" Z93 does not exist among Serbs.

I didn't said that Serbs are Pashtuns. I said that there is an theory, among many others, that indicates as a possible original homeland of the Serbs, the region of Pashtunistan.
How much are related Serbs with Pashtuns in terms of language, genetics, etc, this is an issue that probably in the future scholars maybe will explain it.

Bachus
06-11-17, 14:21
I didn't said that Serbs are Pashtuns. I said that there is an theory, among many others, that indicates as a possible original homeland of the Serbs, the region of Pashtunistan.
How much are related Serbs with Pashtuns in terms of language, genetics, etc, this is an issue that probably in the future scholars maybe will explain it.

Serbs and Pashtuns are not related genetically.

Ancestors of Pashtuns were Scythians (R1a-Z93) and they came to Afghanistan as invaders from southern Russia. When they came to central Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and India as invaders they mixed with mongoloids, Dravidians and Semitic people, because of that modern holders of R1a-Z93 are not white people (except few Iranian and Pashtuns), ancient holders of R1a-Z93 (Scythians/Aryans) were 100% white.

LABERIA
06-11-17, 14:29
Serbs and Pashtuns are genetically unrelated.

Ancestors of Pashtuns were Scythians (R1a-Z93) and they came to Afghanistan as invaders from southern Russia. When they came to central Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and India as invaders they mixed with mongoloids, Dravidians and Semitic people, because of that modern holders of R1a-Z93 are not white people (except few Iranian and Pashtuns), ancient holders of R1a-Z93 (Scythians/Aryans) were 100% white.

And according to you, which place could be the best candidate as the original homeland of the Serbs?

Crya
06-11-17, 14:46
Huh, what makes you jump into conclusion?

Crya
06-11-17, 14:47
Sorry for not quoting, this is related to "Novi Pazar is that you"

Bachus
06-11-17, 14:59
And according to you, which place could be the best candidate as the original homeland of the Serbs?

Balkans is original homeland of Serbs because ethno-genesis of Serbs were in the Balkan in Middle Age.
Original holders of Serbian name are not same as modern Serbs.

There is theory that proto-Serbs were Alan (Iranic) tribe Serboi.
Serboi were probably R1a-Z93, G and R1b-Z2103.
R1a-Z93 were the main haplogroup among Iranic people, G is most common among Ossetians (they are known as descandants of Alans) and R1b-Z2103 is present among Ossetians and exist in France and Spain (came with Alans)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Alani_map.jpg


https://youtu.be/2RrFgP4OwHY

R1a-Z93, R1b-Z2103 (quite common among Albanians) and Caucasian branch of G does not exist among Serbs and if Serbs are related with Serboi then this haplogroup shoulds be present among Serbs.

By the way original homeland of all humans is Africa.

Crya
06-11-17, 15:28
You have genetics and all you say prove with genetics, till then you talk fairy tales.
I’d wish it is simple as that, but it is not. I’ll ask you one question. The most dominant haplogroup in Croatia is I2a. Maybe the original Croatians are R1a only, that had asimilated I2a and shared their genes? Possible? In order to prove something you will need to know some historical facts in conjunction with arheology, etimogy and other relevant disciplines... These you cannot learn in 2 days, more often not even in 2 years. “Till then you talk fairy tales”.

hrvat22
06-11-17, 16:40
I’d wish it is simple as that, but it is not. I’ll ask you one question. The most dominant haplogroup in Croatia is I2a. Maybe the original Croatians are R1a only, that had asimilated I2a and shared their genes? Possible? In order to prove something you will need to know some historical facts in conjunction with arheology, etimogy and other relevant disciplines... These you cannot learn in 2 days, more often not even in 2 years. “Till then you talk fairy tales”.
So far, most or all of those who are negative for S17250 have patrilineageoriginating near the Carpathians, particularly southeastern Poland andextreme western Ukraine. That pattern may change with more sampling, ofcourse Date: 20 May 2014.http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I/2014-05/1400615460
May 4, 2017..In fact there is still only one known man who is CTS10228+ S17250- Y4460- Z17855- A2512-, he has paternal ancestry from southeastern Poland.http://i2aproject.blogspot.hr/2017/05/may-2017-draft-trees-for-i-l621-and-i.html
n 2010 has Ken Nordtvedt argued that I-L69.2 is too young not to have been a result of a sudden expansion. According to him I2a1b1 arose not earlier than 2500 years ago in Eastern Europe. He has presumed this to be a consequence from the Slavic invasion of the Balkans, from the area north-east of the Carpathians since 500 CE. In 2011 Nordtvedt has confirmed I-L69.2 is not older than 2,800 years. In his last comments about Haplogroup I tree and the conjectured spread map, he locates the start of the I-L69.2 lineage around the middle course of the Vistula.http://www.waughfamily.ca/Ancient/Tree%20and%20Map%20for%20Hg%20I.pdf
The second haplotype of Croats R1a Z280 CTS3402 also has a high frequency in southern Poland but for now it does not know the source of the same ... probably in southern Poland but it needs to be determined.https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?hl=en&mid=1uIEV-Unzie9mLufrQJyWb4fD9zg
Stiljsko, southwestern Ukraine ..there were numerous Croatian sitesVI.-XI. (naseobine, gradina, grobi-what, cult centers). Found richarchaeological material proves that it was oldCroatian township functioned intime from the middle of the IX. to the beginning of XIhttps://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%82%D1%96%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D1%8C%D0%BA%D 0%BEhttps://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=17599
Russian geneticist I. Rozhansky says:2013/10/18 translation from Russian ...Croats haplogroup R1a is represented almost exclusively by the Central Eurasian subcommittee Z280 (as in Eastern Slavs and Carpathians). And Croats, Slovenians, and as, most likely, Serbs dominate several branches that have the common Sneap CTS3402. the geography of these branches is such that it is possible to trace its path from Carpathian side to the Adriatic. The same can be said about "Dinarides" subsidiary subclades I2a1b. Obviously, White Croats and Croats from Carpathians to Adriatic are really close peoples. You can not say this about Lužičani Sorbs and Danubian Serbs - they are too different linehttp://pereformat.ru/2013/10/kolybel-evropejskoj-civilizacii/

DAI 10th century


From Croats, who came to Dalmatia, one part separated, and occupied Illyricum (Illurikon) and Panonian (Pannonian), they also had their own independent prince, who maintained friendly bonds, only through the apostles, with the knight of Croatia.


​But, at that time, Croats lived behind Bagibaree, where they were now White Croats (Belohrobatoi)..


Iraklije 612-641From letter of Roman Pope Gregory I, year 600.
Because Slavs began to enter through Istria to Italyetc...

LABERIA
06-11-17, 16:52
Balkans is original homeland of Serbs because ethno-genesis of Serbs were in the Balkan in Middle Age.
Original holders of Serbian name are not same as modern Serbs.

There is theory that proto-Serbs were Alan (Iranic) tribe Serboi.
Serboi were probably R1a-Z93, G and R1b-Z2103.
R1a-Z93 were the main haplogroup among Iranic people, G is most common among Ossetians (they are known as descandants of Alans) and R1b-Z2103 is present among Ossetians and exist in France and Spain (came with Alans)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Alani_map.jpg


https://youtu.be/2RrFgP4OwHY

R1a-Z93, R1b-Z2103 (quite common among Albanians) and Caucasian branch of G does not exist among Serbs and if Serbs are related with Serboi then this haplogroup shoulds be present among Serbs.

By the way original homeland of all humans is Africa.

I asked about Serbs, not all humans. Seems that you don't have an theory.

Miroslav
07-11-17, 01:37
Knez Dervan's country population which were ancestral to contemporary Sorbs cannot be anyhow dominantly related to I2a-Dinaric when Sorbs have around 65% R1a. Instead to be interested about R1a, no, Serbs must jump once again on the I2a-Dinaric bandwagon because it is a dominant haplogroup on the Western Balkan and as such politically profitable to prove it is of Serbian origin.

Also, note - the frequency in the Czech Republic is a mistake as it represents many samples from a single Czech surname family who tried to trace its mutual origin and relationship (furthermore, they belong to a single branch, it's not the I2a-Dinaric group of SNP branches at all). These contemporary maps are not an evidence, they are mostly useless and misleading for the representation of the past.

Garrick
07-11-17, 02:54
I didn't said that Serbs are Pashtuns. I said that there is an theory, among many others, that indicates as a possible original homeland of the Serbs, the region of Pashtunistan.
How much are related Serbs with Pashtuns in terms of language, genetics, etc, this is an issue that probably in the future scholars maybe will explain it.

Scientists Grey and Atkinson find that Albanian has same root as Indic and Iranian:

http://armchairprehistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/family-tree.gif

It has much greater weight, because it is scientific paper, than what people write in forums. And their paper is not only one.

Johane Derite
07-11-17, 04:15
Scientists Grey and Atkinson find that Albanian has same root as Indic and Iranian:

http://armchairprehistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/family-tree.gif

It has much greater weight, because it is scientific paper, than what people write in forums. And their paper is not only one.

Andrew Garrets 2015 paper has already disproved this, he has a lecture about the faulty method many linguists were using that produced odd results making the indo european language 10000 years old and many languages being in odd branches. Albanian is not on the indic-iranian branch. It is on the same branch with greek/armenian. https://i.imgur.com/GMHnVmh.jpg

Garrick
07-11-17, 04:39
Andrew Garrets 2015 paper has already disproved this, he has a lecture about the faulty method many linguists were using that produced odd results making the indo european language 10000 years old and many languages being in odd branches. Albanian is not on the indic-iranian branch. It is on the same branch with greek/armenian.

In newer comprehensive study:

Willems, Lord, Laforest, Labelle, Lapointe, Di Sciullo (2016), opposite Garrets, again determine: Albanian and Indic & Iranic.

Crya
07-11-17, 12:53
I am referring to Indo-Iranic origin of Albanian language and refering to language tree given by Johane Derite.

I must notice that this is complete nonsense (i am talking about Slavic tree). Placing Slovenian in front of other Slavic languages is, just, funny. After that placing Serbian in front of Macedonian is 2nd nonsense since Macedonian is characterized as archaic Serbian and as such is older then Serbian. From here we can see that even today there is no serious studies conducted regarding the Slavic languages by western scientists, instead they have adopted some ridiculous theories. It is not a secret that Germans have usurp many of the Slavic tribes now days presented as Germanic. One example is Markomanni. But unfortunately it is written in the stone:

STYN. OVVY. UKLOPYEN. BYLIE. JESTI. MERA.
SGODE. KRUKOVUYE. NASS. MARKOMAN. I.
BRETE. SLAVNOV. LITOV. BOYA. NASGA. MAR-
KOMAN. PROYDE. NI. SLAVNOV. STYN . POKOI.
LYTH. V. VIKA.

Prevod (IKAVSKI):
STINA OVA UKLOPLJENA BILJEG JESTE MIRA
ZGODE KRUKOVIJE NAS MARKOMAN(A)
I BRATIJE (BRACE) SLAVNIJEH LITA (LETA) BOJA NASEGA
MARKOMAN PROIDE (PRODJE) NI (NE) SLAVNI STINA (STENA)
POKOJ LIT (LETA) V VIKE (VEKE ILI VJEKE)

Regarding modern Albanian, it is one of the youngest European language. Regarding the roots, i doubt it is Iranic since Iranic and Indic are more linked to Serbian through Sanskrit.

Only few examples of words related to family relations - Serbian vs Sanskrit:

Mayka - Majka (Mother)
Tata - Tata (Dad)
Dada, Baba - Deda, Baba (Grandfather, Grandmother)
Bhrat - Brat (Brother)
Zet - Zet (Brother in law)
Tatku - Tetak (Uncle)

LABERIA
07-11-17, 14:11
Scientists Grey and Atkinson find that Albanian has same root as Indic and Iranian:

http://armchairprehistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/family-tree.gif

It has much greater weight, because it is scientific paper, than what people write in forums. And their paper is not only one.
Excuse me but what have to the origin of Albanian language with the ethnogenesis of the Serbs? I am not going to report your post, because is useless, but honestly i can`t understand this, only an brilliant mind like yours can explain this connection.
From years now, the only your preocupation in this forum is spreading disinformation about Albanians. Albanians are from Africa, Berber tribe, from Asia, from Romania(your funny theory of koçi-boçi from Carpathian mountains), from Bulgaria, now from Iran and India. And i am sure that you will continue to do this in the future for many years, it`s evident that you have some support in this forum.
What i want to remember to you is that this thread is about the ethnogenesis of YOUR nation, not about my nation.
Thanks for your attention.

Wonomyro
07-11-17, 14:27
(...) One example is Markomanni. But unfortunately it is written in the stone:

STYN. OVVY. UKLOPYEN. BYLIE. JESTI. MERA. SGODE. KRUKOVUYE. NASS. MARKOMAN. I. BRETE. SLAVNOV. LITOV. BOYA. NASGA. MAR- KOMAN. PROYDE. NI. SLAVNOV. STYN . POKOI. LYTH. V. VIKA.

Prevod (IKAVSKI): STINA OVA UKLOPLJENA BILJEG JESTE MIRA ZGODE KRUKOVIJE NAS MARKOMAN(A) I BRATIJE (BRACE) SLAVNIJEH LITA (LETA) BOJA NASEGA MARKOMAN PROIDE (PRODJE) NI (NE) SLAVNI STINA (STENA) POKOJ LIT (LETA) V VIKE (VEKE ILI VJEKE)

That's interesting. Could you pls. provide a reference?

Crya
07-11-17, 14:27
To hrvat22

I have read the whole interview with Klyosov that you have linked. Unfortunately you are showing only one comment from Rozhansky which, btw, is saying, citing: "And Croats, Slovenians, and as, most likely, Serbs (since this research is from 2013) dominate several branches that have the common Sneap CTS3402. Thus, we all came from the same area, correct? :D Regarding, citing: "Lužičani Sorbs and Danubian Serbs - they are too different line". What you want to show with this? Let me enlighten you: root of the word SRB is very old, much older then word Slavs. Some of very important slavists (not Serbians) are saying that in ancient times all the Slavs called them self Serbs which they are supporting with too many toponyms from all over the Europe and more. With that analogy Lusatians Serbs and Balkan Serbs still call them self Serbs like in ancient times. What was common for all the Slavs in ancient times was their language (Continuity of languages among Slavik people is the stronges in Europe). What you said is that Croats came from White Croatia, which could be truth, partially, but only for small amount of people, warriors, who came back to their ancient homeland where still the common people of their own kind were living unprotected, same as Serbs but only in larger number. I have a feeling that you want to show here that there is continuity with Croats but not with Serbs.

Crya
07-11-17, 14:52
That's interesting. Could you pls. provide a reference?

I am unable to provide link since I need to have more then 10 posts which i don’t. Anyway it is Maveo Orbini “Il regno de gli Slavi”

Wonomyro
07-11-17, 15:08
I see, OK.

The old authors were often "merging" Slavs and Goths in their works.

Johane Derite
07-11-17, 15:31
In newer comprehensive study:

Willems, Lord, Laforest, Labelle, Lapointe, Di Sciullo (2016), opposite Garrets, again determine: Albanian and Indic & Iranic.

Just read the study and they say no such thing. It does not claim albanian to be on indic iranian branch.

hrvat22
07-11-17, 16:52
Crya (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/members/54813-Crya)


Regarding, citing: "Lužičani Sorbs and Danubian Serbs - they are too different line". What you want to show with this?

Balkan Serbs have nothing to do with Sorbs.



Let me enlighten you: root of the word SRB is very old, much older then word Slavs.

Historical records say that Serbs get their name in Greece.


Some of very important slavists (not Serbians) are saying that in ancient times all the Slavs called them self Serbs which they are supporting with too many toponyms from all over the Europe and more.

Historical records say that Serbs get their name in Greece.



With that analogy Lusatians Serbs and Balkan Serbs still call them self Serbs like in ancient times.

That analogy is not proven with historical records.


What you said is that Croats came from White Croatia, which could be truth, partially, but only for small amount of people, warriors, who came back to their ancient homeland where still the common people of their own kind were living unprotected,

City of Stiljsko had about 30,000 inhabitants, while in southwestern Ukraine there are about 50 abandoned fortresses which is supposed to belong to White Croats.



I have a feeling that you want to show here that there is continuity with Croats but not with Serbs.

Serbs do not come from White Croatia, and genetics have confirmed that Serbs do not come to Balkans at all.

Today's Serbs are genetic mixture of Croats, Albanians and Vlachs.

Crya
07-11-17, 17:27
Balkan Serbs have nothing to do with Sorbs.






Historical records say that Serbs get their name in Greece.



Historical records say that Serbs get their name in Greece.




That analogy is not proven with historical records.



City of Stiljsko had about 30,000 inhabitants, while in southwestern Ukraine there are about 50 abandoned fortresses which is supposed to belong to White Croats.




Serbs do not come from White Croatia, and genetics have confirmed that Serbs do not come to Balkans at all.

Today's Serbs are genetic mixture of Croats, Albanians and Vlachs.

Wow, my friend, I don't want to comment your history knowledge, and i saw it before but wasn't sure. Now you have shown your real face. It is even pointless to provide you with the facts to disproof what you have said here. Read something, it is from your favorite source of information site wikipedia:

Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias) wherein people of low ability suffer from illusory superiority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority), mistakenly assessing their cognitive ability (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognition) as greater than it is. The cognitive bias of illusory superiority derives from the metacognitive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacognition) inability of low-ability persons to recognize their own ineptitude.

LeBrok
07-11-17, 17:29
Wow, my friend, I don't want to comment your history knowledge, and i saw it before but wasn't sure. Now you have shown your real face. It is even pointless to provide you with the facts to disproof what you have said here. Read something, it is from your favorite source of information site wikipedia:

Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias) wherein people of low ability suffer from illusory superiority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority), mistakenly assessing their cognitive ability (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognition) as greater than it is. The cognitive bias of illusory superiority derives from the metacognitive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacognition) inability of low-ability persons to recognize their own ineptitude.Tone down your ridiculing of other members of Eupedia.

hrvat22
07-11-17, 18:03
Wow, my friend, I don't want to comment your history knowledge, and i saw it before but wasn't sure. Now you have shown your real face. It is even pointless to provide you with the facts to disproof what you have said here. Read something, it is from your favorite source of information site wikipedia:

Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias) wherein people of low ability suffer from illusory superiority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority), mistakenly assessing their cognitive ability (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognition) as greater than it is. The cognitive bias of illusory superiority derives from the metacognitive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacognition) inability of low-ability persons to recognize their own ineptitude.

I said
Serbs do not come from White Croatia, and genetics have confirmed that Serbs do not come to Balkans at all.

Logical conclusion after that statement is
Today's Serbs are genetic mixture of Croats, Albanians and Vlachs.

Do you understand, nation, group or tribe which considers itself as Serbians genetically do not come to Balkans, only logical conclusion is what I'm quote.

If you have genetic evidence that rejects my statement say it.

Miroslav
07-11-17, 21:18
Some of very important slavists (not Serbians) are saying that in ancient times all the Slavs called them self Serbs which they are supporting with too many toponyms from all over the Europe and more.

You mean debunked and outdated (18th-19th century) theories about Sporoi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sporoi) and Zeriuani (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeriuani)? Please spare us this historiographical mythologization, we are living in the 21st century with more advanced scientific research.

Miroslav
07-11-17, 21:30
I have a feeling that you want to show here that there is continuity with Croats but not with Serbs.

In DAI is literally said:

"...entered Serbia and took away with them the entire folk, both old and young, and carried them into Bulgaria, though a few escaped away and entered Croatia; and the country was left deserted. Now, at that time these same Bulgarians under Alogobotour entered Croatia to make war, and there they were all slain by the Croats. Seven years afterwards Tzeeslav escaped from the Bulgarians with four others, and entered Serbia from Preslav, and found in the country no more than fifty men only, without wives or children, who supported themselves by hunting... Serbs living in Croatia and Bulgaria and the rest of the countries... Moreover, many had escaped from Bulgaria and entered Constantinople... And from the rich gifts of the emperor of the Romans he organized and populated the country..."

If the Serbs, like Croats, came as elite warrior caste i.e. minority elite who imposed their political rule, and these accounts represent their history, then it is clear these same Serbs almost vanished, and only a few managed to return and reimpose their rule with Byzantine Empire support in a depopulated territory.

Basically speaking:


There's a doubtful continuity between R1a dominant Sorbs from Lusatia (White Serbia), which tribes were located in the West and not like White Croatian tribes all along the Carpathian mountains from the Czech Republic to Ukraine, and I2a-Dinaric dominant Serbs from Balkan.
There's a doubtful continuity between Serbs from Balkan who arrived since the 7th century and contemporary Serbs.

Crya
08-11-17, 00:54
In DAI is literally said:

"...entered Serbia and took away with them the entire folk, both old and young, and carried them into Bulgaria, though a few escaped away and entered Croatia; and the country was left deserted. Now, at that time these same Bulgarians under Alogobotour entered Croatia to make war, and there they were all slain by the Croats. Seven years afterwards Tzeeslav escaped from the Bulgarians with four others, and entered Serbia from Preslav, and found in the country no more than fifty men only, without wives or children, who supported themselves by hunting... Serbs living in Croatia and Bulgaria and the rest of the countries... Moreover, many had escaped from Bulgaria and entered Constantinople... And from the rich gifts of the emperor of the Romans he organized and populated the country..."

If the Serbs, like Croats, came as elite warrior caste i.e. minority elite who imposed their political rule, and these accounts represent their history, then it is clear these same Serbs almost vanished, and only a few managed to return and reimpose their rule with Byzantine Empire support in a depopulated territory.

Basically speaking:


There's a doubtful continuity between R1a dominant Sorbs from Lusatia (White Serbia), which tribes were located in the West and not like White Croatian tribes all along the Carpathian mountains from the Czech Republic to Ukraine, and I2a-Dinaric dominant Serbs from Balkan.
There's a doubtful continuity between Serbs from Balkan who arrived since the 7th century and contemporary Serbs



Please provide the link.

Wonomyro
08-11-17, 01:24
Let me enlighten you: root of the word SRB is very old, much older then word Slavs. Some of very important slavists (not Serbians) are saying that in ancient times all the Slavs called them self Serbs which they are supporting with too many toponyms from all over the Europe and more.

The root is indeed old.

The root “srb” existed in archaic Croatian in the meaning “to slurp” or “to suck”. A place where shepherds bring their flocks to drink water was called “srbišće”. The high occurrence of the word in some areas may indicate such places. It is possible that Serbia got its name after the high number of montain rivers where sheperds could find lot of water for their flocks. Then the Balkan Serbs probably got their name from the the region they lived in/occupied, not vice versa. Also we can imagine that the word itself was brought to the region by Croats.

Garrick
08-11-17, 01:51
Just read the study and they say no such thing. It does not claim albanian to be on indic iranian branch.

Close relative to indic-iranian branch, you can see picture.

Quote of authors:

"The Albanian group is also a close relative of the union of the Sanskrit and Persian in the IE language tree"

Garrick
08-11-17, 02:08
Excuse me but what have to the origin of Albanian language with the ethnogenesis of the Serbs?

You mentioned Pashtuns, and you see that in some papers Albanian has same root as Indo-Iranic (where is Pashto).

hrvat22
08-11-17, 09:08
Please provide the link.

http://homepage.univie.ac.at/ilja.steffelbauer/DAI.pdf

Bachus
08-11-17, 09:13
Today's Serbs are genetic mixture of Croats, Albanians and Vlachs.:banghead:

Samo u tvojim mitomanskim snovima.

Only in your dreams.

hrvat22
08-11-17, 09:18
Samo u tvojim mitomanskim snovima.

You have genetics, historical records and refute my statement.

That's why Eupedia is genetic forum to prove something while we are here. If I'm wrong and you prove that I will respect it.

Bachus
08-11-17, 09:20
You have genetics, historical records and refute my statement.

That's why Eupedia is genetic forum to prove something while we are here. If I'm wrong and you prove that I will respect it.

There is no genetic evidence that Serbs are conected with Croats, Albanians and Vlachs, but there is a genetic evidence that large part of Croats are Serbian origin, deal with it. :grin:

hrvat22
08-11-17, 09:35
There is no genetic evidence that Serbs are conected with Croats, Albanians and Vlachs, but there is a genetic evidence that large part of Croats are Serbian origin, deal with it. :grin:

You are the joker hahahaa.. how is it possible that there is no genetic evidence that Serbs are conected with Croats when you clame that Croats are genetic Serbs.

Joke to the side, please show genetic evidence and historical records that support you clame, till then you talk fairy tales.

Bachus
08-11-17, 10:10
You are the joker hahahaa.. how is it possible that there is no genetic evidence that Serbs are conected with Croats when you clame that Croats are genetic Serbs.

Joke to the side, please show genetic evidence and historical records that support you clame, till then you talk fairy tales.

Proto-Croats were Turkic tribe possible Avars or Ogurs as Turkish historian Osman Karatay claims.

Haplogroup I2-PH908 came to the Balkans with Serbs in VII century. Serbs came to Balkans from modern western Czechia and eastern Bavaria, haplogroup I2-CTS10228 exist in western Czechia and eastern Bavaria today.
Real name of Sorbs were Wends they were in the alliance with Serbs which lived south from them, because of that Wends adopted Serbian name.
Sorbs don't call themselves Sorbs, they call themselves Serby
https://dsb.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serby

Croats came to the Balkans as Turkic tribe probably as remains of Avars, few Turkic Croats it imposed as elite to Slavs and local Slavs in part of western Balkans adpted Croatian name, similar as Turkic Bulgars and Slavs in eastern Balkans.
In VII and VIII century Croats were mentioned as non-Slavic people with weird non-Slavic names of their rulers such as Kluk, Muhol, Lovel, Kosen, Tuga, Vuga...
Proto-Croats were Turkic without any doubt, deal with it. :laughing:

hrvat22
08-11-17, 12:12
Proto-Croats were Turkic tribe possible Avars or Ogurs as Turkish historian Osman Karatay claims.

Serbs came to Balkans from modern western Czechia and eastern Bavaria, haplogroup I2-CTS10228 exist in western Czechia and eastern Bavaria today.
Real name of Sorbs were Wends they were in the alliance with Serbs which lived south from them, because of that Wends adopted Serbian name.
Sorbs don't call themselves Sorbs, they call themselves Serby
https://dsb.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serby

Croats came to the Balkans as Turkic tribe probably as remains of Avars, few Turkic Croats it imposed as elite to Slavs and local Slavs in part of western Balkans adpted Croatian name, similar as Turkic Bulgars and Slavs in eastern Balkans.
In VII and VIII century Croats were mentioned as non-Slavic people with weird non-Slavic names of their rulers such as Kluk, Muhol, Lovel, Kosen, Tuga, Vuga...
Proto-Croats were Turkic without any doubt, deal with it. :laughing:




Haplogroup I2-PH908 came to the Balkans with Serbs in VII century.

No one with I2-PH908 came to Balkans with Serbs.

Do you know the history of Serbs?

Give me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman Dalmatia


Translation into English you have no proof for your theory, which means I'm right.


Kluk, Muhol, Lovel, Kosen, Tuga, Vuga...
Proto-Croats were Turkic

Names, surnames, language, letter, hair color, etc. have nothing to do with origin of man, group or tribe.


Serbs came to Balkans from modern western Czechia and eastern Bavaria, haplogroup I2-CTS10228 exist in western Czechia and eastern Bavaria today.

Quote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia.

Bachus
08-11-17, 12:48
No one with I2-PH908 came to Balkans with Serbs.

Do you know the history of Serbs?

Give me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman Dalmatia


Translation into English you have no proof for your theory, which means I'm right.



Names, surnames, language, letter, hair color, etc. have nothing to do with origin of man, group or tribe.



Quote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia.

The earliest found mention of Serbs is from Einhard's Royal Frankish Anals, writen in 822, when Ljudevit went from his seat at Sisakto the Serbs (believed to have been somewhere in western Bosnia), with Einhard mentioning the Srbs, who control the great part of Dalmatia (ad Sorabos, quae nation magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Serbs#Middle_Ages

Deal with it. :29:

Wonomyro
08-11-17, 14:36
The earliest found mention of Serbs is from Einhard's Royal Frankish Anals, writen in 822, when Ljudevit went from his seat at Sisakto the Serbs (believed to have been somewhere in western Bosnia), with Einhard mentioning the Srbs, who control the great part of Dalmatia (ad Sorabos, quae nation magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Serbs#Middle_Ages

Deal with it.

"quae natio magnam Dalmatiae partem optinere dicitur"

He mention them but with reserve. He is not sure whether the information he got correct.

My take is that that "Sorabos" were Gheg Albanians. Otherwise Franks would know more about them. I think he might heard the name from Croats or Byzantins.

Crya
08-11-17, 14:41
The root is indeed old.

The root “srb” existed in archaic Croatian in the meaning “to slurp” or “to suck”. A place where shepherds bring their flocks to drink water was called “srbišće”. The high occurrence of the word in some areas may indicate such places. It is possible that Serbia got its name after the high number of montain rivers where sheperds could find lot of water for their flocks. Then the Balkan Serbs probably got their name from the the region they lived in/occupied, not vice versa. Also we can imagine that the word itself was brought to the region by Croats.

The two of you should agree (Wonomyro and hrvat22) about the root SRB. One is saying this is Greek name the other saying it is Croatian. Interesting :D

Crya
08-11-17, 14:55
In DAI is literally said: "...entered Serbia and took away with them the entire folk, both old and young, and carried them into Bulgaria, though a few escaped away and entered Croatia; and the country was left deserted. Now, at that time these same Bulgarians under Alogobotour entered Croatia to make war, and there they were all slain by the Croats. Seven years afterwards Tzeeslav escaped from the Bulgarians with four others, and entered Serbia from Preslav, and found in the country no more than fifty men only, without wives or children, who supported themselves by hunting... Serbs living in Croatia and Bulgaria and the rest of the countries... Moreover, many had escaped from Bulgaria and entered Constantinople... And from the rich gifts of the emperor of the Romans he organized and populated the country..." If the Serbs, like Croats, came as elite warrior caste i.e. minority elite who imposed their political rule, and these accounts represent their history, then it is clear these same Serbs almost vanished, and only a few managed to return and reimpose their rule with Byzantine Empire support in a depopulated territory. Basically speaking:

There's a doubtful continuity between R1a dominant Sorbs from Lusatia (White Serbia), which tribes were located in the West and not like White Croatian tribes all along the Carpathian mountains from the Czech Republic to Ukraine, and I2a-Dinaric dominant Serbs from Balkan.
There's a doubtful continuity between Serbs from Balkan who arrived since the 7th century and contemporary Serbs.

You are again dealing with counterfeits and delusion. You have extracted only the part which supports your falls theory intentionally skipping the part where is written: And thenceforward the emperor of the Romans continually benefited him, so that the Serbs living in Croatia and Bulgaria and the rest of the countries, whom Symeon had scattered, rallied to him when they heard of it. Moreover, many had escaped from Bulgaria and entered Constantinople, and these the emperor of the Romans clad and comforted and send to Tzeeslav. Simply saying they came back, since never is written that he killed peaople it was written they What is also written in Constantin testimony is: Now, after some time these same Serbs decided to depart to their own homes, and the emperor sent them off. But when they crossed river Danube, they changed their minds and sent a request to the emperor Heraclius, through the military governor then holding Belgrade, that he would grant them other land to settled in. And since what is now Serbia and Pagania and the so-called Zachumli and Terbounia and the country of the Kanalites were under the dominion under the emperor of the Romans, and since these countries had been made desolated by the Avars (for they had expelled from those parts the Romani who now live in Dalmatia and Dyrrachium), therefore the emperor settled these same Serbs in these countries... Now attaching the map of these territory https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/Paganija%2C_Zahumlje%2C_Travunija%2C_Duklja%2C_Cro atian_view.png This is to support my theory of Serbs living in today Croatia which is highest concentration of I2a. And the other one showing demography of the 19 century https://srbski.weebly.com/uploads/4/8/9/7/48971821/5075472_orig.jpg

Wonomyro
08-11-17, 15:07
Proto-Croats were Turkic tribe possible Avars or Ogurs as Turkish historian Osman Karatay claims.

Haplogroup I2-PH908 came to the Balkans with Serbs in VII century. Serbs came to Balkans from modern western Czechia and eastern Bavaria, haplogroup I2-CTS10228 exist in western Czechia and eastern Bavaria today.
Real name of Sorbs were Wends they were in the alliance with Serbs which lived south from them, because of that Wends adopted Serbian name.
Sorbs don't call themselves Sorbs, they call themselves Serby
https://dsb.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serby

Croats came to the Balkans as Turkic tribe probably as remains of Avars, few Turkic Croats it imposed as elite to Slavs and local Slavs in part of western Balkans adpted Croatian name, similar as Turkic Bulgars and Slavs in eastern Balkans.
In VII and VIII century Croats were mentioned as non-Slavic people with weird non-Slavic names of their rulers such as Kluk, Muhol, Lovel, Kosen, Tuga, Vuga...
Proto-Croats were Turkic without any doubt, deal with it.

The real name of Sorbs was maybe different.Take a look:


The boundary between Thuringia and the Sorbs was defined as the Saale river by Einhard, writing in the 830s: Salam fluvium, qui Thuringos et Sorabos dividit ("the river Saale, which divides the Thuringii and the Sorbs").

There is the list of cities and villages along the Saale river:



Originating in Zell, the Saale flows through – Sparneck – Weißdorf – Seulbitz – Förbau – Schwarzenbach an der Saale – Fattigau – Oberkotzau – Hof – Brunnenthal – Saalenstein – Joditz – Landesgrenze Bayern/Thüringen – Hirschberg – Sparnberg – Rudolphstein – Blankenberg – Blankenstein – Harra – Saaldorf – Saalburg – Poeritzsch – Gräfenwarth – Burgk – Walsburg – Ziegenrück – Neidenberga – Hohenwarte – Eichicht – Kaulsdorf – Fischersdorf – Weischwitz – Reschwitz – Breternitz – Saalfeld – Schwarza – Volkstedt – Rudolstadt – Catharinau – Kolkwitz – Weißen – Uhlstädt – Rückersdorf – Zeutsch – Niederkrossen – Orlamünde – Freienorla – Großeutersdorf – Kleineutersdorf – Kahla – Großpürschütz – Jägersdorf – Rothenstein – Maua – Lobeda – Jena – Zwätzen – Porstendorf – Dornburg – Dorndorf-Steudnitz – Wichmar – Camburg – Tümpling – Großheringen – Kleinheringen – Landesgrenze Thüringen/Sachsen-Anhalt – Stendorf – Saaleck – Bad Kösen – Naumburg – Schellsitz - Schönburg – Eulau – Goseck – Leißling – Lobitzsch – Uichteritz – Markweben – Weißenfels – Dehlitz – Schkortleben – Kleinkorbetha – Großkorbetha – Oebles-Schlechtewitz – Wengelsdorf – Bad Dürrenberg – Kröllwitz – Leuna – Trebnitz – Merseburg – Meuschau – Freiimfelde – Schkopau – Korbetha – Hohenweiden – Rockendorf – Holleben – Halle – Kröllwitz – Lettin – Brachwitz – Schiepzig – Salzmünde – Pfützthal – Döblitz – Zaschwitz – Wettin – Kloschwitz – Rumpin – Dobis – Friedeburg – Zickeritz – Rothenburg – Nelben – Gnölbzig – Trebnitz – Alsleben – Poplitz – Großwirschleben – Plötzkau – Gröna – Neuborna – Bernburg – Dröbel – Nienburg – Wedlitz – Damaschkeplan – Wispitz – Calbe (Saale) – Trabitz – Groß Rosenburg – Werkleitz

The place names Kleinkorbetha, Großkorbetha and Korbetha are of Slavic origin but germanized. In the times of Limes Sorabicus their names were slightly different:


(..) in Germany along Saale river there were Chruuati near Halle) in 901 AD, Chruuati in 981 AD,[24] Chruazis in 1012 AD,[24] Churbate in 1055 AD,[24] Grawat in 1086 AD,[24] Curewate (now Korbetha), Großkorbetha (Curuvadi and Curuuuati 881-899 AD) and Kleinkorbetha,[24] and Korbetha west of Leipzig

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Croatia

So the place names were as follows:
- Chruuati (Chruwati)
- Curuuuati 881-899 (Curuwati)
- Curuvadi
- Curewate
...

Obviously it comes from the plural form of "Hrvat" - "Hrvati".

We can't fully trust Einhard and other Frankish sources when it comes to ethnonyms.

Wonomyro
08-11-17, 15:11
The two of you should agree (Wonomyro and hrvat22) about the root SRB. One is saying this is Greek name the other saying it is Croatian. Interesting

Which theory do you like more?

Crya
08-11-17, 15:26
In DAI is literally said:

"...entered Serbia and took away with them the entire folk, both old and young, and carried them into Bulgaria, though a few escaped away and entered Croatia; and the country was left deserted. Now, at that time these same Bulgarians under Alogobotour entered Croatia to make war, and there they were all slain by the Croats. Seven years afterwards Tzeeslav escaped from the Bulgarians with four others, and entered Serbia from Preslav, and found in the country no more than fifty men only, without wives or children, who supported themselves by hunting... Serbs living in Croatia and Bulgaria and the rest of the countries... Moreover, many had escaped from Bulgaria and entered Constantinople... And from the rich gifts of the emperor of the Romans he organized and populated the country..."

If the Serbs, like Croats, came as elite warrior caste i.e. minority elite who imposed their political rule, and these accounts represent their history, then it is clear these same Serbs almost vanished, and only a few managed to return and reimpose their rule with Byzantine Empire support in a depopulated territory.

Basically speaking:


There's a doubtful continuity between R1a dominant Sorbs from Lusatia (White Serbia), which tribes were located in the West and not like White Croatian tribes all along the Carpathian mountains from the Czech Republic to Ukraine, and I2a-Dinaric dominant Serbs from Balkan.
There's a doubtful continuity between Serbs from Balkan who arrived since the 7th century and contemporary Serbs.



Again misleadings and delusions. You cited only part that supports your fake theory intentionally missing the part mentioning the folk coming back and resettling, since they were not killed. Also you forgot to mention part referring to initial settling of Roman areas by Serbs which, in that time includes Serbia, Travunia, Zahumlje, Pagania, Konavle. Map provided here https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/Paganija%2C_Zahumlje%2C_Travunija%2C_Duklja%2C_Cro atian_view.png This map, together with attached Austro-Hungerian demography map from 19th century https://srbski.weebly.com/uploads/4/8/9/7/48971821/5075472_orig.jpg completely supports my theory of Serbs with dominant I2a haplogroup, and putting a big question mark on Croatian origin, and your so-called "theory".

Wonomyro
08-11-17, 15:55
Again misleadings and delusions. You cited only part that supports your fake theory intentionally missing the part mentioning the folk coming back and resettling, since they were not killed. Also you forgot to mention part referring to initial settling of Roman areas by Serbs which, in that time includes Serbia, Travunia, Zahumlje, Pagania, Konavle. Map provided here https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/Paganija%2C_Zahumlje%2C_Travunija%2C_Duklja%2C_Cro atian_view.png This map, together with attached Austro-Hungerian demography map from 19th century https://srbski.weebly.com/uploads/4/8/9/7/48971821/5075472_orig.jpg completely supports my theory of Serbs with dominant I2a haplogroup, and putting a big question mark on Croatian origin, and your so-called "theory".

Mind that Constantine places that migration (and Christianization) into 7th century, which is impossible because Serbia got Christianized in the middle of 9th century. Moreover, at the end of the chapter 32. he precisely locates “Baptized Serbia” behind the mountains. In “Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea”, that area is named Red (South) Croatia.

Austrian maps are extremely biased when it comes to ethnic naming.

Crya
08-11-17, 16:39
Mind that Constantine places that migration (and Christianization) into 7th century, which is impossible because Serbia got Christianized in the middle of 9th century. Moreover, at the end of the chapter 32. he precisely locates “Baptized Serbia” behind the mountains. In “Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea”, that area is named Red (South) Croatia. There are too many inconsistencies about Constantine which you agree to swallow it for Croats benefits only. Now swallow it all. “Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea” is completely disputed book, you better don't mention it.
Austrian maps are extremely biased when it comes to ethnic naming. Austrian maps are neutral they didn't have any benefits to undermine Croats in favor to Serbs. Not only this, have you seen the numbers? Numbers do not go into your favor... at all. So if i were Croat, i would take a friendly request as i offered in beginning and i would stop denying other peoples origin and history, since something bad might come out if we uncover the truth. At the end we are condemned to live together on Balkan... better to leave in peace and respect...

Wonomyro
08-11-17, 16:59
There are too many inconsistencies about Constantine which you agree to swallow it for Croats benefits only. Now swallow it all. “Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea” is completely disputed book, you better don't mention it.

Cronicle is a primary source and no one has right to "completely dispute" it. One should try to decode it, not simply reject it. "Priest" was local bishop. He based his story on a local oral tradition. The inconstencies in his stories are due to the nature of oral tradition. He was bishop of the area that he called Red Croatia, so we can't say that he didn't know how the area was called. Using the colours (red, white) to name two parts of Croatia is another proof that the names are authentic. Just compare it to very well known Slavic system of naming of the cardinal direction e. g. White Rus' and Red Rus' (Ruthenia).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_direction#Cultural_variations


Austrian maps are neutral they didn't have any benefits to undermine Croats in favor to Serbs. Not only this, have you seen the numbers? Numbers do not go into your favor... at all. So if i were Croat, i would take a friendly request as i offered in beginning and i would stop denying other peoples origin and history, since something bad might come out if we uncover the truth. At the end we are condemned to live together on Balkan... better to leave in peace and respect...

Contrary, Austria, as a imperial, power was very often playing "divide et impera" game with its nations. In the beginning of the 19th century their state administration had plans to split Croats into "Serbs" and "Slovenians". For that reason they initiated and financed Serbian language reform.

Miroslav
08-11-17, 19:13
Haplogroup I2-PH908 came to the Balkans with Serbs in VII century. Serbs came to Balkans from modern western Czechia and eastern Bavaria, haplogroup I2-CTS10228 exist in western Czechia and eastern Bavaria today.

It is incredible that you, Serbs, are constantly making such a fraudulent argumentation with which you intentionally ignore the fact the I-PH908 could not come to the Balkans with the Serbs since the 7th century because the territory from which consider the migration took place is populated by ancestral population of the Sorbs who are dominant, around 65%, R1a, without almost any trace of I-CTS10228. Also, the small peak of I-CTS10228 in the Czech Republic is due to one surname family multiple test samples, practically one SNP sub-branch of I-PH908 which is absent in the Balkan. So much about the Serbian ethnogenetic "continuity". One of the simplest and typical examples of historiographical debunks in history.

Miroslav
08-11-17, 19:25
Again misleadings and delusions. You cited only part that supports your fake theory intentionally missing the part mentioning the folk coming back and resettling since they were not killed. Also, you forgot to mention part referring to initial settling of Roman areas by Serbs which, in that time includes Serbia, Travunia, Zahumlje, Pagania, Konavle.

You are saying that citing a historical source is misleading and delusional, while never bothered to read even Tibor Živković work about DAI. The few remaining "folk" are the elite caste, and from which areas the other part of the lower caste i.e. people of the land migrated i.e. is highly doubtful they were the same Serbs or mostly Serbs. Also, you forgot to understand that the settling of the Roman areas actually meant tribal political control over these provinces and not the actual ethnogenetic reality of the people in these provinces. DAI is not an ethnographic work, if anything, it is very bad being and understanding it like that. One of the best examples is Greek etymologies of Serbian and Croatian ethnonyms.

hrvat22
08-11-17, 22:26
The earliest found mention of Serbs is from Einhard's Royal Frankish Anals, writen in 822, when Ljudevit went from his seat at Sisakto the Serbs (believed to have been somewhere in western Bosnia), with Einhard mentioning the Srbs, who control the great part of Dalmatia (ad Sorabos, quae nation magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Serbs#Middle_Ages

Deal with it. :29:

I askeed, quote


Give me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman Dalmatia


Quote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia.

Please answer otherwise my claim is true.

Regarding
Serbs who control the great part of Dalmatia

In the same record write that
Ljudevit left Serbs and went to Dalmatia, if Serbs control great part of Dalmatia how is possible that Ljudevit left Serbians and go to Dalmatia.?

Furthermore today Dalmatia in Croatia is small part of Roman Dalmatia that covered Bosnia, western parts of Serbia, part of Croatia all way to Albania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalmatia_(Roman_province)#/media/File:Roman_Empire_-_Dalmatia_(125_AD).svg so we do not know which part of Roman Dalmatia is spoken here.

Stated
the Srbs, who control the great part of Dalmatia is disputed by Priest of Dioclea 12th century
And from the field of Dalmae (Duvno)(Bosnia) to the city of Dyrrachium (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyrrachium) (Durrës (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durr%C3%ABs)) (Albania) is Red Croatia"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Croatia

De administrando imperio, 10th century
From the Croats who came to Dalmatia, one part separated and occupied Illyricum (Illurikon) and Panonian (Pannonian)
Territory Ilirikuma stretches from the Drim River in today's Albania to Istria in Croatia and from the Adriatic coast to the Pannonian Basin. Salona near today's Split in Croatia was the center of the Roman province Ilirikum.



John Skylitzes, Latinized as Ioannes Scylitzes (1040-1101)...The Bulgarians asked Mihajla,who then rule of those who were called Croats, who sat in Kotor and Prapratnica(Montenegro), and who had no small country under them, to help them and work with them, and to give them their son whom they would proclaim as emperor of Bulgaria "
Mihailo, in Cyrillic Mihailo, the first king in Duklja and Montenegrin history, the head of the Duklja state from Vojislavljević dynasty from 1046 to 1081.


1154 g. - The Arabic geographer, cartographer and travel writer Muhammad Al-Idrisi (1099-1164), describing Croatia (Bilad Garwasija), writes in his work "Kitab al Rudjar" the following:
"Ragusa, Ragusah is away from Ston 30 miles. (Residents) are Dalmatians who have many boats for long sailing. This is the last town in Croatia (Garwasijah)".

Crya
09-11-17, 22:14
You are saying that citing a historical source is misleading and delusional, while never bothered to read even Tibor Živković work about DAI. The few remaining "folk" are the elite caste, and from which areas the other part of the lower caste i.e. people of the land migrated i.e. is highly doubtful they were the same Serbs or mostly Serbs. Also, you forgot to understand that the settling of the Roman areas actually meant tribal political control over these provinces and not the actual ethnogenetic reality of the people in these provinces. DAI is not an ethnographic work, if anything, it is very bad being and understanding it like that. One of the best examples is Greek etymologies of Serbian and Croatian ethnonyms.

I said that citing some historical sources partially with intentionally missing the part that disproves you is misleading and delusional.

I've seen Tibor few times on TV and some of his old interviews on youtube. Yeah, you gave me a homework. Yesterday and today I have read some of his work but I couldn't find what you are talking about. Could you provide a link please?
Anyway Tibor said for Serbians and Croats that have come to Balkan in 7th century could have been only 1-3% of total Balkan population, nobles, that ruled the natives. If this is truth how can we call our self Serbs and Croats today?
One more thing, what is the difference in R1a and I2a between so-called Serbs and so-called Croats? Is there any difference, I am just asking since I haven't gone deep into the genetics yet?

Angela
10-11-17, 01:00
I said that citing some historical sources partially with intentionally missing the part that disproves you is misleading and delusional.

I've seen Tibor few times on TV and some of his old interviews on youtube. Yeah, you gave me a homework. Yesterday and today I have read some of his work but I couldn't find what you are talking about. Could you provide a link please?
Anyway Tibor said for Serbians and Croats that have come to Balkan in 7th century could have been only 1-3% of total Balkan population, nobles, that ruled the natives. If this is truth how can we call our self Serbs and Croats today?
One more thing, what is the difference in R1a and I2a between so-called Serbs and so-called Croats? Is there any difference, I am just asking since I haven't gone deep into the genetics yet?

Stop posting this nonsense. We now have dna from the Balkans, both ancient and modern. People from the Balkans are no longer like the people who lived there before the Slavic invasions.

Please read all three of the following papers carefully:

Iain Mathiesen et al 2015:https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/30/135616

Balkan Genetics:
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology...l.pbio.1001555 (http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555)

It was discussed here:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...eway-to-Europe (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30366-The-Balkans-as-the-Gateway-to-Europe)

The Geography of Recent Ancestry across Europe: Ralph and Coop et al-based on IBD analysis
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology...l.pbio.1001555 (http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555)

From the last paper based on IBD or actual inherited links:
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/figure/image?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555.g003&size=medium

That didn't come from 2-3% of the population.

It's beyond time to enter the modern era.

hrvat22
10-11-17, 07:44
I said that citing some historical sources partially with intentionally missing the part that disproves you is misleading and delusional.

I've seen Tibor few times on TV and some of his old interviews on youtube. Yeah, you gave me a homework. Yesterday and today I have read some of his work but I couldn't find what you are talking about. Could you provide a link please?
Anyway Tibor said for Serbians and Croats that have come to Balkan in 7th century could have been only 1-3% of total Balkan population, nobles, that ruled the natives. If this is truth how can we call our self Serbs and Croats today?
One more thing, what is the difference in R1a and I2a between so-called Serbs and so-called Croats? Is there any difference, I am just asking since I haven't gone deep into the genetics yet?

So-called Croats they have R1a types that exist in southern Poland, whether there originate remains to be seen.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?hl=en&mid=1uIEV-Unzie9mLufrQJyWb4fD9zg

So-called Serbs have different main type of R1a, which is located in northeastern Bosnia and northwest Serbia,
Z280>CTS1211>Y35>CTS3402>Y33>CTS8816>Y3301>L1280>Y5647>YP611>YP3987>YP3992 where is his source I do not know.

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1a?iframe=ymap

So-called Croats have I2a types that coming from southern Poland and southwestern Ukraine (White Croatia).


So-called Serbs have I2a types that coming from southern Poland and southwestern Ukraine (White Croatia) and I2a (dinaric-N types) that coming from southeastern Europe with Vlachs, together with other haplogroups (E1b, J2b, R1b types etc.)

Bachus
10-11-17, 09:33
So-called Croats they have R1a types that exist in southern Poland, whether there originate remains to be seen.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?hl=en&mid=1uIEV-Unzie9mLufrQJyWb4fD9zg

So-called Serbs have different main type of R1a, which is located in northeastern Bosnia and northwest Serbia, where is his source I do not know.

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1a?iframe=ymap

So-called Croats have I2a types that coming from southern Poland and southwestern Ukraine (White Croatia).


So-called Serbs have I2a types that coming from southern Poland and southwestern Ukraine (White Croatia) and I2a (dinaric-N types) that coming from southeastern Europe with Vlachs, together with other haplogroups (E1b, J2b, R1b types etc.)

I did not know that I2-CTS10228 (north) is Vlachs origin, then Vlachs came from Belarus, because I2-CTS10228 originated in modern Belarus.

Belarusians and Ukrainians have more I2-CTS10228 than any nation in the Balkans.

I2-CTS10228 is 17,5% in Belarus and 20,5% in Ukraine, I2-PH908 does not exist in Ukraine and Belarus.

I2-CTS10228 is pan-Slavic haplogroup and I2-PH908 is present only among Yugoslavs (except Slovenes), I2-PH908 it coincides with Vlach migrations.

So there is much much much more chance that Dinaric-south is related with Vlachs than Dinaric-north.

hrvat22
10-11-17, 11:42
I did not know that I2-CTS10228 (north) is Vlachs origin, then Vlachs came from Belarus, because I2-CTS10228 originated in modern Belarus.

Belarusians and Ukrainians have more I2-CTS10228 than any nation in the Balkans.

I2-CTS10228 is 17,5% in Belarus and 20,5% in Ukraine, I2-PH908 does not exist in Ukraine and Belarus.

I2-CTS10228 is pan-Slavic haplogroup and I2-PH908 is present only among Yugoslavs (except Slovenes), I2-PH908 it coincides with Vlach migrations.

So there is much much much more chance that Dinaric-south is related with Vlachs than Dinaric-north.
I askeed, quote


Give me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman Dalmatia



Quote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia.


Please answer otherwise my claim is true.

Regarding
I2-CTS10228 (north) is Vlachs origin

types that coming from Greece, Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia in period of 500 years to Croatia¸are Vlachs origin (I2-CTS10228)


Originally I2-CTS10228 with mutation

https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/

is White Croatian origin.


Wich types of I2-CTS10228 coming to Croatia with Vlach we'll see in the future.



Belarusians and Ukrainians have more I2-CTS10228


There are branches of I2-CTS10228 in Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Romania etc..we follow specific branches and not all I2-CTS10228.


https://yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/


Do you see how many branches there are behind I-CTS10228, not all are from Belarus.


I2-CTS10228 is pan-Slavic haplogroup and I2-PH908 is present only among Yugoslavs
What does this have to do with source of same in southern Poland.



So there is much much much more chance that Dinaric-south is related with Vlachs than Dinaric-north.


All types I2a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types E1b in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types J2a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types R1a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs and all types R1b in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, but each haplotype and types has its origin and path of migration.


History of most Vlachs in Croatia is around 500 years,


When in a couple of years are establish which haplotipes and which branches of same coming to Croatia at that time then we will know exactly which mutation is Vlach origin. Which is source and original origin of that haplotype is another matter.


You have to know that Vlach have mixed genetics, they have aboriginal Balkans genetic and genetic of newly arrived Croats and Slavs.

Crya
10-11-17, 12:36
Stop posting this nonsense. We now have dna from the Balkans, both ancient and modern. People from the Balkans are no longer like the people who lived there before the Slavic invasions.

Please read all three of the following papers carefully:

Iain Mathiesen et al 2015:https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/30/135616

Balkan Genetics:
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology...l.pbio.1001555 (http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555)

It was discussed here:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...eway-to-Europe (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30366-The-Balkans-as-the-Gateway-to-Europe)

The Geography of Recent Ancestry across Europe: Ralph and Coop et al-based on IBD analysis
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology...l.pbio.1001555 (http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555)

From the last paper based on IBD or actual inherited links:
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/figure/image?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555.g003&size=medium

That didn't come from 2-3% of the population.

It's beyond time to enter the modern era.

Thanks for the info. As I said before I have only scratched the surface of these researches and I joined forum to learn and find out more. Now that I have read it I agree with the findings and can deal with it. I have read a lot of history and as it is now supplemented with DNA research data I will try to contribute with some more serious thoughts.

Bachus
10-11-17, 12:48
I askeed, quote


Give me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman Dalmatia



Quote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia.


Please answer otherwise my claim is true.

Regarding

types that coming from Greece, Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia in period of 500 years to Croatia¸are Vlachs origin (I2-CTS10228)


Originally I2-CTS10228 with mutation

https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/

is White Croatian origin.


Wich types of I2-CTS10228 coming to Croatia with Vlach we'll see in the future.





There are branches of I2-CTS10228 in Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Romania etc..we follow specific branches and not all I2-CTS10228.


https://yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/


Do you see how many branches there are behind I-CTS10228, not all are from Belarus.


What does this have to do with source of same in southern Poland.





All types I2a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types E1b in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types J2a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types R1a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs and all types R1b in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, but each haplotype and types has its origin and path of migration.


History of most Vlachs in Croatia is around 500 years,


When in a couple of years are establish which haplotipes and which branches of same coming to Croatia at that time then we will know exactly which mutation is Vlach origin. Which is source and original origin of that haplotype is another matter.


You have to know that Vlach have mixed genetics, they have aboriginal Balkans genetic and genetic of newly arrived Croats and Slavs.

I2-Din have nothing to do wich Vlachs.

Romanians have 28% I2a-Din thanks to strong Slavic influence, real Vlach haplogroups are R1b, E-V13 and J2b2, these 3 haplogroups among Aromanians together are around 65%.

I2a-Din among Aromanians is Slavic influence, Aromanians on average have 17% I2a-Din.

Aromanians are purest Vlach than Romanians, because they have less Slavic influence, Romanians are heavy Slavic infected they have 46% Slavic Y DNA (I2a-Din+R1a).

Crya
10-11-17, 13:57
I askeed, quoteGive me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman DalmatiaQuote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia.Please answer otherwise my claim is true.Regarding types that coming from Greece, Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia in period of 500 years to Croatia¸are Vlachs origin (I2-CTS10228)Originally I2-CTS10228 with mutation https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ is White Croatian origin.Wich types of I2-CTS10228 coming to Croatia with Vlach we'll see in the future.There are branches of I2-CTS10228 in Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Romania etc..we follow specific branches and not all I2-CTS10228. https://yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/Do you see how many branches there are behind I-CTS10228, not all are from Belarus.What does this have to do with source of same in southern Poland.All types I2a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types E1b in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types J2a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types R1a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs and all types R1b in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, but each haplotype and types has its origin and path of migration.History of most Vlachs in Croatia is around 500 years, When in a couple of years are establish which haplotipes and which branches of same coming to Croatia at that time then we will know exactly which mutation is Vlach origin. Which is source and original origin of that haplotype is another matter.You have to know that Vlach have mixed genetics, they have aboriginal Balkans genetic and genetic of newly arrived Croats and Slavs.Is it possible that Serbs and Croats that are coming under the I2-CTS10228 and having the same origin could have simply been Serbs and Croats, two different tribes of the same people? When I say Serbs and Croats I am talking about people not territory. Maybe todays Serbia is mixed with the people of different haplogroups which I will not discuss until I find out more, but lack of evidence of Serbian territorial name near by the White Croatia in Poland before migration should not necessarily mean that Serbia didn't existed. On contrary, it has been confirmed later by DIA. I must note that according to DIA in 7th century Serbs were given territory near the Croats which coincides with todays territory of South Dalmatia, Monte Negro, part of Bosnia and South-West Serbia. Serbia got expanded in middle age to todays Serbian territory and far more, taking other people under their state, same as, according to Priest of Doklea Red Croatia existed in Monte Negro. These are just territories. Now what we are arguing here is the name. Croatians are saying I2-CTS10228 are all Croatians. Serbians are saying these are all Serbians. Perhaps when we find out that above mentioned is the truth and face it the tensions between our two countries will disappear and we might start living and helping each others as we did in the past.

hrvat22
10-11-17, 15:05
I2-Din have nothing to do wich Vlachs.

Romanians have 28% I2a-Din thanks to strong Slavic influence, real Vlach haplogroups are R1b, E-V13 and J2b2, these 3 haplogroups among Aromanians together are around 65%.

I2a-Din among Aromanians is Slavic influence, Aromanians on average have 17% I2a-Din.

Aromanians are purest Vlach than Romanians, because they have less Slavic influence, Romanians are heavy Slavic infected they have 46% Slavic Y DNA (I2a-Din+R1a).


I2-Din have nothing to do wich Vlachs.

But certain branches of I2-Din do have, independently of its original origin.

If Ante Antic has I2-Din with a 400-year old Greek mutation and comes to Croatia with Vlach name(written in a historical record), this mutation age of 400 years is Vlach origin, same branch with mutation a 1000 years old can be of Greek origin, same branch with mutation a 1600-year old can be White Croatian origin.

We have keep track historical records and genetics and then make a conclusion, we must not make conclusions only on the basis one haplotype or mutation which is old 2000 years.

In two thousand years there are about 20 mutations, we still need around 15 mutations roughly in each branch to bring final conclusion for https://yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/



https://yfull.com/tree/I-PH908/ subclade is about 2,000 years old, behind I-PH908 we have 3 or 4 branches(it does not matter), this means that we need 20 mutations or subclades in each branch for some sort of conclusion.


Only thing we know for now is that subclade https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ originated in White Croatia, this can be changed in the future, that's for now.

Bachus
10-11-17, 15:24
But certain branches of I2-Din do have, independently of its original origin.

If Ante Antic has I2-Din with a 400-year old Greek mutation and comes to Croatia with Vlach name, this mutation age of 400 years is Vlach origin, same branch and mutation of 1000 years old can be of Greek origin, same branch with mutation a 1600-year old can be White Croatian origin.

We have keep track historical records and genetics and then make a conclusion, we must not make conclusions only on the basis one haplotype or mutation which is old 2000 years.

In two thousand years there are about 20 mutations, we still need around 15 mutations roughly in each branch to bring final conclusion for https://yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/



https://yfull.com/tree/I-PH908/ subclade is about 2,000 years old, behind I-PH908 we have 3 or 4 branches(it does not matter), this means that we need 20 mutations or subclades in each branch for some sort of conclusion.


Only thing we know for now is that subclade https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ originated in White Croatia, this can be changed in the future, that's for now.


Vlach means speaker of vulgar Latin in the Balkans and central/east Europe nothing else.

Serbs which settled in western Bosnia, Lika, Kordun and Banija in 16th and 17th century were not Latin speakers so they can't be Vlachs, deal with it.

hrvat22
10-11-17, 15:42
Vlach means speaker of vulgar Latin in the Balkans and central/east Europe nothing else.

Serbs which settled in western Bosnia, Lika, Kordun and Banija in 16th and 17th century were not Latin speakers so they can't be Vlachs, deal with it.

I already told you, it seems that you not understand that language, dance, last name, piano, letter, religion, nationality, flag has nothing to do with the origin of man.


Serbs which settled in western Bosnia, Lika, Kordun and Banija in 16th and 17th century were not Latin speakers so they can't be Vlachs

Show me historical records of settling Serbs to western Bosnia, Lika, Kordun and Banija, as far as I know, there is no historical record that says that to quoted area comes Serbs.

This was confirmed by genetics as well since that in Serbians from Croatia dominate Dinarik-N types and they supposedly come from area where dominate Dinaric-S types(eastern Herzegovina, southern Serbia). This shows that connection between Croatian Serbs and Serbs from Serbia is not exist.

Bachus
10-11-17, 16:26
I already told you, it seems that you not understand that language, dance, last name, piano, letter, religion, nationality, flag has nothing to do with the origin of man.



Show me historical records of settling Serbs to western Bosnia, Lika, Kordun and Banija, as far as I know, there is no historical record that says that to quoted area comes Serbs.

This was confirmed by genetics as well since that in Serbians from Croatia dominate Dinarik-N types and they supposedly come from area where dominate Dinaric-S types(eastern Herzegovina, southern Serbia). This shows that connection between Croatian Serbs and Serbs from Serbia is not exist.

AGAIN: VLACHS = LATIN SPEAKERS IN THE BALKANS AND CENTRAL/EAST EUROPE !!!

If somebody want to be Vlach he must to speak vulgar Latin language, if somebody don't speak vulgar Latin he is not Vlach.
Similar as Jew, if some Jew convert to other religion he is not Jew, because Jew is man which belong to Judaism.

Sorry, but Serbs from western Bosnia, Lika, Kordun, Banija and northern Dalmatia are mostly Dinaric-S, they are around 60% Dinaric-S and 40% Dinaric-N.

You using outdated informations, Serbs from these areas was pred. Dinaric-N at the small sample few years ago, but now at the larger sample they are mostly Dinaric-S, even at the smaller sample they were not 100% Dinaric-N as you think they were around 60% Dinaric-N.

Wonomyro
10-11-17, 17:14
AGAIN: VLACHS = LATIN SPEAKERS IN THE BALKANS AND CENTRAL/EAST EUROPE !!!

If somebody want to be Vlach he must to speak vulgar Latin language, if somebody don't speak vulgar Latin he is not Vlach.
Similar as Jew, if some Jew convert to other religion he is not Jew, because Jew is man which belong to Judaism.

Sorry, but Serbs from western Bosnia, Lika, Kordun, Banija and northern Dalmatia are mostly Dinaric-S, they are around 60% Dinaric-S and 40% Dinaric-N.

You using outdated informations, Serbs from these areas was pred. Dinaric-N at the small sample few years ago, but now at the larger sample they are mostly Dinaric-S, even at the smaller sample they were not 100% Dinaric-N as you think they were around 60% Dinaric-N.

Except that they were not Serbs by origin but became ones due to the efforts of Serbian Church in building their Serbian identity.

hrvat22
10-11-17, 17:24
AGAIN: VLACHS = LATIN SPEAKERS IN THE BALKANS AND CENTRAL/EAST EUROPE !!!

Child of Croats in Germany, second generation they do not know what is Croatian language. Language, Latin, Serbian, Chinese, religion, nationality, etc.. have nothing to do with origin of people.


LATIN SPEAKERS You can not determine someone's origin on the basis Latin language.


If somebody want to be Vlach he must to speak vulgar Latin language,

Are you a child?, language has no connection with origin of people including Vlach, I2a that Croatians have is not Indo-European origin although Croatians speak Indo-European language, do you get it.


Sorry, but Serbs from western Bosnia, Lika, Kordun, Banija and northern Dalmatia are mostly Dinaric-S, they are around 60% Dinaric-S and 40% Dinaric-N.

Serbian genetic portal Poreklo, Serbs from Croatia

I2a-Dinaric = 22.95%, I2-PH908 = 3.93%

This is for Lika. Maybe there in Serbs are Croatian Dinaric-S types, so we do not know from where these Dinaric types come to Croatia or they Croatian origin.

I2-PH908 is about 2,000 years old, how do you know that he came from Eastern Herzegovina and Southern Serbia to Croatia. This we know for five years. I can only make a conclusion on basis of the branch Dinaric-S and Dinaric-N, if in eastern Herzegovina and southern Serbia dominate Dinaric-S then it should be dominate and in Lika etc.

Bachus
10-11-17, 17:49
Child of Croats in Germany, second generation they do not know what is Croatian language. Language, Latin, Serbian, Chinese, religion, nationality, etc.. have nothing to do with origin of people.

You can not determine someone's origin on the basis Latin language.



Are you a child?, language has no connection with origin of people including Vlach, I2a that Croatians have is not Indo-European origin although Croatians speak Indo-European language, do you get it.



Serbian genetic portal Poreklo, Serbs from Croatia

I2a-Dinaric = 22.95%, I2-PH908 = 3.93%

This is for Lika. Maybe there in Serbs are Croatian Dinaric-S types, so we do not know from where these Dinaric types come to Croatia or they Croatian origin.

I2-PH908 is about 2,000 years old, how do you know that he came from Eastern Herzegovina and Southern Serbia to Croatia. This we know for five years. I can only make a conclusion on basis of the branch Dinaric-S and Dinaric-N, if in eastern Herzegovina and southern Serbia dominate Dinaric-S then it should be dominate and in Lika etc.

Serbs from Dalmatia (I2a-Din)

I2a-Dinaric-south
Đurić (Plavno/Knin)
Bubonja (Golubić/Knin)
Lukić (Tribanj/Starigrad)
Vekić (Ervenik)
Dokić (Biskupija/Knin)
Rakić (Varivode/Kistanje)
Poljak (Tribanj/Starigrad)
Dobrić (Benkovac)
Ljubičić (Obrovac)
Kubat (Žegar/Obrovac)
Babac (Tribanj/Starigrad)
Njegić (Gračac/Skradin)
Krnjaja (Žegar/Obrovac)

I2a-Dinaric-north
Amanović (Vrbnik/Knin)
Berber (Bilišane/Obrovac)
Barišić (Bribir/Skradin)
Vujasinović (Ivoševci/Kistanje)
Gagić (Zelengrad/Obrovac)
Vučković (Polača/Knin)
Mirilo (Žegar/Obrovac)


I2a-Din-south (I2-PH908) - 65%

I2a-Din-north (I2-CTS10220) - ​35%


Deal with it. :37:

hrvat22
10-11-17, 19:30
Serbs from Dalmatia (I2a-Din)

I2a-Dinaric-south
Đurić (Plavno/Knin)
Bubonja (Golubić/Knin)
Lukić (Tribanj/Starigrad)
Vekić (Ervenik)
Dokić (Biskupija/Knin)
Rakić (Varivode/Kistzanje)
Poljak (Tribanj/Starigrad)
Dobrić (Benkovac)
Ljubičić (Obrovac)
Kubat (Žegar/Obrovac)
Babac (Tribanj/Starigrad)
Njegić (Gračac/Skradin)
Krnjaja (Žegar/Obrovac)

I2a-Dinaric-north
Amanović (Vrbnik/Knin)
Berber (Bilišane/Obrovac)
Barišić (Bribir/Skradin)
Vujasinović (Ivoševci/Kistanje)
Gagić (Zelengrad/Obrovac)
Vučković (Polača/Knin)
Mirilo (Žegar/Obrovac)


I2a-Din-south (I2-PH908) - 65%

I2a-Din-north (I2-CTS10220) - ​35%


Deal with it. :37:


Serbs from Lika I2a-Dinaric= 22.95%, I2-PH908 = 3.93%

Do you realize that there is no historical records which prove arrival of Serbs to Dalmatia, Lika, Kordun, Banija. They are Vlach and possibly Croatian origin that have nothing to do with Serbs.

Further, as I have previously said, Serbs in the 7th century do not come to Roman Dalmatia.


I2a-Din-south (I2-PH908) - 65%

I2a-Din-north (I2-CTS10220) - ​35%

I2a with mutation https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ comes exclusively with Croatians to Dalmatia and Balkans.

Since you did not provided evidence
Give me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman Dalmatia
Quote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia. with genetic and historical data, my quote
Today's Serbs are genetic mixture of Croats, Albanians and Vlachs. is true and only logically possible.

Sile
10-11-17, 20:23
I am unable to provide link since I need to have more then 10 posts which i don’t. Anyway it is Maveo Orbini “Il regno de gli Slavi”

Kraljevstvo Slavena, Mavro Orbini (Il Regno de gli Slavi, 1601)
by Mavro Orbini, 1601.

Publication date 1999
Topics Orbini, Iliri su Slaveni/Sloveni, Illyrians are Slavs

Orbini basically states that the origins of croats and slovenians are illyrian and this is also what Gimbatus states in her bronze age book . The illyrians originate near the volga, move to become the lusatians and then settle in the eastern alps ( noricum, modern slovenia , istria and northern croatia ) circa around 1500BC

I have found a similar scenario , and continution of this scenario for illyrians in these places is confirmed by Roman historians Livy and Strabo

MOESAN
10-11-17, 20:29
How can it be, if you present your hypotheses as real history?

I agree all these affirmations seem lacking caution in their formulations - but let's allow him to take the risk of ridicule if he goes too far, we 'll judge with more data, later, if we have... we laready saw worst on this forum, so...

Dumidre
10-11-17, 20:57
I2-Din have nothing to do wich Vlachs.

Romanians have 28% I2a-Din thanks to strong Slavic influence, real Vlach haplogroups are R1b, E-V13 and J2b2, these 3 haplogroups among Aromanians together are around 65%.

I2a-Din among Aromanians is Slavic influence, Aromanians on average have 17% I2a-Din.

Aromanians are purest Vlach than Romanians, because they have less Slavic influence, Romanians are heavy Slavic infected they have 46% Slavic Y DNA (I2a-Din+R1a).

Huh? It doesn't make much sense to me...
Aromanians through out history were a minority among Slavic majority AND Romanians were a majority among other minorities (including Slavic) and they have more Slavic DNA than Aromanians?
You make this assumption because Romanians have more I2a-DIN than Aromanians AND you attribute that I2a-DIN is pure Slavic... this is where I think you're wrong.

MOESAN
10-11-17, 21:08
Glup! Gargle! I posted before to read the remnant of this interesting thread, spite a bit animated. Sorry for my out of date posts; but I'll read all the posts, maybe can I find something of worth.
just a remark for someones: "historical report" is a vague term and not synonymous of modern scientific proof...

Bachus
10-11-17, 21:53
Do you realize that there is no historical records which prove arrival of Serbs to Dalmatia, Lika, Kordun, Banija. They are Vlach and possibly Croatian origin that have nothing to do with Serbs.

Further, as I have previously said, Serbs in the 7th century do not come to Roman Dalmatia.



I2a with mutation https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ comes exclusively with Croatians to Dalmatia and Balkans.

Since you did not provided evidence with genetic and historical data, my quote is true and only logically possible.

Among Serbs from Dalmatia Dinaric-south is 65% and Dinaric-north is 35%, so do you still think that majority of them came from central and southern Balkans?

Even Serbs from Krajina which are Dinaric-north are mostly Herzegovian origin. For example Mirilo from Žegar in Bukovica originated from Mirilović clan from eastern Herzegovina, Mirilović clan is mentioned in documents from 14th century in Herzegovina and they have nothing to do with southern Balkans.

Wonomyro
10-11-17, 22:07
Among Serbs from Dalmatia Dinaric-south is 65% and Dinaric-north is 35%, so do you still think that majority of them came from central and southern Balkans?

Even Serbs from Krajina which are Dinaric-north are mostly Herzegovian origin. For example Mirilo from Žegar in Bukovica originated from Mirilović clan from eastern Herzegovina, Mirilović clan is mentioned in documents from 14th century in Herzegovina and they have nothing to do with southern Balkans.

Why haven't you said that they were Catholics in 14th century. As Catholics they could not have been Serbs niether they were mentioned as such. Sources from Dubrovnik called them Vlachs as it is a common way in Dalmatia to call the shepherds from the hinterland. They became Serbs long after they accepted Serbian Orthodoxy. That was a general rule of Serbian ehnogenesis.

Under that circumstances, it is rediculous to use their genetics to prove Serbdom. Change of one's religion does not effect his Y-DNA chromosome.

hrvat22
10-11-17, 23:11
Bachus



Among Serbs from Dalmatia Dinaric-south is 65% and Dinaric-north is 35%, so do you still think that majority of them came from central and southern Balkans?


Among Serbs from Lika Dinaric-south PH908 is 3.93% do you still think that majority of them came from eastern Herzegovina and southern Serbia?


Even Serbs from Krajina which are Dinaric-north are mostly Herzegovian origin. Mirilović clan is mentioned in documents from 14th century in Herzegovina and they have nothing to do with southern Balkans.

Prove with genetics until then you talk fairy tales.


For example Mirilo from Žegar in Bukovica originated from Mirilović clan from eastern Herzegovina,

There is no historical record about arrival of Serbs to northwest Dalmatia, do you understand English?




I2a2 'Dinaric' ..L621>CTS10228>S20602/YP196>Z17855>PH3414 (I-PH3414)
Name: Not Disclosed
Kit Number: 327269
Earliest Known Ancestor: N/A
Marker Location: Žegar, Dalmacija

Last established subclade is Z17855 old about 2 thousand years, on basis of which subclade you conclude that Mirilović clan from Žegar comes from Herzegovina.

I'm telling you that for this conclusion needs be established 20 subclades or circa 5,6 years work in DNA laboratory. You probably have a crystal ball?

Only thing we know for now is that https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ comes from White Croatia to Balkans exclusively with Croats and that all carriers of subclade I-S17250 are White Croatian origin. Genetics did not confirm that Serbs coming to Balkan.

Serbs with E1b types have Albanian origins (20% Bosnian Serbs) and they are coming from direction of Albania and Kosovo to Croatia and Bosnia with Vlach name, since E1b is in epicenter in Albanians we can assume this without waiting for 5 years.

All point to the fact that today's Serbs are genetic mix of Croats, Albanians and Vlach. Since you do not dispute it at all, it is now evident and clear.

And yes, about 10% of Croatians with E1b types are Vlach-Albanian origin by male line.

Bachus
10-11-17, 23:57
Among Serbs from Lika Dinaric-south PH908 is 3.93% do you still think that majority of them came from eastern Herzegovina and southern Serbia?



Prove with genetics until then you talk fairy tales.



There is no historical record about arrival of Serbs to northwest Dalmatia, do you understand English?





Last established subclade is Z17855 old about 2 thousand years, on basis of which subclade you conclude that Mirilović clan from Žegar comes from Herzegovina.

I'm telling you that for this conclusion needs be established 20 subclades or circa 5,6 years work in DNA laboratory. You probably have a crystal ball?

Only thing we know for now is that https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ comes from White Croatia to Balkans exclusively with Croats and that all carriers of subclade I-S17250 are White Croatian origin. Genetics did not confirm that Serbs coming to Balkan.

Serbs with E1b types have Albanian origins (20% Bosnian Serbs) and they are coming from direction of Albania and Kosovo to Croatia and Bosnia with Vlach name, since E1b is in epicenter in Albanians we can assume this without waiting for 5 years.

All point to the fact that today's Serbs are genetic mix of Croats, Albanians and Vlach. Since you do not dispute it at all, it is now evident and clear.

And yes, about 10% of Croatians with E1b types are Vlach-Albanian origin by male line.

Bosnian Serbs don't have 20% E1b, Serbs from Bosnia have 13% E1b and mainly is not conected with Albanian and Vlachs types of E1b.

Serbs from Lika I2a-Dinaric

I2a-Dinaric-north
Glumac (Vrelo/Korenica)
Damjanović (Srb)
Dimić (Pribudić/Gračac)
Eror (Bunić/Udbina)
Kljajić (Korenica)
Novaković (Velika Popina/Gračac)
Šijan (Kupirovo/Gračac)
Đukić (Kurjak/Udbina)
Budimir (Prljevo/Gračac)
Lalić (Ponikve/Ogulin)

I2a-Dinaric-south
Graovac (Vrebac/Gospić)
Vukobratović (Gornja Ploča/Lovinac)
Dukić (Deringaj/Gračac)
Zorić (Srb)
Janjatović (Latin/Plaški)
Jovanić (Srb)
Tesla (Raduč/Lovinac)
Opačić (Donji Lapac)
Petrović (Srb)
Paskaš (Oraovac/Donji Lapac)


I2a-Dinaric-north - ​50%

I2a-Dinaric-south - 50%


Deal with it :29:

hrvat22
11-11-17, 08:09
Bosnian Serbs don't have 20% E1b, Serbs from Bosnia have 13% E1b and mainly is not conected with Albanian and Vlachs types of E1b.

Serbs from Lika I2a-Dinaric

I2a-Dinaric-north
Glumac (Vrelo/Korenica)
Damjanović (Srb)
Dimić (Pribudić/Gračac)
Eror (Bunić/Udbina)
Kljajić (Korenica)
Novaković (Velika Popina/Gračac)
Šijan (Kupirovo/Gračac)
Đukić (Kurjak/Udbina)
Budimir (Prljevo/Gračac)
Lalić (Ponikve/Ogulin)

I2a-Dinaric-south
Graovac (Vrebac/Gospić)
Vukobratović (Gornja Ploča/Lovinac)
Dukić (Deringaj/Gračac)
Zorić (Srb)
Janjatović (Latin/Plaški)
Jovanić (Srb)
Tesla (Raduč/Lovinac)
Opačić (Donji Lapac)
Petrović (Srb)
Paskaš (Oraovac/Donji Lapac)


I2a-Dinaric-north - ​50%

I2a-Dinaric-south - 50%


Deal with it :29:

In eastern Herzegovina and southern Serbia prevails subclade I2-PH908, if there is any movement from that area to Croatia proof is subclade I2-PH908.
Although it has not been scientifically established Serbs from Croatian Lika have I2a-Dinaric = 22.95%, I2-PH908 = 3.93% (Serbian genetic portal Poreklo)

https://www.poreklo.rs/forum/index.php?topic=1494.220

The only scientific work for Bosnian Serbs says that they have 20% of E1b. Officially we only have to believe this scientific work.

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/22Kangars/BesenyoGeneticsEn.htm






Croats also have I2a Dinaric types with subclade https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ in Dalmatia up to 60% and this is proof that Croats come from White Croatia to Roman Dalmatia.

Genetics have proven that Croatians comes to Roman Dalmatia as only tribe.

Bachus
11-11-17, 09:57
In eastern Herzegovina and southern Serbia prevails subclade I2-PH908, if there is any movement from that area to Croatia proof is subclade I2-PH908.
Although it has not been scientifically established Serbs from Croatian Lika have I2a-Dinaric = 22.95%, I2-PH908 = 3.93% (Serbian genetic portal Poreklo)

https://www.poreklo.rs/forum/index.php?topic=1494.220

The only scientific work for Bosnian Serbs says that they have 20% of E1b. Officially we only have to believe this scientific work.

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/22Kangars/BesenyoGeneticsEn.htm






Croats also have I2a Dinaric types with subclade https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ in Dalmatia up to 60% and this is proof that Croats come from White Croatia to Roman Dalmatia.

Genetics have proven that Croatians comes to Roman Dalmatia as only tribe.

Ti si stvarno retardirana osoba, kakvo crkno poreklo tamo ima puno debila i trolova.

To što oni pričaju nema veze sa mozgom, pogledaj ovde
https://poreklo.rs traži u tabeli za I2a-Din south i north Ličane i napravi statistiku kao što sam ja uradio a ne da ponavljaš nebulozu o 3,93% kao pokvarena ploča.
Pored imena i prezimena svakog testiranog piše slave i mesto porekla, znaćeš da napraviš statistiku ako si završio bar 4 razreda osnovne škole a ako nisi onda žalim slučaj.

hrvat22
11-11-17, 10:16
Ti si stvarno retardirana osoba, kakvo crkno poreklo oni su gomila debila.

To što oni pričaju nema veze sa mozgom, pogledaj ovde
https://poreklo.rs traži u tabeli za I2a-Din south i north Ličane i napravi statistiku kao što sam ja uradio a ne da ponavljaš nebulozu o 3,93% kao pokvarena ploča.
Pored imena svakog testiranog piše slave i mesto porekla, znaćeš da napraviš statistiku ako si završio bar 4 razreda osnovne škole a ako nisi onda žalim slučaj.

Please do not insult me, you have a history records and genetics, use it to refute my claims. By insulting and humiliating me as a person you do not getting anything.

Bachus
11-11-17, 11:16
Please do not insult me, you have a history records and genetics, use it to refute my claims. By insulting and humiliating me as a person you do not getting anything.

I gave you a link with database, please make it statistic because your claims about 3,93% Dinaric-south among Lika Serbs is not true.

You claims is based on outdated date made at small sample, and yes poreklo is full of ***** that is true.

I'm not fighting for higher percentage of Dinaric-south among Serbs I only fighting for the truth.

To be honest I would like that Serbs have more Dinaric-north, because Dinaric-north is older than Dinaric-south and also Dinaric-north is real Slavic haplogroup which can't be said for Dinaric-south, but facts are facts Serbs have 2/3 Dinaric-south and 1/3 Dinaric-north.

hrvat22
11-11-17, 14:48
I gave you a link with database, please make it statistic because your claims about 3,93% Dinaric-south among Lika Serbs is not true.You claims is based on outdated date made at small sample, and yes poreklo is full of ***** that is true. I'm not fighting for higher percentage of Dinaric-south among Serbs I only fighting for the truth. To be honest I would like that Serbs have more Dinaric-north, because Dinaric-north is older than Dinaric-south and also Dinaric-north is real Slavic haplogroup which can't be said for Dinaric-south, but facts are facts Serbs have 2/3 Dinaric-south and 1/3 Dinaric-north.


октобар 30, 2017,I2a-Dinaric = 22.95%, I2-PH908 = 3.93%...So, when it comes to Serb populations, typical haplogroups / sub-branches can be I2-CTS10228, R1a-M458, J2b-M205,..

https://www.poreklo.rs/forum/index.php?topic=1494.220They each day look at the data for Lika, they best know statistics for Lika Serbs although it is not a scientifically based evidence.
You claims is based on outdated date made at small sample, and yes poreklo is full of ***** that is true.

I use Serbian genetic portal Poreklo only for statistical genetic data, I do not read their mythomania, but some of details they know best since they explore Serb genetic from Lika, Dalmata, Bosnia etc.


Serbs from Bosnian Kraina (northwestern Bosnia)
Укупан број тестираних износи 68Хаплогрупа I2a (21) - 30.9%I2a-PH908 - 16.2%I2a-CTS10228 - 10.3%I2a - 4.4%

Хаплогрупа I2a (21) - 30.9%

In Herzegovina is I2a to 70%, how much is percentage in eastern Herzegovina I do not know, but I'm telling you all the time that I2a-PH908 in Croatian Serbs it can also be of Croatian origin, do you understand English.

Croats from Herzegovina and Dalmatia have up to 70% of I2a and most of it is PH908(which proves Croatian migration from White Croatia), maybe today's Serbs come from Croatian areas to Lika and later transferred to Orthodoxy and become Serbians, maybe today's Serbs from Lika etc. with Dinaric-S and N types are native Croats who never come from south Serbia etc with Vlach population.
We do not have historical data on Serbian coming to Lika, Do you understand English.

Subclades about whom we are talking about are old 2,000, 1,500 years etc., when they get to subclade age of 700, 500, 400, 200 years, then we will be able to bring concrete conclusion.
For now we know that genetics only confirm arrival of Croats to Balkans(White Croatian subclade https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/), we also know that for now E1b, J2b and R1b types from southeast Balkans are mostly Albanian-Vlachs origin including some I2a Dinaric-N types and R1a types.

When and from where Vlachs come to Croatia and Bosnia we will know for few years. For now based on subclades old 2000 or 1500 years we can not bring concrete conclusion.

Bachus
11-11-17, 15:42
https://www.poreklo.rs/forum/index.php?topic=1494.220They each day look at the data for Lika, they best know statistics for Lika Serbs although it is not a scientifically based evidence.

I use Serbian genetic portal Poreklo only for statistical genetic data, I do not read their mythomania, but some of details they know best since they explore Serb genetic from Lika, Dalmata, Bosnia etc.


Serbs from Bosnian Kraina (northwestern Bosnia)

Хаплогрупа I2a (21) - 30.9%

In Herzegovina is I2a to 70%, how much is percentage in eastern Herzegovina I do not know, but I'm telling you all the time that I2a-PH908 in Croatian Serbs it can also be of Croatian origin, do you understand English.

Croats from Herzegovina and Dalmatia have up to 70% of I2a and most of it is PH908(which proves Croatian migration from White Croatia), maybe today's Serbs come from Croatian areas to Lika and later transferred to Orthodoxy and become Serbians, maybe today's Serbs from Lika etc. with Dinaric-S and N types are native Croats who never come from south Serbia etc with Vlach population.
We do not have historical data on Serbian coming to Lika, Do you understand English.

Subclades about whom we are talking about are old 2,000, 1,500 years etc., when they get to subclade age of 700, 500, 400, 200 years, then we will be able to bring concrete conclusion.
For now we know that genetics only confirm arrival of Croats to Balkans(White Croatian subclade https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/), we also know that for now E1b, J2b and R1b types from southeast Balkans are mostly Albanian-Vlachs origin including some I2a Dinaric-N types and R1a types.

When and from where Vlachs come to Croatia and Bosnia we will know for few years. For now based on subclades old 2000 or 1500 years we can not bring concrete conclusion.

Croats from Herzegovina have 71% I2a thanks to genetic drift (bottleneck efect) without any doubt.

Croats from Dalmatia have 50-55% I2a.

Croats from Primorje-Gorski Kotar Country (Primorsko-Goranska Županija) have 21 I2a.

Croats from nothwest Croatia have only aroun 15% I2a.

You talking only about Croats from Herzegovina and Dalmatia because they have high percentage of I2a, but you don't mention Croats from western and northwestern Croatria which have less I2a than Serbs from any region.

Wonomyro
11-11-17, 17:10
Croats from Herzegovina have 71% I2a thanks to genetic drift (bottleneck efect) without any doubt.

Croats from Dalmatia have 50-55% I2a.

Croats from Primorje-Gorski Kotar Country (Primorsko-Goranska Županija) have 21 I2a.

Croats from nothwest Croatia have only aroun 15% I2a.

You talking only about Croats from Herzegovina and Dalmatia because they have high percentage of I2a, but you don't mention Croats from western and northwestern Croatria which have less I2a than Serbs from any region.

Srbia was repopulated from Herzegovina. They became Serbs later.

hrvat22
11-11-17, 19:05
Bachus


Croats from nothwest Croatia have only aroun 15% I2a.They have 25%.
Croats from Primorje-Gorski Kotar Country (Primorsko-Goranska Županija) have 21 I2a.

Western Croatia with Istria, Primorje, Lika have about 40%.


You talking only about Croats from Herzegovina and Dalmatia because they have high percentage of I2a, but you don't mention Croats from western and northwestern Croatria which have less I2a than Serbs from any region

http://www.srpsko-nasledje.rs/sr-l/1998/10/article-1.html


Year 1804.....When we look at data of Šumadia (Central Serbia) population, we see that there are very few aboriginal people among them. In the Šumadia areas of Kačer, Gruža, Lepenica, Kragujevac, Jasenica, Smederevo, Podunavlje and Jasenica, Kosmaju and in the villages around Belgrade, the origin of the 8894 gender with 52,475 houses was examined. Of this number there are only 464 gender with 3603 aboriginal, and all other Šumadia population are settled and settlers have 7960 gender with 46,408 houses. Šumadia(central Serbia) are settled by settlers from almost all parts of today's kingdom, but they are mostly from dinaric areas, i.e. from Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, from Sjenica and New Pazar, Kolasin, Pešteri and Bihor, Dalmatia, Lika and other Dinaric regions.

We do not know original genetics of Serbs from Serbia when they mostly came from Dinaric regions where I2a Dinaric prevails.


That Serbia are not settled from Dinaric regions two hundred years ago, Serbs from Serbia would probably have 5% or 10% I2a.

Bachus
11-11-17, 19:09
Srbia was repopulated from Herzegovina. They became Serbs later.

Around 3/4 of Serbs from modern Serbia (without Vojvodina) are originated from Herzegovina and Montenegro, thier ancestoes settled at teritory of modern Serbia in 18th and 19th century.
Serbia was heavy depopulated in late 17th ans early 18th century because of Serbian migration to the north and northwest in Srem, Bačka, Banat, Slavonia, Hungary, Lika, Kordun and Banija.
During the 18th and 19th century Serbs from Herzegovina and Montenegro were massively settled to territory of modern Serbia.

Bachus
11-11-17, 19:35
@ hrvat22

Y DNA of Croats from Primorsko-Goranska Županija

R1a - ​28,7%

I2a-Din - ​21,8%

R1b - 11,9%

I1 - 9,9%

E1b - 9,9%

J2b - 5%

G2 - 2%

N1a - 2%

I2-M223 - 2%

T - 2%

J2a - 2%

L - 1%

D1a - 1%

I2a-L38 - 1%

H - 1%

hrvat22
11-11-17, 19:50
@ hrvat22

Y DNA of Croats from Primorsko-Goranska Županija

R1a - ​28,7%

I2a-Din - ​21,8%

R1b - 11,9%

I1 - 9,9%

E1b - 9,9%

J2b - 5%

G2 - 2%

N1a - 2%

I2-M223 - 2%

T - 2%

J2a - 2%

L - 1%

D1a - 1%

I2a-L38 - 1%

H - 1%

Last scientific work for Croats from year 2012.

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

Wonomyro
11-11-17, 20:05
Around 3/4 of Serbs from modern Serbia (without Vojvodina) are originated from Herzegovina and Montenegro, thier ancestoes settled at teritory of modern Serbia in 18th and 19th century. Serbia was heavy depopulated in late 17th ans early 18th century because of Serbian migration to the north and northwest in Srem, Bačka, Banat, Slavonia, Hungary, Lika, Kordun and Banija. During the 18th and 19th century Serbs from Herzegovina and Montenegro were massively settled to territory of modern Serbia.

I agree with the most of you said. That's the reason why present day Serbs have lot of I2a-Din. The reason why some parts of Croatia don't is that Croatia was not fully depopulated durring the Otoman invasion, so the immigrants from Dalmatia and Herzegovina never became majority in some areas. However, you are making a logical mistake by calling them all Serbs before they migrated to Serbia or became Serbian Orthodox. Those who migrated elswhere and who never become Othodox, those never called themselves Serbs.

hrvat22
11-11-17, 20:35
Wonomyro


Those who migrated elswhere and who never become Othodox, those never called themselves Serbs.

Those Othodox who migrated to Croatia never called themselves Serbs(there is no historical record who mentions Serbs except one or two records but also with Vlachs), before hundred years ago they beginning called themselves as Serbs under influence of Serbian Orthodox Church.


The reason why some parts of Croatia don't not have high percentage of I2a-Din is that Croatia was not fully depopulated durring the Otoman invasion,

In northern Croatia I2a is about 25%, average for Serbia is 33%.

We know that settlers from Dinaric areas bring I2a to Serbia, that these settlers do not exist, Serbs in Serbia would have 5 to 10% of I2a.

However, this not change fact that I2a originally was White Croatian( https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/) origin in the Balkans.

Miroslav
12-11-17, 00:12
Ti si stvarno retardirana osoba... znaćeš da napraviš statistiku ako si završio bar 4 razreda osnovne škole a ako nisi onda žalim slučaj.

Translation to English "You are really a retarded peson... you will know to make statistics if you finished 4 classes of the elementary school, if you did not, then I am sorry for your case". Moderators, your move, again.

mobileacc200
12-11-17, 04:57
Its true that modern Serbs from Croatia are mostly of Vlach origin. But these are for sure not I2a samples, no matter South or North. I2a-cts10228 is of Slavic expansion regarding Balkans. Just as R1a is.

When it come to Vlach haplogroups, best candidates are E-v13, R1b, J2b2 as Aromun study represented. And these would be mostly Romanized Illyrians and various natives. Furthermore there are more Vlach groups like J1, J2b1, E-M123, J2a, G2, G1, T, I1 and all who were completely Romanized therefore spoken Latin language or that arrived in Balkans from various parts of Roman empire or later Byzantine one.

LeBrok
12-11-17, 05:37
Ti si stvarno retardirana osoba, kakvo crkno poreklo tamo ima puno debila i trolova.

To što oni pričaju nema veze sa mozgom, pogledaj ovde
https://poreklo.rs traži u tabeli za I2a-Din south i north Ličane i napravi statistiku kao što sam ja uradio a ne da ponavljaš nebulozu o 3,93% kao pokvarena ploča.
Pored imena i prezimena svakog testiranog piše slave i mesto porekla, znaćeš da napraviš statistiku ako si završio bar 4 razreda osnovne škole a ako nisi onda žalim slučaj.All members of Eupedia are required to post in English. You also got infraction for demining other member of Eupedia.

Yetos
12-11-17, 09:58
Its true that modern Serbs from Croatia are mostly of Vlach origin. But these are for sure not I2a samples, no matter South or North. I2a-cts10228 is of Slavic expansion regarding Balkans. Just as R1a is.

When it come to Vlach haplogroups, best candidates are E-v13, R1b, J2b2 as Aromun study represented. And these would be mostly Romanized Illyrians and various natives. Furthermore there are more Vlach groups like J1, J2b1, E-M123, J2a, G2, G1, T, I1 and all who were completely Romanized therefore spoken Latin language or that arrived in Balkans from various parts of Roman empire or later Byzantine one.


what?

can you give the source of the study of Vlach?
cause there are Vlachs with Slavic ancestry,
like the Antes

Bachus
12-11-17, 10:33
Its true that modern Serbs from Croatia are mostly of Vlach origin. But these are for sure not I2a samples, no matter South or North. I2a-cts10228 is of Slavic expansion regarding Balkans. Just as R1a is.

When it come to Vlach haplogroups, best candidates are E-v13, R1b, J2b2 as Aromun study represented. And these would be mostly Romanized Illyrians and various natives. Furthermore there are more Vlach groups like J1, J2b1, E-M123, J2a, G2, G1, T, I1 and all who were completely Romanized therefore spoken Latin language or that arrived in Balkans from various parts of Roman empire or later Byzantine one.

The strongest haplogroups among Serbs from Croatia are I2a-Din and R1a, so majority of them are not Vlach origin, Vlach haplogroups are R1b, J2b2 and E-V13.

Wonomyro
12-11-17, 10:36
I2*/I2a

Bosnia-Herzegovina
- Croats ... 71.0%
- Bosniaks ... 53.5%
- Serbs ... 32.5%
Croatia ... 37.0%
Serbia ... 34.0%
Slovenia ... 20.5%

---------------------
Vlachs/Aromuns

J2 - 24.5%
R1b - 21.5%
I - 20.50%
E - 16.5%
R1a - 10.0%

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

Bachus
12-11-17, 11:23
Y DNA of Serbs from Serbia at the day May 5 , 2017

I2a-Din - ​35%

R1a - 19%

E1b - 14%

I1 - 10%

J2 - 7%

R1b - 5%

G2a - 3%

N- 2%

J1 - 2%

I2b - 1%

Q -1%

hrvat22
12-11-17, 13:36
The strongest haplogroups among Serbs from Croatia are I2a-Din and R1a, so majority of them are not Vlach origin, Vlach haplogroups are R1b, J2b2 and E-V13.

I2a-Din and R1a with subclades from Greece, Macedonia, Albania, Bulgaria, Romania age of 500, 400, 300 etc.. years are and Vlach origin.

When Vlachs come to Croatia they have all those haplogroups.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#Genetic_studies

hrvat22
12-11-17, 13:51
Y DNA of Serbs from Serbia at the day May 5 , 2017

I2a-Din - ​35%

R1a - 19%

E1b - 14%

I1 - 10%

J2 - 7%

R1b - 5%

G2a - 3%

N- 2%

J1 - 2%

I2b - 1%

Q -1%



Link to scientific work?

Without scientific work these results are not relevant.

Serb from Bosnia and Herzegovina I2a 30%

Serbians, Reguiero et al. (2012)
I2a 29,1%


Serbs, Aleksandrovac https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandrovac (
Todorović et al. (2014) I2a 35%

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

hrvat22
12-11-17, 14:04
I2*/I2a

Bosnia-Herzegovina
- Croats ... 71.0%
- Bosniaks ... 53.5%
- Serbs ... 32.5%
Croatia ... 37.0%
Serbia ... 34.0%
Slovenia ... 20.5%

---------------------
Vlachs/Aromuns

J2 - 24.5%
R1b - 21.5%
I - 20.50%
E - 16.5%
R1a - 10.0%

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

Bosnia-Herzegovina Serbs, I2a 30%, R1a 13% E1b 20%

This is only data from scientific work for Bosnian Serbs, everything else is not based on scientific work, ie it can not serve as evidence.

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/22Kangars/BesenyoGeneticsEn.htm

If we start to add haplogroups from different portals then there is nothing left of statistics, each portal has its own statistics.

We have to keep scientific papers, everything else is a crystal ball and anarchy.

Bachus
12-11-17, 14:32
Bosnia-Herzegovina Serbs, I2a 30%, R1a 13% E1b 20%

This is only data from scientific work for Bosnian Serbs, everything else is not based on scientific work, ie it can not serve as evidence.

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/22Kangars/BesenyoGeneticsEn.htm

If we start to add haplogroups from different portals then there is nothing left of statistics, each portal has its own statistics.

We have to keep scientific papers, everything else is a crystal ball and anarchy.

Stop using data from year 2005 that was 12 years ago, you live in past my dear friend.

Look at Eupedia
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

Bosnian Serbs according to Eupedia from year 2017

I2a - 32,5%

R1a - 20%

E1b - 17,5%


Deal with it. :29:

hrvat22
12-11-17, 17:08
Stop using data from year 2005 that was 12 years ago, you live in past my dear friend.

Look at Eupedia
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

Bosnian Serbs according to Eupedia from year 2017

I2a - 32,5%

R1a - 20%

E1b - 17,5%


Deal with it. :29:

Which Eupedia ?

Only scientific work on Planet Earth for Bosnian Serbs is from year 2005.

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/22Kangars/BesenyoGeneticsEn.htm

Eupedia dont doing genetic research for Bosnian Serbs, there is no other scientifically based article for Bosnian Serbs. That why it is only evidence, everything else is a children's show.

Bachus
12-11-17, 17:38
Which Eupedia ?

Only scientific work on Planet Earth for Bosnian Serbs is from year 2005.

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/22Kangars/BesenyoGeneticsEn.htm

Eupedia dont doing genetic research for Bosnian Serbs, there is no other scientifically based article for Bosnian Serbs. That why it is only evidence, everything else is a children's show.


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


You're jealous because Bosnian Serbs have more R1a than Bosnian Croats. :29:

Bosnian Serbs also have more R1a than Bosniaks, but don't be sad Bosnian Croats have more Vlach I2a Din-south. :good_job:

hrvat22
12-11-17, 18:03
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtmlDo you understand English?
Only scientific work on Planet Earth for Bosnian Serbs is from year 2005.Why and on what basis on Eupedia writes differently you need to ask them on Eupedia.My opinion is that they get information from Serbian genetic portal Poreklo, but this is not based on a scientifically article. This is not scientifically based evidence and I can not use it as such. For Bosnian Croats is the same result in the Eupedia as it was and year 2005. because there are not any new scientific work.The same thing is for Bosnian Serbs, we can use as evidence only scientific article. Eupedia, Serbian genetic portal Poreklo, genetic databases in the world, public genetic databases etc.. are not scientifically proven evidence.

hrvat22
12-11-17, 18:30
https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtmlYou're jealous because Bosnian Serbs have more R1a than Bosnian Croats. :29:Bosnian Serbs also have more R1a than Bosniaks, but don't be sad Bosnian Croats have more Vlach I2a Din-south. :good_job:How I2a Din-south with 70% can be Vlach origin when Vlachs have and E1b, J2b, R1b types, there is no gene detector at the border to Croatia or Herzegovina which only lets people with I2a Din-south.I2a Din-south with subclade https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ is proof that Croats came from White Croata to Balkans.http://www.waughfamily.ca/Ancient/Tree%20and%20Map%20for%20Hg%20I.pdf
You're jealous because Bosnian Serbs have more R1a than Bosnian Croats. Do you hear me..
Only scientific work on Planet Earth for Bosnian Serbs is from year 2005.If in that scientific work writes that Bosnian Serbs have
Bosnia-Herzegovina Serbs, I2a 30%, R1a 13% E1b 20% and there is no other scientific work on the Planet Earth, then this is the only genetic evidence of Bosnian Serbs.

Bachus
12-11-17, 20:03
How I2a Din-south with 70% can be Vlach origin when Vlachs have and E1b, J2b, R1b types, there is no gene detector at the border to Croatia or Herzegovina which only lets people with I2a Din-south.I2a Din-south with subclade https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ is proof that Croats came from White Croata to Balkans.http://www.waughfamily.ca/Ancient/Tree%20and%20Map%20for%20Hg%20I.pdfDo you hear me.. If in that scientific work writes that Bosnian Serbs have and there is no other scientific work on the Planet Earth, then this is the only genetic evidence of Bosnian Serbs.

I2a Din-south is Vlach haplogroup, and I2a Din-north is Slavic.

I am I2a Din-north and I am happy because I'm not Vlach (Morlach) origin as majority of Herzegovian/Dalmatian Croats.

hrvat22
12-11-17, 21:17
Bachus (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/members/54831-Bachus)
I'm not Vlach (Morlach) origin as majority of Herzegovian/Dalmatian Croats.Genetics of Croats and especially Croats from Dalmatia proves migration from White Croatia.For the first time I hear that from White Croatia to Roman Dalmatia come Vlachs (Morlachs). Do you have historical record that proves this migration or and that writes on Eupedia.?
Historia Salonitana 13th centuryFrom the Polish territories called Lingonia seven or eight tribal clans arrived under Totilo. When they saw that the Croatian land would be suitable for habitation because in it there were few Roman colonies, they sought and obtained for their duke...The people called Croats.
Nikifor Brienije (1062-1137)..- Croats and Dukljans, again (1073), devastated the entire Illyricum ...- When Croats and Dukljans destroyed Illyricum, "Brijen's father assembled army by.order of Emperor Mihail VII, (1071-1078) and lead against "Dukljans and Croats".
Mehmed-paša Sokolović, great vizier of the Ottoman Empire, issued a year 1566 commandment on the occasion of the Greek Patriarch, in which he says: " Roman Franciscan in Budim (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buda), Timisoara (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timi%C8%99oara) and Dubrovnik and of all Croatian nation do not ask charity, if that nation belong to the Greek patriarch

Toponyms that Croats brought from Carpatians to Croatia.http://www.kapitaltrade.hr/wp-content/uploads/Toponimi-s-Karpata.jpg

Name Hrvat-Croat



The basic Croatian or Latinized characters of these names are more frequently mentioned in the 13th century in the Zadar surrounding and on Pag, from 14th century in Skradin, Split, Kljuc in western Bosnia and in the Zagreb area, and from the 15th century in the Klis(Dalmatia)surrounding and Budva in today's Montenegro.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:wKJayW47ylkJ:https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/835931.Hrvat_za_HJ_1.docx+&cd=20&hl=hr&ct=clnk&gl=hr


Mehmed Zilli (25 March 1611 – 1682), known as Evliya Çelebi (was an Ottoman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire) explorer who travelled through the territory of the Ottoman Empire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire))


It is interesting that Evliya Çelebi does not mention Vlachs where it would be expected to be everywhere in the hinterland of the Adriatic. He does not know about Morlachs. All that population he simply calls as Croatians,

http://www.evliyachelebi.org/novi-evlija-autograf-putopisa/

etc..


Venetians were called population of Dalmatia as Morlachs but still to Roman Dalmatia coming Croats from White Croatia and proof for that is I2a Dinaric.

Bachus
13-11-17, 11:05
There is no evidence that I2a Din-south came from "White Croatia."

"White Croatia" probably did not exist, deal with it.

hrvat22
13-11-17, 13:01
There is no evidence that I2a Din-south came from "White Croatia."

"White Croatia" probably did not exist, deal with it.

If White Croatia does not exist, there existed White Croats.

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


In 2010 has Ken Nordtvedt argued that I-L69.2 is too young not to have been a result of a sudden expansion. According to him I2a1b1 arose not earlier than 2500 years ago in Eastern Europe. He has presumed this to be a consequence from the Slavic invasion of the Balkans, from the area north-east of the Carpathians since 500 CE. In 2011 Nordtvedt has confirmed I-L69.2 is not older than 2,800 years. In his last comments about Haplogroup I tree and the conjectured spread map, he locates the start of the I-L69.2 lineage around the middle course of the Vistula.


http://www.waughfamily.ca/Ancient/Tree%20and%20Map%20for%20Hg%20I.pdf



So far, most or all of those who are negative for S17250 have patrilineage
originating near the Carpathians, particularly southeastern Poland and
extreme western Ukraine. That pattern may change with more sampling, of
course Date: 20 May 2014.

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



May 4, 2017..In fact there is still only one known man who is CTS10228+ S17250- Y4460- Z17855- A2512-, he has paternal ancestry from southeastern Poland.

http://i2aproject.blogspot.hr/2017/05/may-2017-draft-trees-for-i-l621-and-i.html



R1a Z280 CTS3402 also has a high frequency in southern Poland, but for now it does not know the source of the same ... probably in southern Poland but it needs to be determined.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?hl=en&mid=1uIEV-Unzie9mLufrQJyWb4fD9zg

Garrick
14-11-17, 01:26
No historical sources, no scientific sources in this list.

But there are historical sources.

One of them is Latin medieval text by Bavarian Geographer containing a list of tribes in Central-Eastern Europe, it is emerged in 9th century.

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

There is no Croats or White Croats.

Latin text:

Descriptio civitatum et regionum ad septentrionalem plagam Danubii.

(1) Isti sunt qui propinquiores resident finibus Danaorum, quos vocant Nortabtrezi, ubi regio, in qua sunt civitates LIII per duces suos partite.
(2) Uulici, in qua civitates XCV et regiones IIII.
(3) Linaa est populus, qui habet civitates VII.
(4-6) Prope illis resident, quos vocant Bethenici et Smeldingon et Morizani, qui habent civitates XI.
(7) Iuxta illos sunt, qui vocantur Hehfeldi, qui habent civitates VIII.
(8) Iuxta illos est regio, que vocatur Surbi, in qua regione plures sunt, que habent civitates L.
(9) Iuxta illos sunt quos vocant Talaminzi, qui habent civitates XIII.
(10) Beheimare, in qua sunt civitates XV.
(11) Marharii habent civitates XL.
(12) Uulgarii regio est inmensa et populus multus habens civitates V, eo quod mutitudo magna ex eis sit et non sit eis opus civitates habere.
(13) Est populus quem vocant Merehanos, ipsi habent civitates XXX.
Iste sunt regiones, que terminant in finibus nostris.

Isti sunt, qui iuxta istorum fines resident.
(14) Osterabtrezi, in qua civitates plus quam C sunt.
(15) Miloxi, in qua civitates LXVII.
(16) Phesnuzi habent civitates LXX.
(17) Thadesi plus quam CC urbes habent.
(18) Glopeani, in qua civitates CCCC aut eo amplius.
(19) Zuireani habent civitates CCCXXV.
(20) Busani habent civitates CCXXXI.
(21) Sittici regio inmensa populis et urbibus munitissimis.
(22) Stadici, in qua civitates DXVI populousque infinitus.
(23) Sebbirozi habent civitates XC.
(24) Unlizi populus multus civitates CCCCXVIII.
(25)Neriuani habent civitates LXXVIII.
(26) Attorozi habent civitates CXLVIII, populus ferocissimus.
(27) Eptaradici habent civitates CCLXIII.
(28) Uuilerozi habent civitates CLXXX.
(29) Zabrozi habent civitates CCXII.
(30) Znetalici habent civitates LXXIIII.
(31) Aturezani habent civitates CIIII.
(32) Chozirozi habent civitates CCL.
(33) Lendizi habent civitates XCVIII.
(34) Thafnezi habent civitates CCLVII.
(35) Zeriuani, quod tantum est regnum, ut ex eo cuncte genetes Sclauorum exorte sint et originem, sicut affirmant, ducant.
(36) Prissani civitates LXX.
(37) Uelunzani civitates LXX.
(38) Bruzi plus est undique quam de Enisa ad Rhenum
(39) Uuizunbeire
(40) Caziri civitates C.
(41) Ruzzi.
(42) Forsderen.
(43) Liudi.
(44) Fresiti.
(45) Serauici.
(46) Lucolane.
(47) Ungare.
(48) Uuisane.
(49) Sleenzane civitates XV.
(50) Lunsizi civitates XXX.
(51) Dadosesani civitates XX.
(52) Milzane civitates XXX.
(53) Besunzane civitates II.
(54) Uerizane civitates X.
(55) Fraganeo civitates XL.
(56) Lupiglaa civitates XXX.
(57) Opolini civitates XX.
(58) Golensizi civitates V.

Picture of the tribes:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/51/Hermann_Geogr_Bavar1.png

Miroslav
14-11-17, 02:16
There is no Croats or White Croats.

Could be a use of a different ethnonym/exonym (for e.g. Chozirozi mentioned alongside Lendizi), toponym, political situation, in the fact they did not live alongside a river or trade routes, among others. The list is incomplete, has many errors, while the map is even less complete and has a hypothetical consideration by an author of dubious reliability. One historical source does not over-weight other even more reliable sources. Actually, you are intentionally making low provocation.


There is no evidence that I2a Din-south came from "White Croatia."


There is no evidence for many things, but considering all the evidence we have, in a such an ideological and two-sided discussion, there is much less probability Dinaric-South came from "White Serbia" which probably even less existed and Serbs than "White Croatia" and White Croats. By historiographical, archeological, ethnogenetic and genetic evidence and viewpoint, that's a fact.

hrvat22
14-11-17, 07:45
No historical sources, no scientific sources in this list.It does not have to be scientific sources when we have ancestors of Croatian I2a types in southeastern Poland, include brain. Father of mutation https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ is in southestern Poland, from where mutation I-S17250 comes to Roman Dalmatia, Spain?



How do you think that there are no historical sources?


Nestor the Chronicler (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestor_the_Chronicler) in his Primary Chronicle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_Chronicle) (12th century)From among these Slavs, parties scattered throughout the country and were known by appropriate names, according to the places where they settled. Thus some came and settled by the river Morava (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morava_(river)), and were named Moravians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravians_(tribe)), while others were called Czechs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czechs). Among these same Slavs are included the White Croats,
Alfred the Great (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_the_Great) in his Geography of Europe (888–893) relaying on Orosius (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paulus_Orosius), recorded that "To the north-east of the Moravians are the Dalamensae; east of the Dalamensians are the Horithi (Choroti, Choriti; Croats),



Nestor described how many East Slavic tribes of "...the Polyanians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polans_(eastern)), the Derevlians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drevlians), the Severians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severians), the Radimichians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radimichs), and the Croats lived at peace" In 904-907, "Leaving Igor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_of_Kiev) (914–945) in Kiev (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiev), Oleg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_of_Novgorod) (879–912) attacked the Greeks. He took with him a multitude of Varangians, Slavs, Chuds, Krivichians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krivichs), Merians, Polyanians, Severians, Derevlians, Radimichians, Croats, Dulebians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dulebes), and Tivercians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivertsi), who are pagans.


Many Croats also lived in the territory of Bohemia. The Prague Charter from 1086 AD (actually with data from 973) mentions on the Northeastern frontier of the Prague diocese "Psouane, Chrouati et altera Chrowati, Zlasane...". They were probably located around Elbe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbe) river in Czech Republic, while others on upper Vistula in Poland.


In the 10th century, Arab historian Al-Masudi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Masudi) in his work The Meadows of Gold (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Meadows_of_Gold) mentioned Harwātin or Khurwātīn, between Moravians, Chezchs and Saxons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxons).[ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Croats#cite_note-FOOTNOTEGluhak1990211-70)


In the Hebrew book Josippon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josippon) are listed four Slavic ethnic names from Venice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venice) to Saxony (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxony); Mwr.wh (Moravians), Krw.tj (Croats), Swrbjn (Sorbs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorbs_(tribe))), Lwcnj. Those Croats are probably those who were located in Bohemia.



Historia Salonitana 13th centuryFrom the Polish territories called Lingonia seven or eight tribal clans arrived under Totilo. When they saw that the Croatian land would be suitable for habitation because in it there were few Roman colonies, they sought and obtained for their duke...The people called Croats...Many call them Goths, and likewise Slavs, according to the particular name of those who arrived from Poland and Bohemia.


De Administrando Imperio 10th centuryThe Croats at that time ( 610—641)were dwelling beyond Bagibareia (usually considered Bavaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bavaria)), where the Belocroats(White Croats) are now.(10th century)

The toponyms that Croats brought from the Carpathians to Croatia http://www.kapitaltrade.hr/wp-content/uploads/Toponimi-s-Karpata.jpg

Czech Tribes and Prince's Territorieshttp

http://labphys.tf.czu.cz/czechtribes.htm



In this article author describes archaeological excavations in the town of Stiljsko in Ukraine, which enabled researchers to reconstruct some aspects of historical and cultural development in this region during the early middle ages. On the basis of these revelations author points up that in the ninth century there existed one of the greatest fortifi ed settlements of Croats in the eastern-Karpatian region
https://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=17599

hrvat22
14-11-17, 08:11
There is much less probability Dinaric-South came from "White Serbia" which probably even less existed and Serbs than "White Croatia" and White Croats. By historiographical, archeological, ethnogenetic and genetic evidence and viewpoint, that's a fact.

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

Bachus
14-11-17, 09:55
White Serbia does not exist, there is no historical record that mentions White Serbia.

Wrong.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Dervan.png

Deal with it.

Wonomyro
14-11-17, 10:36
No historical sources, no scientific sources in this list. But there are historical sources. One of them is Latin medieval text by Bavarian Geographer containing a list of tribes in Central-Eastern Europe, it is emerged in 9th century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bavarian_Geographer There is no Croats or White Croats. Latin text: Descriptio civitatum et regionum ad septentrionalem plagam Danubii. (1) Isti sunt qui propinquiores resident finibus Danaorum, quos vocant Nortabtrezi, ubi regio, in qua sunt civitates LIII per duces suos partite. (2) Uulici, in qua civitates XCV et regiones IIII. (3) Linaa est populus, qui habet civitates VII. (4-6) Prope illis resident, quos vocant Bethenici et Smeldingon et Morizani, qui habent civitates XI. (7) Iuxta illos sunt, qui vocantur Hehfeldi, qui habent civitates VIII. (8) Iuxta illos est regio, que vocatur Surbi, in qua regione plures sunt, que habent civitates L. (9) Iuxta illos sunt quos vocant Talaminzi, qui habent civitates XIII. (10) Beheimare, in qua sunt civitates XV. (11) Marharii habent civitates XL. (12) Uulgarii regio est inmensa et populus multus habens civitates V, eo quod mutitudo magna ex eis sit et non sit eis opus civitates habere. (13) Est populus quem vocant Merehanos, ipsi habent civitates XXX. Iste sunt regiones, que terminant in finibus nostris. Isti sunt, qui iuxta istorum fines resident. (14) Osterabtrezi, in qua civitates plus quam C sunt. (15) Miloxi, in qua civitates LXVII. (16) Phesnuzi habent civitates LXX. (17) Thadesi plus quam CC urbes habent. (18) Glopeani, in qua civitates CCCC aut eo amplius. (19) Zuireani habent civitates CCCXXV. (20) Busani habent civitates CCXXXI. (21) Sittici regio inmensa populis et urbibus munitissimis. (22) Stadici, in qua civitates DXVI populousque infinitus. (23) Sebbirozi habent civitates XC. (24) Unlizi populus multus civitates CCCCXVIII. (25)Neriuani habent civitates LXXVIII. (26) Attorozi habent civitates CXLVIII, populus ferocissimus. (27) Eptaradici habent civitates CCLXIII. (28) Uuilerozi habent civitates CLXXX. (29) Zabrozi habent civitates CCXII. (30) Znetalici habent civitates LXXIIII. (31) Aturezani habent civitates CIIII. (32) Chozirozi habent civitates CCL. (33) Lendizi habent civitates XCVIII. (34) Thafnezi habent civitates CCLVII. (35) Zeriuani, quod tantum est regnum, ut ex eo cuncte genetes Sclauorum exorte sint et originem, sicut affirmant, ducant. (36) Prissani civitates LXX. (37) Uelunzani civitates LXX. (38) Bruzi plus est undique quam de Enisa ad Rhenum (39) Uuizunbeire (40) Caziri civitates C. (41) Ruzzi. (42) Forsderen. (43) Liudi. (44) Fresiti. (45) Serauici. (46) Lucolane. (47) Ungare. (48) Uuisane. (49) Sleenzane civitates XV. (50) Lunsizi civitates XXX. (51) Dadosesani civitates XX. (52) Milzane civitates XXX. (53) Besunzane civitates II. (54) Uerizane civitates X. (55) Fraganeo civitates XL. (56) Lupiglaa civitates XXX. (57) Opolini civitates XX. (58) Golensizi civitates V. Picture of the tribes: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/51/Hermann_Geogr_Bavar1.png

These are the names of tribes, not nations. Do you believe that there were as much as 58 Slavic nations, only in that area?

"(35) Zeriuani, quod tantum est regnum, ut ex eo cuncte genetes Sclauorum exorte sint et originem, sicut affirmant, ducant."

Croats were "hidden" under the "Sclauorum" ethnonyme.

hrvat22
14-11-17, 10:50
Wrong.https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Dervan.pngDeal with it.
Dervan or Derwan (Latin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_language): Dervanus) was an early King of the Sorbs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorbs) (fl. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floruit) 615–636)
Sorbs (Upper Sorbian: Serbja, Lower Sorbian: Serby, German: Sorben), known also by their former autonyms Lusatians and Wends, are a West Slavic ethnic group predominantly inhabiting their homeland in LusatiaSorbs and Balkan Serbs they have nothing to do among themselves historically and genetically. Where in historical records is mentioned White Serbia in the area of Lusatia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusatia), or elsewhere?

Wonomyro
14-11-17, 10:51
Wrong.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Dervan.png

Deal with it.

The territory of "Dervan's Serbia" was full of Croatian ethnotoponyms durring the early medieval period:



Germany along Saale (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saale) river there were:

Chruuati near Halle) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halle_%28Saale%29) in 901 AD,
Chruuati in 981 AD,[24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Croatia#cite_note-FOOTNOTEMar.C4.8Dinko2000183-24)
Chruazis in 1012 AD,[24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Croatia#cite_note-FOOTNOTEMar.C4.8Dinko2000183-24)
Churbate in 1055 AD,[24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Croatia#cite_note-FOOTNOTEMar.C4.8Dinko2000183-24)
Grawat in 1086 AD,[24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Croatia#cite_note-FOOTNOTEMar.C4.8Dinko2000183-24)
Curewate (now Korbetha),
Großkorbetha (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gro%C3%9Fkorbetha) (Curuvadi and Curuuuati 881-899 AD) and
Kleinkorbetha,[24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Croatia#cite_note-FOOTNOTEMar.C4.8Dinko2000183-24) and
Korbetha west of Leipzig
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leipzig)


Some of these are still there. They indicate early Croat presence in the area even though the sources do not mention them. What does it tell us? We shuld allow a possibility that they were mentioned under a different name(s). There are no toponymes to indicate "Slavic" presence so it is natural to suppose that the Croats were "hiddden" under a Slavic ethnonym.

hrvat22
14-11-17, 11:00
Wonomyro


The territory of "Dervan's Serbia"

Sorbs and Balkans Serbs are not same people,
He is mentioned by Fredegar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredegar) in his Latin chronicle as dux gente Surbiorum que ex genere Sclavinorum:


The earliest surviving mention of the tribe was in 631 A.D


Chronicle described them as Surbi

Bachus
14-11-17, 11:18
Sorbs and Balkans Serbs are not same people,

Sorbs were not part of Serbian tribe from eastern Germany they lived north of Serbs. Sorbs adopted Serbian name because they were in state federation with Serbs, name of Sorbs before they adopted Serbian name were ​Wends.

Serbs came from eastern Germany in VII century, of course that modern Serbs are not 100% same people as Sebs from VII century because of mixing with native Balkanites.

Same is with Croats, modern Croats are not same people as Croats which lived in White Croatia.
Western Ukrainians, Rusyns and southern Poles are closer to White Croats than modern Croats from Croatia.

Modern Magyars are not same people as proto-Magyars.
Modern Tukish people are not same people as Oghuz Turks.
Modern French are not same people as Franks.
Modern Germans are not same people as ancient Germanics.
Modern Italians are not same people as Romans.
Modern Greeks are not same people as ancient Greeks.
Modern Spaniards are not same people as ancient Iberians.
Modern northern Indians and Pakistanis are not same people as ancient Indo-Aryans.
Modern Iranians are not same people as ancient Persians.
Modern Egyptians are not same people as ancient Egyptians.
Modern Mexicans are not same people as Maya and Aztec people.
Modern Finns are not same people as ancient Finno-Ugric people.
Modern English people are not same people as Angle and Saxon tribe from Middle Age.

hrvat22
14-11-17, 13:00
Bachus (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/members/54831-Bachus)


Sorbs were not part of Serbian tribe from eastern Germany they lived north of Serbs. Sorbs adopted Serbian name because they were in state federation with Serbs,

Give me historical information about Serbs in that area.

Balkan Serbs are named in the Balkans in Greece, therefore no Serbs exist around Sorbs.

Before that they come from a place called
in a
region called by them Boïki,

Miroslav
15-11-17, 15:55
Sorbs were not part of Serbian tribe from eastern Germany they lived north of Serbs. Sorbs adopted Serbian name because they were in state federation with Serbs, name of Sorbs before they adopted Serbian name were Wends.

Serbs came from eastern Germany in VII century, of course that modern Serbs are not 100% same people as Serbs from VII century because of mixing with native Balkanites.

Your list is another typical denial of historical and genetic evidence which oppose the generally promoted theory by Serbian DNA Project. The generalizations are not definitive in the same amount for each of these listed groups. Sorbs were not part of the Serbian tribe because they were the same people with same ethnonym (Sorbs=Serbs). At the time there were no two separate populations with different but similar ethnonyms (Sorbs, Serbs). You are factually wrong, and the assertion that Sorbs adopted the Serbian name is a lie, while the name Wends was actually an exonym by the Germans used for Slavic people in general, including for the So(e)rb tribe. Basically with your saying that the modern Serbs are not the same as Serbs from VII century Eastern Germany because of mixing with native Balkanites you admit that dominance of I2-Dinaric in modern Serbs is of foreign origin because Sorbs have over 60% R1a and absence of any significant percentage of haplogroup I2 in general.

Wonomyro
15-11-17, 17:14
It is interesting that Balkan Serbs, unlike Sorbs in Lusatia, actually do not use a root form "Srb", as it is usually translated to English (Serb) and other foreign languages. They use the from "Srbin" which should be properly translated to English as “Serbian”. Srbian means “one from Serbia”. I’ve never heard them to say “Srb” for themselves. It is always “Srbin”.

It seems that "Srbin" became a "real" ethnonym over time. Croatian sources until middle 19. century regularly call their country Servija (Servia) and its population Servijani (Servians).

Miroslav
15-11-17, 23:01
We are going off topic with linguistics, but just to add. Servia and Servians is the same as Serbia and Serbians (v=b), while in medieval Serbian documents like Dušan's Code (14th century) are used terms such as "Sebri", "Srbljin", "Srbljem" etc. -in is a suffix, as well as -at in "Hrvat" (and some supposed same or similar Iranian origin of hrv=srb), it is also recorded "Surbia", "Serbulia", "Sorbulia", in Lusatia due to influence by Germans changed Serb to Sorb. Heinz Schuster-Šewc considered origin from Indo-European *serbh- / *sirbh- / *surbh- (meaning "sip", "breast-feed", "flow").

Wonomyro
16-11-17, 00:53
We are going off topic with linguistics, but just to add. Servia and Servians is the same as Serbia and Serbians (v=b), while in medieval Serbian documents like Dušan's Code (14th century) are used terms such as "Sebri", "Srbljin", "Srbljem" etc. -in is a suffix, as well as -at in "Hrvat" (and some supposed same or similar Iranian origin of hrv=srb), it is also recorded "Surbia", "Serbulia", "Sorbulia", in Lusatia due to influence by Germans changed Serb to Sorb. Heinz Schuster-Šewc considered origin from Indo-European *serbh- / *sirbh- / *surbh- (meaning "sip", "breast-feed", "flow").

Don't worry, @Miroslav, we are still on topic. I am just using linguistics to support what you already concluded from genetics. I agree with all what you said above except that there is no analogy between Hrv-at and Srb-in. Here is why:

1. "Croat" was never "Hrv", always "Hrvat". There is no "Cro" except as an abbreviation...:grin:

2. Lusatian "Serb" is just "Srb" not "Srbin".

e.g.

Lower Sorbian: Serb
Czech: Srb
Ukrainian: серб
...
Serbian: Srbin (exception!)

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Serb#Translations

3. Srbin is analogue to Hrvatin (plural: Hrvatini).

e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hrvatini (Hrvatini = people from Croatia)

That means that "Srbin" is "Serbian" the same way as "Hrvatin" is "Croatian". Original ethnonyms are therefore "Srb" and "Hrvat", not "Srbin" and "Hrvat".

This tells us that Balkan Serb(ian)s got their name after the region (Serbia), not vice versa.

Garrick
16-11-17, 00:55
These are the names of tribes, not nations. Do you believe that there were as much as 58 Slavic nations, only in that area?

"(35) Zeriuani, quod tantum est regnum, ut ex eo cuncte genetes Sclauorum exorte sint et originem, sicut affirmant, ducant."

Croats were "hidden" under the "Sclauorum" ethnonyme.

No.

Bavarian Geographer doesn't mention Croats.
...

Historians are scientists, as all scientists they base their scientific papers on the facts, not speculations.

We already discussed the Croatian name in Dalmatia, it is mentioned first time in 9th century, not before.

No one Frankish chronicle, or Eastern Roman chronicle, or any other source mention Croats before 852.

For example Duke Borna was named as "Duke of Dalmatia and Liburnia".

About Croatian name, what is right question, I will continue in another thread.

Wonomyro
16-11-17, 01:36
No.
Bavarian Geographer doesn't mention Croats.

So what? Other sources do. Toponyms do.


Historians are scientists, as all scientists they base their scientific papers on the facts, not speculations.

There are many historians and many theories.


We already discussed the Croatian name in Dalmatia, it is mentioned first time in 9th century, not before.

They were mentioned as Slavs. Hopefully there are two inscriptions of duke Branimir from 9th century: "dux Sclavorum" and "dux Chroatorum". The two were obviously synonyms. The Branimir’s predecessors had Slavic names too. We have no reason not to believe that they also called themselves Croats.


No one Frankish chronicle, or Eastern Roman chronicle, or any other source mention Croats before 852.

They mention Slavs. These were the same guys as I showed you above.


For example Duke Borna was named as "Duke of Dalmatia and Liburnia".

So what?