Sarmatians, Serbs, Croats and I2a2

[LeBrok]

Interesting, refreshing, a counter intuitive thinking with reversing hg for Slavs and Sarmatians,...I need time to digest it, when I'm on vacation next week. Very interesting.
cya

 

[iapodos]

Very brave idea of Shetop but not without sense. As I understand he states that R1a in eastern Europe are of Sarmatian stock, and later he conclude that all neighboring people of Slavs were Baltic speakers who adopted Slavic language. What does not fit in that story is so numerous R1a population ( if it was ruling caste) and so little I2a population to be subjects of rule. I do not why, but generally people with I2a seems to me much more like those who rule than those to be ruled with. Carpatian Highlanders, Dinaric Highlanders. It has always been mountainious warlike sociaties. But that tie Baltic-Slavic could be very interesting, especially if we put R1a to Baltic and I2a to Slavic.

 

[Shetop]

Very brave idea of Shetop but not without sense. As I understand he states that R1a in eastern Europe are of Sarmatian stock, and later he conclude that all neighboring people of Slavs were Baltic speakers who adopted Slavic language. What does not fit in that story is so numerous R1a population ( if it was ruling caste) and so little I2a population to be subjects of rule. I do not why, but generally people with I2a seems to me much more like those who rule than those to be ruled with. Carpatian Highlanders, Dinaric Highlanders. It has always been mountainious warlike sociaties. But that tie Baltic-Slavic could be very interesting, especially if we put R1a to Baltic and I2a to Slavic.

To clarify this issue about R1a groups. There were to groups:
1. Northeast of the Black Sea - Sarmatians (Alans)
2. North and north east of I2a2 people - let's call this people Balto Slavs

Only small portion of Sarmatians moved with the Huns (including old Serbs (Serboi) and Croats) towards central Europe. These basically military units had a task of controlling people North of Carpathians, mostly I2a2 people. They got Slavicised but they also transfered their names to a large part of I2a2 people. Their direct descendants today would be Sorbs in East Germany and also some of the people in the Krakow region (White Croatia).

Numerous R1a (today related to R1a1a7, Balto Slavs) 2000 years ago dwelled probably somewhere around Belarus and also received Slavic language in maybe even earlier process. In 5th or 6th century they moved towards Poland, Czechoslovakia...

 

[iapodos]

To clarify this issue about R1a groups. There were to groups:
1. Northeast of the Black Sea - Sarmatians (Alans)
2. North and north east of I2a2 people - let's call this people Balto Slavs
Only small portion of Sarmatians moved with the Huns (including old Serbs (Serboi) and Croats) towards central Europe. These basically military units had a task of controlling people North of Carpathians, mostly I2a2 people. They got Slavicised but they also transfered their names to a large part of I2a2 people. Their direct descendants today would be Sorbs in East Germany and also some of the people in the Krakow region (White Croatia).
Numerous R1a (today related to R1a1a7, Balto Slavs) 2000 years ago dwelled probably somewhere around Belarus and also received Slavic language in maybe even earlier process. In 5th or 6th century they moved towards Poland, Czechoslovakia...

Possible theory, but what you need to prove it, is to show that R1a of Sorbs is some different R1a (of Sarmatian origin) than eastern european R1a. As I know there was only one testing on Sorbs which shows that 64% figure of R1a, but also 20% of I haplogroup.

 

[Shetop]

Possible theory, but what you need to prove it, is to show that R1a of Sorbs is some different R1a (of Sarmatian origin) than eastern european R1a. As I know there was only one testing on Sorbs which shows that 64% figure of R1a, but also 20% of I haplogroup.

At this moment it is maybe impossible to prove it.

But if we know this - Krakow also has 64% for R1a. I am not aware of any other regions in Europe with that high R1a. These two regions are somehow special and I think that is because Sarmatians significantly contributed their DNA in them.

 

[Ewgeni Martschew]

Hi folks(from Serbia and Croatia),

has been fun watching your consructive efforts trying to relate I2a to historically known ethnicities.

Summary:
1. An ethnic group located 4 -6 century AD north of the Black Sea;
2. May have been (part of) the Huns of Atilla;
3. Has relocated after 475 AD to Ukraine, northern Romania, Panonia, Belorus, Poland.
4. Had a lot to do with both Visi- and Austro-Goths.

 

[Ewgeni Martschew]

Folks,

I was not done yet.
...
6. Spoke church-slavonic;
7. Had to to with Slavs in Ukraine, Romania, Panonia, and the Balkans.

And for the Croats: had brought the Glagolitza.

Who could have been that?

Regards

 

[Neander]

I think I2a2 are Maurovlachs

They were accumulated in the west Croatia, exactly in the place where we can find hotspot of I2a2

Vlachs came from Moldavia-Romania where is another hotspot of I2a2.

Both were Vlachs.

Vlachs came together with Slavs.

 

[Shetop]

I think I2a2 are Maurovlachs

They were accumulated in the west Croatia, exactly in the place where we can find hotspot of I2a2

Vlachs came from Moldavia-Romania where is another hotspot of I2a2.

Both were Vlachs.

Vlachs came together with Slavs.

Then I would have to ask you how did historians describe these people before they came to Balkans? Getae, Dacians or something else?

Btw, I disagree with your opinion.

 

[Gusar]

If Shetops theory is correct then I think we would have to exclude a Sarmatian (Serboi) origin theory for Serbs since I don't think it would at all be possible for a smaller populace of R1a dominant people to dominate over a larger populace I2a2 dominant people.

 

[Shetop]

This may be interesting - river Neretva in Northwest Ukraine (tributary of the Western Bug): http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Неретва_(притока_Західного_Бугу).

For those who don't know, Neretva is also name of the largest river in Herzegovina.

Btw, there are a lot of clues which are saying that Western Bug was a western boundary to the areas where I2a2 Dinaric people dwelled for centuries (before 5th century).

 

[Haganus]

But I suppose that the Dinaric race had an origin in the Balkan and
maybe in Turkey. The actual Yugo-Slavians are a mixture of
invading Slavic tribes and ancient Illyric tribes.

 

[iapodos]

But I suppose that the Dinaric race had an origin in the Balkan and
maybe in Turkey. The actual Yugo-Slavians are a mixture of
invading Slavic tribes and ancient Illyric tribes.

Dinaric race is one thing and haplogroup I2a2 Dinaric is other thing.
I2a2 Dinaric, especially its southern part, is quite young (2500 years old) subclade to be considered as autochtonuous on Balkan. Its high presence in Dinaric Alps could be result of high natality rate of newcomers.
Illyrians are much more conected with haplogroup E1b than I2a2.
According to haplotypes I saw, there is strong and obvious connection between Carphatian and Dinaric region.
So Yugoslavs could be considered as mixture between Slavs and old population (Illyrians, Thracians, Celts, Greeks and Latins) but only if we have on mind that majority of arriving Slavs belong to I2a2 haplogroup which is known as Dinaric only because its high presence in Dinaric Alps, and not as a place of its origin.
About 40% of Yugoslavs belong to I2a2 haplogroup.

 

[Gusar]

This may be interesting - river Neretva in Northwest Ukraine (tributary of the Western Bug): ...

For those who don't know, Neretva is also name of the largest river in Herzegovina.

Btw, there are a lot of clues which are saying that Western Bug was a western boundary to the areas where I2a2 Dinaric people dwelled for centuries (before 5th century).

I have been told there are many Serbian related toponyms in Ukraine. I'd imagine that to some extent these are related to the territories of Slav Serbia and New Serbia established in present day Ukraine during the 18th century. Id also imagine this river name would predate those territories though.

 

[YLLIRJANIngaYLLIRIA]

Only about 30% of Croats, 45% of Bosniaks, and 20% of Serbs belong to the haplogroup I which was the dominant (NOT the only one, but the dominant) Illyrian Y Chromosone.

The rest are foreign to the balkans, mostly slavic which belong to haplogroup R1a (which is found in most slavic countries like Russian and Poland)

Bosnians are the ones who posses the most indegenous Y DNA in the balkans (besides the people who were already indegenous like Albanians and Romanians) because about half of Bosnia is slavicized Illyrian Albanians.


Like the Serb said in a post a few above mine, the main Illyrian haplogroups were I2a2 and E1b which are 2 of the main 3 Albanian haplogroups, which proves it all.

 

[iapodos]

Only about 30% of Croats, 45% of Bosniaks, and 20% of Serbs belong to the haplogroup I which was the dominant (NOT the only one, but the dominant) Illyrian Y Chromosone.

The rest are foreign to the balkans, mostly slavic which belong to haplogroup R1a (which is found in most slavic countries like Russian and Poland)

Bosnians are the ones who posses the most indegenous Y DNA in the balkans (besides the people who were already indegenous like Albanians and Romanians) because about half of Bosnia is slavicized Illyrian Albanians.


Like the Serb said in a post a few above mine, the main Illyrian haplogroups were I2a2 and E1b which are 2 of the main 3 Albanian haplogroups, which proves it all.

It would be nice if it would be true. I suggest you to visit few profesional forum groups specialized for I haplogroup:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=results

When you read what profesionals have been working there for all this years, it will be clear to you that you lived in a fairytale.

Low freqency of I2a2 in Albanians is what make them genetically so different of South Slavs.

 

[Zenati]

Dig deeper

Hi to all of you folks,

First, let me congratulate you on the very interesting topic that you have developed.

In my humble opinion you have asked very interesting questions and proposed original and quite exciting answers.

However, there are some problems with your basic assumptions about both Sarmatians and Slavs, and their connection to the Balkanic populations.

First problem: you seem to think that the Sarmatians must have had a kind of modal Y haplotype, as it is the case for the R1a in the present day Slavic populations.

Second problem: you seem to imply that the fact that the majority of the present day Balkanic populations do consider themselves as being of the Slavic ancestry must be confirmed somehow on the genetic level.

About the first problem: after the end of the Indo-Iranian Scythian age, the Eurasian steppes have been ruled and inhabited by nomad confederations, which have been formed by different tribes of very diverse ethnic origins. It is in fact very well described by the roman authors when it comes to the Huns of Attila, who have been presented as a horde consisting of tribes of a very different ethnic background (Germanic, Alan, Ugric, Uralic, Turkic, Mongolic) unable to communicate in a single language, but named Huns after their ruling elite. The same was true of the Avar's horde, Genghis khan's horde and so on. The same was probably true about Sarmatians: they were not a single and unified ethnic group, but a tribal confederation of people of very different ethnic origins united under a single dominant clan: the real Sarmates. They might have had several different Y haplotypes, including the ones that you argue about.

About the second problem: Slavic migration from the current Pripyat region in the VI century A.D. was a migration of settlers intended on occupying the lands of the Roman and Byzantine ravaged by the centuries of wars, but not completely deserted by the indigenous population. This migration was in fact rather well accepted by the Byzantine authorities which needed the Slavic newcomers for the protection of the borders against the steppes nomads. The Slavs did not replace the indigenous population, they simply superseded it and in majority of the cases converted it culturally.

So it is useless to look for a specific "Sarmatian" haplotype, because it is quite possible that such haplotype has in fact never existed outside of a tiny elite in a huge nomadic confederation which included everything and anything that this elite was able to subdue.

And it is not surprising at all that R1a haplotype is not a completely dominant one in the Balkans, after all this region has had already a population before the coming of the Slavs, a population which has been converted to Slavic culture after many centuries of cohabitation with the Slavic settlers. This is the origin of the I1a haplotype: romanized Illyrians, Thracians and Dacians are the ancestors of these Vlakhs with whom the Slavs intermixed.

BTW, for me Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks are all the same people, produced by the interbreeding of the Vlakhs (all indigenous populationns of the former Byzantine border-lands) and Slavs. If it was not for religious divisions and the cultural shifts that these divisions triggered, there would be a single nation in the Balkans by now. So blame it all on the popes, mullahs and catholic priests and quit arguing about who of you Balkanic guys is the "purest" Slav... :grin:

 

[Regulus]

Interesting and well-written.

I would note that the movement of Slavs from the Pripet Marshes at around that time seems to me to be a very likely scenario. I have mentioned before about the Balkan area suffering depopulation with the Romano-Gothic struggles, Huns, and later with the Avars, but do agree very much that many Balkan regions probably still had strong populations.

I had read once that many of these Balkan communities mounted successful militia-type defenses against Huns and Avars. The source (can't recall its name) also held that Constantinople gave the people a hard time for doing so. Apparently this conflicted with their policy of buying off the invaders. Maybe someone can jump in here with more details.

The picture of the southward-moving Slavs establishing their language and culture on these populations, leaving Albanian as the only holdout, could very well be accurate in my opinion. Prior to joining this forum and seeing the DNA maps which abound here, I had thought that Slav R1A would have been found not exclusively but in higher percentages in the Balkans. Yet another reason why I am glad that I joined.

 

[iapodos]

First of all, there is no a single proof that I2a2Dinaric were in Illyricum during Roman times. If it would be so, there should be some I2a2 Dinaric haplotypes in France, Britain, Iberia, and not to mention neighboring Italy where I2a2 Dinaric is practicaly absent.
The region of I2a2 Dinaric today is almost exact region which were inhabited by Slavs in 6th and 7th century during their greatest expansion, and if you want to recognize Slav in today populations I2a2Dinaric is most secure marker for that. If you ask yourself, why is I2a2 Dinaric absent in Italy, the only answer could be: Slavic tribes never entered Italy. If you ask yourself why is I2a2 presented in Greece, even in Peloponesus, the answer would be: Slavic tribes occupied and setlled in Greek inland in 6th century.
There is no any connection with Illyrians and I2a2Dinaric. On the other hand R1a could exist on Balkan in some haplotypes before arriving of Slavs.
It is enough only to compare following maps and everything would be clear.

 

[Shetop]

However, there are some problems with your basic assumptions about both Sarmatians and Slavs, and their connection to the Balkanic populations.

First problem: you seem to think that the Sarmatians must have had a kind of modal Y haplotype, as it is the case for the R1a in the present day Slavic populations.

Second problem: you seem to imply that the fact that the majority of the present day Balkanic populations do consider themselves as being of the Slavic ancestry must be confirmed somehow on the genetic level.

Thanks for the nice words.

I admit I had mistakes at the beginning. It was common to think Slavs were predominantly R1a so I tried to make story which would explain arrival of Croats and Serbs. One of mistakes for example was relating Serbian and Croatian migrations to the Hunnic period, and now I believe Avars played much bigger role in Slavic migrations as a whole, but especially for Croats and Serbs.

But the "Second problem" as you described it, is the premise I'm still holding to. As fellow forum member iapodos explained there is no reason to assume I2a2a-Dinaric was in the Balkans prior to Slavic migrations. You have a nice subtitle for your post "Dig deeper". The deepest clue I had, before I had known much about haplogroups is that majority of the people in Western Balkans did arrive in the Early middle ages. Maybe we do not know this or that, maybe I'm an amateur in some of these fields, but on the other side living in the Balkans, great interest in history of the neighboring people, visiting different parts of the region made people like iapodos and me believe that connection between I2a2a-Dinaric and the Slavic arrival is inevitable. Some researchers from the West are beginning to accept this, and I also have to say the whole thing is not my idea.

To all the arguments already written I will add the language issue.
Croatian and Serbian languages are clearly Slavic, and their roots do not come from the areas with significant R1a frequencies, but from Dalmatia and Herzegovina, exactly those areas with the highest I2a2a-Dinaric. This match between language and Y-DNA is very clear and to use the words of "how yes no" it can't be a coincidence.

Where are Sarmatians in all this. Well since I understood that history of I2a2a-Dinaric is less related to them I did neglect them a bit. I agree with your assumption of Sarmatian tribal confederations with people of different origin. The main question is how many of them did move from Russian plains towards west? In both of scenarios, the one with high number of Sarmatians entering Europe and the other scenario with not that significant Sarmatian migration, R1a seem to be important part of their Y-DNA. I'm not saying that modal R1a haplotype defines them, but for me it would not be strange that Sarmatians were predominantly R1a.

When talking about R1a, Klyosov did some interesting work:
http://r1a.org/3.htm
He is not much appreciated by some people for his stories about R1b, but when it comes to making some structure inside R1a haplogroup I see no one else close to his results.