How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crya

Great Slavic migration have never happened. Tibor Zivkovic said that only 1-3% of the nobles came to the Balkan during the so-called the great migration. I will cite Mario Alinei:In short, if such an enormous expansion of the Slavs both to the South and to theNorth from their alleged homeland in Middle-Eastern Europe had really taken place, themost important evidence we should expect to find would be archaeological. Which isentirely missing. Just as we miss any discussion of this point in Mallory’s book –andcertainly not by accident, given the fact that Mallory is an archaeologist. I fail to see,then, how an archaeologist can advance the hypothesis of a massive expansion thatinvolves half of Europe, and is capable of entirely changing its linguistic identity,without the slightest archaeological evidence: unless it is a curious case ofunderestimation of one’s own science.Another fundamental objection to this thesis lies in the fact that, following thetraditional scenario, we would have to assume that this ‘great migration’ involved alsothe Southern Slavic area: an absolute impossibility, as we have just seen. If there hasbeen a ‘migration’, it must have proceded from South northwards. A third, fundamental objection to this thesis is the contradiction between theidea of a medieval migration and the total disappearance of the presumed pre-existinglanguages. Not even modern mass migration and colonization, despite the enormoustechnological and cultural difference between the migrants and the indigenous people,have caused the total extinction of all autocthonous languages in the New World. Theideal of the extinction of all alleged pre-Indo-European languages because of a CopperAge IE migration is already hard enough to admit, given the same reason, plus the factthat research on pre-Indo-European has never produced any serious result (Alinei 1996,2000). How can we accept such an idea for the Early Middle Ages, and for the highlycivilized areas of Southern Eastern prehistoric Europe? What and where would the preIndo-Europeansubstrate be in Bulgaria, Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia andSlovenia? Unless we associate this late migration to a gigantic genocide – aphantascientific hypothesis – this hypothesis does not belong to serious scientificthinking.

---

stopped reading here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fustan

stopped reading here

---

These hidden, spineless accounts such as the one you quoted have set their roots deeply in these foras to spread misinformation.

They must all be banished!

It is not about massive migration, but the massive depopulation that preceeded the migration. Then even a small number of immigrants could rule over the empty land and grow in number with time.

I found a support for that in Ralph and Coop paper:

Quote:

---

The migration period. One of the striking patterns we see is the relatively high level of sharing of IBD between pairs of individuals across eastern Europe, as high or higher than that observed within other, much smaller populations. This is consistent with these individuals having a comparatively large proportion of ancestry drawn from a relatively small population that expanded over a large geographic area.

---

That one was easy...

We don't have any reliable way of knowing at present how much "repopulation" took place during the migration period. The only way we will know is to compare ancient samples from the Balkans from before the Migration period to after it. Anything else is just speculation and wishful thinking.

What is clear is that people from the Balkans, including Croatians, have a lot more "farmer" ancestry and ancestry from Iran/the Caucasus than people like the Ukrainians and Poles, so there was no "replacement" in the Balkans: there was admixture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

What is clear is that people from the Balkans, including Croatians, have a lot more "farmer" ancestry and ancestry from Iran/the Caucasus than people like the Ukrainians and Poles, so there was no "replacement" in the Balkans: there was admixture.

---

Founder effect and bottleneck could do a significant influence on the population ethnogenesis, however, you are right. The truth is in the middle - admixture happened. These extreme considerations, that there were massive depopulation and repopulation, or that there were no massive depopulation and repopulation, are by argumentation and conclusion more wrong than right. For example, previously in a long post (#1189), I noted that archaeologists on the territory of former Yugoslavia rather proved continuity from antique period rather than discontinuity. Hence, such extreme viewpoints represent a specific cultural-political i.e. ideological agenda (for e.g. the Yugoslavian pan-Slavic autochthonous theory, or if migration theory then "Hrabak emphasized that South Slavic scholarship and Serbian nationalists tried to neglect or minimize (making it a social term) the contribution of Vlachs in their ethnogenesis and history because the old-Balkan element insulted their idea of pure Slavs" as Vlachs were historiographically considered as a population of non-Slavic origin), rather than scientifically neutral research.

For example, according to "Standing at the Gateway to Europe - The Genetic Structure of Western Balkan Populations Based on Autosomal and Haploid Markers" (2014), the "Figure 2. ADMIXTURE analysis of autosomal SNPs of the Western Balkan region in a global context on the resolution level of 7 assumed ancestral populations" perfectly shows such admixture in Western and Eastern Balkan; from the Middle East and Caucasus (Red), South Europe (Light Blue), and East Europe (Dark Blue).

......................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

We don't have any reliable way of knowing at present how much "repopulation" took place during the migration period. The only way we will know is to compare ancient samples from the Balkans from before the Migration period to after it. Anything else is just speculation and wishful thinking.

---

That is one way of course. But in a meantime we have Ralph and Coop IBD analysis. The method they used takes the time parameter into account, which is not case with the methods you are suggesting. That is why we should trust R&C more then to the others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

What is clear is that people from the Balkans, including Croatians, have a lot more "farmer" ancestry and ancestry from Iran/the Caucasus than people like the Ukrainians and Poles, so there was no "replacement" in the Balkans: there was admixture.

---

First you should prove that the present day Poles and Ukrainians are prototypes of the early Slavs. The method that Ralph and Coop use overcomes that problem. They don’t care about the name and location of the common ancestry. They only quantify it. And their numbers clearly show that West-South-Slavs share “lot more” ancestry with present day Poles during the period of Roman Empire then with all others in a study.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wonomyro

That is one way of course. But in a meantime we have Ralph and Coop IBD analysis. The method they used takes the time parameter into account, which is not case with the methods you are suggesting. That is why we should trust R&C more then to the others.



First you should prove that the present day Poles and Ukrainians are prototypes of the early Slavs. The method that Ralph and Coop use overcomes that problem. They don’t care about the name and location of the common ancestry. They only quantify it. And their numbers clearly show that West-South-Slavs share “lot more” ancestry with present day Poles during the period of Roman Empire then with all others in a study.

---

Again, you are misinterpreting the Ralph and Coop study because you don't understand the difference between IBD analysis and whole genome comparisons using ADMIXTURE and formal stats, especially when used with ancient samples.

Yes, Ralph and Coop show that there is IBD sharing between the people in the Balkans and people in Poland/Ukraine, and that it increased during the Migration Period.

What it doesn't show is what percentage of the entire genome of modern Balkanites can be attributed to the pre-Slavic inhabitants of the Balkans versus the newcomers.

That has to be accomplished using other methods, and they would be the first to tell you that.

The inhabitants of the modern Balkans do not share more ancestry with Poles/Ukrainians than with any other groups. Bulgarians/Romanians, for example, are closest to Northern Italians.

Someone who can't understand the methods used by population geneticists or their findings the findings of academic papers just confuses himself and others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

Again, you are misinterpreting the Ralph and Coop study because you don't understand the difference between IBD analysis and whole genome comparisons using ADMIXTURE and formal stats, especially when used with ancient samples. Yes, Ralph and Coop show that there is IBD sharing between the people in the Balkans and people in Poland/Ukraine, and that it increased during the Migration Period. What it doesn't show is what percentage of the entire genome of modern Balkanites can be attributed to the pre-Slavic inhabitants of the Balkans versus the newcomers. That has to be accomplished using other methods, and they would be the first to tell you that. The inhabitants of the modern Balkans do not share more ancestry with Poles/Ukrainians than with any other groups. Bulgarians/Romanians, for example, are closest to Northern Italians. Someone who can't understand the methods used by population geneticists or their findings the findings of academic papers just confuses himself and others.

---

This is NOT what I said. Who speaks about "people in the Balkans" or "modern Balkanites"?

I am talking about West-South-Slavs (Croats, Serbs, Bosnians, Slovenians).

I DON'T speak about Romanians, Bulgarians, Greeks and Albanians.

Please note that and check the diagrams again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wonomyro

This is NOT what I said. Who speaks about "people in the Balkans" or "modern Balkanites"? I am talking about West-South-Slavs (Croats, Serbs, Bosnians, Slovenians). I DON'T speak about Romanians, Bulgarians, Greeks and Albanians. Please note that and check the diagrams again.

---

Go on the internet and find some papers on IBD analysis. Read the Ralph and Coop paper again. Look at the graphs again. Ralph and Coop are not producing data on the total genetic similarity of people in the Balkans versus people in Poland, for example. You have to use programs like ADMIXTURE, f3 stats and even newer methods for that. Until you understand that you're going to continue to draw wrong conclusions. Unless, of course, that's what you want to do.

Then go back and read the Kovacevic paper again. Look at the admixture runs for goodness sakes'. You'd have to be blind not to see it. The differences between the people of the Balkans are minimal. There was no complete population replacement in the Balkans. Yes, the Croatians are the most "northern" of the Balkan peoples, if that's so important to you, although you have a lot of variation. However, your closest population looks like the Hungarians, a Central European population with a lot of Germanic influence, and a lot of Neolithic ancestry from the LBK all the way to the MN and LN, not Poles or Ukrainians. Propaganda has really done a number on people from the Balkans.

Click to enlarge.

Attachment 9450

No matter what you were taught or what your ideology leads you to want to believe, Croatians are not ethnic Slavs, although you have ancestry from them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

Go on the internet and find some papers on IBD analysis. Read the Ralph and Coop paper again. Look at the graphs again. Ralph and Coop are not producing data on the total genetic similarity of people in the Balkans versus people in Poland, for example. You have to use programs like ADMIXTURE, f3 stats and even newer methods for that. Until you understand that you're going to continue to draw wrong conclusions. Unless, of course, that's what you want to do.

---

In my previous post I asked you not to misinterpret my words, and here it is again:

You said: “total genetic similarity of people in the Balkans versus people in Poland”

1. Who on earth mentioned any “TOTAL genetic similarityof people in the Balkans”. Where and when have I said that?

2. Haven’t I said in the previous post that it is NOT about “people in the Balkans versus people in Poland”. It IS about people in Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and Slovenia versus people in Poland. It is a BIG difference. If you don't want to understand such a simple thing the whole furher conversation is pointless.

Quote:

---

Then go back and read the Kovacevic paper again. Look at the admixture runs for goodness sakes'. You'd have to be blind not to see it. The differences between the people of the Balkans are minimal. There was no complete population replacement in the Balkans. Yes, the Croatians are the most "northern" of the Balkan peoples, if that's so important to you, although you have a lot of variation. However, your closest population looks like the Hungarians, a Central European population with a lot of Germanic influence, and a lot of Neolithic ancestry from the LBK all the way to the MN and LN, not Poles or Ukrainians. Propaganda has really done a number on people from the Balkans.

---

Don’t you understand that we are not talking about the differences in the means of prehistorical genetic components. We are tracing historical migrations! Again:

1. I am not talking about Balkans as whole. I am talking about Croats (and Slovenains, Serbs, Bosnians). The difference is big.

2. I am not talking about “complete population replacement”, I am talking about high level of shared ancestry between Poles and Croats from the times of Roman Empire. Please check the diagrams (3rd row, 1st column):

http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology...o.1001555.g005

and (images C and E):

http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology...o.1001555.g003

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

No matter what you were taught or what your ideology leads you to want to believe, Croatians are not ethnic Slavs, although you have ancestry from them.

---

How on earth can someone get to such conclusion from EHG, WHG and EEF combination?!

Let me cite one respectable member of this forum: "IBD doesn't lie, my friend...at least not when done by people of this caliber...". :grin:

A medieval I2a-Din (S17250) was found in Russia (Sungir6) not long ago:

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...l=1#post521178

Some data from the thread:

Quote:

---

# Population (source) Distance
1 Ukrainian 3.62
2 Polish 4.33
3 Estonian_Polish 4.6
4 Russian_Smolensk 4.72
5 Southwest_Russian 4.9
6 Ukrainian_Lviv 5.39
7 Belorussian 5.9
8 Ukrainian_Belgorod 5.92
9 South_Polish 5.99
10 Kargopol_Russian 8.67
11 Lithuanian 8.82
12 Estonian 9.47
13 Croatian 10.93
14 Erzya 11.03
15 Finnish 12.01
16 East_Finnish 12.5
17 Southwest_Finnish 12.82
18 Moldavian 13.9
19 Hungarian 15.11
20 East_German 16.04

---

Another medieval sample from Silesia (Poland):

NA_13, Niemcza, (900-1000 AD), I2a1b2-L621

That one could be easily I2a-Din as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

No matter what you were taught or what your ideology leads you to want to believe, Croatians are not ethnic Slavs, although you have ancestry from them.

---

I agree with most things you write,but i have question for you here.
What is ethnic Slav for you? in your perception,what define a Slav? How genetically Slav look like,since you are talking about genetics here.

Then please tell me what genetic Italian is?


I am interested in ethnic "genetic" Slav and ethnic "genetic" Italian?

Because you are Italian and i am South Slav,that's why i brought up Italians.

.................

There is something strange going on! I got some negative points but I can't identify their source and reason:

10-11-17 20:00 Wonomyro has lost -20 Points for User points

11-11-17 17:30 Wonomyro has lost -38 Points for User points

It is quite a lot. No warning, no explanation. It happened during my debate with @Angela about the origin of South-Slavic people but I don't want to believe that @Angela, as moderator, would misuse her power in such a way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wonomyro

There is something strange going on! I got some negative points but I can't identify their source and reason:

10-11-17 20:00 Wonomyro has lost -20 Points for User points

11-11-17 17:30 Wonomyro has lost -38 Points for User points

It is quite a lot. No warning, no explanation. It happened during my debate with @Angela about the origin of South-Slavic people but I don't want to believe that @Angela, as moderator, would misuse her power in such a way.

---

I had the same for simply disagreeing with Angela that Anthrogenica is not such a bad forum. Imagine the irony. The only explanation is that she's got freedom to do what she wants from Maciamo as in the end "it's just an internet forum, right?". Take your daily anger and insecurity on people online.

I've been warned already for "provocation", so I guess this will be my last post in here lol

11th century Moravia! "Genomic and isotopes Study shed light into mobility of medieval individuals from Central Europe":

https://www.academia.edu/35123252/Ge...Central_Europe

From the poster:

Quote:

---

Dětkovice was thought to be situated near the old amber route that led from the South of Europe to the North. It awas also relatively close to Olomouc - important centre of Přemyslid colonization of Moravia and important node on the trade route between Bohemia and Kiev.

---

There is a PCA plot in there. The 11th century Moravians plot near present day Hungarians and Croatians.


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

Dětkovice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C4%9Btkovice_(Prost%C4%9Bjov_District)

Přemyslid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C5%99emyslid_dynasty

Charváty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charv%C3%A1ty

(thanks to user Waldemar from the "bad" forum who let us know about the poster)

It is no serious, in any case, to clasify I2a as a Illyrian. It is just bosniak-croatian ill pride to be 'autochthonous' everyway

I2a is present among Slavic people like belorrusians, who nobody can link to illyrians. Also it is present among moldavians who in comparison with romanians are more slavic in race and origins, and were romanized, moldavs ara neodanubian anthropological type. So even those fanatics who doesnt accept illyrian origins of albanians, there is facts against illyrians theory of haplogroup I2a

But for those who have open eyes and mind, there is plenty of fact in albanian language, culture, which is derived from ilyrians mostly, and than with many elements from thracians and dacians, who were dislocated in albanian lands fleeing from teh barbaric-slavic invasion.

Simply I2a came together with people who brought it in Balkans: Serbs and Croats, and other slavs as well.

Albanians are the sole inheritors of neolithic population, while others cannot be considered as such:
- Vlachs are remnants of melting pot of Roman Empire
- today greeks were hellenized albanians, slavs, vlachs and reinforced by Karamanlides ande Pontic greeks, with no greek genetics
- Slavs are newcomers in the 7th century (the same time arabs occupied Israel)

Albanians are inheritors of Paleobalkanic people (Illyrians, Thracians, Dacians, Epirotes, Macedonians).

We can say for sure the were three consequences for paleobalkanic people during slavic invasion:
- masacre, genocide, ("roads were filled with piles of killed people", "Slavs seized Asbadus, flayed his backs skin, and roasted him in fire" Procopie)
- fleeing for example, creation of diocese of Dacia for dacian & illyrian newcomers from dacia after 274 when Goths occupied dacia, yes there were illyrian miners in dacia which return in albanian lands (Dalmatians, Sardeates, Pirustes etc)
- assimilation - disimilarity between slavs and albanians, tell us that there was little assimilation, it is more pronounced in Montenegrins, less in serbs, and far less in croatians and bosniaks who pretend to be 'illyrians'

Even, that autosomal "Balkanic" genetic were borrowed through the mothers line, because there is no the same spread of masculine haplogroups and ausotosmal dna, they have different percentages fro example: Croatians have 60-70% Balkanic admixture very simmilar to albanians with more than 80%, but they are far different from albanians in masculine haplogroups: in albanian people dominate neolithic haplogroups Ev13 and J2b, while in croatians dominate slavic haplogroups I2a and R1a.

That means that Slavs were inveding generation after generation a new region begining from Slavic Uhreimat and finishing in todays yugoslavic lands. After each generation slavic admixture was dimidiated (that means 50% less) because of mixing with paleobalkanic women kidnaped during the invasion, but newcomers masculine haplogroups remained high in these newcomers populations, while is very low in autochthonous remnants (Albanians)

I think that time hes come for the main contributors of this forum to unterstand reality which is seen with simple eye, even from the airplane.

This reality is, that I2a cannot be linked with illyrians, not even in small percentages, there is no I2a in Balkans before the slavic invasion. This haplogroup in albanians is from slavs assimilated in albanian language who forgot their identity and mixed with albanians.

The main difference between north Slavs and south Slavs is the percentage of I2a... unless the south Slavs got the I2a from Amazon.com (they have EVERYTHING) [emoji16], they have mixed with the people that lived in the Danube area already and were I2a... so I2a is not original Slavic but it did spread with the growing Slavic presence in the Balkans.
BTY, Vlachs are Daco-Romans and not just remnants of melting pot of Roman Empire... also Moldovan people are the same as Vlachs; language is the same as proof. Moldovan tend to have more percentage of I2a BECAUSE of the Dacian substrate (after Romans took over Dacia, there were free Dacians right where Present Moldova is now).


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

No matter what you were taught or what your ideology leads you to want to believe, Croatians are not ethnic Slavs, although you have ancestry from them.

---

Are you serious ?

:embarassed:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxCRO

Are you serious ?

:embarassed:

---

Yes, I'm serious, are you? What scientific evidence do you have to back up the nonsense propaganda that you were fed?

That was a rhetorical question, so don't bother answering. The answer is none.

Don't you think your time would be better spent trying to get rid of the vestiges of being part of the Iron Curtain countries for decades, and making amends for behavior during the war instead of trying to find non-existent proof for the toxic identity myths that you all were fed?

Just as I thought: no answer.

You and Milan and the Croatian can keep on down voting my posts forever. Do you think I'm childish enough to care? God, where are the adults interested in these topics? I'm surrounded by 20 somethings, which in this day and age is like being surrounded by middle school students. Grow up.

Since you obviously do care about this nonsense, however, mine are worth ten times yours. Contemplate that as you dream of your minority "Slavic" ancestry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

Yes, I'm serious, are you? What scientific evidence do you have to back up the nonsense propaganda that you were fed?

That was a rhetorical question, so don't bother answering. The answer is none.

Don't you think your time would be better spent trying to get rid of the vestiges of being part of the Iron Curtain countries for decades, and making amends for behavior during the war instead of trying to find non-existent proof for the toxic identity myths that you all were fed?

---

Quote:

---

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/Tr...r%20Hg%20I.pdf

Quote:

---

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.

---

Quote:

---

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/2017/0...621-and-i.html

Quote:

---

European lineage was probably the Slavic migrations from the 6th to the 9th century CE. Most modern Eastern Europeans belonging to I2a1b fit into the L147.2 (aka CTS10228, CTS2180 or Y3111) subclade,

---

Quote:

---

The I2a1b-L147.2 subclade seems to have expanded very fast from 1900 years ago, which is concordant with the timing of the Slavic ethnogenesis,

---

https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplo...I2_Y-DNA.shtml

Quote:

---

The Croatian R1a-Y2608 also expanded from Poland during the same period, but via Czechia, Slovakia, Austria and Slovenia.

---

https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplo...1a_Y-DNA.shtml

Quote:

---

Stiljsko, southwestern Ukraine ..From VI. until the 9th century
of this micro-region in intercourse
rivers Barvinka, Ilovac, Kolodnica and
The tooth, which is left by Dnjistra,
gave insight into existence in IX. one
of the largest in East Timor
a region with a strong fortified Croatian
city. Its fortified area
it is almost 250 ha long and the length of the defenses
the line reaches 10 km. Around
on a site of 200 km2
.
there were numerous Croatian sites
VI.-XI. (naseobine, gradina, grobi-
what, cult centers). Found rich
Archaeological material proves that it was old
Croatian township functioned in
time from the middle of the IX. to the beginning of XI.

---

https://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show...ak_jezik=17599

Quote:

---

From 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.

---

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

Quote:

---

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 of affiliates that have the common denominator of the Sneap CTS3402. the geography of these branches is such that it is possible to trace its path from the Carpathian side to the Adriatic. The same can be said about the "Dinarides" subsidiary subclades I2a1b. Obviously, White Croats and Croats from the Carpathians to the Adriatic are really close peoples. You can not say about Lužičani Serbs and Danubian Serbs - they are too different in the line

---

http://pereformat.ru/2013/10/kolybel...j-civilizacii/

Quote:

---

Toponyms and hydronyms that Croats brought from Carpatian to Croatia, it would take more than 17 pages of the book to bring them all up

---

http://www.kapitaltrade.hr/wp-conten...-s-Karpata.jpg

Quote:

---

Czech Tribes and Prince's Territories

---

Charvati, Charvatci ie. Croats

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

Here is also present one toponym Zahvozd (Czech) and in Croatia exist Zagvozd and Gvozd..

https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zagvozd

https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gvozd

Chlum (Czech)

Croatian...Hum,

https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hum_(Buzet)

https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hum

Vranik (Czech)

Croatia, Vranik

https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vranik

etc..

Quote:

---

John the Deacon (Italian: Giovanni Diacono or Giovanni da Venezia;. (940- 1018)
"Qui (Petrus) dum Chroatorum fines rediens transire vellet, a Michahele Sclavorum duce fraude deceptus...
[While he (Peter) was returning from Croatian territory he was deceived through fraud by Michael, duke of the Slavs...]
Michael of Zahumlje(913 – 926), also known as Michael Višević...

---

etc...

In most of the population and the male line Croats are undeniable Slavic origin, ie. White Croatian origin.


Greetings from Croatia, happy new year and all the best everyone !!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

FYI your country was under a communist dictatorship for decades. I know all about Tito, as I know all about the history of Croatian Nazism, and as I know about the atrocities committed barely a generation ago.

---

Angela, what does "communist dictatorship", Tito and "Croatian Nazism" have to do with genetics and the early medieval history?

This is one of my favourite websites. We wouldn't like to see it becoming a polygon for spreading political stereotypes about Croats. How would you react if I mention Italian Fascism and Mafia each time I disagree with some Italian? When you already mentioned "Croatian Nazism" (what is that anyway?) you should have also mention that the protagonists of what you called "Croatian Nazism" were financed and trained in the Italian camps before WWII and installed in Croatia right after the occupation of Yugoslavia. A member of an Italian royal dynasty was their king... should I stop with politics now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angela

"ETHNIC Croats is a slavic language speaker, with slavic mother tongue."

So, does that mean everyone in the U.S. whose mother tongue is English is ETHNIC English? Have you ever looked at a PCA? German speakers plot with one another. You think you plot with Russians and Poles?

---

The parallels with America don't work here. It is Europe and processes were different.

Technically speaking you are right when saying that Croats are not ethnic Slavs, because Slavs nowadays are not an ethnic group. They are only a language group. But neither Poles and Russians, whom you use for comparison, are ethnic Slavs in that regard. They are also members of a language group. However, that does not mean that such ethnic group or groups didn’t exist in 9th century or earlier. Historical sources recognized them under a name Slavs although the latter used other names for themselves e. g. Croats, Czechs....

Croats have been Slavs at least since the times when they were first mentioned under their ethnic name. All subsequent genetic contributions, that surely existed, haven't changed that fact. The continuity of a language, ethnic name and the external perception remained throughout the centuries. Now we also see that genetics is proving what linguists and most of historians already know, the Croats are of the Slavic stock, in spite of some dubious forum interpretations.

And please stop patronizing (or should I say matronizing) people from certain countries. We didn't lived in the trees before we met Angela. Happy new year!