New data from Montenegro and Serbia

[Shetop]

For those interested some data from this study is available in supporting information:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...21235/suppinfo

[iapodos]

Finally, study from Serbia and Montenegro.
It shows expected percents for Serbia, but I must admit that I am quite surprised for the results from Montenegro and high percent of E1b. On the other side it is understandable, because of Montenegro bordering with E1b peak regions: Kosovo and northern Albania.
So, according to this study, difference between Serbia and Montenegro is ratio I2a:E1b.
In Serbia 2:1
In Montenegro 1:1.
Also interesting question would be, who are I1 people in Serbia and Montenegro.
There is, for example 7,82% of I1 , and only 4,5% of R1b in Serbia, making the I1 on the fourth place haplogroup in Serbia after I2a,E1b,R1a.

[Shetop]

Also interesting question would be, who are I1 people in Serbia and Montenegro.

Germanic tribes which invaded Italy conquered Dalmatia also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odoacer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostrogothic_kingdom

The other reason for I1 frequency might be movements of Goths in earlier centuries. They were close or passing by Western Ukraine inhabited by I2a2 Din. So they could have mixed there already, and later came to Balkans together.

PS: When calculating percentages pay attention to first column. It shows number of the same haplotypes, so I1 frequency found by this study in Serbia is actually 7,82%.

[iapodos]

Yes, I've noticed later first column.
And for I1 and Goths, that was also may idea.
But,the other solution could be Normans from south Italy.
Or the Saxon miners in medievial times.

[Imperium Romanorum]

Finally,I2a hawe higher percents for Serbia!

[Yorkie]

Germanic tribes which invaded Italy conquered Dalmatia also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odoacer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostrogothic_kingdom

The other reason for I1 frequency might be movements of Goths in earlier centuries. They were close or passing by Western Ukraine inhabited by I2a2 Din. So they could have mixed there already, and later came to Balkans together.

PS: When calculating percentages pay attention to first column. It shows number of the same haplotypes, so I1 frequency found by this study in Serbia is actually 7,82%.

Good, cogent point about the Goths and I1. I tend to agree with you here, and can't really think of a better source for the haplogroup in this region.

[StillSRB]

I see the test sized used was finally a bit bigger, however its unfortunate that they want you to purchase the article. Also if you have any other links to Balkan y-haplogroups research please post the links here. I've read the one by Pericic, but that was more focused on Croatia

[StillSRB]

Interesting, I was expecting a higher percentage of I2a in Montenegro; also its unfortunate that it doesn't say from what parts of Serbia were the participants. I would like to see the difference between various parts of Serbia, for example between western and eastern Serbia. Here are a couple of other studies I've come across, if anyone knows about any other studies related to the region please post them.
Bosnia
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1529-8817.2005.00190.x/pdf
Balkans
mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/22/10/1964.full.pdf+html
Croatia
cmj.hr/2005/46/4/16100752.pdf
nature.com/ejhg/journal/v11/n7/pdf/5200992a.pdf

[StillSRB]

I took out the http and www because it wouldn't allow me to post urls yet, but I'm sure you can figure it out

[Bogdan]

That is very strange about montenegro considering that I2a is the hg of the slavs who live in the dinaric alps liek for example its at 60% or so in herzegovina and southern croatia... and montenegro lays along that same chain of mountains...

But anyway i cant see this article as it looks like you ahve to buy it which im not sure where you can do that either but would anyone mind posting the exact numbers for all the other haplogroups found here??

[iapodos]

That is very strange about montenegro considering that I2a is the hg of the slavs who live in the dinaric alps liek for example its at 60% or so in herzegovina and southern croatia... and montenegro lays along that same chain of mountains...

But anyway i cant see this article as it looks like you ahve to buy it which im not sure where you can do that either but would anyone mind posting the exact numbers for all the other haplogroups found here??

It is not strange for Montenegro, especially its eastern part bordering with Albania to have lower percent of I2a. It is well known fact that I2a haplogroup fall dramaticaly in Kosovo Albanians and Northern Albania too. I believe that E1b1 dominating in area of Zeta-Sandzak dialect. There are already some Vasojević clan members which tested as E1b1. On the other side, part of Montenegro known as Old Herzegovina is predominantly I2a. It is obvious on following maps:

[Bogdan]

Ethnic ALBANIANS have high E values, ethnic montengrins are not ethnic albanians. On those mentioned parts the south close to albania are predimontaely albanian areas eg ulcinj. where these ethnic montenegrins from these areas tested or just people who live there albos included??

[iapodos]

Ethnic ALBANIANS have high E values, ethnic montengrins are not ethnic albanians. On those mentioned parts the south close to albania are predimontaely albanian areas eg ulcinj. where these ethnic montenegrins from these areas tested or just people who live there albos included??

Ethnic Montenegrins is very discutable term. Just few years ago they were practicaly Serbs. On the either side some parts of Montenegrin society show great resemblance with Albanians. Some of the Montenegrin clans have legends about common ancestors with some Albanian clans. Vasojevic clan I already mentioned.
The study above has been done probably in one city, Podgorica I suppose. Authors states they selected samples considering their regional origins for at least two generations. Honestly I doubt that high percent of E1b1 haplogroup in Montenegro sample is result of tested Albanians in Montenegro.

[Garrick]

Many Montenegrin tribes were linked with Albanian (line south-west, north-west) and the real situation is that in today's Montenegro I2a2 and E1b1 are in the proportion 1:1.

But one should not interfere a nation that is a political entity with origin.

Some Russian sources call E1b1 this haplogroup: Иллирийцы, хамитский род (Illyrians, Hamitic race).

Although the Romanians, Serbs and Bosnians are mostly I haplogroup, some of them have haplogroup E1b1 and this only showing the connection of the old Balkan population.


For example in Slovenia and Croatia, this haplogroup is a little represented.

[Bogdan]

@Montenegrin is not a disputable term its just that some Montenegrins identify as Montenegrins while others as Serbs. Members of the same family can have different identifcations two brothers even. No ETHNIC Montenegrin identifies as an albanian. To explain Montenegrins are Serbs but we are not exactly the same... there are some i guess you could call cultural differences and the such. But mixing with albanians neevr occured ona large scale they are probably the biggest enemies up until 1913 or so we had been in on and off periods of warfare with them for over half a millenia... same as with the turks. The only semblence with albanian society is what they copied from montenegro notably the clan system. Prior to the turks arriving albos were like nomads they had nothing as far as infrastructure goes. This can also be seen by their last names. Last names in albania range from arabic/turk, to slavic. Whereas almost all serbian and montenegrin and any of the other south slavs last names are south slavic and ending in ic.

@ Garrick
I doubt that haplogroup e is little represented in croatia or slovenia its more than likely they twisted that. In those countries it should be between 10-15% as looking at that area in europe e is at that % for example austrians, slovaks, hungarians, non north germans, north italians etc... are all at around 10% for hg E. doesnt make sense that croats and slovenes lack it that much as all of their neighbors have it. But yes they have it less than serbs or montenegrins do although i do think in the latter it is overly excessive

[StillSRB]

@Montenegrin is not a disputable term its just that some Montenegrins identify as Montenegrins while others as Serbs. Members of the same family can have different identifcations two brothers even. No ETHNIC Montenegrin identifies as an albanian. To explain Montenegrins are Serbs but we are not exactly the same... there are some i guess you could call cultural differences and the such. But mixing with albanians neevr occured ona large scale they are probably the biggest enemies up until 1913 or so we had been in on and off periods of warfare with them for over half a millenia... same as with the turks. The only semblence with albanian society is what they copied from montenegro notably the clan system. Prior to the turks arriving albos were like nomads they had nothing as far as infrastructure goes. This can also be seen by their last names. Last names in albania range from arabic/turk, to slavic. Whereas almost all serbian and montenegrin and any of the other south slavs last names are south slavic and ending in ic.

@ Garrick
I doubt that haplogroup e is little represented in croatia or slovenia its more than likely they twisted that. In those countries it should be between 10-15% as looking at that area in europe e is at that % for example austrians, slovaks, hungarians, non north germans, north italians etc... are all at around 10% for hg E. doesnt make sense that croats and slovenes lack it that much as all of their neighbors have it. But yes they have it less than serbs or montenegrins do although i do think in the latter it is overly excessive

I think you are mixing up modern ethnic groups with very old y-haplogroups, which is never a good idea. In the study about 27% of Montenegrins belong to the E haplogroup, the same haplogroup which reaches its peak in Europe in Kosovar Albanians. This doesn't mean the two mixed in the last 100 years or even last few hundred years. What it does mean is that when the two different haplogroups did first meet there was mixing and assimilation mostly of the E haplogroup in Serbia and even more so in Montenegro. This doesn't make anyone who belongs to the E haplogroup any less of a Serb or Montenegrin.

[how yes no 2]

I think you are mixing up modern ethnic groups with very old y-haplogroups, which is never a good idea. In the study about 27% of Montenegrins belong to the E haplogroup, the same haplogroup which reaches its peak in Europe in Kosovar Albanians. This doesn't mean the two mixed in the last 100 years or even last few hundred years. What it does mean is that when the two different haplogroups did first meet there was mixing and assimilation mostly of the E haplogroup in Serbia and even more so in Montenegro. This doesn't make anyone who belongs to the E haplogroup any less of a Serb or Montenegrin.

exactly, belonging to nation is about cultural identity...
Serbs of today have significant E-V13 component, however proto-Serbs who arrived to balkans were likely I2a2+ R1a

in any case, Y DNA haplogroups are about only very small part of our genes, about part that is passed from father to son, from him to his son and so on... so a person who had single ancestor who was E-V13 1000 years ago, might have had in mean time zillion other male ancestors (e.g. his grandfather on mother's side, father of his grandfather on mother's side... father of his grandmother on father's side...) who were I2a2... he inherits genes from all of them equally as from his E-V13 ancestor, but in this classification into haplogroups their contribution is not visible......

point is that haplogroups tell you almost nothing about genetic makeup of an individual, but they make some sense as an indicator of historical movements of tribes...

[Garrick]

how yes and no

Although there are sources that I2a2 and R1a are treated separately, we must respect the people who watch them together as Slavic.

On the DNA forum Heindale gives very strong arguments for I2a2 Dinaric Clade as Slavic and one can hard to argue differently.

However, one can build theories which can fuse different things, including that belonging to haplogroups I2a2 was originally distinguished from R1a.

[how yes no 2]

how yes and no

Although there are sources that I2a2 and R1a are treated separately, we must respect the people who watch them together as Slavic.

On the DNA forum Heindale gives very strong arguments for I2a2 Dinaric Clade as Slavic and one can hard to argue differently.

However, one can build theories which can fuse different things, including that belonging to haplogroups I2a2 was originally distinguished from R1a.

good point, the joint or separate arrival of R1a and I2a2 is still not clear....
what sources do you talk about? I know that some archeologist in Serbia did make map with separate archeological finds of Serbs, of Croats, and of Slavs...but I do not know how reliable data of that guy is...

[StillSRB]

I also think I2a2 has to be a 'Slavic' marker which came to the Balkans around the 7th century. How else can you explain Croat-Herzegovinians having up to 70% I2a2 and speaking Croatian, a slavic language. There is no way such a large majority would accept the language of an oncoming minority of R1a which is only around 12-15% in that region. Especially in a region with a topography such a Herzegovina, a very karst and mountainous area. The spread and acceptance of a new language would almost be impossible, or if did happen some traces of an ancient Illyrian language would have stayed at least in the most isolated villages. Also I2a2 falls very well in the region of old Serbian and Croatian Kingdoms. Its concentration is almost exactly in the location of medieval Principalities of: Travunia, Zachlumia, Pagania, Dalmatia, Raska, Bosnia, and Doclea. Making the Illyrian origin on the marker unlikely.

[how yes no 2]

I also think I2a2 has to be a 'Slavic' marker which came to the Balkans around the 7th century. How else can you explain Croat-Herzegovinians having up to 70% I2a2 and speaking Croatian, a slavic language. There is no way such a large majority would accept the language of an oncoming minority of R1a which is only around 12-15% in that region. Especially in a region with a topography such a Herzegovina, a very karst and mountainous area. The spread and acceptance of a new language would almost be impossible, or if did happen some traces of an ancient Illyrian language would have stayed at least in the most isolated villages.

what if previous inhabitant did already speak similar languages?

according to Strabo, in his time (1st century AD) most of Illyria (in fact Bosnia, Hercegovina and Croatia) is not settled anymore by Illyrians, but by Pannonians, while Illyrians lived in Albania and Montenegro.

see this post for explanation
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showpos...2&postcount=72

I argue that Pannonians were pre-Slavic folk, as the subtribe of theirs living in area of Plitvice lakes was called Oseriates... where as Ozero = lake in Russian and Ukrainian languages and similar in all Slavic languages, while in all non Slavic languages of Europe words for lake are completely different...

see post
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showpos...2&postcount=35

Also I2a2 falls very well in the region of old Serbian and Croatian Kingdoms. Its concentration is almost exactly in the location of medieval Principalities of: Travunia, Zachlumia, Pagania, Dalmatia, Raska, Bosnia, and Doclea. Making the Illyrian origin on the marker unlikely.

you make lot of assumptions in that list...
exact geographical spread is not really known...

[StillSRB]

you make lot of assumptions in that list...
exact geographical spread is not really known...

I assume its somewhere around here
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WestBalkans800.png
Also are you trying to explain the 70% of I2a2 in Herzegovina by Oseriates?
I'm sure if more research was done in the area I2a2 would come up in large numbers in many other place around the original home land of Serbs/Croats in the Balkans. Most Serbs living in Serbia proper today can trace their linage back to the areas of Herzegovina, Montenegro, Bosnia, or Raska. Linguistically the most correct form of Serbian and Croatian is spoken in the areas of high I2a2 concentration and from where the standardization of both language was founded upon. It would be interesting if I could show the linguistic differences that existed in the Western Balkans only a hundred years back. They would clearly outline the origin of Serbs/Croats in the Balkans with relation to other Slavs, but unfortunately with the standardization of the language these linguistic gaps have been bridged.

[how yes no 2]

I assume its somewhere around here

when I said you assume, I was talking about exact spread of I2a2 as it is not known...
e.g. you talk about Doclea, and not about Serbia, but Serbia has much more I2a2 than Doclea... also there is no data for Dalmatia except for area of Narentania / Pagania... no data at all for the place where Croats initially settled ( http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...tity_1523.html ) ... sampling was not done there..it was done in Dubrovnik, Zagreb, Osijek, Delnice, Zabok, Pazin, on Krk, Hvar, Brac and Korcula in Croatia... now I2a2 is in Croatia over 55% in islands of Hvar, Brac and Korcula

all the 3 islands in south Croatia (Hvar, Korcula , Brac) with over 55% I2a2 were part of Pagania as your map shows as well, while Dubrovnik is even more south Zachlumia on your map (btw, samples from Herzegovina Croats were also mostly from Zachlumia and Pagania)...... now people from Pagania (also called Narentania) are in early history recorded as unbaptized Serbs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagania

I2a2 is also relatively high in Osijek (up to 30%) and in Dubrovnik, and in Zagreb (normal due to big imigration), but is scarce in Istra, Krk, Zagorje...

now what Croats did is came up with 42% by taking around half samples from 3 scarcely populated islands in south Croatia (where all together like 40 thousand people live and where I2a2 is over 55%) together with half of samples from the rest of Croatia (where more than 4 milion people live)...
and they also made diagrams where they interpolated data so that I2a2 looks high in Dalmatia due to Pagania and looks high in Slavonia due to Osijek and Zagreb (while small town just bit north of Zagreb has almost no I2a2 at all) .... but truth is there is no data at all for area that is in your map Dalmatia and is supposed settlement area of Croats... before supposed settlement of Croats there lived Illyrian/Pannonian/Celtic (different sources use different attribute) tribe Dalmatae ...

Also are you trying to explain the 70% of I2a2 in Herzegovina by Oseriates?

No, with Ardiaei, Sardeates, Narentanes... note that Scordisci, Sardeates ... could easiy been proto-Serb related tribal names and I2a2 carriers .... later the (perhaps the same) inhabitants of the area are called Narentanes (due to river Neretva around which they live) and also Pagani because they are unbaptized /pagan Serbs..

Oseriates are just example that previous inhabitants might have spoken Slavic-alike language... and that your argument might not hold..

btw. here are some maps (classification is bad though) from wikipedia

prior to Roman conquest:



year 6 AD (time when Strabo sees there only Pannoni and no Illyrians):




according to Strabo

The Breuci, Andizetii, Ditiones, Peirustæ, Mazæi, Daisitiatæ, whose chief was Baton, and other small obscure communities, which extend to Dalmatia, and almost to the Ardiæi to the south, are Pannonians.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...r=5&highlight=

I'm sure if more research was done in the area I2a2 would come up in large numbers in many other place around the original home land of Serbs/Croats in the Balkans.

perhaps for Serbs... I am not so sure about Croats...

Most Serbs living in Serbia proper today can trace their linage back to the areas of Herzegovina, Montenegro, Bosnia, or Raska.

ok, but I2a2 is 38.5% % in Serbia and 29.2% in Montenegro...so, how can immigration from Montenegro increase I2a2 in Serbia.. it can only lower it..

btw. Doclea is more east part of Montenegro where I2a2 is likely to be less... while west part is related to Herzegovina

Linguistically the most correct form of Serbian and Croatian is spoken in the areas of high I2a2 concentration and from where the standardization of both language was founded upon.

and what are those areas? Serbia and Croatian part of Hercegovina?

It would be interesting if I could show the linguistic differences that existed in the Western Balkans only a hundred years back. They would clearly outline the origin of Serbs/Croats in the Balkans with relation to other Slavs, but unfortunately with the standardization of the language these linguistic gaps have been bridged.

ok, here's the map... let's hear your explanation (since it is easy)

first, stokavian dialects of serbo-croatian:


than 3 different dialects (or languages) of Croatian


if you look at chakavian areas (blue on map), I2a2 is like 55% on south most and like 10% on north most... in kaikavian area is almost no I2a2 except in Zagreb as it is capital and had strong imigration from I2a2 reach areas......

[StillSRB]

I mostly agree with everything you say.
I view Croats living in Herzegovina and Dalmatia to be of same origin as Serbs in those areas that are just slightly more eastern. This can be seen in your example of Pagania and how the local population could have potential switch between the two peoples. As for Istra and Zagorje everyone is aware of the different origin of that part of the Croatian population; and also Slavonia before the settlement of Bosnians (Croats) in that area.

you talk about Doclea, and not about Serbia, but Serbia has much more I2a2 than Doclea

I mentioned Raska which was as far as the Serbs went east, therefor there was no Serbia yet, but Raska can be considered modern day Serbia if you wish. Doclea is of course on the eastern edge of the old Serb/Croat kingdoms, and this is why it has less I2a2. The same being northern Dalmatia close to Istra where I2a2 also drops off, that being the western edge of the 7th century kingdoms.

Oseriates are just example that previous inhabitants might have spoken Slavic-alike language

This is interesting, I never gave it much thought. I would need more examples and proof of this being possible to be persuaded.

ok, but I2a2 is 38.5% % in Serbia and 29.2% in Montenegro...so, how can immigration from Montenegro increase I2a2 in Serbia.. it can only lower it..btw. Doclea is more east part of Montenegro where I2a2 is likely to be less... while west part is related to Herzegovina

It doesn't but maybe it does explain the high number of E-v13 in Serbia when compared to other countries. Most of modern day central Serbia and Vovjodina was settled by people from the areas previously mentioned. Where the Serbs originate from in the Balkans.

ok, here's the map... let's hear your explanation (since it is easy)

These maps are of modern day dialects, because of the prior mentioned emigration from old kingdoms into various areas across former Yugoslavia the Shtokavian dialect takes up a larger area then it once did. Croatians standardized their language based on Dubrovnik, even though most of the them spoke with different dialects and a different grammar. The same thing happened in Serbia especially with grammar and pronunciation.
Anyway I consider I2a2 to be the main marker of the first Serbs and Croats to settle the Balkans.

[iapodos]

Anyway I consider I2a2 to be the main marker of the first Serbs and Croats to settle the Balkans.

I also thought so, but not anymore. I2a2 Dinaric South is definetely Serbian marker on Balkan. I believe that Croats were predominantly R1a.