Nik
Banned
- Messages
- 458
- Reaction score
- 114
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Albanian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13>CTS9320>Z38456
Correct.There is no diversity within CTS10228. The clade that every tested I2a1b belongs is Y3120. Y3120 only descend from one man in 100BC. There is a 1700 year gap between CTS10228 and Y3120. The Frenchman likely forms his own clade under CTS10228 that may shed light to where CTS10228 was, but certainly not where Y3120 was.
Are you sure you're talking to me? Are you even reading what I'm saying? Why would you answer that Y3120 couldn't have descended from Dacians, Getae, Pannonian, or Slav? I really don't get your argument here. So unnecessary.There is simply no way what so ever for Y3120 to be descended from Dacians, Getae, Thracians, Pannonians and Slavs all when the survivor that spread the ENTIRETY of it was only born around 100BC some time. The formation age of Y3120 is NOT the tmrca(where all men draw the most distant ancestor). There is simply no way for this clade to be descended from all these far older cultures, and somehow only lived in the late Iron Age.
Maybe there are, maybe they all died. Celts were also located in Pannonia, Carpathians, and Goths were also in Crimea.As Kelmendasi stated, there should be clades of CTS10228 that are brother clades to Y3120, found in Central Europe. Why? because thats where Celts and Germanics were located.
I'm not proposing scenarios, I'm ridiculing the confidence you all show with this theory that "it spread with Slavs".There needs to be clades bridging the gap to satisfy the scenario you propose. We need brother clades of I2a1b-CTS10228 in Dacians, Thracians, Pannonian, Getae, Celts etc. There aren't any. Even if we discover them, it won't change the fact that Y3120 survived and spread mostly with Slavs. and possibly(only minimally) with East Germanics, Bulgars, Avars, Huns.
Can you disprove the version that maybe Y3120 was running away from Slavs? Can you disprove that it was absorbed much later by Slavs? Can you disprove that they were captured Goths, Celts, or Scythians, Romanized Dacians forced to fight for them like the Huns did with almost everyone?
Now that is the only thing I'm proposing, to open the mind and learn some more history. Slavs weren't the exclusive people making history in those years. Were all Italic people Roman? No, but it's been 2000 years that they are. Should we call every single clade in Italy Roman? So why simplify the origin of Y3120 like we do by calling every East European a Slav/Russian?
I can't believe you actually thought I was being serious with the "Ottoman Sipahis" sarcasm.Also, taking a nab at Kelmendasi for having J1 and saying it is related to Ottomans is nonsensical. The TMRCA of his J1-P58 is over 8500 years. He also doesn't share any matches with J1 in the middle east for probably more than 3000 years. So you connecting it to Ottomans to illustrate your point makes little sense. His line has thousands of years to develop and disperse. This is not the case for Y3120, whose descendants come from one man no more than 2100 years. This is specifically why I told you we need ancient samples to push the TMRCA of Y3120 back further for your story to work.
Unnecessary lesson. If we knew each other, I'd say even offensive.They can tell the difference between brother clades because theoretically each should be negative for the related brothers branch. Y3120 follows a very linear progression. When Kelmendasi said majority in the Dinaric Alps belong to one clade, he literally is telling you based on the evidence they actually all bottlenecked from 1 guy in the area. Y3120/M458/Z280 are all the main 3 uniting Slavs. Take away Y3120, L1029 and even some Z280 who the hell would they even descend from?
As for Slavs, you have to open your eyes that they were a minority in Eastern Europe. Germans, Daco-Thracians, Scythians and Sarmatians were some of the most numerous tribes in antiquity. I didn't count Celts since they moved East later.
I don't use my evidence to come up with conclusive statements like you 2, I use them to question these false statements that can only be verified with ancient DNA.He is right to ask for your evidence but you don't have any genetic finds proving it. Just historical accounts, phenotypes, and culture. That is not evidence, and often times can misconstrue the reality. Which is why we need archaeogenetics. If we find ancient samples pushing the age of Y3120 further in time we can explore these possibilities. Also, there are only 2 descendants of Y3120, the small and rare Greek/Jewish branch, and the young and huge branch which is near entirely Slavic.
Actually we don't know anything about Proto-Slavs, just theories based on findings that could belong to any given tribe in that area. We know so much more of Dacians, Getae, and Scythians and archaeologist cannot pinpoint that a certain settlement belonged to a specific tribe based on findings. Tribes living in vicinity were pretty much the same. Now how would you know that a discovered settlement in Dnieper was Slavic or Scythian? Answer is you can't, but Poles and Russians will jump into theories immediately.My case is also a rare scenario like the Greek branch. However the Albanian ancestor of this haplotype is 1200ybp. Mostly from Diber on both sides, and now its starting to develop sub-clusters in Tosks. Given its current TMRCA and restriction to East Albania/West Macedonia. The likely scenario is the earliest settlement of of Slavic tribes around the later Proto-Albanian phase, likely absorbed it and spread exclusively with Albanians then on. Maybe it was a Romanized Slav, or as you said one time a Goth. However we would need a pre-dibra cluster among Albanians, or have the TMRCA pushed back further in time prior to the migration. Then we can make some of those possible associations. However right now theres almost 1000 years between the basal L1029 ancestor and my Albanian haplotype. Given what we know at the moment, Proto-Slavs are the best bet. Also they were not all warlike as you claim. Some around Albania and Greece HELPED the Byzantines against their warlike brethren.
Fair enough. I hope you use the same attitude of questioning and considering alternatives with the Y3120 case as well.As far as Sardinia, you are forgetting the Byzantines could have brought assimilated Slavic lineages. Also, there was a Slavic led Taifa from the Balaeric Islands. He led a unsuccessful campaign against Sardinia. He also hired many Slavic mercenaries and guess where they ruled for 1-2 years? Cagliari...exactly where these Slavic lineages showed up.
Now we're talking. Completely agree.There is really no way for you to tell whether the impact was Vandals, Goths, Byzantine Romans, Slavs without first having actual Vandal/Goth/Byzantine Roman remains that are positive for Y3120 or any of the R1a clades in question.
Looking forward to this, although I believe they're wasting 10 million Euros on the least interesting region of Europe and specifically during the Middle Ages. For the sake of I2a I wish for ancient tombs in these regions rather than Medieval.Also, the study I referenced from the last page will put a nail in the coffin to any further arguments. It will be the first study of its kind incorporating all disciplines. Over 6000 graves spanning 400-900CE in Central and East Europe.
https://www.ias.edu/press-releases/2019/erc
“The Institute for Advanced Study (IAS) and its international partners have received a €10 million Synergy Grant from the European Research Council (ERC) to fund a multidisciplinary study of more than 100 medieval cemeteries located across central and eastern Europe. The project, HistoGenes, will seek to understand the impact of migrations and mobility on the population of the Carpathian Basin from 400–900 CE, based on a comprehensive analysis of samples from 6,000 ancient burial sites. HistoGenes will, for the first time, unite historians, archaeologists, geneticists, anthropologists, and specialists in bioinformatics, isotope analysis, and other scientific methods in understanding this key period of European history.”