How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

Because the term Slavic only appeared at its earliest time between 200 and 400AD according to slavic historians.

---

Right, and I'm arguing that it was mainly a 1st millennium CE expansion, which matches...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

2 - I2a1b1a according to Ftdna in NOV 2011 found 40% of their tested people with this marker in Iberia. and it comprised of L160

---

L160+ is I2a1a1, not I2a1b1a (which is L621+ L147+). Those two clades are separated by nearly 20,000 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

3 - KN stated in DEC 2011 that there are 11 types of I HG and this slavic ones which came from the Antes and sklavians happened after the Roman empire existed. It does not make sense that he lost over 1000 years

---

Sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

Define what a Slav is?................if you read most web sites it designates a group similar to naming a Latin, british, iberian, scandinavian or celtic .........that is many tribes who had different HG and spoke the same tongue

---

A Slav is a speaker of a Slavic language. I fully expect that they had regional variations in their haplogroups, and have said so before.

here is an interesting view on slavs


http://aleria.info/temp/kijj9p50v5_8692.pdf

It was removed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gosh

Zanipolo
you didn't answer my question about I2a1b1 )))

---

?
which question, which post

EDIT - I read it and still do not understand what you are trying to say

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sparkey

Right, and I'm arguing that it was mainly a 1st millennium CE expansion, which matches...

---

Common Era (also Current Era^[1] or Christian Era^[2]), abbreviated as CE, is an alternative designation for the calendar era originally introduced by Dionysius Exiguus in the 6th century, traditionally identified with Anno Domini (abbreviated AD)

so you are saying this HG in question arrived in the balkans in the middle ages, thats 300 years after the "slavic migration"

Quote:

---

L160+ is I2a1a1, not I2a1b1a (which is L621+ L147+). Those two clades are separated by nearly 20,000 years.

---

so ftdna are wrong

Quote:

---

Sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

---

I said that KN noted the marker in question came from central europe with the antes and sklavians. I am saying that does this appear to young.
How old is this marker?

It would indicate from what KN and yourself are saying is that its not a european marker , but more likely from the urals area

Quote:

---

A Slav is a speaker of a Slavic language. I fully expect that they had regional variations in their haplogroups, and have said so before.

---

correct, so why do we refer to slavic as a terminology when we do not use this level of terminology elsewhere?

we say galicians , basques, etc etc instead of iberians

By saying slavic we are undermining the level of western tribes and overembelishing the slavic name.
Which brings the point on why do we call these tribes in the east who spoke a slavic tongue a slavic. its also detrimental to our discussions and leads to arguements

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

Common Era (also Current Era^[1] or Christian Era^[2]), abbreviated as CE, is an alternative designation for the calendar era originally introduced by Dionysius Exiguus in the 6th century, traditionally identified with Anno Domini (abbreviated AD)

so you are saying this HG in question arrived in the balkans in the middle ages, thats 300 years after the "slavic migration"

---

I don't mean that they arrived in 1000 CE, I mean that most of the migrations occurred between 0 CE and 1000 CE. (Obviously we can probably get more precise than that, but that's what I meant by "first millennium CE.")

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

so ftdna are wrong

---

If they said that 40% of L160+ is in Iberia, then they're probably right. But I2a-Din is L160-.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

I said that KN noted the marker in question came from central europe with the antes and sklavians. I am saying that does this appear to young.
How old is this marker?

---

Per Nordtvedt's estimates, I2a-Din is only about 2500 years old (I don't have the precise estimate or error bars handy, but that's what it is, roughly). Its most common subgroup in the Balkans, I2a-Din-S, is probably less than 2000 years old.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

It would indicate from what KN and yourself are saying is that its not a european marker , but more likely from the urals area

---

Why would that follow? Didn't Balto-Slavic diverge into Baltic and Slavic in Europe? At which point, if I'm right that only Slavic picked up I2a-Din, then I2a-Din needs to have been European at that time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

correct, so why do we refer to slavic as a terminology when we do not use this level of terminology elsewhere?

we say galicians , basques, etc etc instead of iberians

By saying slavic we are undermining the level of western tribes and overembelishing the slavic name.
Which brings the point on why do we call these tribes in the east who spoke a slavic tongue a slavic. its also detrimental to our discussions and leads to arguements

---

I think it's a generally appropriate word to use for this analysis, since there is a relatively tight correlation between Slavic and I2a-Din (probably owing to I2a-Din's youth), and we're really only talking about one particular aspect of I2a-Din's spread ("how it got to the Balkans"). So, did most of the individuals who brought I2a-Din to the Balkans speak a Slavic language? I think so, so I think I can say that I2a-Din got to the Balkans via the Slavs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sparkey

If they said that 40% of L160+ is in Iberia, then they're probably right. But I2a-Din is L160-.

---

so the difference between positive and negative is the distance between the balkans and Iberia ..........why did they use the same number L160

Quote:

---

Per Nordtvedt's estimates, I2a-Din is only about 2500 years old (I don't have the precise estimate or error bars handy, but that's what it is, roughly). Its most common subgroup in the Balkans, I2a-Din-S, is probably less than 2000 years old.

---

so which I HG was in illyria, at 500BC 12a-Din but not I2a-Din-S.
seems weird to call something ( HGs) similare and not branching from this same named HG but migrating

Quote:

---

Why would that follow? Didn't Balto-Slavic diverge into Baltic and Slavic in Europe? At which point, if I'm right that only Slavic picked up I2a-Din, then I2a-Din needs to have been European at that time.

---

Again, what is slavic which tribes? . Clearly it was proven recently that the Venedae where modern lithuains which are baltic, the bastanae are germanic same as peuccini and finni are finns

There's a big problem today in Balkans- nationalism. Every nation claims that they are the eldest, smartest, strongest etc, etc. Therefore they use genetic researches on different ways. Nobody wants to feel themselves as members of some other ethnic groups although all of them are a big (and obvious) mixture of haplogroups.

That's the reason why we have (on this theme) 46% of people which proves that Dinaric South are genuine population there. There is not so many people who understand fundamental principles of mutations and STRs. They prefer to read nationalistic sites and enjoy in lies written there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

?
which question, which post

EDIT - I read it and still do not understand what you are trying to say

---

Upssss....... I didn't see your post, sorry )))

If I understood you correctly, you prefer opinion that Illyrians were Din-S population? Right?

I put you a question, how is it possible if we know that Din-S is a young branch of I2a1? According to actual data it is obviously impossible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sparkey

I

Per Nordtvedt's estimates, I2a-Din is only about 2500 years old (I don't have the precise estimate or error bars handy, but that's what it is, roughly). Its most common subgroup in the Balkans, I2a-Din-S, is probably less than 2000 years old.



Why would that follow? Didn't Balto-Slavic diverge into Baltic and Slavic in Europe? At which point, if I'm right that only Slavic picked up I2a-Din, then I2a-Din needs to have been European at that time.



I think it's a generally appropriate word to use for this analysis, since there is a relatively tight correlation between Slavic and I2a-Din (probably owing to I2a-Din's youth), and we're really only talking about one particular aspect of I2a-Din's spread ("how it got to the Balkans"). So, did most of the individuals who brought I2a-Din to the Balkans speak a Slavic language? I think so, so I think I can say that I2a-Din got to the Balkans via the Slavs.

---

Then while I2a-Din cannot be "slavic" because it is about 2500 years which makes it 400BC , the I2a-Din-S can only be "slavic" IF and I say IF, it is much less than 2000 years old.

Your analysis contradicts Roman and Greek historians and all other historians of the time, in regards to the slav migration

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gosh

Upssss....... I didn't see your post, sorry )))

If I understood you correctly, you prefer opinion that Illyrians were Din-S population? Right?

I put you a question, how is it possible if we know that Din-S is a young branch of I2a1? According to actual data it is obviously impossible.

---

the Thread question was concerning I2a-Din and NOT I2a-Din-S

KN says this I2a-Din came from central europe......since its age starts from 400 to 500BC , then its likely that the illyrians ( who inhabited central europe with the celts brought this HG into the balkans.
The greeks have no record of illyrians before 400BC, so where did they come from?

My idea is that these illyrians where pushed southward by the germanic people moving from west to east and the baltic people moving northeast to south west in the years in question.

Other illyric tribes brought other stems of I HG into northern illyrian lands.

Considering the term illyrian only refers to a confederation of tribes use by Roman historians which made up of tribes of dalmatians, pannonians, luburnians, etc etc.............all these tribes had different type of HGs.
If we consider all these tribes where illyrians, they would surely have dominated eastern europe and the balkans as a group ..........but they where not one race

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sparkey

Why would that follow? Didn't Balto-Slavic diverge into Baltic and Slavic in Europe? At which point, if I'm right that only Slavic picked up I2a-Din, then I2a-Din needs to have been European at that time.

---

Not sure if that helps, but I'll give you a bit of a background on the Slavic languages:

A common Proto-Balto-Slavic language was probably still spoken in the bronze age (perhaps as late as the early iron age), however due to the fact that the Baltic languages are more different from each other than the Slavic languages are from each other, it stands to reason Proto-Baltic began to fragment significantly earlier, as early as the mid-1st millennium BC.

In contrast, the Proto-Slavic language didn't begin to fragment into it's daughter branches (ie. West Slavic, South Slavic, East Slavic - from which the modern Slavic languages stem) until the Migration Period. There's a wide range of Germanic loanwords into Proto-Slavic, ranging from Proto-Germanic to Gothic, which suggests a time period of multiple centuries of language contact with Germanic tribes (approximately 1st century BC to 4th century AD). So by the time the Slavs show up on the stage of history, they were still probably speaking with a common language that only began to diversify in the following centuries.

So, my opinion is that Nordtvedt's estimates regarding I2a-Din are consistent with the above described scenario.

@zanipolo

Quote:

---

the Thread question was concerning I2a-Din and NOT I2a-Din-S

---

It is almost the same haplogroup. We're not talking only about the Din-N but about Dinaric in general. Both of them are parts of I2a-Din.

Quote:

---

KN says this I2a-Din came from central europe......since its age starts from 400 to 500BC , then its likely that the illyrians ( who inhabited central europe with the celts brought this HG into the balkans.

---

Where we can find proofs for that? Which historical source says that Illyrians lived in CE?
About which Celts we can speak if we have the lowest European level of R1b in the regions settled with Din-S?

Quote:

---

The greeks have no record of illyrians before 400BC, so where did they come from?

---

I can't answer on that question because I don't have historical documents which talks about that.

Quote:

---

My idea is that these illyrians where pushed southward by the germanic people moving from west to east and the baltic people moving northeast to south west in the years in question.

---

It is just an idea. Not a scientific fact. Do you agree with me?

Even more, a level of Din-N in historical Illyria today is "funny" comparing with Din-S.


rgds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanipolo

Then while I2a-Din cannot be "slavic" because it is about 2500 years which makes it 400BC , the I2a-Din-S can only be "slavic" IF and I say IF, it is much less than 2000 years old.

Your analysis contradicts Roman and Greek historians and all other historians of the time, in regards to the slav migration

---

Obviously, we expect populations to have more than one carrier of a given haplogroup, so TMRCAs should be older than the migrations they're tied to. No contradiction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taranis

Not sure if that helps, but I'll give you a bit of a background on the Slavic languages:

A common Proto-Balto-Slavic language was probably still spoken in the bronze age (perhaps as late as the early iron age), however due to the fact that the Baltic languages are more different from each other than the Slavic languages are from each other, it stands to reason Proto-Baltic began to fragment significantly earlier, as early as the mid-1st millennium BC.

In contrast, the Proto-Slavic language didn't begin to fragment into it's daughter branches (ie. West Slavic, South Slavic, East Slavic - from which the modern Slavic languages stem) until the Migration Period. There's a wide range of Germanic loanwords into Proto-Slavic, ranging from Proto-Germanic to Gothic, which suggests a time period of multiple centuries of language contact with Germanic tribes (approximately 1st century BC to 4th century AD). So by the time the Slavs show up on the stage of history, they were still probably speaking with a common language that only began to diversify in the following centuries.

So, my opinion is that Nordtvedt's estimates regarding I2a-Din are consistent with the above described scenario.

---

Indeed that is what I am trynig to express,
But in that family where only these 3 or a few more,
could the connection you describe to be from another language?
I mean could that connection be due to Scythian?

I mean that Scythians R1a gave language to I2 Din who moved south?
or the pass of Scythians- Thracians to West and North left behind these 3 languages?

Florin Curta's book "The Making of The Slavs" is a much more realistic approach.


http://home.arcor.de/maknews/CurtaCon2.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diurpaneus

Florin Curta's book "The Making of The Slavs" is a much more realistic approach.


http://home.arcor.de/maknews/CurtaCon2.pdf

---

I've taken a quick look at that document. I couldn't catch a point but I've found an interesting citation:

Quote:

---

The greater part of Slavic loans in Romanian seem to be of literary origin (Church literature, charters, and
popular literature). See Nandris 1939. Only fifteen words can be attributed to a Common Slavic influence
on the basis of their phonetical treatment. For a complete list and discussion, see Mihaila 1973:16;
Duridanov 1991:15. All fifteen words appear in all Romanian dialects, both north and south of the Danube
river. See Mihaila 1971:355. One of the earliest loans is schiau (pi. schei), a word derived from the Slavic

---

It is very interesting if we know how Romanian language looked like 500 years ago. Besides of that, today's Romania is full of Slavic toponymes. That region was settled with so called "7 Slavic tribes" for some period of time.
BTW, contemporary Romanian genetics, similar like Hungarian contain about 50% of R1a/I2a1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diurpaneus

Florin Curta's book "The Making of The Slavs" is a much more realistic approach.

http://home.arcor.de/maknews/CurtaCon2.pdf

---

Realistic? I'm not sure I can agree with that. The article takes a heavy opposition to the concept of a Proto-Slavic homeland. But, it fails to realize something: that the Slavic language evidently has a history before the Migrations Period, a history that is clearly spanning centuries. Where, if not in some form of "homeland", did this history of interaction with other ethnic groups take place?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gosh

I've taken a quick look at that document. I couldn't catch a point but I've found an interesting citation:



It is very interesting if we know how Romanian language looked like 500 years ago. Besides of that, today's Romania is full of Slavic toponymes. That region was settled with so called "7 Slavic tribes" for some period of time.
BTW, contemporary Romanian genetics, similar like Hungarian contain about 50% of R1a/I2a1.

---

Well I do not know about 1500 Ad Romanian language,

But I know from 1750 and after and believe is about same,
remember that Greek revolt started in Romania, and many documents in Latin and in Greek alphabet exist,
it seems like they had 2 major Latin based Dialects with more Greco-Byzantine and Turkish and Russian
the moldo-wallachian and the moesian,

the language seems to be similar Aromani people, closest the type of Moesian Vlachs firstly, then to moschopolis Vlachs, and the farther is kutsuk Vlachs,
it seems like at 1780 Romanian parts as moesia moldavia etc were almost modern Romanian speaking

so the case of slavic toponyms as also Cumans etc it is older,
By what I know romania was speaking latin-romanian much before the Con/polis fall.

I wonder the areas that these Slavic toponyms are?

The thing that we all are missing is this,

Slavic people are the ones who today speak Slavic language,
Slavic people are the biggest part of Europe today,
Slavic language as mother language also,
so it can't be here in Europe as SLavic and Greeks Romans did not found them so many they are,

so what Happened?
for me the time of roman empire collapse we have the Goths people moving west, probably even before we might had similar,
but sudenly we find the Slavic people,
Slavic people so many millions where were they hiden?

my personal believe is that they had another exonym so geographers to describe them,
they can devastate 200 millions today from Central asia. neither to be so many in North Russia.
so who were they?
the older substractum of Europe as described are Thracian+Getae in Balkans and ucraine until far (almost baltic) and Scythians and Saurmates, could Finland hold all Slavs? surely not could Baltic lands hide all those Slavs? again no,
so they were near, maybe west of Urals already.

so what had happened?
for me it seems like Scythians who enter Romania as Scythia minor etc and Sarmates create a unification movement,
the case of Bulgaria, where Slavic Severi with Huno-Bulgars of Asparuch IS A GOOD EXAMPLE,

seems like cooperation of Scythians with Sarmates, devastate west and South to the Lands that Goths left, and create new kingdoms, in one of them Great-Moravia someone study their language, creates an Alphabet,
The change of Religion and the acceptance of Cyrillic creates the Slavic and the Slavs of Today.
meaning that old alliances, older dialects, are erased and a new era starts,

similar phainomena we find in Greece when majority accepts the Attic in written Speach,
in Germany after Goethe etc

So considering today someone as Slav is mostly after the linguistic determination,

now about the genetics of Slavs, until one year all here would say R1a M17
suddenly we find I2a2 DIN
what does that mean?
Slavic language does not change,
but what change?
the how pure is nation?
or who is older in that land?
Are we starting a new war in Balkans? and start propaganda?
simply not.

then? what?
I2a DIN in primary in ex-Yugoslavia, now if I am I2a what?
I am a Serb? I am a Croat? I am a Bosnian? I am a Cernagoran one? I am ROmanian?

the problem is
IS I2a DIN autochthonus in Dinaric Alps?
IS I2a DIN primary after one or 2 or 3 migrations?
IF I2a DIN is after a devastation then? Starting Land Ucraine? Slovakia? Baltic?

and I wonder? is I2a DIN primary a IE HG mark? or it learn the language? and from which HG?

Let's try this from a different perspective and ask ourselves the following question. If I2a where associated with the Slavic arrival in the Balkans, in which populations would you expect it to reach the highest levels?

I would say the following.
-It should reach maximum level in South Slavs. More so in the north than in the South, because as the Slavs advanced, they absorbed locals.
-Albania and Greece should have some in low levels.
-In Greece it should be highest in Northern Greece, especially among Slavophones and Pomacs. The Greek Islands should have the least I2a.
-Southern Italy should have almost none, because Greeks colonized the region before the south Slavic expansion. (Remember that a considerable number of Byzantine Greeks migrated to Italy also)
-Cyprus should have almost none of it.

In analyzing the data. We can see just that. I2a reaches the maximum in Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia(38-60%). It decreases to around 20% in the FYR of Macedonia and Bulgaria. Northern Greece has 16%. The rest of mainland Greece has something around 8%, while the Aegean Islands have 3%. Southern Italy and Sicily have something like 1-2.5% of I2a. Indicating that the Ancient Greek population may not have had I2a. (Note: Greeks from Magna Graecia came from Southern Greece which now has 9% of I2a)

The deal breaker is Cyprus. It has something like 8% of I2a which is more or less the same with that of mainland Greece.

Yet, most of the data is incomplete. So we can get a better image in the future. There are strong indications though, that there is a clear link between I2a and the medieval expansion of the South Slavs as is described by historical data.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dianatomia

Let's try this from a different perspective and ask ourselves the following question. If I2a where associated with the Slavic arrival in the Balkans, in which populations would you expect it to reach the highest levels?

I would say the following.
-It should reach maximum level in South Slavs. More so in the north than in the South, because as the Slavs advanced, they absorbed locals.
-Albania and Greece should have some in low levels.
-In Greece it should be highest in Northern Greece, especially among Slavophones and Pomacs. The Greek Islands should have the least I2a.
-Southern Italy should have almost none, because Greeks colonized the region before the south Slavic expansion. (Remember that a considerable number of Byzantine Greeks migrated to Italy also)
-Cyprus should have almost none of it.

In analyzing the data. We can see just that. I2a reaches the maximum in Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia(38-60%). It decreases to around 20% in the FYR of Macedonia and Bulgaria. Northern Greece has 16%. The rest of mainland Greece has something around 8%, while the Aegean Islands have 3%. Southern Italy and Sicily have something like 1-2.5% of I2a. Indicating that the Ancient Greek population may not have had I2a. (Note: Greeks from Magna Graecia came from Southern Greece which now has 9% of I2a)

The deal breaker is Cyprus. It has something like 8% of I2a which is more or less the same with that of mainland Greece.

Yet, most of the data is incomplete. So we can get a better image in the future. There are strong indications though, that there is a clear link between I2a and the medieval expansion of the South Slavs as is described by historical data.

---

Yes but the same results could have in case that we consider I2a as Thracian, especially the Triballi Thracian

meaning that if I2a was before Slavic expansion to south, then it could be a mark of Triballi Thracians,
and the results in Greece Albania Bulgaria and Cyprus will be the same as also in Italy,

so a better Idea is to find out from where exactly it came if entered, or where did it expand?

if it came from North, from Bohemia East Germany etc, then surely is connected with the movement of Serbs,
But if it came from Romania Ucraine ? then with who? Scythians? Sarmates?

and if it is autochthonus and expand in Romania-ucraine then we might consider it as Thracian

the case that Bosnia Croatia Serbia montenegro today speak Slavic language proves nothing, cause the same I2a Hg people could speak another language before, and accept the Cyrillic.

If I2a Din S is primary Slavic then it should be also high in Bulgaria due to Severi especially in the lands west of Veliko Tyrnovo until Sofia land of Serdi (between Sofia Phillipoupolis Romania Ryce)

except if we enter the theory that primary Slavic R1a entered in greece, slavonising each in it past and become Greek in the end? !!! the R1a of Pindus mountains from Makedonia to Locris,
But then how come Magna Grecia has High R1a? if that R1a in Greece is Slavic?
and Locris never had Slavophones

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dianatomia

Let's try this from a different perspective and ask ourselves the following question. If I2a where associated with the Slavic arrival in the Balkans, in which populations would you expect it to reach the highest levels? I would say the following. -It should reach maximum level in South Slavs. More so in the north than in the South, because as the Slavs advanced, they absorbed locals. -Albania and Greece should have some in low levels. -In Greece it should be highest in Northern Greece, especially among Slavophones and Pomacs. The Greek Islands should have the least I2a. -Southern Italy should have almost none, because Greeks colonized the region before the south Slavic expansion. (Remember that a considerable number of Byzantine Greeks migrated to Italy also) -Cyprus should have almost none of it. In analyzing the data. We can see just that. I2a reaches the maximum in Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia(38-60%). It decreases to around 20% in the FYR of Macedonia and Bulgaria. Northern Greece has 16%. The rest of mainland Greece has something around 8%, while the Aegean Islands have 3%. Southern Italy and Sicily have something like 1-2.5% of I2a. Indicating that the Ancient Greek population may not have had I2a. (Note: Greeks from Magna Graecia came from Southern Greece which now has 9% of I2a) The deal breaker is Cyprus. It has something like 8% of I2a which is more or less the same with that of mainland Greece. Yet, most of the data is incomplete. So we can get a better image in the future. There are strong indications though, that there is a clear link between I2a and the medieval expansion of the South Slavs as is described by historical data.

---

This is a good way of thinking!!!

Slavic migrations had two main directions and one "semi-direction". Eastern direction went from Carpathian mountains down to the south as a result of movement today's Bulgarian population. Western direction went through today's Austria avoiding Pannonian basin which was under Avarian control. It was the path of Slovenian, Croatian and Serbian tribes. And third, "semi-direction" was the result of Slavic migrations from the region of today's Hungary under the Avarian pressure. This route had main impact on the region of northern Croatia, northern Serbia and northern Bosnia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dianatomia

Let's try this from a different perspective and ask ourselves the following question. If I2a where associated with the Slavic arrival in the Balkans, in which populations would you expect it to reach the highest levels?

I would say the following.
-It should reach maximum level in South Slavs. More so in the north than in the South, because as the Slavs advanced, they absorbed locals.
-Albania and Greece should have some in low levels.
-In Greece it should be highest in Northern Greece, especially among Slavophones and Pomacs. The Greek Islands should have the least I2a.
-Southern Italy should have almost none, because Greeks colonized the region before the south Slavic expansion. (Remember that a considerable number of Byzantine Greeks migrated to Italy also)
-Cyprus should have almost none of it.

In analyzing the data. We can see just that. I2a reaches the maximum in Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia(38-60%). It decreases to around 20% in the FYR of Macedonia and Bulgaria. Northern Greece has 16%. The rest of mainland Greece has something around 8%, while the Aegean Islands have 3%. Southern Italy and Sicily have something like 1-2.5% of I2a. Indicating that the Ancient Greek population may not have had I2a. (Note: Greeks from Magna Graecia came from Southern Greece which now has 9% of I2a)

The deal breaker is Cyprus. It has something like 8% of I2a which is more or less the same with that of mainland Greece.

Yet, most of the data is incomplete. So we can get a better image in the future. There are strong indications though, that there is a clear link between I2a and the medieval expansion of the South Slavs as is described by historical data.

---

exactly
it is not R1a that really distinguishes south Slavs from people around them, but I2a-din...
look at this work from Macedonia comparing Albanians and FYR Macedonians
http://www.bjmg.edu.mk/UploadedImages/pdf/11-18.pdf
the two R1a more or less the same and in the level close to the one of Serbia and higher than Montenegro and Herzegovina...

but difference is I2a-Din, Slavic Macedonians have lot of it, FYRM Albanians close to none...



Cypress is probably related to earlier wave of I2a-din from Asia minor...the one in Kurds and the one that I relate to sea people.....

the way I see it, originally I2a-Din people were spread along Danube from Bohemia to Black sea....
a part entered Asia minor via Black sea as part of the sea peoples conquest (that was invasion of northern people largely by land but also by sea - first from Black sea judging by order of conquest) ...those where Sherdana whose name give rise to the name of a lake in Egypt - Serbonian bog.... from those people come to existence Kurds and Pastun Sarbans that both are distinguished from surrounding people by having I2a

Sherdana are responsible for spreads of I2a-Din in Asia minor and in Cypress

on other hand there were I2a-din people still living in Europe along Danube....
from them came Celtic Scordisci....

when pushed by spreading Roman empire, Scordisci (and other people living in Pannonian plane) could do one of the two: go along Danube to Bohemia, go along Danube to Carpatians or both..
no else where to go...Pannonian plane is flat - cannot be defended against better armed and organized armies....

in fact, Russian primary chronicle speaks of Danubian Slavs living originally around Danube from Hungaria to Bulgaria (which is exactly where Scordisci lived), and how they moved to north and settled Vistula (Ukraine) and Morava (Czech republic) river when they were pushed by Vlakhs (read Roman empire)....

Quote:

---

Over a long period the Slavs settled beside the Danube, where the Hungarian and Bulgarian lands now lie. 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, and were named Moravians, while others were called Czechs. Among these same Slavs are included the White Croats, the Serbs, and the Carinthians. For when the Vlakhs attacked the Danubian Slavs, settled among them, and did them violence, the latter came and made their homes by the Vistula, and were then called Lyakhs. Of these same Lyakhs some were called Polyanians, some Lutichians, some Mazovians, and still others Pomorians.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_Chronicle
http://www.utoronto.ca/elul/English/...selections.pdf

so, who were those Slavs?


taking nto account large R1a in Hungary and I2a-din along Danube
1) R1a Pannonians
among Pannonian tribes are Osseriates which in slavic language just mean lake people, and it means that only in Slavic languages
same tribal name reappears in Slavic settlements in Greece for people also living in area of lakes...



2) Serbs probably origin from I2a-Din Scordisci
3) for Croats a wild guess would be Carpi...or perhaps Heruli..also I2a-Din..

I think this Serb-Croat like tribal names are old... and goes to very start of I2a...
Scirii-Hirri / Heruli
Scordisci (Serdi)/Helvetti
Sardinians
Srbi /Hrvati
and in Asia where they spread with sea peoples invasion
white Syrians (Cappadocia in Strabo's time) - Hurrians (earliier)

essentially this pair of names could have meant - day and night - perhaps originally about the ones living east where sun comes up and others west where it goes down...but later as a duality that makes a whole, like yin and yang...always in battle between themselves and always closest to each other...
interestingly, Hirri did dress in black and attack during night - clear identification with night......
and in Asia minor mythology of Seri and Hurri - sacred bulls with names day and night, who carry the weather god Teshub
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_bull





Serbs appear on Balkan in 7th century and it is recorded in De administrando imperio that they come from land Boiki which in my opinion can be only land of Boii - Bohemia /Bavaria because document says it borders Franks on west and white Croatia on east.... besides it is Bohemia/Bavaria where we do find several toponyms Srby, also town Serviodurum... mention of people with name Sibini by Tacitus... (Serb = Srbin in serbo-croatian).... i2a-din has high molecular diversity in Serbia, Bohemia and part of Ukraine...
.
De administrando imperio says it is also where they originally dwellt... which fits with higher haplogroup diversity in Bohemia, Serbia and part of Ukraine...
http://books.google.nl/books?id=3al1...page&q&f=false


i believe also Pelasgians were R1a people related to later Pannonians R1a people
Pelasgians is in fact tribal name of same origin as Poles... field people / flatland people /sea people

Quote:

---

Julius Pokorny derives Pelasgoi from *pelag-skoi (Flachlandbewohner, or "flatland-inhabitants"); specifically, Bewohner der thessalischen Ebene ("Inhabitants of the Thessalian plain").^[9] He details a previous derivation, which appears in English at least as early as William Gladstone's Studies on Homer and the Homeric Age.^[10] If the Pelasgians were not Indo-Europeans, the name in this derivation must have been assigned by the Hellenes.The ancient Greek word for "sea", pelagos, comes from the same root, *plāk-, as the Doric word plagos, "side" (which is flat), appearing in *pelag-skoi. Ernest Klein therefore simply interprets the same reconstructed form as "the sea men", where the sea is the flat.^[11]
Klein's interpretation does not require the Indo-Europeans to have had a word for "sea", which living on the inland plains (if they did) they are likely to have lacked. On encountering the sea they simply used the word for plain, "the flat." The flatlanders also could acquire what must have been to the Hellenes a homonym, "the sea men". Best of all, if the Egyptians of the Late Bronze Age encountered maritime marauders under this name they would have translated as Sea People.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelasgians

besides Sherdana, among sea people there are Pelast and Tjekker and Lukka
Pelast are Pelasgians...

so Pelast and Tjekker = same tribal names as Poles and Czechs :)
Lycians or Lukka would map to tribal name of Lech (also Poles)

note that Kurds stand out from environment not only by I2a-din but also by R1a


4) in the end about Russians, contrary to hypothesys about tribal name origin from viking tribe Rus (that in fact did not exist by that name before making a state in Kiev, they were Varnagians not Rus...Rus they became once they organized Russians in a state), Russians like Poles also carry old R1a name... e.g. Etruscans (not saying that Etruscans were Russians but that they had strong or dominant R1a) who left R1a imprint in Italy called themselves Rasena, Thracians were possibly originally R1a people as well... Rašani was alternative Serb name in medieval period and state was named Raška....

if with expansion of Roman empire, Pannonians migrated north to give Poles, than Thracians easily migrated north to gave Russians... old Greeks were stating that Thracians were largest people in numbers after indians....in fact, Pannonians were likely offshoot of Thracians, and Scythians or Saka (note Sakalibe name for Slavic people in middle east) were related or same people....note also that according to myth Sarmatians origin from Scythians...

Pelasgians and Thracians being R1a people - this is all inline with R1a being very old in Balkan and now considered being Paleolithic in that area...

I saw on another forum pictures with serbs.
A lot of serbs who are looking identical to old dacians statues from the Arch of Constantine.
Novak Djokovic looks like those dacian statues from Arch of Constantine.
I2A could be from old dacians.
A lot of romance speakers said that romanian sound like a latin but that is spoken with slavic sonority.
The dacian names of towns are looking like south slavic,Petrodava,Sucidava and so on.
Is said that after dacians were beaten by Roman Empire in 2nd Roman empire-dacian war,a lot dacians fled to mountains,a lot of them in the mountains from Serbia it seems,others in Greece,so I think this is how a lot of I2A got in north Greece.
Look how crazy are serbians today,like old dacians,they fought with NATO not many years ago.
Romanians are also from dacians,but it seems that serbians have a lot more from dacian warriors.
I think romanians got a lot of words from latin and the gramar from there,but they retained old pronunciation from dacian language.

There are a lot of resemblances between romanians and serbians and croatians,in national costumes and so on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pr...9_tance_VI.JPG
Exactly same kind of dance can be found in Romania,almost same costumes and so on.

Quote:

---

Agreed; the most obviously important I subclades in early Germanic peoples, as evidenced by both diversity patterns and modern frequency distributions, were I1 (all subclades except maybe AS4 and P)

---

This is something that I would like to see any Shred of evidence for, seriously, ha ha ha.

The Hg I1 is the ONLY of current euro Hg that is totally absent from the ancient DNA record on the euro continent. It literally does not exists in ANY samples of ancient euro DNA.

While in the sense that the Svears of central scandinavia are of adopted germanic culture, its 'germanic' in modern times, Hg I1 is not provably in any way the source or origin of germanic paternal ancestry, because it is totally absent in any provable euro samples historically. Given that they took over the germanic Geats they seem to have adopted german culture from the Geats.

Germany loses half its populations during the 30 years war alone, and many more with plagues and wars, so the modern I1 in north europe is coming in likely from the masses of I1 we KNOW were fleeing scandinavia during and after the DARK AGES, not in ancient germanic tribal times.

The modern I1 are most likely descendants of the many poor paternally 'Svear' descent farmers from scandinavia looking to settle father south for better lands freed up by depopulation while their own lands are now too crowded.

They are in no way the historical angles, saxons, or germans like Nortvedt wrongly asserted starting a decade ago.

since that time, over a decade ago, we have many ancient y-dna samples from europe and in germany and the I1/germanic crowd has gotten more and more desperate since their tale has now fallen apart like many warned when Nortvedt started this claims.
Show me one ancient DNA discovery of I1 in europe before the dark ages expansions from Svearish Scandinavians that does come from legitimate source, and we can discuss you claims. For the time being, if they are not gibberish and disproven Nordtvedt is as close as you can get to that. He has made many promise to people who emotionally want to believe this claims, and even as they fail, they still seek to sell with emotions and psueudo-babble, what is failing them in provable science.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sparkey

We're not talking about I2, we're talking about its subclade, I2a-Din (I2a1b1a in Nordtvedt's hierarchy).

---

Please. The I2 is isolated pools that were no longer in contact with one another and develop proprietary STR's and SNP in their isolation. They are all still aboriginal peoples who exist before the modern cultures we recognize even come into europe. They are adopted into these varied cultures. I2 exists in every population of europe. It held out against R1b/R1a arrival better in the Balkan because the terrain protected them from the aggression of the arrival R males better than in easy flat or open terrain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mihaitzateo

I saw on another forum pictures with serbs.
A lot of serbs who are looking identical to old dacians statues from the Arch of Constantine.
Novak Djokovic looks like those dacian statues from Arch of Constantine.
I2A could be from old dacians.
A lot of romance speakers said that romanian sound like a latin but that is spoken with slavic sonority.
The dacian names of towns are looking like south slavic,Petrodava,Sucidava and so on.
Is said that after dacians were beaten by Roman Empire in 2nd Roman empire-dacian war,a lot dacians fled to mountains,a lot of them in the mountains from Serbia it seems,others in Greece,so I think this is how a lot of I2A got in north Greece.
Look how crazy are serbians today,like old dacians,they fought with NATO not many years ago.
Romanians are also from dacians,but it seems that serbians have a lot more from dacian warriors.
I think romanians got a lot of words from latin and the gramar from there,but they retained old pronunciation from dacian language.

There are a lot of resemblances between romanians and serbians and croatians,in national costumes and so on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pr...�_tance_VI.JPG
Exactly same kind of dance can be found in Romania,almost same costumes and so on.

---

that makes sense....

Romanians cluster typically close to south Slavs in genetic research...
Dacians were related to wolf same as Lycians and Serbs...

Carpathians with name likely related to Dacian tribe Carpi were also known as montes Serrorum - mountains of Serians... Carpathians were also core of white Croatia....

perhaps Carpi = Hrvati? or maybe Heruli = Hrvati? as in more west parts of white Croatia prior to white Croats Heruli are recorded... or both? what if Carpi = Heruli?

that is hard to state though... but personally, I am sure that Heruli = Hirri, and that east Germanic could in fact have been same as west Slavic but am not decided whether Heruli and Scirii were related to Slavic people...

Quote:

---

In the Scandinavian Hervarar saga, which describes ancient Germanic legends about battles between Goths and Huns, the name Karpates appears in the predictable Germanic form as Harvaða fjöllum

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpathian_Mountains

hence, Carpi = Hervada = Hrvati? (Croats)
what complicates things is that in same time Carpathians were montes Sarmatici - mountains of Sarmatians...and Serboi were one of the tribes mentioned in Asian Sarmatia (later Siraces come from them probably) and there are links of Croats to Sarmatians as well...

Scirii are sometimes said to be part of Alans (=Sarmatians)...
http://books.google.nl/books?id=pIg9...=sciri&f=false
read on mid of the page:

Quote:

---

and the Scirii have already been called Alan population

---

http://books.google.nl/books?id=pIg9...=sciri&f=false

on top of same page,

Quote:

---

there were Scirii as far east as Bavaria

---

note that Bavaria/Bohemia is from where Serbs come to Balkan

Sciri /Scirians (?= Serians mentioned by Seneca = I2a-Din?)

Quote:

---

[369] Though kings should gather themselves together, both they who vex the scattered Scythians and they who dwell upon the Red Sea’s marge, who hold wide sway o’er the blood-red main with its gleaming pearls, they who leave unguarded26 the Caspian heights to the bold Sarmatians; though he strive against him, who dares on foot to tread the Danube’s waves27 and (whersoe’er they dwell,) theSerians28 for fleeces famous – ‘tis the upright mind that holds true sovereignty. He has no need of horses, none of arms and the coward weapons which the Parthian hurls from far when he feigns flight, no need of engines hurling rocks, stationed to batter cities to the ground. A king is he who has no fear; a king is he who shall naught desire. Such kingdom on himself each man bestows.
Seneca - Thyestes
27. i.e. the frozen surface.
28. The poet here conceives of the Serians as near by Scythia.

---

http://www.theoi.com/Text/SenecaThyestes.html


what if by origin I2a-Din people living in Europe along Danube and had conquest that spread them further along Black sea into Asia

Hirri = Heruli = Hervada = Carpi = Hrvati (? Helvetti)
and
Scirii = Siraces = Serboi = white Serbs = Serdi / Scordisci = Sherdana = white Syrians = Kurds = Sarbans = white Sarts = Serians = Serres



btw. for Romanian - south Slavic link look at this clustering of Y-DNA samples
Attachment 5536
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/11...an-y-strs.html


note this
haplogroup I old tribal names

Suebi (Swabians) - Swedes - Srbi - Sarbans - Serdi - Sardinians - Sherdana - Scordisci - Kurds- Scirii / Scirrians- Serians
Dutch/Deutch - Dacians

as I said I2a-Din has spread along Danube from Bohemia to Black sea and than with invading conquests further to Asia (Sherdana, Seres, Serians, Sart, Kurds, Sarbans)

Dacians were one of the tribes around Danube and hence reach in I2a-Din

I think Dacians had dominant haplogroup I (I1?, I2a-Din , I2b ) with significant R1a of Thracians, hence similar mix to Serbs prior to settlement on Balkan, but I do not think they were ancestors of today Serbs...as Serbs are recorded to have settled Balkans from Boiki that neghbours Franks and white Croatia (hence Boiki = land of Boii = Bohemia/Bavaria) ...also I2a-Din south typical for south Slavs is not found in Romania but is found in Germany...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipinnacanus

The Hg I1 is the ONLY of current euro Hg that is totally absent from the ancient DNA record on the euro continent. It literally does not exists in ANY samples of ancient euro DNA.

---

Do you seriously think that we have enough samples, in the right places, to expect more than that right now? Everyone who has looked at current I1 samples will tell you that it's remarkably young in terms of TMRCA, but quite old in terms of clade age, meaning that we don't expect there to be many ancient I1 samples anywhere prior to its relative late expansions.

The center of diversity of I1 is around Schleswig-Holstein per Nordtvedt, by the way. There are no ancient clades with apparent origins far from that discovered so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipinnacanus

While in the sense that the Svears of central scandinavia are of adopted germanic culture, its 'germanic' in modern times, Hg I1 is not provably in any way the source or origin of germanic paternal ancestry, because it is totally absent in any provable euro samples historically. Given that they took over the germanic Geats they seem to have adopted german culture from the Geats.

---

Who do you propose the Svears were, if not Germanic? And you're saying they brought I1 to Scandinavia from where...?

And again, you're reading too much into the lack of ancient DNA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipinnacanus

Germany loses half its populations during the 30 years war alone, and many more with plagues and wars, so the modern I1 in north europe is coming in likely from the masses of I1 we KNOW were fleeing scandinavia during and after the DARK AGES, not in ancient germanic tribal times.

---

:rolleyes2: Then why is North German I1 of the same subclade as English I1 for the most part? And Scandinavian-type I1 is much rarer there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipinnacanus

The modern I1 are most likely descendants of the many poor paternally 'Svear' descent farmers from scandinavia looking to settle father south for better lands freed up by depopulation while their own lands are now too crowded.

They are in no way the historical angles, saxons, or germans like Nortvedt wrongly asserted starting a decade ago.

---

And you say my theories have no evidence...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipinnacanus

since that time, over a decade ago, we have many ancient y-dna samples from europe and in germany

---

Wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipinnacanus

and the I1/germanic crowd has gotten more and more desperate since their tale has now fallen apart like many warned when Nortvedt started this claims.

---

Nobody's worried, because we haven't had any samples other than Birger Jarl where I1 was seriously expected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipinnacanus

Show me one ancient DNA discovery of I1 in europe before the dark ages expansions from Svearish Scandinavians that does come from legitimate source, and we can discuss you claims. For the time being, if they are not gibberish and disproven Nordtvedt is as close as you can get to that. He has made many promise to people who emotionally want to believe this claims, and even as they fail, they still seek to sell with emotions and psueudo-babble, what is failing them in provable science.

---

OK, seriously. Listen up. We only have diversity analysis now. We haven't expected more ancient I1 than we have.

And diversity analysis still indicates strong ties between Haplogroup I1 and Germanic peoples. Your assertions, on the other hand, don't match even a cursory subclade analysis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipinnacanus

Please. The I2 is isolated pools that were no longer in contact with one another and develop proprietary STR's and SNP in their isolation. They are all still aboriginal peoples who exist before the modern cultures we recognize even come into europe. They are adopted into these varied cultures. I2 exists in every population of europe. It held out against R1b/R1a arrival better in the Balkan because the terrain protected them from the aggression of the arrival R males better than in easy flat or open terrain.

---

You're putting it strangely. STR mutations and SNPs develop linearly, not due to isolation, of course. And I agree that I2 is indigenous to Europe (I even call them Paleolithic Remnants), I'm only trying to investigate the reasons for the present distribution of its subclades.

And you indicate that you believe the Paleolithic continuity theory for I2a-Din in the Balkans, but you don't present any evidence. So, I don't see why I should consider your theory. I've presented my theory based on geographic diversity analysis, STR dating, and a related subclade analysis. What do you have?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by how yes no 3

but difference is I2a-Din, Slavic Macedonians have lot of it, FYRM Albanians close to none...

---

Are you sure in that? )))
Take another look on data about Albania. Especially southern Albania.

I like to read your posts because you have a rich imagination but I don't agree with you in many things. Too much speculations without historical sources. Some things which you told are true but many of them aren't.

rgds

I see someones on this thread are keeping on making adventurous hypothesis based on possible common origins of tribes names, sometime very possible but the most often without any linguistic basis -
I think we have to take official history as a basis and try to correct it, maybe challenge it when data make it possible, but not begin by building complicated hypothesis that seam to me as 'scoops' or fairy tales...
NO offense...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gosh

Are you sure in that? )))
Take another look on data about Albania. Especially southern Albania.

I like to read your posts because you have a rich imagination but I don't agree with you in many things. Too much speculations without historical sources. Some things which you told are true but many of them aren't.

rgds

---

I am sure, I speak of FYR Macedonia Albanians ..
there were tests done in Macedonia....

south Albania is different story
it was heavily settled by Slavs, plenty of Slavic place names there, it was conquered for long time by Bulgarians (in times when they were also holding Macedonia)

Macedonia albanians have probably settled FYRM from north Albania mountains not so long ago in history...they didnot mix with south Slavs or Bulgar Slavs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MOESAN

I see someones on this thread are keeping on making adventurous hypothesis based on possible common origins of tribes names, sometime very possible but the most often without any linguistic basis -
I think we have to take official history as a basis and try to correct it, maybe challenge it when data make it possible, but not begin by building complicated hypothesis that seam to me as 'scoops' or fairy tales...
NO offense...

---

your last name is likely to correlate with set of people related to you
tribal name is last name of the nation.... it sometimes passes on even when language and culture change...


theory that i propose links spread of tribal names and quotes from history sources, with genetic findings...
it is pretty good theory if you give it a fair chance...

but mediocre people always by default discard ideas that they did not learn about in schools and hence are never able to discover anything, they just repeat known and will fail to recognize flaws in any school theory regardless of sometimes total lack of proof in it...

e.g. school says Scirii are east Germanic,for mediocre mind that is absolute truth...
but history books in fact discuss about them being Alan nation, being related to Venedi, even being Turkic..

same is for Scordisci..their culture (archeological escavation) indicate Celtic culture, but that doesnot mean they were neccessery celtic speakers... if I wear jeans, am I American?
Scordisci might be bad example as they probably were Celtic speakers as testified e.g. by town names.... but what if elite was Celtic and people not?
point is also that languages of people change.... but genetics stays....

genetics, same as tribal names, speaks about origin, language is about dominant culture or military...it can change very fast - e.g. not so long ago Celtic was spoken in France, latin only in a village called Rome.. people here keep speaking about germanic, slavic, celtic - but those are language groups and may have somewhat different history from genetic history... they are on different time scales as well..haplogroups splits happened much earlier in history, so at times when modern groups of languages are forming many peoples were already mixed genetically.....
... but knowing history, genetics and identifying tribal names of same origin can help interpret history...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sparkey

And diversity analysis still indicates strong ties between Haplogroup I1 and Germanic peoples. Your assertions, on the other hand, don't match even a cursory subclade analysis.

---

when you say Germanic people, you mean as what? as Geographical Area?
As modern Duetsh? as a Nation that existed since when? Before IE expansion or After?

plz it is very important to make that more specific,
cause personally I believe that Germanic Language was more East 3 millenium before,
and Personally I connect I HG with Thracians-Getae substractum which was ruled by R1 than Germanic people ( non Geographical term)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yetos

Yes but the same results could have in case that we consider I2a as Thracian, especially the Triballi Thracian

meaning that if I2a was before Slavic expansion to south, then it could be a mark of Triballi Thracians,
and the results in Greece Albania Bulgaria and Cyprus will be the same as also in Italy,

---

Seems to me like a long shot. If I2a would belong to Triballi Thracians, the epicenter of I2a would have been somewhere between Serbia and Bulgaria. Not Bosnia-Croatia.

Also, notice that the peninsular Greeks, Ionian Greeks, Greek Islanders, Albanians, Albanian Macedonians, Western Anatolians, Cypriots and South Italians have higher rates of E-V13 and J2 than the - in part newly arrived - Slavic peoples. These haplogroups are indigenous to the ancient region and where present in the Balkans before most of the ethnic identities where formed. This means that they had all the time in the world to spread and dominate in the region.

It is important to note that I2b as a rule comes at the expense of E-V13 and J2. It's very hard to see very high J2 + E-V13 as well as high I2a in the same population. This means they are competing haplogroups in that region. A slight indication that it is a new arrival.

Highest diversity of I2A-din found till now is in croats and also in moldavians from north Romania,from Neamt & Buhusi.
Croats are another dacian tribe,they came there from Carpathians that were in those times in north Moldavia.
Now that land belongs to Ukraine.
As a very curious thing,moldavians from Neamt and Buhusi are more close genetically to croats,than serbs are to croats.
Moldavians from Neamt and Buhusi:
40.7% I2A-din,20% R1A1-M17 ,13% R1B3,7.4% E-V13,5.7% various clades of J2,5.6% G-M201,3.7% I1A-M253,1.9% I1c-M223 ...
Compare this to croatian Y DNA,lol.
There is an ancient population living in Carphatians from Moldavia and Ukraine,they are called hutsuls,they are linked to the mountains,they have a very high percentage of I2A-din and they speak a slavic language,they have the usual popular costume that looks like those posted from those serbians,which is almost identical to some romanians etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mihaitzateo

Highest diversity of I2A-din found till now is in croats and also in moldavians from north Romania,from Neamt & Buhusi.

---

diversity is not the same as frequency...

actually, from what i have read (not much data yet about diversity of I2a-din in official publications) Moldavians have lowest diversity and Croats relatively low diversity...biggest diversity is in part of Ukraine in Czech republic and Serbia..

Bosnia Croats have high frequency of I2a-Din but not so high diversity...

Croatian origin of big part of this people is disputed as Narentanes/Pagani were by Byzantine historians captured as unbaptized Serbs.... in last centuries people were classified as Serbs/Croats based on religion... catholic = Croat, orthodox = Serb

42% of I2a-Din in Croatia is big lie made by talking half of samples from 3 southern islands that were part of Narentania and where I2aDin is between 60 and 80%...
in reality, Croatia has I2a-Din on same level as Serbia - around 30%

Quote:

---

Croats are another dacian tribe,they came there from Carpathians that were in those times in north Moldavia.
Now that land belongs to Ukraine.

---

well, that is hard to state as we do not know much about Dacians...
but yes, Croats did have state in Carpathians in part that is now Ukraine and south Poland and perhaps even Slovakia...
they may have been same people as Carpi and/or Heruli but there is no real proof for that yet...

Quote:

---

As a very curious thing,moldavians from Neamt and Buhusi are more close genetically to croats,than serbs are to croats.Moldavians from Neamt and Buhusi:
40.7% I2A-din,20% R1A1-M17 ,13% R1B3,7.4% E-V13,5.7% various clades of J2,5.6% G-M201,3.7% I1A-M253,1.9% I1c-M223 ...
Compare this to croatian Y DNA,lol.
There is an ancient population living in Carphatians from Moldavia and Ukraine,they are called hutsuls,they are linked to the mountains,they have a very high percentage of I2A-din and they speak a slavic language,they have the usual popular costume that looks like those posted from those serbians,which is almost identical to some romanians etc.

---

as i said Croats do not have 42% of I2a-Din
its about how to lie with numbers...
i can take half samples from Sweden and half from Sardinia and say there is 25% I2a1 in Sweden, but there is 0%


regarding Neamt and Buhusi, if those counties are very different than rest of Romania, than they are not Dacians in origin..
neamt county is named after a word that means german in Slavic languages which is likely indication of germanic settlement...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by how yes no 3

diversity is not the same as frequency...

actually, from what i have read (not much data yet about diversity of I2a-din in official publications) Moldavians have lowest diversity and Croats relatively low diversity...biggest diversity is in part of Ukraine in Czech republic and Serbia..

Bosnia Croats have high frequency of I2a-Din but not so high diversity...

---

From what I've read, Ukrainians seem to have the highest I2a-Din diversity, with Poles a possible #2 (Poles become #1 if we restrict to I2a-Din-S only, although the Czechs are also important then and may challenge them for that title, as you indicate). Moldavians have a good amount of diversity, maybe #3 or even #2, consistent with the Ukranian diversity spike, but it seems to go down as you get farther from Ukraine, indicating that the origin is farther north than they are. Verenich's analysis is great for this, although I think that the forum he posted it on might be down now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yetos

when you say Germanic people, you mean as what? as Geographical Area?
As modern Duetsh? as a Nation that existed since when? Before IE expansion or After?

---

After IE expansion, meaning groups of peoples that spoke languages that would today be classified as "Germanic."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by how yes no 3

diversity is not the same as frequency...

actually, from what i have read (not much data yet about diversity of I2a-din in official publications) Moldavians have lowest diversity and Croats relatively low diversity...biggest diversity is in part of Ukraine in Czech republic and Serbia..

Bosnia Croats have high frequency of I2a-Din but not so high diversity...

Croatian origin of big part of this people is disputed as Narentanes/Pagani were by Byzantine historians captured as unbaptized Serbs.... in last centuries people were classified as Serbs/Croats based on religion... catholic = Croat, orthodox = Serb

42% of I2a-Din in Croatia is big lie made by talking half of samples from 3 southern islands that were part of Narentania and where I2aDin is between 60 and 80%...
in reality, Croatia has I2a-Din on same level as Serbia - around 30%






well, that is hard to state as we do not know much about Dacians...
but yes, Croats did have state in Carpathians in part that is now Ukraine and south Poland and perhaps even Slovakia...
they may have been same people as Carpi and/or Heruli but there is no real proof for that yet...




as i said Croats do not have 42% of I2a-Din
its about how to lie with numbers...
i can take half samples from Sweden and half from Sardinia and say there is 25% I2a1 in Sweden, but there is 0%


regarding Neamt and Buhusi, if those counties are very different than rest of Romania, than they are not Dacians in origin..
neamt county is named after a word that means german in Slavic languages which is likely indication of germanic settlement...

---

I do not know why you do not take the ancient Serbians as non-slavic , but a thracian race...the Triballi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triballi

most ancient, dark ages and medieval historians say the serbian come from this thracian tribe, that where pushed eastward by the illyrians coming down from the north and later conquered by the gaulish scordisci. The serbs did not bring any I2a into the blakans if they where always in the balkans, they are in majority E HG.
Its one reason to this day the serbs want their ancient homeland of kosovo

Read link and all link at the bottom of the link presented.

The only south slavs that came to the balkans was the bulgars, all the rest where not ancient slavic people.

http://books.google.com.au/books?ei=...iballi&f=false

search inside this book.

BTW , the triballi as some historians claim became the moesians

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sparkey

From what I've read, Ukrainians seem to have the highest I2a-Din diversity, with Poles a possible #2 (Poles become #1 if we restrict to I2a-Din-S only, although the Czechs are also important then and may challenge them for that title, as you indicate). Moldavians have a good amount of diversity, maybe #3 or even #2, consistent with the Ukranian diversity spike, but it seems to go down as you get farther from Ukraine, indicating that the origin is farther north than they are. Verenich's analysis is great for this, although I think that the forum he posted it on might be down now...

---

are czechs south slavs, ....no. Where they slavic in the ancient times ...no. So how can these west slavic people bring I2a-Din into the balkans?

The only people that can bring I2a-din into the balkans was from Central europe. If there was no slavs there at that time, how did it happen