How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?

How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?

  • Total voters
    230
As for that list of well-known individuals with I2a1b, which was posted before:

Marcin_Luter.png


Martin Luther being I2a1b is not surprising. His ancestors were from Thuringia. Eastern Thuringia was settled by Slavs during the Migration Period - and those particular Slavs from Thuringia did not suffer any major demographic losses, as they were Christianized early on (already by Charlemagne IIRC) and without bloodshed. So Luther family could be paternally descended from Germanized Slavs.
 
Tomenable said:
^ Below is continuation of my posts from previous page (read discussion on page 31 first):



There was lack of continuity between Neolithic Scandinavians and Scandinavians of Bronze & Iron Ages (see: Malmström et. al. 2009).

Also, there is a very long long way from I2a1 to I2a1b1. For example Sardinians are I2a1a, not I2a1b (and certainly not I2a1b1).

I2a was present not only in prehistoric Scandinavia but in most of Mesolithic and Neolithic Europe.

Check for example I2a1 from Loschbour (5960-5750 BCE) or I2a from Tiszaszölös-Domaha'za in Hungary (5780-5650 BCE).

And more anient I2a in Hungary was discovered at Apc-Berekalja I (Lengyel culture), dating to 4490-4360 BCE.

There is also Neolithic I2a1 from Starčevo culture in Croatia, at site Vinkovci Jugobanka, dated 5840-5480 years BCE.

Finally there is I2a1b L161+, CTS1293+ from Els Trocs in Spain, dated 5310-5206 BCE (see Haak 2015).

As well as I2a1b from Funnelbeaker culture dating to 3360-3086 BCE. And I2a1 from France (Treilles, Aveyron) dated 3000 BCE.

Finally more I2a1 from Dolmen of La Pierre Fritte, Villeneuve-sur-Yonne in France, dated 2750-2725 BCE.
Click to expand...

A couple of the bones (Loschbour and Motala12) were even found to be L178+ L161- L621-, putting them as a possibly new more ancient branch off of the tree branch leading to our modern L178+ L621+ Dinaric and L178+ L161+ Isles populations.
 
Frequency distribution of I2a1b in Ukraine totally does NOT correspond to places where Gothic leftovers lived.Gothic leftovers lived in Crimea, while the highest % of I2a1b is in the opposite end - in Western & Northern Ukraine.
Click to expand...

That is pure BS. Goths occupied both north and west of present day Ukraine. I must admit that this was a good deception you tried to pass but unfortunately it doesn't work for me. Check out this map:
Pre_Migration_Age_Germanic.png


If I2a1b is Slavic- why is it not found in any slightly larger quantity in other Slavic lands except south ones and Ukraine? It is because small number of Goths remained in Ukraine and settled permanently in western Balkans.

And this is crucial. Because Goths did not stop their migration in what is now Slovenia.

They entered Italy, they sacked Rome, established a kingdom. So why there is so little of I2a1b in Italy ???

Simply because I2a1b has absolutely nothing to do with Goths. Northern Italy has <1% of it.
Click to expand...


Wrong again. Northern Italy has some I2a1b, in Trento area there is as much as 10 percent of it. Southern Italy has not I2a1b like North does because Goths left nothing there, in some cases only small garrisons.

Gothic conquest of Italy was of strictly political nature. Nowhere will you find any historical source that says that Goths relocated to Italy from Balkans. They settled (like Jordanes says) permanently on western Balkans, and they conquered Italy for political reasons and never settled there in large numbers. From Wikipedia:

Theoderic sought to revive Roman culture and government and in doing so, profited the Italian people.[14] It was in both characters together that he set out in 488, by commission from the Byzantine emperor Zeno, to recover Italy from Odoacer. By 493 Ravenna was taken, where Theoderic would set up his capital. It was also at this time that Odoacer was killed by Theoderic's own hand. Ostrogothic power was fully established over Italy, Sicily, Dalmatia and the lands to the north of Italy.


Italy was conquered because of establishing Roman administration, not because Goths wanted to settle there. Only Gothic soldiers went to Italy, and Gothic people as whole never relocated to Italy as you are trying to say.

There was lack of continuity between Neolithic Scandinavians and Scandinavians of Bronze & Iron Ages
Click to expand...

Then why are Scandinavians so genetically close to those same Western Hunter-Gatherers?

I listed ancient I2a1 from other countries (Hungary, France, Spain, Croatia, Luxembourg, Germany) in my post above.But the point is, that I2a1 is not I2a1b1. There are dozens of SNPs (and dozens of centuries) separating the two.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I do not know if I2a1 samples from other European countries can qualify as ancestors of I2a1b Dinaric.

On other hand, I2a1 from northern Europe (Motala and Lochsbour) is very possible ancestor of Dinaric and Isles. I will quote gyms:

A couple of the bones (Loschbour and Motala12) were even found to be L178+ L161- L621-, putting them as a possibly new more ancient branch off of the tree branch leading to our modern L178+ L621+ Dinaric and L178+ L161+ Isles populations.
Click to expand...



Wrong. First of all you have random drift (due to which frequencies can change), and secondly you have founder effects.
Slavs dispersed in various directions and those migrating groups certainly did not have identical frequencies of haplogroups
Click to expand...



You are explaining differences among Slavs by "accident". They have different HG's "by accident". There is sharp reduction of I2a Din when we leave Dinaric Alps and go to plains of northern Yugoslavia "by accident".


There is no accident. It is not accidental that I2a1b is common only in lands where Goths lived. It is not accidental that from history we know that Slavs settled only in agriculturaly good areas while pre-Slavs lived in Dinaric Alps. It is not also accidental that Borreby racial type was found by Carleton S. Coon as dominant in Montenegro and parts of Herzegovina, and as we know Borreby type is Germanic type common in Germany and western Norway.

Main plus for Slavs are Slavic toponyms that are sometimes found in other Slavic lands and Slavic language. And nothing else.
 
^continuing last post

Slavs were already divided into distinct tribes when they were first described by people of the Mediterranean world.So no - they don't all descend from "same Slavs". From Slavs, but not same ones. From different groups of Slavs.
Croats for example came to the Balkans from what is now Czechoslovakia. Croats came to the Balkans relatively late, but mixed with other Slavs who had already been there before them (most likely ancestors of Slovenes and Bosniaks). Most of Slavic groups had come to the Balkans before Croats, from areas of Ukraine-Moldova, crossing Romania on their way. And before crossing the Danube and flooding into the Balkans, those Slavs had settled north of the Danube in southern Romania.
Click to expand...

According to all historical sources Herzegovinians and Slavonians are considered as same Croats. Yet they are so different. Most of our medieval historical sources say that people of Dinaric Alps is descended from Goths. As Thomas Archdeacon says, Croats are descended from Goths, and got Slavic name much later.

Official history tells us that Slavic tribes of Serbs (of so called "White Serbia") came from western Slavic lands, that Montenegrins came from Elbe Slavs in northwestern Germany and that Croats came from south Poland/Czechoslovakia.
There is absolutely no historical proof for Balkan Slavs coming from Ukraine/Moldova, which would explain I2a1b. Every historical proof that speaks about coming of Slavs to Yugoslavia says that they came from WESTERN Slavic lands, which are predominantly R1a, and I2a Din is non-existent there.

My opinion: Croats from north Croatia and most of Serbs of plains are descended from Slavs.
Croats (from Herzegovina, Dalmatia, Lika), Montenegrins and smaller part of Bosnians of Dinaric Alps are descended from Goths.
There is more than enough genetic, historical, anthropological and cultural proof.
 
There is absolutely no historical proof for Balkan Slavs coming from Ukraine/Moldova, which would explain I2a1b. Every historical proof that speaks about coming of Slavs to Yugoslavia says that they came from WESTERN Slavic lands
Click to expand...

You are completely mistaken, you should read early Byzantine primary sources on Slavs.

First Slavs came to Moesia and Thrace, crossing the Danube River along what is now Romanian-Bulgarian border.

Later from Moesia & Thrace they were spreading westward and southward within the Balkans.

It is illustrated by this map (it shows areas inhabited by Slavs in year 500 AD):

Slavs, name of a people (communication community), speakers of an Indo-European language. Between the 6th and the 7th c. they spread across a great territory in Europe, from Ukraine in the east to the Balkans in the south, the river Unstrut, possibly even the Upper Main, in the west, and Schleswig Holstein in the north-west (...)

The name is recorded for the first time in Greek and Latin sources during the first half of the 6th century as: Σκλαβηνοι; Σκλαβοι; sclavi. It may be what the Slavs called themselves. The original form, is reconstructed by some as *slověne; perhaps this has something to do with the Slav word slovo, which in Polish still means ‘word’ and ‘language’. During the Middle Ages Slavs are sometimes also referred to as “Wends, from the Antique Veneti (cf. Germanic Wenden, Finnish Venäja)

The earliest written record on S., from around 550 AD is in →Cassiodorus, his work known from its summary, handed down by →Jordanes (Getica), and →Procopius of Caesarea (especially, his De bello Gothico). Both Jordanes and Procopius report that Slavs were divided into Sclaveni and Antae; Jordanes mentions also the race of the Venethi whom he considers an earlier name of the people, or possibly, a tribe contemporary to the Sclaveni and Antae (Getica, V.34-35, p. 16). From Procopius we learn that the Sclaveni and Antae were known originally as Spori, or Sporoi (De bello Gothico III.14, p. 272-273).

According to →Jordanes the Sclaveni lived in the lands to the north of the Danube, as far as the Upper Vistula in the west and the Dniester in the east (map 1-2.); the territory of the Antae extended east from the Dniester to the Dnieper (Getica, V.34-35, p. 16). If we accept that Antae indeed were Slavs, then the first Slav ruler known from the written record was Boz, defeated in late 4th century by Vinitharius of the →Ostrogoths (Getica, XLVIII.246-247, p. 101-102).

According to the Byzantine records in the second half of 6th and during the 7th century Slavs moved into the Balkans. (...)
Click to expand...

Slavs_500.png


And directions of migrations added:

Slavs_Two.png
 
Tomenable said:
You are completely mistaken, you should read early Byzantine primary sources on Slavs.

First Slavs came to Moesia and Thrace, crossing the Danube River along what is now Romanian-Bulgarian border.

Later from Moesia & Thrace they were spreading westward and southward within the Balkans.

It is illustrated by this map (it shows areas inhabited by Slavs in year 500 AD):

Slavs_500.png
Click to expand...

That is many centuries after the goths first crossed in the same place
 
crossed in the same place
Click to expand...

Well, that is the best place to cross. There are not many places to cross, due to mountains:

Dark red - mountain ranges
Light green - best crossings

Places_to_cross.png


And the Goths didn't cross on their own, but the Romans opened their gates to them (refugees):

 
I am not talking about haplogroup continuity in Scandinavians. Haplogroups do not tell much about you. You can be I1 African.
I am talking about autosomal DNA. When autosomal DNA was compared, Scandinavians (together with some Baltics) were matched closest with those Western Hunter Gatherers.

It is true that Slavs crossed the Danube on eastern Balkans, but that DOESN'T MEAN they came from Moldavia and Ukraine. What emperor Constantine says in De Administrando Imperio about where Slavic Serbs and Croats came from:

31. Of the Croats and of the country they now dwell in.The Croats who now live in the region of Dalmatia are descended from the unbaptized Croats, also called 'white', who live beyond Turkey (he means Hungary) and next to Francia, and have for Slav neighbours the unbaptized Serbs. 'Croats' in the Slav tongue means 'those who occupy much territory'.
Click to expand...

32. Of the Serbs and of the country they now dwell in.
The Serbs are descended from the unbaptized Serbs, also called 'white', who live beyond Turkey (Hungary) in a place called by them Boïki, where their neighbour is Francia, as is also Great Croatia, the unbaptized, also called 'white'; in this place, then, these Serbs also originally dwelt
Click to expand...

Where did they live:
640px-White_serbia_white_croatia01.png






To sum up: It is clear that Slavs that settled in Yugoslavia came from WESTERN Slavic lands, and NOT from Ukraine. As we know, I2a Din is practically absent in western Slavic lands, and since Slavic Yugoslavs did not come from Ukraine, it becomes perfectly clear that Slavs are NOT the ones who spread I2a Din, but the Goths.
Yugoslav languages are also closer to western ones than to eastern Slavic ones.
It is clear who spread I2a Din.
 
clintCG said:
To sum up: It is clear that Slavs that settled in Yugoslavia came from WESTERN Slavic lands, and NOT from Ukraine. As we know, I2a Din is practically absent in western Slavic lands, and since Slavic Yugoslavs did not come from Ukraine, it becomes perfectly clear that Slavs are NOT the ones who spread I2a Din, but the Goths.
Yugoslav languages are also closer to western ones than to eastern Slavic ones.
It is clear who spread I2a Din.
Click to expand...

West Slavs are about ~10% I2a-Din, with the concentration increasing as you get closer to the Balkans (Slovaks are ~15% I2a-Din). Far from "practically absent." How much I2a-Din do Germanic peoples have, meanwhile? I'd say "practically absent," outside of places with historic Slavic input.

I'd agree with the summary that I2a-Din migrated into the Balkans from the direction of Poland, rather than directly from Ukraine, by the way. The clines hint at that.
 
When autosomal DNA was compared, Scandinavians (together with some Baltics) were matched closest with those Western Hunter Gatherers.
Click to expand...

You are not up-to-date. Read Haak 2015. Most of Hunter-Gatherer ancestry in Scandinavians (or at least Norwegians) matches Yamnaya population (descendants of Eastern Hunter-Gatherers from Russia - genetically similar to Western ones). See the graph below:

Untitled3.png


And here you can find data for more modern populations than in the graph above:

"Genetic distance of Yamnaya samples to other groups":

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3840-Genetic-distance-of-Yamnaya-samples-to-other-groups

http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/43356-Bell-Beakers-Gimbutas-and-R1b/page9

To sum up: It is clear that Slavs that settled in Yugoslavia came from WESTERN Slavic lands
Click to expand...

Nope. First of all, Croats and Serbs came to the Balkans later than other Slavs (for example Slovenes came before Croats).

As for White Croats and White Serbs (Sorbs) - they share common ancestors with Balkan Serbs and Balkan Croats.

But they did not come to the Balkans from Germany. They split into two groups - one migrated to the Balkans, one to Germany.

Moreover Sorbs in Germany are mixed with other Slavic tribes (Lusatians among others), and so are Serbs in the Balkans.
 
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280


http://pereformat.ru/2013/10/kolybel-evropejskoj-civilizacii/

I. Rozhansky

2013/10/18

Croatia haplogroup R1a represented almost exclusively by the Central Eurasian subclade Z280


https://www.familytreedna.com/public/dinaric_alps_dna/default.aspx?section=ymap

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/r1a/default.aspx?section=ymap

As for I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983 haplotype which has a majority of Croats.. it comes from White Croatia, today southern Poland and has a mutation I2a1b2a1a S17250/YP204...


So far, most or all of those who are negative for S17250 have patrilineage
originating near the Carpathians, particularly southeastern Poland and
extreme western Ukraine.

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I/2014-05/1400615460

I2a1b2a1a S17250/YP204
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a* -
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a1 Z16971
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a2 Y4882
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983


This means that all those who have this mutation I2a1b2a1a S17250 / YP204 are White Croatian origin...Today people with this mutation I2a1b2a1a S17250 / YP204 are located in the Ukraine, Czech Republic, Belarus, Poland, Croatia, Russia, etc ... which proves that the migration of Croats went in different directions and that historical data for Greate Croatia were reality....



http://yfull.com/tree/I2/
 
Last edited:
clintCG said:
I am not talking about haplogroup continuity in Scandinavians. Haplogroups do not tell much about you. You can be I1 African.
I am talking about autosomal DNA. When autosomal DNA was compared, Scandinavians (together with some Baltics) were matched closest with those Western Hunter Gatherers.

It is true that Slavs crossed the Danube on eastern Balkans, but that DOESN'T MEAN they came from Moldavia and Ukraine. What emperor Constantine says in De Administrando Imperio about where Slavic Serbs and Croats came from:





Where did they live:
640px-White_serbia_white_croatia01.png






To sum up: It is clear that Slavs that settled in Yugoslavia came from WESTERN Slavic lands, and NOT from Ukraine. As we know, I2a Din is practically absent in western Slavic lands, and since Slavic Yugoslavs did not come from Ukraine, it becomes perfectly clear that Slavs are NOT the ones who spread I2a Din, but the Goths.
Yugoslav languages are also closer to western ones than to eastern Slavic ones.
It is clear who spread I2a Din.
Click to expand...


White Serbia do not exist ...
 
Last edited:
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280
Click to expand...

Not according to Underhill et. al. 2014:

Croatia_mainland.png


There is more than enough genetic, historical, anthropological and cultural proof.
Click to expand...

There is no way to distinguish Western Slavic and Eastern Germanic people anthropologically.

They were very similar to each other racially. Summary and all graphs below taken from:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

======================

I will post graphs in next post below.
 
hrvat22 said:
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280
Click to expand...

Not according to Underhill's study from 2014 - see the chart below (appendix to his 2014 study):

Croatia_mainland.png


You quoted data from 2013, so Underhill's data is more up-to-date because it's from 2014.

==================================

clintCG - you wrote that there is an "anthropological proof" that some South Slavs are descended from West Slavs, and other South Slavs from Goths.

But how is it possible considering that West Slavic and East Germanic people (including Goths) were practically indistinguishable in anthropological terms ???

At least according to this 2008 study by the Institute of Anthropology of the University of Poznan:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

The Institute (website in English): http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/html/indexe.html



And several anthropological graph from the same study:








image upload no size limit


upload images free


uploading pictures


upload gifs


windows 7 screenshot


post images
 
hrvat22 said:
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280
Click to expand...

Not according to Underhill's study from 2014 - see the chart below (appendix to his 2014 study):

Croatia_mainland.png


You quoted data from 2013, so Underhill's data is more up-to-date because it's from 2014.

==================================

clintCG - you wrote that there is an "anthropological proof" that some South Slavs are descended from West Slavs, and other South Slavs from Goths.

But how is it possible considering that West Slavic and East Germanic people (including Goths) were practically indistinguishable in anthropological terms ???

At least according to this 2008 study by the Institute of Anthropology of the University of Poznan:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

The Institute (website in English): http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/html/indexe.html



And several anthropological graph from the same study:








image upload no size limit


upload images free


uploading pictures


upload gifs


windows 7 screenshot


post images
 
hrvat22 said:
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280
Click to expand...

Not according to Underhill's study from 2014 - see the chart below (appendix to his 2014 study):

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png

Croatia_mainland.png


You quoted data from 2013, so Underhill's data is more up-to-date because it's from 2014.

==================================

clintCG - you wrote that there is an "anthropological proof" (do you mean biological anthropology?) that some South Slavs are descended from West Slavs, and other South Slavs from Goths.

But how is it possible considering that North Slavic people (West and East Slavs) and East Germanic people (including Goths) were practically indistinguishable in anthropological terms ???

At least according to this 2008 study by the Institute of Anthropology of the University of Poznan:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

The Institute (website in English): http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/html/indexe.html



And several anthropological graphs from the same study:








image upload no size limit


upload images free


uploading pictures


upload gifs


windows 7 screenshot


post images
 
Tomenable said:
Not according to Underhill's study from 2014 - see the chart below (appendix to his 2014 study):

http://s9.postimg.org/7qti4gl8v/Croatia_mainland.png

Croatia_mainland.png


You quoted data from 2013, so Underhill's data is more up-to-date because it's from 2014.

==================================

clintCG - you wrote that there is an "anthropological proof" (do you mean biological anthropology?) that some South Slavs are descended from West Slavs, and other South Slavs from Goths.

But how is it possible considering that North Slavic people (West and East Slavs) and East Germanic people (including Goths) were practically indistinguishable in anthropological terms ???

At least according to this 2008 study by the Institute of Anthropology of the University of Poznan:

http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/pdf/mono/vol012/01piontek.pdf

The Institute (website in English): http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~anthro/html/indexe.html



And several anthropological graphs from the same study:








image upload no size limit


upload images free


uploading pictures


upload gifs


windows 7 screenshot


post images
Click to expand...


This information for the Croatian R1a is from the year 2005...

http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/22/10/1964.full

  • .
Croats mainland 108...

Therefore these data that you mention are only for one part of Croatia and they are out of date....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 1074941 times.

Back
Top