Serb and Croat genes

[Alex D.]

im interested to ask according to this eupedia data there seems to be quite a large amount of genetic difference between Serbs and Croats or amoung suth slavs in general. so im interested to ask if we look at the antic peoples in both countries they are not that different and anthropoligically south slavs are quite similar yet why is there such a y dna difference?
Serbia:
Slav 30%
Illyrian 21%
Teuton 18%
Celtic 14%
Phoenician 9%
Hellenic People 6%
Vikings 2%

Croatia
Illyrian People 34%
Slav 20%
Celtic 18%
Teuton 12%
Phoenician 8%
Hellenic People 8%

Croatia

8
42
1
29
8
1
3.5
0
6
1.5
0
0

Serbia

2
29
4
15
7
1
10
1
24
7
0
0

also im interested to ask which peoples would of brought haplogroup T as its arabic right? and i mean in histroy there never were arab people in Serbia. i mean looking at the antic peoples shouldnt there be more of haplogroup R1a amoung Serbs as its typical of Slavic peoples of which 30% are for Serbia's antic people yet only 15% R1a while croats are 29% but only like 21% Slavic

[Maciamo]

Haplogroup T in the Balkans is not of Phoenician origin. It came with the Neolithic farmers, along with E-V13 and J2b, although ultimately also from the Levant. The Phoenicians never colonised the Balkans, so it's nonsensical to call it Phoenician. Just say Levantine or Near-Eastern, that's better.

You may find interesting that the Bosnians are closer to the Croats than the Serbs. The Serbs have a fairly unique proportion of Y-DNA haplogroups, but are closer to the Kosovars and Albanians than to the Croats. The Serbs have 42% of "Thessalian" admixture E-J-T, against only 5% for the Croats. Albanians have about 50% of E-J-T.

[Alex D.]

Haplogroup T in the Balkans is not of Phoenician origin. It came with the Neolithic farmers, along with E-V13 and J2b, although ultimately also from the Levant. The Phoenicians never colonised the Balkans, so it's nonsensical to call it Phoenician. Just say Levantine or Near-Eastern, that's better.

You may find interesting that the Bosnians are closer to the Croats than the Serbs. The Serbs have a fairly unique proportion of Y-DNA haplogroups, but are closer to the Kosovars and Albanians than to the Croats. The Serbs have 42% of "Thessalian" admixture E-J-T, against only 5% for the Croats. Albanians have about 50% of E-J-T.

First of all there is no such ethnicity as "bosnian" considering the fact you have three ethnicities is bosnia: serbs, bosniaks and croats when you say bosnian who do you mean? as why would a Serb living in bosnia be different from a Serb living in Serbia or be so genetically distant that makes no sense. look ive found these two maps of wikipedia the haplogroup I i dont know if its accurate or not or but ethnicities one is.

i cant psot a link but look up ethnic group chart or map of people in bosnia and youll see what i mean.

as you can see bosnian Serbs have higher amount of haplogroup I than Serbs in Serbia what are their other genes like or percentages?

this is data i got of igenea i just copy and pasted it. anyway near easterners i dont know who would be classified as near easterners and whether illyrians are or arent but look at this:
Near eastern people in croatia (illyrians, hellenics and phoenicans)- 50%
Near eastenr people in Serbia (illyrians, hellenics and phoenicans)- 36%
How do you then explain this huge difference in near eastenr genes amoung croats and serbs (5% as opposed to 50%) when Serbia's antic people have more non near eastern trbes like Slavs, celts, vikings teuton etc.. and why the lack of Slavic haplogroup R1a do you know of any reason or explanation as to why? as R1a sould be closer to 30% as oppsoed to 15 if the antic people statistic is true

are you saying turks when you mean levant?

[Maciamo]

First of all there is no such ethnicity as "bosnian" considering the fact you have three ethnicities is bosnia: serbs, bosniaks and croats when you say bosnian who do you mean? as why would a Serb living in bosnia be different from a Serb living in Serbia or be so genetically distant that makes no sense. look ive found these two maps of wikipedia the haplogroup I i dont know if its accurate or not or but ethnicities one is.

I am not talking about ethnicities, but national percentages for people from Bosnia. Furthermore the so-called ethnic division in Bosnia is much more of a religious division, between Catholic Croats, Muslim Bosniaks and Orthodox Serbs. Their language is very similar. Their cultures only evolved differently fairly recently (after the collapse of the Roman Empire), while haplogroups have been there for much longer.

this is data i got of igenea i just copy and pasted it. anyway near easterners i dont know who would be classified as near easterners and whether illyrians are or arent but look at this:
Near eastern people in croatia (illyrians, hellenics and phoenicans)- 50%
Near eastenr people in Serbia (illyrians, hellenics and phoenicans)- 36%
How do you then explain this huge difference in near eastenr genes amoung croats and serbs (5% as opposed to 50%) when Serbia's antic people have more non near eastern trbes like Slavs, celts, vikings teuton etc.. and why the lack of Slavic haplogroup R1a do you know of any reason or explanation as to why? as R1a sould be closer to 30% as oppsoed to 15 if the antic people statistic is true

I have rarely seen such a pack of bullshit about Y-DNA as on iGenea's website (DNA Tribes isn't recommendable either). I am not talking about the quoted passage in particular, but their assumptions about ethnicities based on haplogroups. People tested with iGenea get their results that say something "You are R1b, therefore your ancestors were Anglo-Saxon", or "You are J2, your ancestors can be traced back to ancient Phoenicia". It's like they do not understand the most basic aspects of population migration and history. I remember that DNA Tribes claimed that the Celts originated in Ireland and colonised Europe from there ! When the level of knowledge is so low (primary school level ?) it makes you wonder how these companies are not bankrupt yet. What is strange is that iGenea is owned by FTDNA, and FTDNA never makes such weird assumptions on their website.

are you saying turks when you mean levant?

Usually when I say Levant I mean the eastern coast of the Mediterranean, from Israel/Palestine to Syria (and part of southern Turkey). If I want to add Anatolia and Greece into the package I say "Near East". If I extend this to Iraq, Egypt, and possibly Iran and the Arabian peninsula, I say "Middle East".

[Alex D.]

I am not talking about ethnicities, but national percentages for people from Bosnia. Furthermore the so-called ethnic division in Bosnia is much more of a religious division, between Catholic Croats, Muslim Bosniaks and Orthodox Serbs. Their language is very similar. Their cultures only evolved differently fairly recently (after the collapse of the Roman Empire), while haplogroups have been there for much longer.



I have rarely seen such a pack of bullshit about Y-DNA as on iGenea's website (DNA Tribes isn't recommendable either). I am not talking about the quoted passage in particular, but their assumptions about ethnicities based on haplogroups. People tested with iGenea get their results that say something "You are R1b, therefore your ancestors were Anglo-Saxon", or "You are J2, your ancestors can be traced back to ancient Phoenicia". It's like they do not understand the most basic aspects of population migration and history. I remember that DNA Tribes cla
imed that the Celts originated in Ireland and colonised Europe from there ! When the level of knowledge is so low (primary school level ?) it makes you wonder how these companies are not bankrupt yet. What is strange is that iGenea is owned by FTDNA, and FTDNA never makes such weird assumptions on their website.


Usually when I say Levant I mean the eastern coast of the Mediterranean, from Israel/Palestine to Syria (and part of southern Turkey). If I want to add Anatolia and Greece into the package I say "Near East". If I extend this to Iraq, Egypt, and possibly Iran and the Arabian peninsula, I say "Middle East".

Its an ethic differnce not a religious one. a Serb living in bosnia is a Serb jsut like a Serb living in germany is a Serb not a german ethnically speaking not citizenship wise or whatever. only religious group in bosnia is a bosniak as they converted to islam much later from the 1500 onwards before that a good majority would of been either Serbs or Croats as thats the two ethnic groups in the region. if you say in bosnia its jsut a religious difference then the difference between all south slavs is religous thats not true.

Igenea compares the DNA profile of say a dead viking warrior's genes and compare it to a modern person's so that tells whether related or not. how its exactly done i dont know as im not a geneticist so go ask them but its similar as to when they establish whether people have a relation to a dead person like in Canada there was this testing of the Mad trappers genes and it was compared to modern day people who claimed to be descendants jsut like it was done with the russian tsar and they ruled out a potential candidate same probably is done for ethnic groups. although similarites would ahve to be less as an ethnic group is much wider than family but i guess certain antic peoples or ethnic groups have some specific STR markers or whatever. the specifics as stated before i do not know but ask igenea about that they also have a forum

Igenea or there haplogroup statitics seemed to be more accurate as Serbs Croats and bosnians had anywhere from 70-85% or so I, R1a, R1b there was much similarity which would make sense. albanians and kosovars are different and the E it seems to latitudically spread from Kosovo again this doesnt make sense because kosovo is now mainly albanian and not Serb so i dont see why the surrounding Serbs would be similar to them as its two completly different ethnicities. an albanian from kosovo is a completly different ethnicity than a Serb in Serbia and a Serb in bosnia.

As well your site or maps seem to show that haplgroup I dims or gets less as you get further away from herzegovina or the coast of bosnia and move east. however bulgarians have much more I than Serbs yet they are fiurther away from that coast again that doesnt make sense. as it shows bulgarians as being closer to bosnian serbs than serbs from Serbia. yet if its a location thing then i guess bulgarians should be more distant

[Maciamo]

Its an ethic differnce not a religious one. a Serb living in bosnia is a Serb jsut like a Serb living in germany is a Serb not a german ethnically speaking not citizenship wise or whatever. only religious group in bosnia is a bosniak as they converted to islam much later from the 1500 onwards before that a good majority would of been either Serbs or Croats as thats the two ethnic groups in the region. if you say in bosnia its jsut a religious difference then the difference between all south slavs is religous thats not true.

I think you misunderstood me. The term "ethnicity" is used in many different ways by different people. It is usually a blend of genes, language, culture and religion. Genetics have now demonstrated that there tend to be a link between genes and languages, but it is often not that clear between geographic neighbours.

What Y-DNA shows about people from Bosnia is that overall they tend to be closer to Croats than Serbs, while Serbs are closer to Albanians and Kosovars (indeed Serbia still insist that Kosovo is part of Serbia, and they probably wouldn't if there wasn't a genetic connection, despite the language difference).

Igenea compares the DNA profile of say a dead viking warrior's genes and compare it to a modern person's so that tells whether related or not. how its exactly done i dont know as im not a geneticist so go ask them but its similar as to when they establish whether people have a relation to a dead person like in Canada there was this testing of the Mad trappers genes and it was compared to modern day people who claimed to be descendants jsut like it was done with the russian tsar and they ruled out a potential candidate same probably is done for ethnic groups.

Could you post the link of the page that says that. For our information, very, very few ancient remains have been tested for Y-DNA. I am not aware of any Viking being tested for Y-DNA so far. Some have been deduced by testing their descendants, but that's it. Even if we knew for sure about a few Vikings, their lineages could be extinguished, or be too close from other ethnicities (Celtic or Slavic) to be able to tell who descend from them now, after over 1000 years. STR markers have been known to change in a single generation. Imagine after 40 or 50 generations. Actually if you found an identical lineage to yours that is 1000 years old it would almost be certain that you've got the wrong ancestor. Your ancestor would more likely be someone who had similar STR (a distant cousin, perhaps separated by 20 or 50 more generations) that has mutated over time to become yours.

There are many people who find perfect STR matches on Ysearch or other databases and are not related within historical times (not even from the same part of Europe). These false negatives are due to the relatively small number of STR used and the population boom that Europe experience since the Middle Ages. I have a Belgian cousin who is I1 and has over 500 matches (using 37 markers) all over northern Europe (yet none in Belgium itself because too few Belgians are in the database).


There have been a bit more ancient remains tested for mtDNA, but not enough to be relevant to determine ethnic origins of modern people. MtDNA in Europe is so old that the same subclades can be found all over the continent. I have made a summary of most of the ancient European DNA tested so far.

Igenea or there haplogroup statitics seemed to be more accurate as Serbs Croats and bosnians had anywhere from 70-85% or so I, R1a, R1b there was much similarity which would make sense. albanians and kosovars are different and the E it seems to latitudically spread from Kosovo again this doesnt make sense because kosovo is now mainly albanian and not Serb so i dont see why the surrounding Serbs would be similar to them as its two completly different ethnicities. an albanian from kosovo is a completly different ethnicity than a Serb in Serbia and a Serb in bosnia.

It does not make sense to you because you think about modern languages. Language can change quite fast. Look at France. 100 years ago, 90% of southern French (Occitan speakers) couldn't speak French at all. Now they all do. In Alsace people have been alternatively German-, then French-, then German-, then French-speakers for the last 500 years. 2000 years ago, Aquitaine was Basque-speaking. Now only two cities on the Spanish border still are, and the rest of Aquitaine doesn't even feel partly Basque, although they are genetically very close to the Basques of Spain. Don't base your assumptions on language.

The Near-Eastern E-J-T haplogroups in the Balkans have been there for over 9,000 years, certainly more than 4,000 years before the arrival of the Indo-Europeans. Nowadays all the languages in the Balkans are Indo-European, even Albanian. Haplogroups are much older than the language split between Albanian, Serbian, German, Russian, Portuguese or even Hindi. You have to change completely your way of thinking if you want to understand population genetics.

[Alex D.]

it is not only language but anthropology also plays a role. dinaric race is dominant in or amound south slavs over 75% maybe even 80%. also found in central europe but less frequently like 25-30% i believe amoung czechs, suthern poles, germans, austrians etc.. anthropoligically wise and linguistically slavs or a south slav would look closer to an east slav than a north indian brahmin would. yet these tests claim genetically south slavs are different due to mixing with balkanic people then north indians would be very different as anthropogically they are much more different from east and west slavs much darker, different facail features etc.. indicative of mixing which was different from slavic. as difference between slavic people is due to with which tribes they mixed so like illyrian, finnic remained slavic etc.. yet how did north indians remain "slavic" or krugan in a sense seeing as krugan is more distant than slavic. it wont allow me to post links but i could show what i mean through pictures better same with haplogroup E

as for igena best to ask them they have their own forum they would know better than i would

[donny]

It's very interesting to read that. I didn't know that genetics plays an important role for an entire nation. I am sure there are factors of influence for that, can anybody here count them all in this thread?

[Joro]

Yes,overall i think we Croats genetically aren't so greatly similar to Serbs.
There is an obvious lack of Neolithic lineages among Croatians,which Serbs have in abundance.

[Joro]

it is not only language but anthropology also plays a role. dinaric race is dominant in or amound south slavs over 75% maybe even 80%.
...

This is cetainly a large exaggeration.Only Bosniaks and Montenegrins would probably fit in that 75-80%,others have significantly lower Dinaric percentages.
Slovenians are more Alpine,Noric and Nordic,Croats have strong Alpine and Atlanto-Med strain,Bulgarians and Macedonians are mainly Pontid Med etc.

[Marianne]

This is cetainly a large exaggeration.Only Bosniaks and Montenegrins would probably fit in that 75-80%,others have significantly lower Dinaric percentages.
Slovenians are more Alpine,Noric and Nordic,Croats have strong Alpine and Atlanto-Med strain,Bulgarians and Macedonians are mainly Pontid Med etc.

Well I don't see any Macedonians looking like Bulgarians... Every Macedonian I know looks 100% Greek simply because he or she is. Bulgarians look like some FYROM-ians and other slavs in general

[Joro]

Well I don't see any Macedonians looking like Bulgarians... Every Macedonian I know looks 100% Greek simply because he or she is. Bulgarians look like some FYROM-ians and other slavs in general

okay then,'FYROM-ians'.
Although I don't agree they look nothing like Greeks,what i've seen so far,they look very similar.Simply because they border.

[Marianne]

okay then,'FYROM-ians'.
Although I don't agree they look nothing like Greeks,what i've seen so far,they look very similar.Simply because they border.

They look Slavic to me...

[Joro]

They look Slavic to me...

To me they look nothing more Slavic than Greeks.Maybe just a little.
You must know,that original Slavs were purely Nordic anthropologicaly,
which doesn't quite fit in today's 'Slavic look' stereotypes.That 'look' is more native Eastern-European than anything else.

[Invictus_88]

Maciamo,

Where do you get your data from?

[Marianne]

To me they look nothing more Slavic than Greeks.Maybe just a little.
You must know,that original Slavs were purely Nordic anthropologicaly,
which doesn't quite fit in today's 'Slavic look' stereotypes.That 'look' is more native Eastern-European than anything else.

I guess it's easier to distinguish others from yourself while other people might find them similar to you. For example, Asians can tell apart a Japanese from a Korean and a Chinese with just one look but westerns think that Asians look all the same. For the same reason I can tell immediately when someone is not Greek while others might find him looking similar to Greeks. I can tell right away if someone I see in the street is Albanian, Turkish or Slavic (eastern European in general) and the differences between them seem huge to me. It is because we have many immigrants from these countries and I after a while I became used to telling them apart.

I assume if someone who lives in a country without these ethnicities comes to Greece he will find them all the same and won't be able to tell them apart from Greeks. After all Greeks have a bit Slavic in them, especially in the north side of Greece.

[Joro]

Well yes,I'm just a 3rd party watcher.Although i remember,for exemple,watching some Greek show on the sattelite(I later found out it was Greek),and while looking how people look,they looked eastern European to me,i thought probably Ukrainian or something.After all,Greece is in eastern Europe,although people definitively look more Mediterranean than 'Slavic'.
It's great if you have the ability to recognize who comes from a Slavic country,but i think it's not so simple.
And not all Slavic countries are in eastern Europe,Czech R. and Slovenia are pure central European countries,and people look like it.To me they are way more similar to Austrians or Germans than to Russians or Ukrainians.
Simply-looks of the people correspond with their geographical location,unless there's been some massive population exchange,like in United States.But that is extremely rare,big majority of European peoples descend from pre-Slavic/Germanic/Ugric etc. populations.

[Marianne]

I agree with your post!

[Alex D.]

This is cetainly a large exaggeration.Only Bosniaks and Montenegrins would probably fit in that 75-80%,others have significantly lower Dinaric percentages.
Slovenians are more Alpine,Noric and Nordic,Croats have strong Alpine and Atlanto-Med strain,Bulgarians and Macedonians are mainly Pontid Med etc.

Where are your sources from? Slovenians yes thats true for them for Croats it is not. Alpine in Croatia would be a dinaric seeing as dinaric is actually the true "alpine" subrace hence it being on the taller and stronger end of the European subraces. In Croatia you have the Dinaric Alps thats your mountain range dinaric alps= dinaric subrace. atlanto med is present but only on the adriactic coast where the ocean is. but still its not the majority only like 10% of the total.

[Joro]

Where are your sources from? Slovenians yes thats true for them for Croats it is not. Alpine in Croatia would be a dinaric seeing as dinaric is actually the true "alpine" subrace hence it being on the taller and stronger end of the European subraces. In Croatia you have the Dinaric Alps thats your mountain range dinaric alps= dinaric subrace. atlanto med is present but only on the adriactic coast where the ocean is. but still its not the majority only like 10% of the total.

All what I said is true.

[Sprinkles]

The error that you seem to be repeating continually over the discourse of which populations are of haplogroup and admixture is that you are not distinguishing between isolated populations and whole populations. If we further extend this to consider that "Serbs are more closely related to Bosnians, or Bosnians are more closely related to Croats" the reasoning behind this seems to be that since certain people live in certain areas that the correlation between their actual lineage is compelling enough to make distinctions within boundaries that are known as nation states. If you even looked at population demographics of municipalities in Hercegovina, you would realize that there are areas that are homogenous with respect to either the nationality of "Croatian, Serbian, or Bosnian (Muslim)." In due course, we should also consider that since there is a high degree of segregation within these municipalities that the genetic composition within them is not comparable to municipalities that are 99% Serbian or 99% Bosnian. Segregation would lead to isolative reproduction and in due course genetic homogeny.
You're focused quite contently on the religious notion of culture rather than than a model that is insistent on a religious culture procuring genetic homogeninity for adaptive reasons.

In any such respect we should consider the origin of Halpogroup I2a2 to found in highest frequency in Hercegovina (71%), which, thus, correlates to the cultural capital of Illiyria (Stolac, Hercegovina) - and more than likely the originator of the haplogroup (since it is well isolated demographically in mountanous regions).

In any regard, I do not know why you do not consider the I haplogroup and others to be of Neanderthal origin, since, accordingly, there is presumable evidence to suggest that microcephalin to have been injected into the gene pool 37kya. And, further, the neanderthal genome project has recently discovered evidence of inbreeding between cro-magnum and neanderthals and can not ruled out up to 20% intermixture with statistical significance.

pnas.org/content/103/48/18178.full

[LeBrok]

Thanks Sprinkles for sharing. It's interesting and intriguing. I hope in not far future will get detailed genetic map of Europe, and also map that tracks gen pool movement through history, from Neanderthals, Cro Magnons to recent.

[Joro]

The error that you seem to be repeating continually over the discourse of which populations are of haplogroup and admixture is that you are not distinguishing between isolated populations and whole populations. If we further extend this to consider that "Serbs are more closely related to Bosnians, or Bosnians are more closely related to Croats" the reasoning behind this seems to be that since certain people live in certain areas that the correlation between their actual lineage is compelling enough to make distinctions within boundaries that are known as nation states. If you even looked at population demographics of municipalities in Hercegovina, you would realize that there are areas that are homogenous with respect to either the nationality of "Croatian, Serbian, or Bosnian (Muslim)." In due course, we should also consider that since there is a high degree of segregation within these municipalities that the genetic composition within them is not comparable to municipalities that are 99% Serbian or 99% Bosnian. Segregation would lead to isolative reproduction and in due course genetic homogeny.
You're focused quite contently on the religious notion of culture rather than than a model that is insistent on a religious culture procuring genetic homogeninity for adaptive reasons.

In any such respect we should consider the origin of Halpogroup I2a2 to found in highest frequency in Hercegovina (67%), which, thus, correlates to the cultural capital of Illiyria (Stolac, Hercegovina) - and more than likely the originator of the haplogroup (since it is well isolated demographically in mountanous regions).

In any regard, I do not know why you do not consider the I haplogroup and others to be of Neanderthal origin, since, accordingly, there is presumable evidence to suggest that microcephalin to have been injected into the gene pool 37kya. And, further, the neanderthal genome project has recently discovered evidence of inbreeding between cro-magnum and neanderthals and can not ruled out up to 20% intermixture with statistical significance.

pnas.org/content/103/48/18178.full

Just to get some facts straight,highest percentage of I2a2 so far is found amoung Croats of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
I didn't read anything about highest frequencies in Stolac,do you have some information we don't know about?
Besides,I think Illyrians were predominantly R1b,like Celts probably.
Illyrians proper lived in today Montenegro,(northern?) Albania and southernmost areas of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.
That corresponds to the higher frequencies of R1b in those areas,in southern Croatia and in Bosnia-Herzegovina you have really small frequencies of r1b,but in southernmost,Dubrovnik area,it elevates to ~17%.
Check the study 'Croatia and its island isolates' in PDF format for this.

[Sprinkles]

Just to get some facts straight,highest percentage of I2a2 so far is found amoung Croats of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
I didn't read anything about highest frequencies in Stolac,do you have some information we don't know about?
Besides,I think Illyrians were predominantly R1b,like Celts probably.
Illyrians proper lived in today Montenegro,(northern?) Albania and southernmost areas of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.
That corresponds to the higher frequencies of R1b in those areas,in southern Croatia and in Bosnia-Herzegovina you have really small frequencies of r1b,but in southernmost,Dubrovnik area,it elevates to ~17%.
Check the study 'Croatia and its island isolates' in PDF format for this.

My claim was that the capital of cultural Illyria was in Stolac, Hercegovina.

This correlates with the highest percent of Haplogroup I2a2 being found amongst Croatian's in Hercegovina.

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/HaplogroupI2.png
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Illyrians.jpg

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrians

The Illyrians formed several kingdoms in the central Balkans, and the first known Illyrian king was Bardyllis. Illyrian kingdoms were often at war with ancient Macedonia, and the Illyrian pirates were also a significant danger to neighbouring peoples. At the delta of Neretva, there was a strong[27] Hellenistic influence on the Illyrian tribe of Daors. Their capital was Daorson located in Ošanići near Stolac in Herzegovina, which became the main center of classical Illyrian culture. Daorson, during the 4th century BC, was surrounded by megalithic, 5 meter high stonewalls (large as those of Mycenae in Greece), composed out of large trapeze stones blocks. Daors also made unique bronze coins and sculptures. The Illyrians even conquered Greek colonies on the Dalmatian islands. Queen Teuta was famous for having waged wars against the Romans

In the Illyrian Wars of 229 BC, 219 BC and 168 BC Rome overran the Illyrian settlements and suppressed the piracy[28] that had made the Adriatic unsafe for Italian commerce. There were three campaigns, the first against Teuta the second against Demetrius of Pharos[29] and the third against Gentius. The initial campaign in 229 BC marks the first time that the Roman Navy crossed the Adriatic Sea to launch an invasion.[30]

[Sprinkles]

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16266413?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed _ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=4

The variation at 28 Y-chromosome biallelic markers was analysed in 256 males (90 Croats, 81 Serbs and 85 Bosniacs) from Bosnia-Herzegovina. An important shared feature between the three ethnic groups is the high frequency of the "Palaeolithic" European-specific haplogroup (Hg) I, a likely signature of a Balkan population re-expansion after the Last Glacial Maximum. This haplogroup is almost completely represented by the sub-haplogroup I-P37 whose frequency is, however, higher in the Croats (approximately 71%) than in Bosniacs (approximately 44%) and Serbs (approximately 31%). Other rather frequent haplogroups are E (approximately 15%) and J (approximately 7%), which are considered to have arrived from the Middle East in Neolithic and post-Neolithic times, and R-M17 (approximately 14%), which probably marked several arrivals, at different times, from eastern Eurasia. Hg E, almost exclusively represented by its subclade E-M78, is more common in the Serbs (approximately 20%) than in Bosniacs (approximately 13%) and Croats (approximately 9%), and Hg J, observed in only one Croat, encompasses approximately 9% of the Serbs and approximately 12% of the Bosniacs, where it shows its highest diversification. By contrast, Hg R-M17 displays similar frequencies in all three groups. On the whole, the three main groups of Bosnia-Herzegovina, in spite of some quantitative differences, share a large fraction of the same ancient gene pool distinctive for the Balkan area.