How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?

Printable View

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

13-10-11, 15:29
razor

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dorianfinder

The frequency in isolated populations of primarily non-Slavic communities strongly suggests that it would have had to have been introduced in pre-Slavic times. Armenian levels of I2a and Greek I2a1* suggests that I2a may have been part of an early Illyro/Phrygian exchange, Phrygian being the Armenian I2a so prominent today.

The King paper showed significantly higher levels of I2a in the Peloponnese compared to North Greece. The King paper found I2a2a (Former I2b1 in the Y2010 tree) at relatively low frequencies throughout Greece from the North to the isolated Lasithi Plateau on Crete. The Battaglia study found a sturdy 17.5% of Greek Macedonian men to be I2a1*.

(1) One should not confuse I2a-Din with I2a
(2) The Slavs absolutely swamped Greece in the late 6th and 7th cs. From top to bottom. The non-Slav population was pushed back to meager coastal areas and a few large cities. The Byzantine reconquista which began later in the 7th c. was largely successful as we know (due to Slavic disorganization), but their earlier massive presence explains the current level of I2a1b1 in Greece with no difficulty at all.
(3) Ditto re the large amounts of I2a-Din among Romanians, some Albanians, Vlachs, and Moldavians. All the result of the Slavic deluge. These early Slavs were not impressive state builders, but Jordanes already noted their impressive numbers. They settled in the Balkans both compactly and amongst other populations. The fate of these myriad little communities was subsequently determined by internal processes. Slavs assimilated non-Slavs linguistically, or the reverse. But the genes remained.
13-10-11, 17:48
sparkey

One by one vs. Dorian's latest points... these are some of his best so far, I'll admit...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dorianfinder

You are not wrong for looking at the variance but I feel you have been swayed somewhat by the pan-slavists who frequent forum discussions.

I hope not. I'm rather influenced by Ken Nordtvedt, but I doubt he's a pan-slavist. I can't think of any other biases I'm coming into this with, and I tend to be self-critical.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dorianfinder

1. The distribution within the Balkans is reminiscent of a much older migration, that is if one did take place, than the Slavic expansion of the 6th-7th cent. AD.

As I've mentioned, modern frequency distributions can be misleading. If we look for a distribution that's an exact match with where incoming Slavs settled, and find a mismatch with I2a-Din frequencies, it doesn't disprove the link.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dorianfinder

2. Montenegrins, Croatians, Serbians and Bosniaks are three distinct peoples, despite what some panslavists want us to believe. I believe the Serb and Bosniak communities are early Balkan.

How early are Serbs and Bosniaks? Because they have the highest diversity of I2a-Din in the Balkans per Verenich, indicating that they have the oldest Slavic input if the Slavic input theories are correct. Maybe this is more consistent with your thinking than you expect?

Besides, I could also say that the Welsh, Cornish, and Bretons are three distinct peoples, "as opposed to what the pancelticists want us to believe," and be correct. But that doesn't mean that they weren't contiguous culturally, linguistically, and genetically to a large degree back in the 1st millennium CE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dorianfinder

3. Greek and Armenian I2a puts the Slav and Sarmatian theories in the realm of fantasy.

Three points: (1) Greeks have a nontrivial Slavic input, (2) The Greek Slavic input is of a generally different flavor than the Balkan Slavic input (N instead of S), (3) Armenians do not have I2a-Din, they have a good amount of I2c-B and low levels of I2a2a2-Cont3 (which has an older spread than I2a-Din).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dorianfinder

4. No links have been found linking Disles and Isles to Sarmatia or the Baltoslavic regions.

Yes, I know. That doesn't rule out wide dispersion, near-total bottleneck, and subsequent getting "picked up" by certain expanding groups. In fact, it makes that the most likely explanation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dorianfinder

I agree wholeheartedly regarding the Sea Peoples and believe we simply do not know enough about them, however it remains a possibility and is not mutually exclusive to a Balkan Paleolithic continuity thesis, in fact they fit rather well.

Sea Peoples run into the same difficulty as Paleolithic continuity (the double-bottleneck problem), which is why I have them listed as nearly equally unlikely. If you find them equally likely, at least we're seeing eye-to-eye here.
13-10-11, 19:07
sparkey

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haustor

I voted for Other.
I think that I2a-Dinarics got to Balkan as Ostrogoths. This would also explain presence of I2* in Georgia, Armenia and Turkey as those would be people who did not complete their voyage to Balkan and NW Italy. TMRCA for Dinarics would be older as it probably belonged to clan chiefs while TMRCA for Ia*s would be younger branches that remained behind.

A Germanic spread of I2a-Din (and I2c-B!) is certainly not one I've thought about yet. It would explain the youngness of both. I feel like the center of diversity of I2a-Din is too far East for that theory to work, though... there is no spike of diversity, or even significant presence, of I2a-Din in traditional proposals for the Ostrogothic launching points. The closest diversity spike is Austria, which I admit I don't have an immediate answer for. I2c, meanwhile, has no detectable presence anywhere near the Ostrogothic launching points, the closest being the extra-diverse but very low-frequency bit in Germany, or maybe the extra-young (in fact, too young) Jewish bit in Eastern Europe. So I'm inclined to dismiss both proposals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haustor

Second option would be Gepids who lived little bit north of Balkan and have joined Huns later on. This aliance with Huns allowed them to spread into areas where I2a-Ds are found today.

The Gepids run into the same problems as the Ostrogoths.

I still think that most I1 in the Balkans (and it's not totally insignificant) is Ostrogothic in origin, though.

The rest of your arguments are solid, Haustor. I think you're too quick to dismiss the presence of I2a-Din throughout the modern Slavs, including North Slavs, though (around 10% in Russians, for example).
13-10-11, 20:07
razor

Quote:

Originally Posted by sparkey

I still think that most I1 in the Balkans (and it's not totally insignificant) is Ostrogothic in origin, though.

The most recent (and quite comprehensive) work on the Chernyakhiv culture by Boris Mahomedov, now acknowledged as Gothic, indicates that it was constructed from very heterogeneous elements: B.M. has traced no less than 8 (!!) distinct "Germanic" sub-elements in it, from today's Poland, Germany, Baltic islands, and Scandinavia, along with "Scythian" (yes, descendants of the Skilur complex, with their specific burial poses) and distinct "Sarmato-Alan" elements {we could have guessed this from some of Ammianus Marcellinus' "Gothic" names). Most of this vanished after ca. 430 CE, towards the Balkans. Good luck with the haplogroups. Luckily a substantial number of gravesites are biritual (inhumations + cremations) so there is some hope at recovery of data.
13-10-11, 20:09
terranova

I see a linguistic problem there as well. Why would Germanic tribes adopt a Slavic language upon settling in the Balkans? It seems unlikely.
13-10-11, 21:57
Shetop

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haustor

I think that I2a-Dinarics got to Balkan as Ostrogoths.

I couldn't agree with that, and here is an interesting reading related to your assumption:
Goths in the Roman Balkans c.350–500
13-10-11, 22:15
Goga

At the time when I2a-din rose the Huns raided Europe. It's well known that the Sarmatians/Alans were their allies. Also at that time there was no significant sight of Slavic tribes.
So I believe to cluster I2a-din to Slavic tribes is giving them way to much credit. According to me Slavic tribes were composed of two main haplogroups N1c1 and R1a!

The Huns and the Sarmatians (Alans) are fitting very well in this theory and according to me it is the best suggestion so far!

"The 5th century Armenian historian Moses of Khorene, in his "History of Armenia," introduces the Hunni near the Sarmatians and describes their capture of the city of Balkh ("Kush" in Armenian) sometime between 194 and 214, which explains why the Greeks call that city Hunuk. ...

... the Huns maintained the loyalties of a number of tributary tribes including elements of the Gepids, Scirii, Rugians, Sarmatians, and Ostrogoths."

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

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/8...nwanderung.jpg
13-10-11, 22:24
Goga

I came to the conclusion that Sarmatians (Alans) spread I2a-din in Europe with help of the Huns. And this makes a lot sense to me! Bodin - I don't know where he is - is right after all....
14-10-11, 08:53
Sile

Quote:

Originally Posted by sparkey

A Germanic spread of I2a-Din (and I2c-B!) is certainly not one I've thought about yet. It would explain the youngness of both. I feel like the center of diversity of I2a-Din is too far East for that theory to work, though... there is no spike of diversity, or even significant presence, of I2a-Din in traditional proposals for the Ostrogothic launching points. The closest diversity spike is Austria, which I admit I don't have an immediate answer for. I2c, meanwhile, has no detectable presence anywhere near the Ostrogothic launching points, the closest being the extra-diverse but very low-frequency bit in Germany, or maybe the extra-young (in fact, too young) Jewish bit in Eastern Europe. So I'm inclined to dismiss both proposals.

The Gepids run into the same problems as the Ostrogoths.

I still think that most I1 in the Balkans (and it's not totally insignificant) is Ostrogothic in origin, though.

The rest of your arguments are solid, Haustor. I think you're too quick to dismiss the presence of I2a-Din throughout the modern Slavs, including North Slavs, though (around 10% in Russians, for example).

If the ostrogoths brought the I2a-din , they would have also brought it to Italy , especially Lombardy, Veneto and friuli, but all they gave to these areas was the architecture ( venetian-gothic)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venetia...c_architecture

You still have not answered this in my opinion
14-10-11, 17:35
sparkey

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sile

If the ostrogoths brought the I2a-din , they would have also brought it to Italy , especially Lombardy, Veneto and friuli, but all they gave to these areas was the architecture ( venetian-gothic)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venetia...c_architecture

You still have not answered this in my opinion

I don't think that Ostrogoths brought I2a-Din anywhere. Do you mean I1? Italy does have I1, probably not insignificant amounts coming from East Germanic peoples (although North Italy in particular probably has some from West Germanic peoples).
21-10-11, 12:46
Dale Cooper

Illyrians were not homogenus people... those "Illyrian" tribes living in area of present day croatia and bosnia, didn't had same genetic as those Illyrians from south montenegro and epirus (today albania), is that so hard to understand?

Illyrians of Epirus had dominant haplogroup E1b1b, like today Albanians, but "Illyrians" from present day Bosnia, Montenegro and parts of Serbia had I2a2 as their dominant haplogroup, and because of slavic mixing with them in 7th century, we have that haplogroup as dominant in Croatia, Bosnia and Serbia even today...

CASE CLOSED.
23-10-11, 22:44
Bodin

Goga Bodin is back
And no Dale Coper case is not closed : Illyrians from Albania and Illyrians from Bosnia , Serbia and Croatia couldnt be diferent , they wouldnt even be diferent from Thracians from Bulgaria - because after rebelions of Illyrian and Panonian tribes in 6-9 AD Romans mixed Thracians , Illyrians and Panones moving parts of tribes and creating new tribes . And again I2a1b is to young to be Illyrian you should realy close that case. Also populations of Balkans were prety much destroyed by Huns , Avars and great plague in VI century -so it is realy inplausible for them to make 90% of gene contribution to today Serbs and Croats .
Goths ( Visigoths were also on Balkans not only Ostrogoths) : They camed from Sweden and there is no I2a1b - mainly I1 , R1b and R1a , but I believe they bring some of I2a1b with them - and they get it via mixing with Sarmathians ( lot of Goths have Sarmathian names )
Slavs there is no prove that any Slavic tribe settled on Balkans west of Morava river( Slavs lived in today Walachia in VI century , and aeria west of Morava was in Avar khaganate before coming of Serbs and Croats - Croats beated Avars and take teritory ). Croats and Serbs have Iranic names and diferent archeology than Slavs , only thing that conect them with Slavs is languague .
If I2a1b is brought by Slavs than WHY SERBS DONT HAVE MORE OF SLAVIC R1A ? They have only like 5% of R1a that is not 11.000 years old ( Illyrian - nonSlavic ) and that number is even more decreased , because part of R1a is certainly from Goths and Sasi miners
23-10-11, 23:15
Shetop

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodin

If I2a1b is brought by Slavs than WHY SERBS DONT HAVE MORE OF SLAVIC R1A ?

Why would they have to have it, if I2a1b which came were Slavs themselves?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodin

They have only like 5% of R1a that is not 11.000 years old ( Illyrian - nonSlavic ) and that number is even more decreased , because part of R1a is certainly from Goths and Sasi miners

Where is this data from?
24-10-11, 07:05
zanipolo

The goths came from sweden and the baltic lands next to the sea, If they brought hg I they would have brought R1a. Its illogical to assume the goths selected people with only HG I to go to the black sea and then through balkans , italy, spain and north Africa

http://www.goggo.com/terry/Haplogrou...ca_5,000BC.jpg

the goths path
http://www.goggo.com/terry/Haplogrou...Migrations.pdf

since the goths came from sweden and sweden has R1a , is it not logical?
24-10-11, 17:38
sparkey

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodin

If I2a1b is brought by Slavs than WHY SERBS DONT HAVE MORE OF SLAVIC R1A ? They have only like 5% of R1a that is not 11.000 years old ( Illyrian - nonSlavic ) and that number is even more decreased , because part of R1a is certainly from Goths and Sasi miners

Your numbers don't sound too far off... but I think it is still totally plausible for it to be the Slavs anyway. All we need is some combination of: (1) The migrating population was an I2a-Din-heavy and R1a-light subset of the Slavs, (2) There was genetic drift, (3) There was cultural selection. My best guess is a combination of (1) and (2) in this case.

Besides, you run into a similar problem with the Sarmatians: Where is all the Iranian R1a? The Sarmatians would have to have been an I2a-Din-heavy and R1a-light subset of Iranians and/or have genetic drift and/or have cultural selection, very much parallel to what I'm proposing for the Slavs. So you see, there's no difficulty here.
25-10-11, 03:25
Bodin

No there is no problem, with Iranian R1a , if Sarmathians are descendants of Medes and carriers of I2a1b , while Slavs would be descendants of Scyth ploughers and carriers of R1a . I2a1b in Russia would be from Roxolans ( Russians get they name after them ) and from mixing with Sarmathians ( it is well known that Avars use to spend every summer with Slavic wifes , and probably Saramathians to ) . What I trying to say is : Slavs are from Pripyat marshes - that aeria is in center of R1a LGM refugee , even today that aeria have over 60% of R1a , so any slavic nation would have to have significant percent of R1a . That mean I2a1b comming from other place and I propose Sarmathians because it fits they movements . All scientist noticed significant genetical differences betwen South Slavs (linguisticaly ) and rest of Slavs , and that could be due to the different origins . Archeology also shows significant differences betwen Slavic and Serbs , Croats and Bulgars . That is little to much differences for coincidence
25-10-11, 03:28
Bodin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shetop

Why would they have to have it, if I2a1b which came were Slavs themselves?

Where is this data from?

How could Slavs be I2a1b , they are from Pripyat valey and there is over 60% of R1a ( one of the strongest ) , and there was no newcoming nations after Slav movement
Check Klyosov
25-10-11, 03:30
Bodin

Quote:

Originally Posted by zanipolo

The goths came from sweden and the baltic lands next to the sea, If they brought hg I they would have brought R1a. Its illogical to assume the goths selected people with only HG I to go to the black sea and then through balkans , italy, spain and north Africa

http://www.goggo.com/terry/Haplogrou...ca_5,000BC.jpg

the goths path
http://www.goggo.com/terry/Haplogrou...Migrations.pdf

since the goths came from sweden and sweden has R1a , is it not logical?

I dont know is this question for me , but I said Goths were R1a and I with some R1b and I2a1b from mixing with Sarmathians north of Black sea
25-10-11, 04:46
razor

This seems to be the third thread in which the proverbial bad penny is driving out the good IMHO. Well, Mathew 7:1 and all that (:=)) Arrivederci and hasta la vista.
25-10-11, 21:38
Bodin

Retreat is best solution for you isnt it :)
25-10-11, 22:19
Shetop

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodin

How could Slavs be I2a1b , they are from Pripyat valey and there is over 60% of R1a ( one of the strongest ) , and there was no newcoming nations after Slav movement
Check Klyosov

Your statement isn't correct but I'll skip that and ask you - where from is I2a1b? And what is the frequency of different haplogroups in that region today?

Bottom line is - so many former Iranian speakers in different parts of Eastern Europe today and all of them, no matter where they were, lost their language!? I would say that it is impossible.
28-10-11, 05:43
Goga

From the Sarmatians!

Iranic tribes were the real power around the Black Sea and North of the Balkans at that time !

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/811/95704057.jpg

I took this from page 50 from this book:
http://books.google.nl/books?id=yVws...page&q&f=false
02-11-11, 17:23
Bodin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haustor

I voted for Other.
I think that I2a-Dinarics got to Balkan as Ostrogoths. This would also explain presence of I2* in Georgia, Armenia and Turkey as those would be people who did not complete their voyage to Balkan and NW Italy. TMRCA for Dinarics would be older as it probably belonged to clan chiefs while TMRCA for Ia*s would be younger branches that remained behind.
Second option would be Gepids who lived little bit north of Balkan and have joined Huns later on. This aliance with Huns allowed them to spread into areas where I2a-Ds are found today.
This option may not be liked by many and is based on observation that there is not much (if any) genetic footprint left by Huns or Magyars in Europe which lead me to believe that people in old times might have commited infanticide against Asian babies while Gepid's babies lived on.

I do not think Dinarics lived in Balkan during Roman Empire as their dna were not found in graves of Roman soldiers from Illyria (graves from Wales seem to indicate hg E as Illyrian).
They are too young for Paleolithic continuity and even if they were not again they were not part of Roman armies so they would have not lived in Balkan.

I think that early Indo-Europeans were more of R1a and R1b folks.
I do not think we were Sea people as we don't have much of seafaring experience. During medivial times Bosnian Kingdom waged wars against both Raguscan and Venetian and took most of land in east Adriatic but those Bosnians had no navy at all.

There is very little R1a in parts of Balkan for it to be mainly Slavic migration.
Don't know much about Sarmatians to make any comments.

Have you consider Sarmathian origins ? Because Gepids had only Semberia and Srem on Balkans .
02-11-11, 17:28
Bodin

Quote:

Originally Posted by terranova

I see a linguistic problem there as well. Why would Germanic tribes adopt a Slavic language upon settling in the Balkans? It seems unlikely.

Why would Bulgarians - turkoIranic nation accepted Slavic languague ?
02-11-11, 17:30
Bodin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shetop

Your statement isn't correct but I'll skip that and ask you - where from is I2a1b? And what is the frequency of different haplogroups in that region today?

Bottom line is - so many former Iranian speakers in different parts of Eastern Europe today and all of them, no matter where they were, lost their language!? I would say that it is impossible.

Why would it be imposible ? If they were all subdued by Huns and they all had a lot of Slavic speacking subjects - limigantes

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