What does the link say exactly?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shetop
I don't understand.
Printable View
What does the link say exactly?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shetop
I don't understand.
That proves that existed a strong inter-living between Slavs and Romance populations.Quote:
Originally Posted by FBS
Since in proto-Indo-European is not this form.
Romanian have other words from Slavic,one of the words that is giving scientists from Romania a lot of headaches being zapada,used in Romanian for snow,which is cognate to old Slavonic zapadati - to fall a lot of snow.
All Slavic speakers have a very closed word to Germanic for snow.
Another thing,zapada is not used in the part of Romania that was conquered by Roman Empire,that much.
Another thing,most Romanian words used for agriculture are cognate to Slavic words.
Some theory tells that Dacians were some kind of Iranic speakers,raising sheep and being leading class,Slavs people practicing agriculture living together with Thracians,which were Italic population conquered by Dacians.
I doubt that Slavs were carrying only one HG on paternal lines and I do not think they were carrying I2-din mostly.
No idea why people do not have a theory in which Slavs actually came from SE Europe and spread to North since they are Satem IE speakers.
It would be common sense that Satem IE Speakers so Slavs also to carry mostly J2,R1A in addition to other HGs.But not carrying too much I2din.
In fact is possible that Slavs came and conquered Balkans&Romania,mixed with people here and after spread towards North Europe.
In the process they mixed with I2-din bearers and spread I2-din towards North Europe.
I think we whsould open a topic on linguistics section with words from Iranic languages in Albanian,Romanian and Slavic languages and also with common culture things between Iranic people and these 4 ethnicities mentioned before.
It says that all I2a-Dinaric-South samples are positive for the newly found S17250 SNP. It also says that this new SNP is the youngest (not private) I2a SNP found so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldritch
On the other side many I2a-Dinaric-North are not positive for S17250.
Since I2a-Dinaric-South is predominant in the Balkans and I2a-Dinaric-North is more frequent as we go towards Northeast (it is almost the only I2a-Dinaric found in Northeast Europe), it is clear that the Balkan I2a-Din is younger than the one in the other parts of Eastern Europe (it is actually the youngest).
If Balkan I2a is the youngest of all the European I2a, then it can't be the source of I2a in Europe.
I was thinking about this and then it occurred to me that I don't have enough genetic knowledge to determine if addition or deletion of a SNP is the sign of age, evolutionary progress if you will. Are you sure if deletion can't happen with time too?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shetop
I don't have enough knowledge too, but I think that deletion possibility is highly unlikely.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeBrok
And if it ever happened it would be impossible that it happened completely only for those I2a samples where the next youngest SNP is not found (the next youngest is I2a-CTS5966).
And for the I2a-CTS5966 it is not completely deleted (some have it some don't). It would make no sense that it is preserved in the youngest samples.
Shetop:"It says that all I2a-Dinaric-South samples are positive for the newly found S17250 SNP. It also says that this new SNP is the youngest (not private) I2a SNP found so far.
On the other side many I2a-Dinaric-North are not positive for S17250."
No.It says that:"Around 12 Dinarics have tested S17250 as part of Big Y or at YSEQ. All 5
Dinaric-South men were S17250+, and some Dinaric-North men were S17250+ and
other Dinaric-North men were S17250-."
Bernie Cullen
one of the volunteer administrators, I2a Project
What part of my post is wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by gyms
The Slavic theory is beginning to look like the most sensible one.
Here is some more data on sampling done in the Balkans. It shows a 9.4% frequency of I2a1 M423 in Trento, which for some reason is shown as 0% in Maciamo's I2a1 map, he must have used data from a different study.
http://www.swotti.com/tmp/swotti/cac...imgtrento3.jpg
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/cont...ogroup_I2a.gif
http://i.imgur.com/gaA5yL5.jpg
And some maps of gothic expansion because we love maps here.
http://img.tyzhden.ua/Content/Digest/week/march/gth.jpg
http://www.mmdtkw.org/MedRom0213Ostrogoths.jpg
http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/...urope526AD.png
http://www.designsofwonder.com/image.../migration.gif
I like this map because it shows the entire history of the gothic migration. The Goths did not settle in the entire "Ostrogothic Kingdom" rather they settled in Bosnia/Croatia and later sacked/conqured rome with no corresponding settlement.
Here is a quote from Jordanes about how the Goths got to Pannonia and how we see them living there south of the Danube (Right where Bosnia is)
"Now when the Goths saw the Gepidae defending for themselves the territory of the Huns and the people of the Huns dwelling again in their ancient abodes, they preferred to ask for lands from the Roman Empire, rather than invade the lands of others with danger to themselves. So they received Pannonia, which stretches in a long plain, being bounded on the east by Upper Moesia, on the south by Dalmatia, on the west by Noricum and on the north by the Danube"
@motzart
I do not know why you put the trento map in the above links.
Trento and alto-adige region of Italy rarely have people who test in genetic sites ( 23andme , ftdna etc) , this is because they get tested for free by the region.
in regard to the I marker from these regional tests for that region. it states
~5% for I1
and ~2% for I2
the 9.4% is for North-east Italy, it can mean Veneto and Friuli regions.
And yes Trento does fall in the term - the 3 venice's ...........veneto, friuli and trento regions
Shetop:"What part of my post is wrong?"
You should say all tested Dinarics instead of"all Dinarics".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sile
I posted the map of Trento to show the Region where they had a 9.4% sample for I2a1 (showing I2a1 has a higher frequency Northeastern italy than Maciamo's I2a1 map suggests), can you post me a link to the 'regional tests' you are talking about?
Here is the study I was going off of.
Materials and methods
Samples
The sample consists of 1206 unrelated male individuals
from 17 population samples (Figure 1). Two-hundred and
thirty-five of these, namely 64 Albanians from Former
Yugoslavia Republic of Macedonia, 29 Croatians from
Osijek, 75 Slovenians and 67 northeast Italians (from the
province of Trento), are reported here for the first time. The
remaining include samples reported earlier,
23,27,33
and
consist of 104 Caucasians (38 Balkarians and 66
Georgians), 149 Greeks (92 from Athens and 57 from
Macedonia), 55 Albanians (collected in Tirana), 89 Croa-
tians, 99 Polish, 75 Czechs, 92 Ukrainians, 53 Hungarians
and 255 Bosnia-Herzegovinians (84 Bosniacs, 90 Croats
and 81 Serbs). Blood samples were collected from healthy
unrelated adults after obtaining informed consent. DNA
was extracted from whole blood according to the
standard phenol/chloroform procedure, followed by ethanol
precipitation.
In addition, P37.2* samples identified from a screening
of the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation collec-
tion (over 14 000 Y chromosomes from more than 100
countries) were also included.
http://www.draganprimorac.com/wp-con.../Battaglia.pdf
Done in 2008, I think a random sampling would provide a better result than voluntary regional testing. Professional random sampling would be done on unrelated individuals with historical roots in the region, voluntary would spread family based and include individuals with no historical roots
there are 3 different 2013 papers in the thread belowQuote:
Originally Posted by motzart
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...n-Italian-Alps
I'll go with your logic for the lack of alternative explanation. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shetop
I don't think the Slavs are responsible for bringing I2a-Din to the Balkans:
- If I understood the argument brought forward by Sparkey correctly, it starts with the observation of high I2a-Din diversity in Southern Poland. Now, because of post WWII population shifts, Southern Poland is a tricky region. In fact, the vast majority of people now living in Silesia west of Katowice should have originated from what is today Western Ukraine. Any more detailed explanation about what "Southern Poland" is meant to comprise is appreciated. Until then, I would rather tend to regard the Dniester basin (SW Ukraine & Moldova) as potential I2a-Din "homeland".
- The Slavic expansion is believed to have taken place from somewhere NE of the Carpathians. The south-western expansion, which comprised Croats and Serbs, is assumed to have ocurred via Moravia and the Pannonian plain. The most convenient way of getting there, especially if you are travelling with children and household belongings, is via the upper Oder and the Moravian Gate (Katowize - Ostrava - Brno). Now, we know about another Slavic expansion that started from the upper Oder, namely the Obodrites that settled Mecklenburg and Eastern Holstein. The Obotrites were "good", i.e. Christianised Slavs, thus after their incorporation into the Holy Roman Empire in the late 12th century, the nobility was left in place and actually continued to rule as Dukes of Mecklenburg until 1919. Their genetic footprint, while diluted by subsequent German settlers (possibly also some Swedes during the 17th and 18th century), is well preserved - R1b frequency peaks around Rostock (central Mecklenburg) at 32%. Ia2-Din, OTOH? None that I am aware of (I am, however not following the various DNA pages).
Now, I find it hard to imagine that two migrations that started about the same time and overlapped each other along the upper Oder have resulted in completely different genetic patterns - R1b prevalence in the North, I2a-Din prevalence in the South. Before someone starts with "founder effects" - the Obotrites initially settled in various disjunct areas ("Siedlungskammern"), and only in the 9th century developed political coherence. If at all, smaller genetic components like Ia2-Din are much more likely to have been amplified in one of the many disjunct Obotrite areas than along the middle Danube, which has been a major transit corridor also during early South Slavonic times.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obotrites (anybody understanding German should select the German version that is far more detailed and less erroneous).- What if I2a-Din took a shortcut from the Dniester Basin to Serbo-Croat lands? The sources of Dniester and Tisza aren't that far apart. Quite a possible migration route. However, in that case we land with Gepids, Dacians etc. rather than with Slavs, all of which have been discussed here already and don't need to be repeated.
- What if the Serbs and Croats picked up I2a-Din somewhere on their way, say around the Morava in SW Slovakia / Eastern Austria (which, as I have understood, seems to be another diversity hotspot)? Well, first of all, this would leave the question how I2a-Din made it almost to the Balkans without the Slavs, but required them to finally arrive there. I believe the grass isn't any less green on the southern bank of the Danube than on the northern shore, and the advance of the Huns would have provided for enough good reason to move on a bit further south, even for those that previously didn't think living in the Roman Empire might be attractive.. Secondly, the advancing Slavs must have picked up quite a lot of I2a-Din on their way to bring forward the frequencies observed today.
- Most importantly, however, if I2a-Din was already present around the Morava (March - the Austro-Slovakian, not the one in today's Serbia), you don't need the Slavs to explain I2a-Din presence on the Balkans. I find it strange that on 23 pages so far nobody has yet been discussing the Heruli: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heruli
German Wikipedia, which I tend to trust more here, mentions that the Heruli kingdom also covered the Austrian Weinviertel (NE Austria north of Vienna).Quote:
After the fall of the Hunnic realm in 454 at the Battle of Nedao, in which the Heruls participated, they created their own kingdom at the March and Theiss rivers, (in the region of today's southern Slovakia).
I am no expert in interpreting Byzantine texts, but to me, "cities" (note the plural) denotes a quite large chunk of land to be repopulated (maybe the Serbians here can find out more details). Similarly, "several thousand Heruli" indicates a sizeable local population by 530/540 (the main period of Belisarius' campaigns), i.e. 20-30 years after the establishment of the Singidonum colony.Quote:
After the Herulian kingdom was destroyed by the Lombards, Herulian fortunes waned. Remaining Heruls joined the Lombards and some of them sought refuge with the Gepids. Marcellinus comes recorded that the Romans (meaning the East Romans or in modern naming the Byzantines) allowed them to resettle depopulated "lands and cities" near Singidunum (modern Belgrade); this was done "by order of Anastasius Caesar" sometime between June 29 and August 31, 512. After one generation, this minor federate kingdom disappeared from the historical records.
Records indicate that the Heruli served in the armies of the Roman emperors for a number of years, in particular in the campaigns of Belisarius, when much of the old Roman territory, including Italy, Syria, and North Africa was recaptured. Pharus was a notable Herulian commander during this period. Several thousand Heruli served in the personal guard of Belisarius throughout the campaigns. They disappeared from historical records by the mid-6th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mundus_(general):
Obviousy, Mundus' forces were mainly made up by Heruli. With all we know about the habits of war those days ("sent much booty to Constantinople", and probably kept even more for himself and his men), genetic founder effects in Bosnia and Croatia brought forward by that Dalmatian campaign are anything but unlikely.Quote:
Mundus (Greek: Μούνδος; died 536) was an Germanic general of the Byzantine Empire during the reign of Justinian I.
Mundus was of the son of Giesmus, a king of the East Germanic tribe Gepids, and nephew to another Gepid king, Trapstila. (..) In 529, Mundus sent envoys to Justinian, offering his allegiance. His offer was accepted, and Mundus was appointed magister militum per Illyricum, head of all military forces in Illyria and along the Danubian frontier.During the next two years, he defeated incursions of Slavs and Bulgars into the Balkans and sent much booty to Constantinople.
In 531, Mundus was briefly magister militum per Orientem, replacing Belisarius after his failure at Callinicum, but it seems that Mundus never actually traveled to the East to assume that command. In January 532, he was again appointed commander of the Illyrian forces. In the same month, he happened to be in Constantinople with a force of Heruli mercenaries when the Nika riots broke out. Mundus remained loyal to Justinian and, along with Belisarius, was responsible for the massacre of the supporters of Hypatius in the Hippodrome and thus the reassertion of imperial control.
Mundus remained in command of the forces in Illyricum thereafter. In 535, as Justinian launched his attempt to reconquer Italy from the Goths, he led his forces into Dalmatia, which the Goths held, while Belisarius invaded Italy by sea. Mundus defeated the Goths and took the capital, Salona; but, early in the next year, a new Gothic army arrived to reclaim the province. In a skirmish near Salona, Mundus's son Mauricius was trapped with only a few men by a larger Gothic force and was killed. Enraged by the loss of his son, Mundus sallied out and defeated the Goths but was mortally wounded in the pursuit
Finally http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singidunum:
So, by the time of the Heruli settlement (512), the city and its surrounding hat seen several devastating raids, and at least seven times changed hands during seventy years. There probably wasn't much original population left. The Heruli colony, OTOH, experienced 70 years of peace, plus another 50 years before the arrival of the Slavs. Might just be enough to propagate I2a-Din to a sizeable number, provided it was already well present within the original Heruli / March basin colony.Quote:
In the 5th and 6th centuries, Moesia and Illyricum suffered devastating raids by the successive invasions of the Huns, Ostrogoths, Gepids, Sarmatians, Avars, and Slavs. Singidunum fell to the Huns in 441, who razed the city and fortress, selling its Roman inhabitants into indentured servitude. Over the next two hundred years, the city passed hands several times: the Romans reclaimed the city after the fall of the Hun confederation in 454, but the Sarmatians conquered the city shortly thereafter. In 470 the Ostrogoths seized the city around, expelling the Sarmatians. The city was later invaded by Gepids (488), but the Ostrogoths recaptured it in 504. Six years later the Eastern Roman Empire reclaimed the city according to a peace treaty.
Byzantine emperor Justinian I rebuilt Singidunum in 535, restoring the fortress and city to its former military importance. The city saw a brief peaceful period of about fifty years, but was then sacked with the arrival of the Avars in 584. During Maurice's Balkan campaigns, Singidunum served as a base of operations, but it was lost again in the early half of the 7th century when the Avars sacked and burned Singidunum to the ground. Around 630, the Slavs settled in the area.
In fact, considering the linguistic situation in the area (Latin vs. Greek as official languages, Illyrian, Dacian, Germanic Heruli & Gepids, Avars, Bulgars, possibly Alans and residual Huns), it doesn't take that many Slavs taking settlement for Slavonic becoming the region's lingua franca..
Southern Poland is important to I2a-Din for two reasons: (1) The greatest outlier was found there. I believe that family came from around Moskorzew. (2) High diversity of I2a-Din-S, the Southern/Western cluster, is found there. I've seen a couple of analyses placing diversity hotspots across Southern Poland (not much more geographic specificity, sorry), including a very good one that I think disappeared when DNA Forums went down. The other was the old Vadim Verenich one, which was also on DNA Forums, but I think he may have cross-posted on Forum Biodiversity or Molgen if somebody wants to dig that up again.Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankN
I've never seen anyone claim that elevated R1b percentages are evidence of Slavic expansion, could you elaborate? I suppose East Germanic peoples don't have a lot of evidence for carrying R1b in high percentages, but in general, Germanic peoples are thought to have tended to carrier greater frequencies of R1b than Slavs.Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankN
I2a-Din in Germany is most common close to Austria from what I've seen, possibly indicating that the Carantanians left a greater genetic impact than the Obotrites.
I see the same problems with the Heruli that I see with the Goths, including that there are I1 subclades that apparently correspond to East Germanic expansions, and yet I2a-Din doesn't match these all that closely. Are you proposing that the Heruli had very different haplogroup distributions compared to other East Germanic peoples? Or that there was a founder effect from some small group of Heruli I2a-Din carriers, even though the Heruli didn't carry much to begin with?Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankN
Depends where one thinks the Heruli origins are ........Scandinavia ( I heard Norway) or modern coastal Poland.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparkey
All I have read on 12a-din in North-east Italy was from Heruli settlement in an area in Friuli under the town called Concordia
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...cordia&f=false
They did arrive in the Black sea area as well
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...heruli&f=false
sometimes older books have far far more detail
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...heruli&f=false
Another thing to think about is ............are the Hirri also known as the Heruli
My mistake! I of course meant to say R1a.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparkey
Sile has already partly answered on my behalf. The origin of the Heruli is unclear. Wikipedia has a 150 AD map showing them on the Danish isles, but that all seems to be a lot of guessing based on a few sentences written by Roman geographers (as usual). The Heruli went somehow alongside the Goths, settling on the northern shores of the Black Sea (which again could have been anywhere from the Don to the Dniester, thus I2a-Din-rich or rather poor areas), followed the Huns westward, then turned against them together with the Goths, and ultimately ended up somewhere around March and Tisza. Along the way, they should have picked up various other populations, and during their 50 years rule of northern Pannonia they collected whoever had been washed there by the Hunnic tide, plus the natives (Dacians?) that had managed to survive the Huns. Essentially, when part of the Heruli (and we don't even know which part of the conglomerate that they had become) settled around today's Belgrade, they most likely did not have much more in common with the Baltic Heruli than a bit of nobility and the language (even about the latter I am not sure).Quote:
Originally Posted by sparkey
Looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Naissus, it appears that the Heruli were especially skilled in seafaring and had their main port at the mouth of the Dniester (I2a-Din "homeland"). Together with the Goths (which appear to have rather travelled by land), in 267-269 they ravaged the western Black Sea and the Aegean, before finally suffering defeat at Naissus (today's Nis in Serbia).
Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not state where they settled - near Mount Haemus, which is the antique name for the Balkan mountain range that runs across Bulgaria ? Anyway, here the Wikipedia map of the Heruli and Gothic invasions, if anybody wants to check if it may explain some of the I2a-Din observed.Quote:
A large number of Goths managed to escape towards Macedonia, initially defending themselves behind their laager. Soon, many of them and their pack animals, distressed as they were by the harassment of the Roman cavalry and the lack of provisions, died of hunger. The Roman army methodically pursued and surrounded the survivors at Mount Haemus where an epidemic affected the entrapped Goths. After a bloody but inconclusive battle, they escaped but were pursued again until they surrendered. Prisoners were admitted to the army or given land to cultivate and become coloni.
Attachment 6441
That is my city. :smile:Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankN
So, who was in Naissus at that times?
Or was it that agricultural people of the surrounding were of no importance for the invaders? They wanted to capture the city for the gold that was inside, and afterwards continue the exploitation of the peasants, same way as the defeated city-holders did?
I1 might have been a minority 1-5% in the Goths but it is totally impossible that I1 or any of the other West/North Germanic subclades (R1b-U106/I2a2) could have been the major haplogroup. Look at the impact the Viking invasions had, we can literally see their presence everywhere they settled and this was a situation with people coming over in boats. They still reach a 15-25% frequency in the areas of Britain they settled (I1+I2a2) AND this occured about 500 years AFTER the Gothic migration/invasion of Rome.Quote:
Originally Posted by sparkey
The Goths were a tribe SO large that they were able to consistently defeat the Romans AND conquer the Western Roman Empire. This was not a group of settlers coming over in boats either, this was literally their whole tribe spilling south of the Danube to escape the Huns.
If you want to read the entire text of Jordanes I have a link here, http://people.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/.../jordgeti.html
you say that I2a-Din doesn't match the East Germanic Expansions but reading through this all I can see is an exact match
In fact, while pointing at the Heruli, I didn't want to rule out the Goths. Let's assume that Ia2-Din originally evolved somewhere on the upper Dniester, and from there initially, in small quantities, spread south-eastwards into Ukraine / Moldowa, and north-westwards into Eastern Poland & Slovakia. Let's furthermore assume that the I2a-Din S and I2a-Din N split already took place on the upper Dniester, with I2a-Din N moving rather to the south-east, and I2a-Din S moving more towards the north-west. The East-Germanic tribes (Bastarnae, Goths, Heruli etc.) would have picked up a bit of I2a-Din S on their way to the Black Sea, and quite a lot of I2a-Din N in Western Ukraine & Moldova. Their incursions into the eastern Balkans, but also their settlement in Moesia as Roman federates, would have brought I2a-Din there. The Bulgars (which I don't qualify as Slavs - we may have a definition problem here) picked up more of I2a-Din N on their way, and probably also served for a re-distribution of the Moesian pool that originated from 3rd / 4th century Roman settlement of East Germanics. Whoever followed them, whether already Slavs, still proto-Slavs, or another linguistic group that later adopted Slavonic, did the same.
I2a-Din S, in the meantime, would have been picked up by Dacians, Iaszyges, and later the Huns, and spread into the northern Pannonian basin. Some of it may already during Roman times have found its way to the southern Bank of the Danube, be it during the Marcomanni incursions, as mercenaries, or seeking refuge from the Huns. The Heruli come into the picture as they provide a plausible explanation for a substantial transfer of NE-Pannonian genes into Illyria and Dalmatia. Note in this respect that during Justinian's wars, while peace negotiations with the Ostrogoths were going on, a massive fleet mainly manned by Illyrian HerulI lay 2 years idle in Salona (just next to the islands of Hvar and Korcula which have extremely high I2a-Din concentrations). Of course, the Avars and then the Slavs should have provided for further gene transfer from NE-Pannonia, either directly or by inducing influx of refugees. But essentially, that would have been the icing on the cake rather than the main cause.
In short - I don't think you can attach a specific ethnic name, be it Sarmatians (Iaszyges), Dacians, Goths, Bastarnae, Heruli, Huns, Bulgars, Avars or Slavs, to the processes that brought I2a-Din to the Balkan. They all played their role.
Heruli = Hirri to some historians ...............seafarers who settled also in estonia and samogitia ( lithuanians)Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankN
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...ry%3Dhirri-geo
Heruli were the forefathers of modern Samogitians. In prehistoric times they were called "Hirri" or "Giriai", which means "Forest Dwellers" (the Prusso-Lithuanic word "giria" means "forest"). The earliest record about the "Hirri" we find in the writings of Plinius. Plinius stated that the territory extending from the Vistula river, as far as Eningia (probably he meant Feningia = Finland). ---- "Nec minor opinione Eningia. Quidam haec habitari ad Vistulam a Sarmatis, Venedis, Sciris, Hirris, tradunt". ----- Plinius, IV. 27.
Later, the Hirri were known as Hirruli or Heruli.
I1 was only 1-5% of the Goths? Yikes. You know that much of the Balkans have 5%-10% range of I1 levels, right? So if we accept that the I1 in the region is largely from the Goths, and there hasn't been major changes in their internal haplogroup percentages, that would imply that Goths contributed nearly 100% of the patrilines of the region. Even if we accept that the Goths had as much as an impact as you believe they did, that seems extreme. If instead you say that Eastern European I1 has a different source than East Germanic peoples, who would it be?Quote:
Originally Posted by motzart
I know you won't accept my rejection of I2a-Din as Gothic, but I think that there are good reasons to guess that Goths had quite high levels of I1. The most important reason to me is the I1:R1b-U106 ratio in Eastern Europe. Among West Germanic peoples, the ratio is low, but in Eastern Europe, it is high.
It doesn't really matter whether or not Goths had high levels of I1 to support my analysis, anyway. It's sufficient to note how Eastern European I1 distributions differ from I1 distributions among West and North Germanic peoples, and use it to gauge what East Germanic peoples must have carried. Note relatively high levels of I1-Z63 in particular, including it being found in a known descendant of Crimean Goths. So based on that, we can track I1-Z63 and compare it to I2a-Din. It doesn't match all that well.
Are you saying that most of the I1 and I2-M223 in Britain is from the Vikings? I'd argue that the high I1-Z58:I1-L22 ratio in Britain implies that the large majority of I1 in Britain is West Germanic (i.e. Anglo-Saxon) rather than North Germanic (i.e. Viking) in origin. I2-M223 is even more complicated because a not-insignificant amount of it in Britain is pre-Anglo-Saxon.Quote:
Originally Posted by motzart
Quote:
Originally Posted by sparkey
I was going by Maciamo's I1 map which suggests there is a lot less than the actual Data, but I can't find the studies he is using for the I1 data in his sources. I see now that the data suggests there is a 5-10% frequency in a minority of the Balkan countries. I do not doubt that Z63 was probably spread by a Gothic migration, but it does not match historical settlements of these people the way that I2a1 does.
The disconnect I see is where we see the final settlement of the Goths, particularly the Ostrogoths. This huge tribe was settled in Pannonia, south of the Danube permanently and throughout all of recorded history was never moved again and integrated into the Roman empire. Only a minority of them would have been settled in Rome and those there would have been a small drop in a large pool rather than a big drop in a small one like Pannonia. The only theory that can explain the peaks of I2a1 in Bosnia/Croatia is the Gothic one. It is unfortunate that the other study I posted on the Croatian island frequencies didn't investigate deeper subclades.
There are so many known Gothic grave sites in Europe that could give a definitive answer to all of this, how do we crowdfund an Ancient DNA sampling! I'd contribute at least $100. :D
I don't want to touch on the vikings in Britain too much, but arguing how much I DNA came with the Angles/Saxons VS the Vikings is splitting hairs. The Angles/Saxons were only coming in to Britain after the Gothic migrations anyway (Why did the Romans leave again ;) ), and if you add up the U106+I1 it adds up to a whole lot more, a little reminiscent of our Herzegovinian frequencies, and again, people in boats vs people on land.
I think we need a thread on I2a1 M26 and the Vandals. Now that we know that there is a I2a Din North & an I2a Din South I think these are good candidates for our Visigoth/Ostrogoth labels. Remember that these people were left Scandinavia Circa 200 B.C. so they had about 500 years to expand in their second homeland of Ukraine.
Mozart - Do I understand you correctly that you think the Goths (originally mainly I1, maybe with a bit of R1a/b) picked up a lot of I2a Din along the middle/ upper Vistula and/ or in Western Ukraine, making them quite I2a Din-loaded? They would then have spread it along their paths through the Balkans (plus during their settlement as Roman federates in Moesia), with the bulk ending up in Pannonia and Dalmatia where they ultimately took residence. May well have been a major factor, indeed.
This leaves, however, to be answered what brought forward the obviously different distribution of I2a Din N vs. S (any frequency figures on this, alongside I1, which is obviously an East Germanic marker, across the Balkans would be appreciated).
The other question is whether, from recent data, I2a Din still appears to have a diversity peak along the middle Danube in Eastern Austria, Western Hungary and Slovakia (the original links to this are down, but maybe Sparkey can give an update). If so, it would be interesting whether the peak is rather on the Roman side of the Danube (which would point towards the Goths), or on the "barbarian" side (which would bring Dacians, Sarmatians and ultimately Heruli in play). However, most likely it will be difficult to establish such a secondary center of diversity with sufficient geographical precision.
Geographic distribution of I2a-Din in the Western Balkans is to compact for scenario with multiple waves. My impression is that the arrival of I2a-Din was one large event. It my had lasted for several decades, but it was not split in completely independent waves.Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankN
Specifically the crucial event, as I see this, was the fall of the Kingdom of Gepids in 567. After that large number of Slavs moved from Wallachia towards West and Southwest. During the following decades Byzantine empire gradually lost the control of different parts of the Balkans, thus allowing uncontrolled arrival of I2a-Din.
"Picking up" large number of people does not make much sense. Why would some mobile tribe bother about moving some ordinary and not related people from one area to another, thus decrising its combat readiness.Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankN
I was going to make a post about the Goths but I'll have to come up with a different way to post it as the forum apparently dislikes it when I past in images from ms word :(
No I think that all the Goths were Primarily an I2a Din tribe and that the Din mutation occurred in Scandinavia (South Sweden Gotland). Why don't we find much of it there today? Because the Tribe left.Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankN
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...hernyakhov.PNG
Green - Götaland
Pink - the island of Gotland
Red - Wielbark Culture in the early 3rd century
Orange - Chernyakhov culture, in the early 4th century
Pruple - Roman Empire
The Wielbark culture (German: Wielbark-Willenberg-Kultur, Polish: Kultura wielbarska, Ukrainian: Вельбарська культура (Vel’bars’ka kul’tura)) or East Pomeranian-Mazovian[1] is part of an Iron Age archaeological complex that dates from the 1st century AD to the 4th century AD.
It replaced the Oksywie culture, in the area of modern-day Eastern Pomerania around the lower Vistula river, which was related to the Przeworsk culture.
Wielbark culture contained Venedi, Rugians, Goths, and Gepids located mainly in Pomerania and West Prussia later spreading down the east side into Podlasie and the southern Ukraine.[2]
Because that's what is recorded in gothic history, as they moved they conquered and adsorbed many tribes into their armies. This is because the Goths where not a great nation of numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shetop
Ok, lets clear this out. When exactly did Goths, which were I2a-Din come to Western Balkans?
Recent Archeology findings indicate that the goths where originally from the Vistula delta-Gdansk area.........they sent some people to gotland and sweden for migrating, but retained their homeland of coastal Poland. They had a policy of culling their numbers via migration by 30% every so often. this "culling" was done by lot systemQuote:
Originally Posted by motzart
http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m...ps07e5f74a.jpg
If I remember the order correctly , its orange, green, blue and then yellow ( or was it orange, blue, yellow and green......matters little) .............after this they decided to move, they invaded the coastal area next to green and conquered the Venedi and Aestii.........then they moved south absorbing the Bastanae and then finally reaching the Black sea
There is nothing in Gothic history about them absorbing tribes into their armies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sile
All wrong, Sweden they referred to as "Scandza" they left Sweden and named the land they migrated to Gothiscandza, read Jordanes here:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sile
IV (25) Now from this island of Scandza, as from a hive of races or a womb of nations, the Goths are said to have come forth long ago under their king, Berig by name. As soon as they disembarked from their ships and set foot on the land, they straightway gave their name to the place. And even to-day it is said to be called Gothiscandza. (26) Soon they moved from here to the abodes of the Ulmerugi, who then dwelt on the shores of Ocean, where they pitched camp, joined battle with them and drove them from their homes. Then they subdued their neighbors, the Vandals, and thus added to their victories. But when the number of the people increased greatly and Filimer, son of Gadaric, reigned as king--about the fifth since Berig--he decided that the army of the Goths with their families should move from that region. (27) In search of suitable homes and pleasant places they came to the land of Scythia, called Oium in that tongue. Here they were delighted with the great richness of the country, and it is said that when half the army had been brought over, the bridge whereby they had crossed the river fell in utter ruin, nor could anyone thereafter pass to or from. For the place is said to be surrounded by quaking bogs and an encircling abyss, so that by this double obstacle nature has made it inaccessible. And even to-day one may hear in that neighborhood the lowing of cattle and may find traces of men, if we are to believe the stories of travellers, although we must grant that they hear these things from afar
There are many points within the full text where he refers to the Goths as a "Race" of people. Definitely not a confederation of tribes.
Probably I'm impatient, but is anyone going to answer my simple question?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shetop
Jordanes is not trusted as accurate to modern scholars and historians in his earlier accounts of Goths....he is only taken seriously from when the goths arrived on the black sea. You can check this out yourself or see threads about it hereQuote:
Originally Posted by motzart
The original goths are Guttones and Gepids...........as all historians quote, these reside on coastla Poland.
The Earliest historian who quoted the Goths is below
Pytheas (who wrote c.320 BC):
Pytheas says that the Gutones, inhabit the shores of an estuary of the ocean ... at one day's sail from this territory is the Isle of Abalus, upon the shores of which, amber is thrown up by the waves in spring ... the inhabitants ... sell it to their neighbours, the Teutones.Around the mouth of the Vistula in modern Pomerelia (Poland), the Nordic-influenced Wielbark culture (c. 30 to 400 AD) was once thought to reflect the arrival of the Goths. Yet Pytheas tells us that the Gutones were living there ( coastal poland) centuries earlier. Archaeologists have pointed to the continuity of the Wielbark culture from earlier cultures in the same area.
Amber is found in east Prussia, one days sail from the vistula delta area
thats not what I saidQuote:
Originally Posted by motzart
I said they are a race that absorbed other people into their race..........you need to remember that Goths where around for very many centuries, over time other merged with them to also become goths
after they started attacking the dacians.........the dacians fled into Roman lands to escape .............so its while Roman empire still existedQuote:
Originally Posted by Shetop
Nothing Pytheas wrote there contradicts what Jordanes wrote, whether it is pre-Goth gutones or Goths by another name is irrelevant. It is estimated that the Germanic migrations began in 750 B.C., there is nothing conflicting with a 320 B.C. or earlier settlement of Gothiscandza. These were oral traditions passed down by a people for centuries, you think they made it up or got it wrong? Jordanes was a Goth himself and the criticisms of his history are all minor labeling issues nothing with the history itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sile