Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
We have plenty of I2 in Sardinia.
Completely different clade.
I2a M26 is not called "Dinaric"
So, it is then "Vandalic"
That study is another proof of the statement you made.If this is not the proof that I2a-Din is recent in Southeast Europe, than I don't know what is: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0065441
u gues are making i2a1b much more recent than it actullely is G2a came in Neloithic R1a and R1b came in brnze age hg I has been in europe for over 30,000 years. I2a1b has probably been in eastern europe for over 15,000 years it is re everything exceot paloithic it is from cavman times u cant find a Neolithic ion age culture that will match where i2a1b came from. trying to say iit is the cimmermans honestly makes n sense at all.
Why slavs the Slavic marker is R1a1a1b1 not I2a1b.
The slavic language spread to Yugoslavia in the middle ages. I2a1b had already been there it is much more rare in the place Slavic languages spread from to Yugoslavia in my opinion there is no way that is the source.
Frm what Maciamo says I2a1 started 20,000ybp in a ice age refuge somewhere ins outhern Europe then I2a1a(western meditreaen) and I2a1b split almost immeditaly. That is what he said in his Genetic history of Italy that makes alot more sense to me.
No population has only one marker. I agree, in fact, that the pre-proto-Slavs, i.e. the Balto-Slavs, would have probably been R1a dominant. Their shared R1a testifies to this. After that, the most likely scenario I see is the two populations splitting and absorbing and/or expanding local N1c (in the case of the Balts) and I2a-Din (in the case of the Slavs) markers.
All of that is basically correct, and not incompatible with I2a1b3a L147.2+ ("I2a-Din") being spread by the Slavs. Notice that I2a-Din is even further downstream than I2a1b. It's a young haplogroup (younger than I1!). So it can both have ancestors as you describe, and be spread by the Slavs coming down from the Ukraine area.
It's possible to claim both that the ancestors of I2a-Din were Paleolithic Europeans, and that its modern spread is primarily the result of much later migrations. Hence why I argue that I2a-Din descends from residents of Paleolithic Europe (I've argued for the Franco-Iberian Ice Age refuge, although most other authors argue for the Balkans); but at the same time I believe it spread later with the Slavs. I think that's the best guess you get when you traverse the I2 tree. I2a P37.2+ as a whole is very western in its diversity and seems to have an affinity for the Atlantic Fringe and the Rhine. I2a-Din itself is in fact a geographic outlier in the I2a family, and STR dating, along with a lack of ancient samples compared to I2a1a M26+, indicates that it only became the most common I2a subclade recently.
Ken N states the marker( i2a) came from ukraine, the only major migration into "illyrian" lands for that marker in BC times ( iron-age) was from the cimmerains. If it was introduced in the bronze-age then it cannot have been a ukraine marker.
This thread has been viewed 1074374 times.