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

You are going off topic. Everytime you post spam and propaganda, i will just repeat myself again. I2a-slav/din came to the balkans with slavs. As this is one of the strongest slavic markers. No ancient I2a-slav/din has been found the balkans. Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
The origins of the Thracians remain obscure, in the absence of written historical records. Evidence of proto-Thracians in the prehistoric period depends on artifacts of material culture. Leo Klejn identifies proto-Thracians with the multi-cordoned ware culture that was pushed away from Ukraine by the advancing timber grave culture or Srubna . It is generally proposed that a proto-Thracian people developed from a mixture of indigenous peoples and Indo-Europeans from the time of Proto-Indo-European expansion in the Early Bronze Age when the latter, around 1500 BC, mixed with indigenous peoples. We speak of proto-Thracians from which during the Iron Age (about 1000 BC) Dacians and Thracians begin developing. - Thracians Wikipedia Thracians inhabited parts of the ancient provinces of Thrace, Moesia, Macedonia, Dacia, Scythia Minor, Sarmatia, Bithynia, Mysia, Pannonia, and other regions of the Balkans and Anatolia. This area extended over most of the Balkans region, and the Getae north of the Danube as far as beyond the Bug and including Panonia in the west. There were about 200 Thracian tribes. Thracians- Wikipedia
 
You are going off topic.
You can start posting thracian history here if we one day find out they were in fact slavs.

Everytime you post spam and propaganda, i will just repeat myself again.

I2a-slav/din came to the balkans with slavs.
As this is one of the strongest slavic markers.
No ancient I2a-slav/din has been found the balkans.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
You are going off topic.
You can start posting thracian history here if we one day find out they were in fact slavs.

Everytime you post spam and propaganda, i will just repeat myself again.

I2a-slav/din came to the balkans with slavs.
As this is one of the strongest slavic markers.
No ancient I2a-slav/din has been found the balkans.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

Thracians inhabited parts of the ancient provinces of Thrace, Moesia, Macedonia, Dacia, Scythia Minor, Sarmatia, Bithynia, Mysia, Pannonia, and other regions of the Balkans and Anatolia. This area extended over most of the Balkans region, and the Getae north of the Danube as far as beyond the Bug and including Panonia in the west. There were about 200 Thracian tribes. Thracians- Wikipedia

Balkanite, just quick question, how do you explain Thracians living in Slavic lands ^ as quoted in upper statement but they themselves Thracians are not Slavs? But they living in the land...
 
@kingslav
so you theory that I2a-slav is based on the assumption that thracians were slavs?
 
@kingslav
so you theory that I2a-slav is based on the assumption that thracians were slavs?

I said already my theory since second post, I2A-Din people are descendants of Thracians.

" I am not Illyrian descendant IMO, Illyrian is south Balkans. Specifically Albanians. I believe Thracians come from near Black Sea coast ( Romania, Moldova, Ukraine ) where you can find I2A." - Kingslav Page 16
 
I can go on forever. Everytime you 4 serbian spies post spam and propaganda, i will just repeat myself again.

I2a-slav/din came to the balkans with slavs.
As this is one of the strongest slavic markers.
No ancient I2a-slav/din has been found the balkans.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

listen turk, no markers belong to any race........
 
listen turk, no markers belong to any race........
Hehehe, a balkanite with haplogroup T is calling a J2b2-l283 a turk. How funny. Check ancient Dna please.

Anyways, maybe markers dont belong to specific groups anymore, but they did originate in some groups for sure.
and it seems I2a-slav originated the same place as Proto-slavs originated, as all slavic countries bear this haplogroup.
If the R1a Porto-slavs enslaved a sarmatian or thracian is not for me to say. But it sure seems that I2a-din spoke slavic since the proto-slavs were forming
 
Sile is wrong here again, and his comment calling someone from the Balkans a "Turk" is wrong too. No one is talking about all of "I2a", or markers that are thousands of years older than present ethnicities existed.

In this case the specific marker I-CTS10228 aka I2a-Slav "Din", has a TMRCA of only 2300 ybp. Originally he could've only lived at one culture, most likely Slavic or Proto-Slavic given the phylogeographic distribution and other factors. So yes, he lived at the time when the Slavs or Proto-Slavs existed, and his descendants expanded soon after throughout what we now know as the Slavic world, and obviously as a Slavic speaking marker, and therefore it can be called I2a-Slav.

Similarly, we're finding younger mutations/markers who are almost entirely present among Albanian speaking populations. So such markers can be called Albanian.
 
Last edited:
listen turk, no markers belong to any race........

You know better than this. One more insult and you get another infraction, which means you're banned again. Control yourself.
 
Gentlemen, somebody had to bring the Slavic languages to the Balkans. There is not enough R1a, imo, especially in certain countries. So, it seems that I2a-Din was probably involved. Whether it was in the area of Poland or Ukraine originally or incorporated in central Europe during the Slavic migrations, I don't know, but I doubt it was in the western Balkans.

There is also the evidence of IBD allele sharing, which documents the Slavic migrations south.

See: Ralph and Coop
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555
 
I can go on forever. Everytime you 4 serbian spies post spam and propaganda, i will just repeat myself again.

I2a-slav/din came to the balkans with slavs.
As this is one of the strongest slavic markers.
No ancient I2a-slav/din has been found the balkans.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

I suppose there is a first time for everything, even for being called a serbian spy.
Balkanite, if you think that being J2b2 makes you Albanian, sorry to say but you are delusional.

What makes you Albanian are the games you play as a kid:
topa gropash, topa rrasash, doce kanoce, rraqi rraqi kikiko, rrjeta dhe peshku, topadjegesi, kala dibrance.




Regarding propaganda, you created a nickname for pure purpose of stereotyping: I2a-slav.
Your logic might be correct, but this does not give you any right to modify scientific terminology with propagandist connotations.

The term I2a-slav is unknown to the world so all your posts that include such term are by definition spam.

I would like to celebrate with someone the findings of the J2b2 and of the pre-ev13, instead of saddening myself about this hole in the water.
So please come back to your senses.
I still do thank you a lot for your videos.
 
I suppose there is a first time for everything, even for being called a serbian spy.
Balkanite, if you think that being J2b2 makes you Albanian, sorry to say but you are delusional.

What makes you Albanian are the games you play as a kid:
topa gropash, topa rrasash, doce kanoce, rraqi rraqi kikiko, rrjeta dhe peshku, topadjegesi, kala dibrance.




Regarding propaganda, you created a nickname for pure purpose of stereotyping: I2a-slav.
Your logic might be correct, but this does not give you any right to modify scientific terminology with propagandist connotations.

The term I2a-slav is unknown to the world so all your posts that include such term are by definition spam.

I would like to celebrate with someone the findings of the J2b2 and of the pre-ev13, instead of saddening myself about this hole in the water.
So please come back to your senses.
I still do thank you a lot for your videos.
Actually i did not mean to add your name too. Now i remember you from other threads, and i dont think you are a serbian spy(not that it matters what i think people are)

And regarding the fact that i call that marker I2a-slav, is just as wrong/right as calling it I2a-din. And i would even argue that I2a-din is a more misleading term than I2a-slav, as it is not a specific dinaric marker, but rather a slavic one which is found throughout the slavic world and everywhere slavs have had influence.
I2a-din is not Scientific terminology. Or at least I2a-slav is just as scientific.
 
Naive and pacific try
Without going too deeply in the thread but just to try to make things clear :

- Y-I is in Europe since Paleolithic
- Y2 is in Europe since Azilean (~14000/13000 BC Bichon)
- Y-I2 is very ancient in all over Europe
- Late Mesolithic/Early Neolithic shows dominance of Y-I2a1 and Y-I2a2 (+ Y-R1b) among Danubian Balkans HG’s, and in Iberia (but here I2a2 seems increasing about Eneolithic in no more Hg’s pops but among megalithers)
- at these stages there was not question of Slavs and maybe not question of Y-I2-Din at all
- Y-I2-Din seems appearing in the supposed places of formation of the future Slavic pops complex


we know uniparental haplo’s are tied to autosomes only for a time, and that sexually unbalanced crossings between pops can easily unclench the former statistical links ; so there is not something like a « slavic haplo » by itself ; but we can try to find if some subclade of an haplo have been typical and/or have found birth among a pop or its proto-pop, no sin here, no honour or life engaged for ever ;
my thoughts (for what they are worth of) :
at LN a lot of pops of East-Central and South-East-Central Europe was shift towards HG’s Y-haplo’s (Y-I2 and Y-R1b) and Farmers mt-haplo’s ; among them, one of the northeasternmost ones of the Carpathians mountains knew a bottleneck eliminating the most of Y-R1b and Y-I2a2, leaving place to only Y-I2a1b – this last pop profited of the Tripolye « aura » (increase in demogtaphy and founder effect) and around (pre-)Bronze Age in the eastern slopes took contact with Y-R1a tribes of the lowlands and western steppes ; I want not go into detailed subclades here ; were these Y-R1a tribes I-Ean or I-Eanized, it’s not the thread to discuss this) ; these dominantly Y-R1a tribes further developped the Baltic-slavic group of langages but I think the individualisation of Slavic took place by the influence of the Carpathian Eneolithic groups (whose Y-I2a1 had produced the Y-I2a-Din) : influence based upon crossings between the 2 firstly distinct pops -


So a great enough number of Y-I2a-Din bearers took part in the Slavic genesis what doesn’t signify that the whole Y-I2a-Din bearers was implicated : I think Y-R1a stayed by far the most important element, and some Tripolye male lineages (Y-G2a + some Y-E1b?) surely were taken into the process – All the way I’m sure Slavic colonization of the Balkans imported Y-I2a-Din (« Slavics » + later incorporated elements from Carpathians) but I cannot be sure other pops rich for Y-I2a-Din (but poor for Y-R1a or lacking it) did not the same travel before the Slavs, under another label (I-E or not) … to disentangle this question we need more and well distributed ancient Y-DNA.
Whatever the input Iranic tribes (Scythians, Sarmatians) could have had linguistically too, they are not responsible I think for the Y-I2a-Din, or only by displacing pops; Thracians and Illyrians are another story but I lack knowledge about their genesis and the reality of their « ethnic » territory, and I think I’m not alone to be ignorant on this very point -



Concerning auDNA and Slavs, Slavs were not « pure » Northerners (even Balts are not), and their dominant male Y-R1a lineages were balanced by dense enough female mt-DNA of diverse origins, as well from Balkans Farmers (by origin) as from Caucasus CHG (by origin too) whatever the dates of entry of these elements -
 
And besides, i have written tens of times now that an albanian bearing I2a-slav/din is just as albanian as a j2b2, v13 or r1b.
I am sure that I have some I2a-slav/din somewhere in my family if i test others than my direct paternal line. But at least i admit that i may have had a minimal slav input sometime in the last 1500 years.
 
we know uniparental haplo’s are tied to autosomes only for a time, and that sexually unbalanced crossings between pops can easily unclench the former statistical links ; so there is not something like a « slavic haplo » by itself

The age: I made a clown of myself! My statement is true but the right reasoning is: uniparental haplo's are not tied to language by nature, even if sometimes they can be linked to it more than autosomals are in the case of male elite transmition... Sorry -
ConcerningY-R1a and India, I red somewhere (I'll try to find the source) that the first lineages Y-R1a1-L657 "LPKSTR" post L342-2(post-Z93) found there would be appeared around 3300/3000 BC through the Bolan Pass (Balutchistan) as "confirmed by archeology, toponymy, numismatic, linguistic, iconography, litteracy..."; linked to "wheeled transport, agriculture, metallurgy; origin: Transcaucasia ("Kura-Araxes migration" according to the theory): horizon Tureng Tepe, Tepe Hissar, Altyn Depe, Mundigask, Shatr-i-Sokhta, Mehrgarh, burnish greyware..."
This very haplo R1a would be found among Goud Saraswat Brahmins (in Lothi): their tradition speaks of a Sarasvati tribe coming from the river Sarasvati or Haraxvati of the Rig-Veda, supposedly non I-E, which the paper places as the Argandab river in Afghanistan and not not the today Ghaggar-Hakra; this tribe would have been there (fghanistan) in the 4000 BC...
to take with some taste of salt, but the basis is that Y-R1a would not be so ancient in India...
 
@Garrick,

If I2a-Din was Germanic and Gothic, why not equal quantities of R1b-U106 and I1 in the Balkans?

Angela, yes, your question is right in the center.

And question is very complex, as this mattery is very complex.

I will try to see some facts (of course it is simplistic, for detailed discussion we can write scientific monography), with what we can dispose and what we can talk about.

I2 and generally I haplogroup is exciting for studying, the first Homo sapiens in Europe in period 45,000 to 28,000 years ago were I carriers (plus CT, C1a, C1b and F). I2 carriers were in Europe in Paleolithic 26500-19000 ybp, I2 and I1 carriers are practically only true Europeans and autochthonous. This fact is important to know where the carriers of the I2a haplogroup could move in the old days.

I-P37 is Forefather of I-CTS10228. This haplogroup is found in Balkans, Serbia, in Lepen whirl, location Padina, age estimation is 8753-8351 BC. Very important lineage I-M423 is found in Loschbour, today’s Louxembourg, 6000 years BC.

If we try to notice where the predecessors of I-CTS10228 lived there is Middle, Western and Northern Europe and beyond, reaching Western parts of Eastern Europe. It is nothing to do with areas of Near East, Caucasus, Iran, Russia, Finland etc. This fact is very important. I-CTS10228 is formed 5300 years ago and it was somewhere in Middle/Western/Northern Europe. It is barely survived, and for now we don’t know about reasons for bottleneck, but area where it lived is logical.

After bottleneck I-CTS10228 emerged before 300 BC. Where? It can be somewhere in today’s Poland/Southern Poland, Slovakia, Carpatian area and beyond.

Who lived in this time in this areas?

Slavic people no. It is the important fact. If I-CTS10228 didn’t emerge among Slavs it cannot be Slavic marker.

We can try to get knowledge in which tribe I-CTS10228 could emerge.

We can acquire knowledge from Greek and Roman sources.

We can see in the Ptolomy map which (#580).

In Poland, Slovakia and Western Ukraine lived German tribes, on the south Thracians and on the east, Sarmatians, who were Iranian people.
Where we can search Slavs , they are Venede in the Baltic sea.

We will not search nationalistic German and Polish/Russian sources which every culture in Iron age in aforementioned areas and beyond proclaimed as Germanic or Slavic depending on whether author is German or Slavic origin .Therefore we escape this.

In that time in these areas and beyond were Celtic, Sarmatian, Thracian etc. tribes and some cultures were mixed.

Some scholars some of cultures in the areas of present days Poland, Slovakia, Western Ukraine, Carpatian mounntains in Iron age claim even as Illyrian.

For one of significant culture in that time, which covered big part of Poland and beyond, even reached Moldavia, Pomeranian culture, scientists are sure it is not Slavic, but they are not sure if it is Germanic or no. But tribe Bastarnae is good candidate for this culture, and this is German tribe:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomeranian_culture

In the picture: Pomeranian culture (oliva green)

ArcheologicalCulturesOfCentralEuropeAtEarlyPreRomanIronAge.png


And Zarubintsy culture since 300 BC was not Slavic:

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

If we can enter in historical Roman and Greek sources, we can see that Slavic people were connected to the territory from river Dneister in today’s Central Ukraine to Baltic sea. Maybe Milodrag culture, located in area the rivers Dnieper and Pripyat, north from Kiev, can be Slavic culture, although it is not proven:

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

But culture is very far of area where I-CTS10228 emerged.

What is saffer terrain, to see which tribes lived in the aforementioned area approximately in 300 BC.

Several German tribes are candidates:

Lugii: they lived in today’s Silesia, Greater Poland, Mazovia and Little Poland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lugii

Buri: they lived between Southern Poland, Czech and Northern Carpatian. Not to be confused with Thracian Burs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buri_tribe

Lugii and Buri were mentioned by Ptolomy as one tribe Lugoi Buroi.

Scirii: they lived in Northern Poland and they moved about 200 BC to the south about 230 BC. Later they lived in Carpatian mountains and Black sea. They mixed with Bastarnae.

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

Bastarnae: Their homeland is probably Pomerania (today Poland) or Southern Poland and Western Ukraine. They migrated and lived since 200 BC in region of Carpatian mountains, to the river Dnieper in Ukraine and were connected with Thracians on the south and Sarmatians in the East. They came to the present days Moldavia and Romanian Danube Delta. They reached Balkans more times in Thracian land.

If we see time and geography the best candidate for first I-CTS10228 carriers after bottleneck are Bastarnae and maybe Scirii.

Therefore neither Goths not Gepids are candidates, they came later from the north, but it can be possible that these tribes could pick up somewhere this haplogroup in their movements.

Bastarnae mixed with Thracians and Sarmatians. Thracians brought this haplogroup to the Balkans and Sarmatians probably transfered to the Slavs.

There is no doubt that I-CTS10228 will be found in the Balkans ,in period 0-5th century AD (maybe even earlier) what is significantly before arrival of Slavs.
 
I suppose there is a first time for everything, even for being called a serbian spy.
Balkanite, if you think that being J2b2 makes you Albanian, sorry to say but you are delusional.

What makes you Albanian are the games you play as a kid:
topa gropash, topa rrasash, doce kanoce, rraqi rraqi kikiko, rrjeta dhe peshku, topadjegesi, kala dibrance.




Regarding propaganda, you created a nickname for pure purpose of stereotyping: I2a-slav.
Your logic might be correct, but this does not give you any right to modify scientific terminology with propagandist connotations.

The term I2a-slav is unknown to the world so all your posts that include such term are by definition spam.

I would like to celebrate with someone the findings of the J2b2 and of the pre-ev13, instead of saddening myself about this hole in the water.
So please come back to your senses.
I still do thank you a lot for your videos.

I find myself largely in agreement.

Indeed, yDna doesn't determine autosomal content, much less nationality and culture. I think it's a misunderstanding of genetics to think so.
 
Naive and pacific try
Without going too deeply in the thread but just to try to make things clear :

- Y-I is in Europe since Paleolithic
- Y2 is in Europe since Azilean (~14000/13000 BC Bichon)
- Y-I2 is very ancient in all over Europe
- Late Mesolithic/Early Neolithic shows dominance of Y-I2a1 and Y-I2a2 (+ Y-R1b) among Danubian Balkans HG’s, and in Iberia (but here I2a2 seems increasing about Eneolithic in no more Hg’s pops but among megalithers)
- at these stages there was not question of Slavs and maybe not question of Y-I2-Din at all
- Y-I2-Din seems appearing in the supposed places of formation of the future Slavic pops complex


we know uniparental haplo’s are tied to autosomes only for a time, and that sexually unbalanced crossings between pops can easily unclench the former statistical links ; so there is not something like a « slavic haplo » by itself ; but we can try to find if some subclade of an haplo have been typical and/or have found birth among a pop or its proto-pop, no sin here, no honour or life engaged for ever ;
my thoughts (for what they are worth of) :
at LN a lot of pops of East-Central and South-East-Central Europe was shift towards HG’s Y-haplo’s (Y-I2 and Y-R1b) and Farmers mt-haplo’s ; among them, one of the northeasternmost ones of the Carpathians mountains knew a bottleneck eliminating the most of Y-R1b and Y-I2a2, leaving place to only Y-I2a1b – this last pop profited of the Tripolye « aura » (increase in demogtaphy and founder effect) and around (pre-)Bronze Age in the eastern slopes took contact with Y-R1a tribes of the lowlands and western steppes ; I want not go into detailed subclades here ; were these Y-R1a tribes I-Ean or I-Eanized, it’s not the thread to discuss this) ; these dominantly Y-R1a tribes further developped the Baltic-slavic group of langages but I think the individualisation of Slavic took place by the influence of the Carpathian Eneolithic groups (whose Y-I2a1 had produced the Y-I2a-Din) : influence based upon crossings between the 2 firstly distinct pops -


So a great enough number of Y-I2a-Din bearers took part in the Slavic genesis what doesn’t signify that the whole Y-I2a-Din bearers was implicated : I think Y-R1a stayed by far the most important element, and some Tripolye male lineages (Y-G2a + some Y-E1b?) surely were taken into the process – All the way I’m sure Slavic colonization of the Balkans imported Y-I2a-Din (« Slavics » + later incorporated elements from Carpathians) but I cannot be sure other pops rich for Y-I2a-Din (but poor for Y-R1a or lacking it) did not the same travel before the Slavs, under another label (I-E or not) … to disentangle this question we need more and well distributed ancient Y-DNA.
Whatever the input Iranic tribes (Scythians, Sarmatians) could have had linguistically too, they are not responsible I think for the Y-I2a-Din, or only by displacing pops; Thracians and Illyrians are another story but I lack knowledge about their genesis and the reality of their « ethnic » territory, and I think I’m not alone to be ignorant on this very point -



Concerning auDNA and Slavs, Slavs were not « pure » Northerners (even Balts are not), and their dominant male Y-R1a lineages were balanced by dense enough female mt-DNA of diverse origins, as well from Balkans Farmers (by origin) as from Caucasus CHG (by origin too) whatever the dates of entry of these elements -

It's a sensible and very nuanced analysis, Moesan, which probably won't satisfy for that very reason either side. :)
 
Thanks Angela, it augments even more the pleasure I'm taking when drinking just now a reasonable taste of scottish whisky (to help my heart condition). My post is a bit off topic but I hope it 'll help to freshen the atmosphere: these topics are so interesting (and I learn things, among some rubbish, and I like it), so, why to spoil this pleasure? Buona sera.
 
Sile is wrong here again, and his comment calling someone from the Balkans a "Turk" is wrong too. No one is talking about all of "I2a", or markers that are thousands of years older than present ethnicities existed.

In this case the specific marker I-CTS10228 aka I2a-Slav "Din", has a TMRCA of only 2300 ybp. Originally he could've only lived at one culture, most likely Slavic or Proto-Slavic given the phylogeographic distribution and other factors. So yes, he lived at the time when the Slavs or Proto-Slavs existed, and his descendants expanded soon after throughout what we now know as the Slavic world, and obviously as a Slavic speaking marker, and therefore it can be called I2a-Slav.

Similarly, we're finding younger mutations/markers who are almost entirely present among Albanian speaking populations. So such markers can be called Albanian.

He called me a serb , is that not wrong!, am I a serb!

There is no I2a-slav ...it is fabricated.............the slavs do not even know who their "founding" tribe is
Read Russian papers on this and they state we know of no tribe that was slav, all we know is that the slav language first appeared on the modern border of belarus and ukraine
 

This thread has been viewed 574367 times.

Back
Top