How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

03-01-18, 18:32
alexfritz

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lenab

The only thing that's comical is that my private messages have now been blocked. alexfritz
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/images...ser-online.png Do you think Italians even Southern should deal with that crap?

to be honest, the way i understand it is that there truly is a strong continuity between neolithic farmers (anatolia_n) and modern people of the mediterranean region incl greeks, jews, italians etc.; yet more so retained in modern south europeans (specially sards) than in modern anatolians/levantines as omrak et al explained there were more/further population movements/changes within that region thus altering the genome as can be seen in lazaridis et al already in bronze age 2800-1800bc anatolia_ba; cassidy et al affinity(allele sharing) heat-map of neolithic-farmers and modern day pops

https://i.imgur.com/1DkA0dl.png
03-01-18, 18:46
AdeoF

Quote:

Originally Posted by davef

I swear to every god, goddess and all the other dudes with super magical powers, this has got to be one of the most comical threads I have ever, ever seen

Anything to do with the Balkans is comical because on how everyone reacts to it!!
03-01-18, 18:50
Lenab

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdeoF

Anything to do with the Balkans is comical because on how everyone reacts to it!!

It's the same as people calling Spanish ''Moors'' that type of language isn't usually tolerated with Spanish, especially the more Far Right type if you catch my drift
03-01-18, 18:58
AdeoF

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lenab

It's the same as people calling Spanish ''Moors'' that type of language isn't usually tolerated with Spanish, especially the more Far Right type if you catch my drift

Yeah I know but hey every/most ethnics don't like to be called something that doesn't mean anything to them like the moors you said. Meh just ignore it and move on. A lot of people need to do that sometimes!
03-01-18, 19:25
Angela

Lenab, consider yourself warned.
03-01-18, 20:32
hrvat22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Litovoi

Of course it is,since regions with very high frequencies,also score very high in the autochthonous autosomes from the Praefectura Illyricum.
Was it originally Vlach?
I believe so,but we must have more concrete evidence.
Many Bosnians as well cluster with the Romanians,since there were lots of links in the past between these regions.
The Romanians-Vlachs are the Latin speakers that once lived in the Eastern Illyricum ,mostly the Diocese of Dacia,and the former Dacia Traiana,while the Serbs,Bosnians and Croats have additionally inherited genes from Western Illyricum(Dalmatia and Pannonia),where there were people that probably spoke a language similar to Dalmatian.
Linguistics have proved that the Vlachs from Serbia during the Medieval Age were of Daco-Romanian type,these,along with their closest relatives ,the Istro-Romanians ,have pushed westwards,reaching Croatia,via Bosnia.

Prove your claim with genetic data about migration of I2a1CTS10228 from Romania to Bosnia.

For now, from his haplotype it is evident that he has an male ancestor(I2a1CTS10228) in White Croatia, that's the only thing we know for now, if you have other information show me.

As far as autosomal data is concerned apparently his distant ancestor in the male line after arrival to the Balkans (probably south eastern part) was mixed with Vlachs, Albanian, Romanians, Bulgarians, Greeks..? and this is now evident, very likely with Vlachs groups coming to Bosnia.

However, there is still mutation or ancestor with a source in White Croatia.

From where it comes to Bosnia, when and with whom his male ancestor mixed we will see in the future.
03-01-18, 21:44
hrvat22

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziratul

I2 from Poland and Ukraine happened to be there cause Balkan Illyrians went there. Illyrians were much more numerous than today.

For now that migration or connection genetics (Y haplotype) does not prove. If you have genetic evidence that proves migration of I2a peoples from Balkans to White Croatia prove it, until then it is not true.

Quote:

Albanian claim on Illyrian heritage is ... laughable at least.. they are Greeks from Sicily who are rejected by their own people.

You have Y haplotype and history records and prove this, until then it's a fairy tale.
04-01-18, 01:48
Dumidre

Quote:

Originally Posted by hrvat22

Prove your claim with genetic data about migration of I2a1CTS10228 from Romania to Bosnia.

For now, from his haplotype it is evident that he has an male ancestor(I2a1CTS10228) in White Croatia, that's the only thing we know for now, if you have other information show me.

As far as autosomal data is concerned apparently his distant ancestor in the male line after arrival to the Balkans (probably south eastern part) was mixed with Vlachs, Albanian, Romanians, Bulgarians, Greeks..? and this is now evident, very likely with Vlachs groups coming to Bosnia.

However, there is still mutation or ancestor with a source in White Croatia.

From where it comes to Bosnia, when and with whom his male ancestor mixed we will see in the future.

CTS10228 is at least 2000 years old, so it is very possible that existed in Romanian territory (Dacian back then), and Bosnian territory (Dalmatian back then) in the same time because of the inter mixing between Dacians, Illyrians and Thracians. The same could be the interaction between Dacians and White Croatians (they weren’t called like that back then) that made possible for another mutation: I-Y3548 (age: 1458 ybp) that could be connected with White Croatia.

Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum
04-01-18, 02:59
Dumidre

CTS10228 is at least 2000 years old, and probably existed throughout a vast area because of Dacians/ Thracians. Dacian tribes were pushed probably even more to the Nord because of the expansion of the Roman Empire (after the fall of Decebalus, the Dacian King). I-Y3548 (age: 1458ybp) could be attributed to the White Croatians. Was the I-Y3548 mutation later on possible, because of the earlier movement of the Dacian Tribes to the North? Maybe... unfortunately we can only assume or presume... no scientific evidence yet...
04-01-18, 13:13
Litovoi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonomyro

That makes sense. So Romanians probably originate from romanized Moesinas and Dardanians who moved north rather then from Dacians. https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datote...nd_Thracia.jpg

The Roman Balkans was not a very urbanized region,according to Tibor Zivkovic about 10% of Moesia Prima's population lived in the cities,but it had certain important centers clustered on the Danube,such as Sirmium,Singidunum and Viminacium,plus Naissus,which was the node that connected Rome(through Adriatic) and Constantinople with this area.
OBVIOUSLY,some of those 90% have started very soon to let their marks,not only in these cities,but in the entire Roman world,we are talking of things like the Mala Kopasnica-Sase graves or the Danubian rider cult.
https://books.google.ro/books?id=pLJ...1%3A10&f=false
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/abstract?...AN%3d119163735
EDIT
Not only that the dispersion of the Roman towns in the Balkans is uneven,but the Vlachs are later recorded EXACTLY near them ,see the Crusaders Chronicle from 1189, where we have vicus Ravana,today's Cuprija on Morava,Medieval Ravno,Roman Horreum Margi,and vicus Nifa,Nis,not to mention Kekaumenos,"Vlachs...who once lived along the Danube and Sava".
https://www.google.ro/url?sa=t&sourc..._8ZAlAfURfLSQ6
Another connection that can be made,the proximity between Justiniana Prima-Lebane and the Vlach bishopric from 1020,Vreanoti,today's Vranje.

http://docplayer.net/54282834-Aleksa...d-desiska.html
04-01-18, 13:51
Litovoi

https://books.google.ro/books?id=6L1...0rider&f=false

https://www.google.ro/url?sa=t&sourc...ls5jkPIVf5M-t_

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=933s&v=6-XVH8a5ftY
04-01-18, 14:12
Litovoi

These articles prove the very strong relations between Moesia and Dacia Traiana.
It is not that surprising,since you could have passed into Trajan's Dacia only from Moesia Superior.
http://historymaps.ro/wp-content/upl...ia_Romanab.png
04-01-18, 15:58
Dibran

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziratul

I2 from Poland and Ukraine happened to be there cause Balkan Illyrians went there. Illyrians were much more numerous than today.

Albanian claim on Illyrian heritage is ... laughable at least.. they are Greeks from Sicily who are rejected by their own people.

L621 under I2-Din to which the majority of Balkan I2 is derived, is a VERY YOUNG branch, that is descended from a Medieval Pole.

Albanians on the other hand have a preponderance of native Neolithic Lineages(regardless of what classical peoples it belonged to.
04-01-18, 18:18
Garrick

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dumidre

CTS10228 is at least 2000 years old, and probably existed throughout a vast area because of Dacians/ Thracians. Dacian tribes were pushed probably even more to the Nord because of the expansion of the Roman Empire (after the fall of Decebalus, the Dacian King). I-Y3548 (age: 1458ybp) could be attributed to the White Croatians. Was the I-Y3548 mutation later on possible, because of the earlier movement of the Dacian Tribes to the North? Maybe... unfortunately we can only assume or presume... no scientific evidence yet...

A lot of people want that I-CTS10228 carriers are Thracian origin, but in reality this assumption cannot be supported.

About 1000 BC and earlier I-CTS10228 carriers were in the north of Europe, most probably in the Baltic region of today's Germany, it is time before than they arrived in upper Vistula region and surrounding.

They were Mesolithic survivors, whose ancestors long time ago were much more widespread in Europe, but unfortunately they had bottleneck.

Irony of destiny, it is possible R1a tribes pushed them to the south, it means in that time they were antagonists.

Gubin culture of Jastorf group probably were culture of these people, I1 carriers had influx and probably Germanic language is result of these impact.

And Croats are far from these areas, Croatian scientists highlight that Croat is Iranian name and original Croats were Iranian, some other scientists claim some other origin (Turkish, Bulgarian etc.) but it doesn't matter areas of original Croats are very very far from areas where I-CTS10228 lived and moved.

So, I-CTS10228 carriers were not Thracian, Illyiran, Slavic, Iranian Croat etc.

I-CTS10228 carriers were European Mesolithic survivors and they became Germanized due to impact of I1 carriers.

Bastarnae were the most likely bearers these genetics (and maybe to a lesser extent Scirii), only later when they moved from the Vistula river to the east they came in contact and mixed with Dacians/Thracins (they first entered in Balkans 179 BC) and Sarmatians, and centuries after that, after Zarubintsy culture, their descendants participated in Kiev culture and ethnogenesis of Slavs.
04-01-18, 19:15
Wonomyro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garrick

And Croats are far from these areas, Croatian scientists highlight that Croat is Iranian name and original Croats were Iranian, some other scientists claim some other origin (Turkish, Bulgarian etc.) but it doesn't matter areas of original Croats are very very far from areas where I-CTS10228 lived and moved.

"Original" Croats were Slavs. Their personal names, language and religion was Slavic since they were first time mentioned in the sources. The places called after Croatian etnhnonym were found in the areas where the historical sources mention Slavs or where the first slavic states emerged, Serbia included.

Croatian ethnonym itself is, however, most probably of Iranian origin, but the slavic word for "god" is as well. All that strongly support the Slavic origin of Croats (or vice versa, who knows). The proposed area of the Croatian origin fits pretty well with the area of highest diversity of the I-CTS10228 subclade, as well as with the area of the earliest Slavic toponymy. Present day Croats are descendants of these Croats and autochtonous population of Panonia and Dalmatia who were a minority at the time of Croatian arrival.
08-01-18, 09:42
Bachus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonomyro

"Original" Croats were Slavs. Their personal names, language and religion was Slavic since they were first time mentioned in the sources. The places called after Croatian etnhnonym were found in the areas where the historical sources mention Slavs or where the first slavic states emerged, Serbia included.

Croatian ethnonym itself is, however, most probably of Iranian origin, but the slavic word for "god" is as well. All that strongly support the Slavic origin of Croats (or vice versa, who knows). The proposed area of the Croatian origin fits pretty well with the area of highest diversity of the I-CTS10228 subclade, as well as with the area of the earliest Slavic toponymy. Present day Croats are descendants of these Croats and autochtonous population of Panonia and Dalmatia who were a minority at the time of Croatian arrival.

Names of Croatian leaders from VII century were Kluk, Muhol, Kosen, Lovel, Tuga and Vuga and that names are not Slavic.
08-01-18, 12:29
Wonomyro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bachus

Names of Croatian leaders from VII century were Kluk, Muhol, Kosen, Lovel, Tuga and Vuga and that names are not Slavic.

These were the names of legendary characters, not of the real leaders. The names of the leaders (historicly proven) were Slavic, with some germanic influence.

Don't misinterpret the sources. That will bring you nowhere.
08-01-18, 12:42
Bachus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonomyro

These were the names of legendary characters, not of the real leaders. The names of the leaders (historicly proven) were Slavic, with some germanic influence.

Don't misinterpret the sources. That will bring you nowhere.

Why Croatian legendary characters have weird non-slavic names?

Maby names such as Kluk, Muhol, Lovel and Kosen exist in Iran. :laughing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin...Iranian_theory

https://youtu.be/d36HxKDJ1i8
08-01-18, 12:55
Wonomyro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bachus

Why Croatian legendary characters have weird non-slavic names?

Maby names such as Kluk, Muhol, Lovel and Kosen exist in Iran. :laughing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin...Iranian_theory

Maybe yes, maybe not.

If you don't understand how Slavs could have legends with "foreign names" in them, try to explain yourself why Christian Serbs today have names of Jewish origin.
08-01-18, 13:04
Bachus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonomyro

You don't even understand that "Iranian" in linguistic sense does not mean "from Iran".

If you don't understand how Slavs could have legends with "foreign names" in them, try to explain yourself why Christian Serbs today have names of Jewish origin.

All Christians have "Jewish" or biblical names, that is normal because of religion.

But why Croats from VII century have non-slavic names?
Kluk, Muhol, Kosen and Lovel are maybe Iranic and maybe Turkic, these names are not Slavic without any doubt.

Proto-Croatians were not Slavs, they were of Iranic or Turkic origin, word Croat is not of Slavic origin and many Croatian historians say that.
08-01-18, 14:23
Wonomyro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bachus

All Christians have "Jewish" or biblical names, that is normal because of religion.

Use the same logic here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bachus

But why Croats from VII century have non-slavic names?
Kluk, Muhol, Kosen and Lovel are maybe Iranic and maybe Turkic, these names are not Slavic without any doubt.

The names are of unknown origin. That could be place names as well. Many peoples had similar legends.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bachus

Proto-Croatians were not Slavs, they were of Iranic or Turkic origin, word Croat is not of Slavic origin and many Croatian historians say that.

These are the speculations.

Nobody knows what "Proto-Croatians" were or were not. We know that the first Croats confirmed in history in 9th century and had Slavic names, spoke Slavic language, called "Slavs" by others, and had the Slavic Perun cult.

The hill called Perun is still there, above the former seat of the Croatian kings. In the past there were more of such names: https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perun_(brdo)
08-01-18, 14:28
hrvat22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bachus

All Christians have "Jewish" or biblical names, that is normal because of religion.

But why Croats from VII century have non-slavic names?
Kluk, Muhol, Kosen and Lovel are maybe Iranic and maybe Turkic, these names are not Slavic without any doubt.

Proto-Croatians were not Slavs, they were of Iranic or Turkic origin, word Croat is not of Slavic origin and many Croatian historians say that.

The I2a that Croats have is not originaly Indo-European origin and that may be just a proof for that. For Kluk, Muhol, Kosen and Lovel we do not know the origin of that names.

Quote:

However, this verse is similar to the one in Hervarar saga ok Heiðreks (13th century), where prior the battle between Goths and Huns,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hervar..._Hei%C3%B0reks

Quote:

King had twelve sons. The eldest was Angantyr, then Hervarth, then Hjörvarth,

http://www.germanicmythology.com/FOR...ARKERSHAW.html

Then maybe and the Goths are Iranians, therefore genetics is clearly said that Croats have nothing to do with Iranians, for ethnonym Croat we will see in the future from where, with whom and when it comes to Azov and then we will bring some conclusion.
08-01-18, 14:38
Bachus

Quote:

Originally Posted by hrvat22

The I2a that Croats have is not originaly Indo-European origin and that may be just a proof for that. For Kluk, Muhol, Kosen and Lovel we do not know the origin of that names.

Yes, we don't know origin of that names, but they are not Slavic neither Germanic for sure.
08-01-18, 14:46
Bachus

Quote:

Originally Posted by hrvat22

Then maybe and the Goths are Iranians, therefore genetics is clearly said that Croats have nothing to do with Iranians, for ethnonym Croat we will see in the future from where, with whom and when it comes to Azov and then we will bring some conclusion.

Who were Croats which are mentioned near Azov it's not clear, but one thing is slear, that Coats from Azov were not same people as Croats from early middle age.

Croats from early middle age were Slavs which adopted Croatian name from non-Slavic Croars.
Non-Slavic proto-Croats probably were small military elite which were conquest some Slavic tribes and that Slavic tribes adopted Croatian name.

Real non-Slavic Croats (proto-Croats) were not I2a-Din and R1a-M458/Z280 without any doubt, they probably have some non-European haplogroups.
08-01-18, 14:52
hrvat22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bachus

Who were Croats which are mentioned near Azov it's not clear, but one thing is slear, that Coats from Azov were not same people as Croats from early middle age.

Croats from early middle age were Slavs which adopted Croatian name from non-Slavic Croars.
Non-Slavic proto-Croats probably were small military elite which were conquest some Slavic tribes and that Slavic tribes adopted Croatian name.

Real non-Slavic Croats (proto-Croats) were not I2a-Din and R1a-M458/Z280 without any doubt, they probably have some non-European haplogroups.

It is possible that Croats in the seventh century came from Africa to Croatia, therefore you have no historical and genetic data to confirm your claims or to translate you talk fairytales without proof.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page