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.