Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum

View Poll Results: How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?

Voters
228. You may not vote on this poll
  • Paleolithic continuity

    100 43.86%
  • The Early Indo-Europeans

    9 3.95%
  • Sea Peoples

    3 1.32%
  • The Sarmatians

    6 2.63%
  • The Slavs

    90 39.47%
  • Other (please tell us your theory)

    20 8.77%
Page 34 of 70 FirstFirst ... 24323334353644 ... LastLast
Results 826 to 850 of 1750

Thread: How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?

  1. #826
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-12-14
    Posts
    45


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Goths were also mostly occupied with agriculture. And they grew millet as well:
    "Stable Carbon and Nitrogen Isotope Analysis of Human Diet Change in Prehistoric and Historic Poland":
    https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap:10:0::NO...su1330969837
    People of the Wielbark culture had a lot of millet in their diet according to this study
    Most peoples in Europe at that period were occupied with agriculture, they were not hunter-gatherers, for God's sake... the real question is: to what extent were they occupied with agriculture? Read Germania, then read sources about Slavs.
    It is not about eating "industrialized junk food packed with hormons", but about eating things in proper amounts and proportions (balanced diet).
    Moreover, the data for each country which you posted does not account for ethnic diversity and ethnic differences in height.
    In Poland, Baltic countries and western part of the USSR before WW2 about 10% (in some regions more) of the population were ethnic Jews.
    And Jews were on average much shorter than Non-Jews - even Jewish sources (written by Jewish scholars) confirm this, such as this book:
    From his writings you can clearly see he examined native inhabitants of areas that were examined- otherwise those researches would make no sense.
    Even if Jews in Poland were examined- they for sure could lower average for max 1cm. Those just sound like claims that Finns are not tallest because they have Samis... and Samis are like only 10.000, even if they all were 150cm they could not move Finn average even for 0.1cm...

    I am still waiting for explanation of how could I2a1b Din be spread with East Slavic migration (I2a1b Din in Ukraine is like 11 percent) and make such a huge conc in Dinaric mountains... as well as increasing R1a and decreasing I2a Din as we move towards northern plains... those things don't just happen by "pure accident".

  2. #827
    Elite member
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,428

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6a

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    1 members found this post helpful.
    From his writings you can clearly see he examined native inhabitants of areas that were examined- otherwise those researches would make no sense.
    Even if Jews in Poland were examined- they for sure could lower average for max 1cm.
    Jews were native inhabitants in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - they lived there for several centuries.

    every Byzantine historian says that ancestors of Croats and Serbs came from western ones.
    Croats and Serbs came from West Slavic lands, but they did not come to empty space. They came to lands inhabited by other Slavic tribes before.

    So Serbs and Croats mixed with other Slavic tribes, who had come from East Slavic lands. Especially Serbs appear to be a highly mixed group.

    I2a1b Din in Ukraine is like 11 percent)
    In Western and North-Western Ukraine it is over 22 percent. Ukraine is not genetically homogeneous.

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

    As for Slovene language - the reason why it is so similar to West Slavic, is because it was originally spoken as far north as the Danube:

    Green area = extent of Slovene-speaking populations in the Early Middle Ages (times of the Slavic Principality of Carantania):

    Hrvati = Croats (Slavic)
    Moravski Slovani = Moravians (Slavic)
    Bavarci = Bavarians
    Langobardi = Langobards
    Romani = Romans / Romance-speakers
    Obri = Avars



    By the way Slovenes are called "Alpine Slavs" - they also settled in the mountains which were largely unfavourable for agriculture.

  3. #828
    Elite member
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,428

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6a

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    One more thing from page 31:

    Quote Originally Posted by clintCG
    Germanic tribes migrated en-masse, taking all of tribe members with them, so what we got after they left were only small leftovers.
    Actually Jordanes wrote that it was "Gothic army with families" which migrated (under the leadership of Filimer).

    So only warriors and families of warriors. Not entire society.

    And we don't even know if those were all warriors - because "army" doesn't necessarily mean "all armed forces".

    Hannibal destroyed a Roman army at Cannaea but it was only one army, and Rome had more armies.

  4. #829
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-12-14
    Posts
    45


    Country: Yugoslavia



    In Western and North-Western Ukraine it is over 22 percent. Ukraine is not genetically homogeneous.
    They did not came from specifically those parts... so Ukraine has 11 percent. And even if whole Ukraine had 22 percent it still would not explain lack of R1a and great regional differences here.

    By the way Slovenes are called "Alpine Slavs" - they also settled in the mountains which were largely unfavourable for agriculture.
    I am talking about Slavs in general... and, it is not just about mountains. It is about type of ground. Dinaric mountains in this area are mostly karstic. There are mountain areas here which are at about 1400m of elevation and very steep but still farmable. Compare:
    Slovenia:



    Herzegovina:






    This is getting pointless... if you support Slavic theory, you need to give explanation of these regional genetic differences.

    Actually Jordanes wrote that it was "Gothic army with families" which migrated (under the leadership of Filimer).So only warriors and families of warriors. Not entire society.
    And we don't even know if those were all warriors - because "army" doesn't necessarily mean "all armed forces".
    Hannibal destroyed a Roman army at Cannaea but it was only one army, and Rome had more armies.
    If they headed only for conquest he would says "warriors". But it is clear that people migrated (besides that Jordanes has some errors like identifying Dacian tribes with Goths).
    When Goths crossed Danube they were Gothic people. In "Chronicles of Priest of Duklja" it is Gothic people that came from north. In "Historia Salonitana" it is also Gothic people that came from Poland.
    So are you trying to say that Goths were outbred even before they hit the Ukraine? That they were no more Germanic? That they incorporated various peoples into them? That is simply not true- as Tacitus says, Germanics have no tendencies towards large-scale mixing with other peoples. Good luck with that propaganda...

    BTW IMO Goths also lived in more fertile lands until they were pushed by Slavs and Avars.

    And I am not saying that Gothic theory is only possible one. I just think it is most possible while Paleolithic continuity is least possible.

    There is also smaller possibility that I2a1b originated in some of east-Germanic tribes that joined Slavic tribes who came to Balkan and eventually became Slavic.
    This is theory of Serbian DNA administrators of Serbian DNA project at poreklo.rs which is largest database on Yugoslavian DNA. Their theory says that I2a1b is Bastarnae in origin but eventually became Slavic.
    Last edited by clintCG; 07-03-15 at 19:26.

  5. #830
    Elite member
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,428

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6a

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    So are you trying to say that Goths were outbred even before they hit the Ukraine? That they were no more Germanic? That they incorporated various peoples into them?
    Well the Gothic kingdom was certainly not mono-ethnic.

    It was inhabited by various tribes, whether allies or subjects of Goths, or integral elements incorporated into the Gothic nation.

    That is simply not true- as Tacitus says, Germanics have no tendencies towards large-scale mixing with other peoples.
    As you admitted above, Tacitus has some errors.

    If Germanics have no tendencies towards mixing then why do you (and several other members on this forum) claim that every haplogroup is Germanic ???

    Some people claim: I1 Germanic, I2b Germanic, R1b Germanic, R1a Germanic, I2a-Din Germanic, N1c1 (some "Varangian" branch) Germanic. What else ??? And yet no mixing ???

    You - people who claim "Germanicness" of everything - already made Germanics a mongrel people by such claims, that they had every kind of haplogroup.

    Each of these haplogroups is older than the ethnogenesis of Germanic people, which took place no earlier than the Bronze Age. So they had to mix, if they ever really carried all of these haplogroups.

    Recent research on Langobard DNA also supports the mixing theory:

    "Lombards on the Move – An Integrative Study of the Migration Period Cemetery at Szólád, Hungary", November 2014:

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...e-0110793-g005

    Abstract:

    In 2005 to 2007 45 skeletons of adults and subadults were excavated at the Lombard period cemetery at Szólád (6th century A.D.), Hungary. Embedded into the well-recorded historical context, the article presents the results obtained by an integrative investigation including anthropological, molecular genetic and isotopic (δ15N, δ13C, 87Sr/86Sr) analyses. Skeletal stress markers as well as traces of interpersonal violence were found to occur frequently. The mitochondrial DNA profiles revealed a heterogeneous spectrum of lineages that belong to the haplogroups H, U, J, HV, T2, I, and K, which are common in present-day Europe and in the Near East, while N1a and N1b are today quite rare. Evidence of possible direct maternal kinship was identified in only three pairs of individuals. According to enamel strontium isotope ratios, at least 31% of the individuals died at a location other than their birthplace and/or had moved during childhood. Based on the peculiar 87Sr/86Sr ratio distribution between females, males, and subadults in comparison to local vegetation and soil samples, we propose a three-phase model of group movement. An initial patrilocal group with narrower male but wider female Sr isotope distribution settled at Szólád, whilst the majority of subadults represented in the cemetery yielded a distinct Sr isotope signature. Owing to the virtual absence of Szólád-born adults in the cemetery, we may conclude that the settlement was abandoned after approx. one generation. Population heterogeneity is furthermore supported by the carbon and nitrogen isotope data. They indicate that a group of high-ranking men had access to larger shares of animal-derived food whilst a few individuals consumed remarkable amounts of millet. The inferred dynamics of the burial community are in agreement with hypotheses of a highly mobile lifestyle during the Migration Period and a short-term occupation of Pannonia by Lombard settlers as conveyed by written sources.
    Unfortunately no Y-chromosomes could be examined - only mitochondrial DNA.

    And here some more details:

    http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post449309

    The paper is basically a confirmation of the historical record: the Lombards were a migratory group who spent some time in Pannonia before continuing onward and eventually reaching Italy. (...) The reproduced data of 28 individuals exhibited a high variability of mitochondrial haplotypes (78.6%). Twenty-two different lineages were identified. This composition includes a large number of hgs that commonly occur in present-day European populations. There are signs of a lot of violence:

    "Four skull fractures and eight traumata on the postcranial skeleton were identified in a total of eight adults and one juvenile individual (Table E in File S1). The skull injuries were exclusive to male remains and included three cases of sharp-force trauma (Ind. 4, 13, 27) as well as one case of a depressed fracture (Ind. 43). Three skull fractures bore traces of healing, whilst one had occurred around the time of death."

    It's also clear that they were a heavily militarized group, with a lot of wealth, as exhibited in the grave goods. (...) Although there seems to have been malnourishment among the children and some of the adults (lower status ones?), no attempt was made to access the fresh water fish in a near by lake. If their ultimate origin was around the Baltic Sea, doesn't that seem a little peculiar - Scandinavians who don't like fish? (...)
    This is their conclusion from all the data:

    The biological evidence suggests that the residents of Szólád were not a close reproductive community. This is in agreement with the notion of a partnership of convenience that resembled Germanic tribe formations with people of different cultural backgrounds maintaining regular contact with other contemporary gentes. Influence from several different European regions is supported archaeologically by the grave constructions that included ledge graves and graves with straight walls, some of which were surrounded by rectangular or circular ditches. The stylistic analysis of the grave goods, such as brooches and weaponry, revealed parallels to south-western and central Germany, Moravia and the middle Danube as well as to Italy. The latter also indicates the possible presence of members of the Roman population of Pannonia, who had settled the area prior to the Lombard period.
    So authors of this paper claim that Lombards were a mongrel group of several origins already before settling in Italy.

    After that they got even more mongrelized by mixing with Italians.

    Of course Langobards =/= Goths, but they were also Germanic-speakers (or at least a significant part of them).

    Quote Originally Posted by clintCG
    Their theory says that I2a1b is Bastarnae in origin but eventually became Slavic.
    That's good to know because - if true - then at least this confirms, that I2a1b is not Germanic.

    The Bastarnae (Peucini) were originally Celtic, and later became Germanized (started to speak a Germanic language).

  6. #831
    Elite member
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,428

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6a

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    And I am not saying that Gothic theory is only possible one.
    And I'm not saying that it is 100% impossible... I'm just tired of people who see "Germanicness" everywhere.

    But maybe you are right - in such case when and why did Goths stop speaking Germanic and start speaking Slavic ???

    For example in Crimea Gothic language is attested as late as the 16th century. But in the Balkans not.

    So in the Balkans they started speaking Slavic much earlier than they started speaking Tatar in Crimea:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Tatar_language

    Were Slavs and Goths good friends and allies against the Byzantine Empire, or did Slavs and Avars conquer Goths ???

  7. #832
    Elite member
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,428

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6a

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    if you support Slavic theory, you need to give explanation of these regional genetic differences.
    I don't need to explain anything. I already did (see previous posts).

    And there are similar - or even greater - differences between Germanic peoples. Norwegians are ca. 30/30/30 mix of I1/R1b/R1a.

    But almost all of Norwegian R1a is Z284 (unlike for example in case of German and Austrian R1a - which are totally different clades).

    English people are ca. 70% R1b on the other hand. Germans are 40-45% R1b. Swedes have a lot of I1 and N1c1, but not much of R1.

    Etc., etc.

    And now you claim that people who are over 50% I2a-Din are also Germanic. It adds even more confusion to the already huge mix. If you claim that people with so different genetics can all have common origin, why do you expect Slavs to all have identical genetics ???

    I have already seen attempts to reduce Slavic genes as much as possible.

    At first it was claimed that only R1a is originally Slavic. Then it was claimed that most of R1a is not even Slavic.

    Perhaps Slavic people don't exist. But Slavic languages have more speakers than Germanic and Romance among Europeans.

    Slavic language is not Esperanto - it is not invented, and real people were responsible for spreading it around Europe.

  8. #833
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-12-14
    Posts
    45


    Country: Yugoslavia



    I do not try to make "Germanicness" of everything. Of course Goths did mix with other peoples, but what are you trying to say is that they got mongrelized and mixed with other people before they even arrived to eastern Europe, which of course, is not true.
    That's good to know because - if true - then at least this confirms, that I2a1b is not Germanic.The Bastarnae (Peucini) were originally Celtic, and later became Germanized (started to speak a Germanic language).
    No. They were Germanics who later received Celtic influence.

    http://www.archaeology.ru/Download/L..._K_voprosu.pdf - E.V Lyahin- K voprosu o prarodine Bastarnov (About question of Bastarnae proto-homeland)

    Here I will translate main points from this study translated by Serbian DNA project administration:

    1. Tribal group of Bastarnae is formed at area between rivers Oder- Nisa and upper Vistula, area of today Silesia in Poland.

    2. Bastarnae belong to Jastorf archaeologic culture which is considered proto-Germanic.

    3. In period 5-4. century B.C Celts arrive to Czech area (attracted by lots of ore). Celts have developed society with already formed aristocracy and are carriers of La Tene culture.
    4. Neighboring proto-Germanic tribes in Silesia (ancestors of Bastarnae) receive intensive influences from their Celtic neighbors, society of Bastarnae becomes diferentiated by classes, receiving influences of developed La Tene culture. That culture of La Tene-ish Germanics in Silesia will separate in 4th century B.C as Gubin archaeological culture, that is, Jastorf Germanic with La Tene Celtic influences.

    5. Starting with 5th century B.C climate in northern and central Europe begins to change, cold periods increase and hunger threatens Jastorf culture, which is very numerous. Ancestors of Bastarnae in old homeland try with sacrificing animals, and then people. Practice of sacrificing people was soonly replaced by exile of young, capable warriors out of tribe.
    6. Area of Pridnestrovie (modern day Moldova?) in that period (3rd century B.C) represents empty land between Sarmatians which subdued Scythians on east and Celtic settlements in Panonia. In that so called "Getic desert" Bastarnae start to settle at half of 3rd century B.C. Sources from antiquity mention them 220. B.C

    7. Bastarnae mix with Sarmatians and other peoples in area of Moldova and western Ukraine.
    8. At around 180. B.C Bastarnae, on invitation of Macedonians cross Danube and come to Balkans to fight against Romans, as fully organised society with their own "principes" and "rex". In their conquests they are joined by Scordisci Celts.

    9. Bastarnae will then return again to Podniestrovie (Moldova), bringing with them Panonian-Balkan elements in culture which will together with local cultures and their own La Tene-ized Jastorf Culture will create Zarubnitsy culture which will be main culture of proto-Slavic homeland in next centuries.

    That is, in short, what Lyahin describes, and Serbian administrator adds this:

    10. Gothic invasion from north will break continuity of Zarubnitsy culture and on her place will appear new cultures, Chernyakhov before all

    11. Elements of Zarubnitsy culture reappear again in first authentic Slavic culture Prague-Korchak.

    12. Arabian writer-traveller Massudi in 9th century mentions Bastarnae as Slavic tribe near Serbs and others.

    13. Bastarnae and Germanic tribe similar to them Sciiri (Odoacer is half-Sciirian) are mentioned even during Migration period

    This might be the answer on why Tacitus specifically mention Bastarnae as ones who had mixed marriages (in this case with Sarmatians), while for other Germanics he explicitly says that they did not form such marriages. Maybe Bastarnae were descended from those expelled young warriors, that married girls from areas they came to. Sarmatian here has, I would say, geographical meaning ("from European Sarmatia") and I think girls they married were, in most cases, proto-Slavic or proto-Balto-Slavic.
    According to them, this can explain how did some Germanics bring their domination (in meaning of Y-DNA genetics) in some Slavic tribes with I2a Din, and they lost their language and partially lost culture, or in other words, they accepted language and partially accepted culture of R1a1 carriers. That is why we call our language "mother tongue" (Muttersprache, maternji jezik), because mothers are those who teach children language.

    Plus those interesting notices:


    "First, from eyes of genetics, area on which Isles, and then Disles separated from Dinaric matches more northern Germany and Poland than Balkans or eastern Europe. Except that continental forms of Isles are found on exactly that area. It would be logical that right there we find people that are M423, and not neither Disles, nor Isles nor Dinaric. Those people do not exist in public bases, but AFAIK Nordtvedt mentioned a few haplotypes that he has and that can be classified as M423*, and which are found exactly in Poland and northern Germany. If this assumption is correct then we should search for oldest branches of I2a1 Din right in area of eastern Germany and western Poland.

    Second, from eyes of archaeology, all archaeological cultures have their genesis, that is, it can be seen from which previous culture they were formed, as we see Russian archaeologists clearly find Zarubnitsy and other cultures connected to Bastarnae. Đorđe Janković, too, considered Zarubnitsy culture as oldest Slavic, claiming origin of Prague culture from it and connecting material culture of dalmatian Serbs with upper cultures.

    Third, from eyes of history, there is plentiful of antiquity sources which describe migrations of Bastarnae, and then Arabic source from 9th century which clearly mentions Bastarnae as one people among Serbs and Slavs.

    And last, linguistically, Serbo-Croatian shtokavian and language of Macedonian and Bulgar Slavs can be made as one common proto-language, which shows some characteristics different to all other Slavic languages, which shows one foreign (I2a1b) component in big sea of R1a1."





    In my opinion, I2a1b is of ancient Germanic origin, but question of how did it appear in modern-day Slavic-speaking populations and how so unusual different concentration regions of I2a1b and R1a1 are found in Yugoslavia are questions which are yet to be answered.

    If Bastarnae carried I2a1b then probably some other east-Germanic tribes also did, which has led me to conclusion of Gothic origin, and Gothic retreat from Avars and Slavs would also explain this concentration pattern. What has also led me to such conclusion was that concetration of I2a1b would be unsually high for a few young warriors expelled from Gubin-Jastorf culture... and as I already explained before conc and diversity patterns of I2a1 Din fit nice in Gothic migrations... but that may and may not be true...

    Who knows........
    Last edited by clintCG; 07-03-15 at 21:47.

  9. #834
    Elite member
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,428

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6a

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    9. Bastarnae will then return again to Podniestrovie (Moldova), bringing with them Panonian-Balkan elements in culture which will together with local cultures and their own La Tene-ized Jastorf Culture will create Zarubnitsy culture which will be main culture of proto-Slavic homeland in next centuries.
    I'm not familiar with this theory. I have read that the emergence of the Zarubintsy culture is associated with an eastward migration of people belonging to the Pomeranian culture into territory occupied by people of the Milograd culture, and the subsequent mixture between those cultures, which lasted for quite a long time (W. W. Siedow, Седов В. В., Славяние верхнево Поднепровья и Подвинья). The Zarubintsy culture is considered by some scholars Proto-Slavic as it seems to correspond with archaic Slavic hydronymy (Третьяков П. Н., Памятники зарубинецкой культуры). Milograd culture is considered by many scholars Balto-Slavic (before its differentiation into Proto-Slavic, West Baltic and East Baltic) or West Baltic, but Siedow wrote: "В лингвистической литературе высказывались предположения о формировании праславянского на основе одного из окраинных западнобалтийских диалектов или, наоборот, о происхождении западнобалтийских диалектов от одной из групп праславянских говоров." Also Bernstein wrote: "Нет сомнения в том, что балто-славянская сообщность охватила прежде всего праславянский, прусский, ятвяжский язык". So Proto-Slavic and West-Baltic were more closely related than was Proto-Slavic with East Baltic (let's remind you that according to more recent theories, there was no such a thing as a unified Baltic, which later splint into West Baltic and East Baltic - but there was Balto-Slavic which split directly into three branches: West Baltic, Slavic and East Baltic). By the end of the 1st century AD the Zarubintsy culture - according to Siedow - was conquered by Sarmatians, but part of their population escaped northward as refugees and settled in Prussia (archaeological prove of this are supposed to be the type of fibulae which had been previously produced by the Zarubintsy culture, and which start to appear in Prussia in the 2nd century AD). Before that, the Lusatian culture fell to Scythians (see page 76 here: http://www.parzifal-ev.de/uploads/media/gimbutas.pdf), so most likely the Pomeranian culture - which evolved out of the Lusatian culture (see below) had some Scythian admixture as well.

    https://archive.org/details/TheBalts

    If we add also your info about contribution of Gubin culture (I guess it contributed more to southern part of that culture than to its northern part), then we have a picture of Proto-Slavs emerging from a mixture of the following archaeological cultures: Milograd (West Balts? or Balto-Slavs?), Pomeranian ("Lusatian" - whoever those Lusatians were - mixed with Scythians) and Gubin (Germano-Celtic Bastarnae?). This would mean that those four peoples contributed to the ethnogenesis of Slavs. So they would be ancestors of Slavs, not some later addition to Slavs. So even if Bastarnae (or maybe Celts who influenced them) originally carried I2a-Din, then still it was part of Slavs since the beginning of their ethnogenesis. A later addition to Slavs - on the other hand - would be Sarmatians, to which the Zarubintsy culture fell by the end of the 1st century AD (according to Siedow). When it comes to the Pomeranian culture:

    About 650 BC, it evolved from the Lusatian culture between the lower Vistula and Parseta rivers,[2] and subsequently expanded southward.
    But it evolved as the result of Scythian influence on the Lusatian culture (see Marija Gimbutas in the link above).

    The study by Haak et. al. 2015 found R1a Z280 in an individual of the Lusatian culture from Halberstadt in Germany.

    I quoted all the details about that Z280 individual here (what is interesting, that guy was probably a redhead):

    http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post451553

    R1a Z280 is today present in all Slavic and Baltic populations in frequencies between ca. 10% and ca. 50% of all males.

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

    All of this suggests that Proto-Slavs evolved out of an interesting mix of Balts (or Balto-Slavs as they are also called - but Balto-Slavic language was rather more similar to modern Baltic languages than to modern Slavic), Lusatians (maybe they spoke some unknown Indo-European language - Venedic, if such a language existed - some scholars hypothesize the existence of Venedic languages as yet another branch of IE), the Bastarnae or Peucini (Germano-Celtic), Scythians and - the final addition - Sarmatians.

    I am probably starting to sound like Germanophiles who see "Germanicness" everywhere.

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

    As for the Balto-Slavic past. There are several theories about this:



    The graph illustrates several models of Balto-Slavic interactions, trying to explain similarities between the two groups (Schleicher - common ancestral language separating into Baltic and Slavic; Endzelins - two separate languages which came under influence of each other at some point; Rozwadowski - common ancestry, then separation, followed by becoming close neighbours again; Meillet - prolonged close influences despite lack of common ancestry; Kromer - common ancestry with Baltia never constituting a linguistic unity, but East Baltic and West Baltic groups separating directly from Balto-Slavic). Rozwadowski's model is also interesting.

    Currently the mostly commonly accepted model when it comes to differentiation of Baltic is this first suggested by Kromer in 2003 - namely that there was no unified Baltic language (from which later West Baltic and East Baltic emerged), but that Balto-Slavic (which, however, was more similar to Baltic than to Slavic) split directly into three parts - West Baltic (now extinct), Slavic and East Baltic.

    Here the theories of Schleicher and Endzelins are outlined:

    The close relationship of the Baltic and Slavic languages is indicated by a series of common innovations not shared with other Indo-European languages, and by the fact that the relative chronology of these innovations can be established. Furthermore, there are also many correspondences in vocabulary: the Baltic and Slavic languages share many inherited words. These are either not found at all in other Indo-European languages (except when borrowed) or are inherited from Proto-Indo-European but have undergone identical changes in meaning when compared to other Indo-European languages.

    Baltic and Slavic share many close phonological, lexical, morphosyntactic and accentological similarities. The notable early Indo-Europeanist August Schleicher (1861) proposed a simple solution: From Proto-Indo-European descended Proto-Balto-Slavic, out of which Proto-Baltic and Proto-Slavic emerged. The Latvian linguist Jānis Endzelīns thought, however, that any similarities among Baltic and Slavic languages were a result of an intensive language contact.
    There is also no perfect agreement on when did the separation of Slavic and Baltic (or both Baltic groups) take place.

    Proposed dates range from ca. 1500 BCE to ca. 500 BCE (3500 - 2500 years ago):

    Atkinson - 1400 BCE
    Novotná & Blažek - 1400–1340 BCE
    Sergei Starostin - 1210 BCE
    Chang et. al. - 600 BCE (http://www.linguisticsociety.org/fil...AlPreprint.pdf)

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

    As for the Balto-Slavic past. There are several theories about this
    Or maybe something like this:



    In my opinion, I2a1b is of ancient Germanic origin
    Except that I2 is Non-Indo-European and Germanic people are Indo-European (despite Non-IE admixtures).

    So it can only be Pre-Germanic rather than Germnaic. Or it can be Pre-Slavic.

    I1 is also Pre-Germanic (it was probably absorbed by Proto-Germanic Indo-Europeans from LBK culture).
    Last edited by Tomenable; 08-03-15 at 03:22.

  10. #835
    Junior Member Ezio's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-02-15
    Posts
    3


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    Slavs, Balts, Baltic Finns, and Germanics are taller than others - not just Germanics.

    This is confirmed by Byzantine (not just Arab) sources describing Slavs as well:

    Procopius of Caesarea (born in ca. 490 died in 565), "De Bello Gothico":

    "(...)Nay further, the Slavs do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair are neither very fair or blond, nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type (...)"

    Theofylaktos Simokattes, "Oikumenike Historia" (written in years 585 - 641), describing events from 595:

    "(...) The Emperor was with great curiosity listening to stories about this tribe, he has welcomed these newcomers from the land of Slavs, and after being amazed by their height and mighty stature, he sent these men to Heraclea. (...)"

    Theophanes the Confessor (describing the same event from 595):

    "(...) The Emperor was admiring their beauty and their stalwart stature. (...)"

    Countries/regions with above 178 cm tall males (on average) according to wikipedia - no data was given for Latvia, Belarus and Ukraine:


    While Russia's average (176 cm in year 1992) includes Asian minorities in Russia:

    There is also one mistake in this graph - data for Dinaric Alps is from Croatia and Herzegovina (from a 2005 study), not from Bosnia and Slovenia. The average was also less than 185,6 cm, but authors added one centimeter because the sample consisted of young men (some could be still growing).


    Height = genes + nutrition. Nutrition is important too - therefore with genes being equal, richer (with better nutrition) country will have taller people.
    Sweden should be higher up. The average male height is 181.4 cm.

  11. #836
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-12-14
    Posts
    45


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Except that I2 is Non-Indo-European and Germanic people are Indo-European (despite Non-IE admixtures).So it can only be Pre-Germanic rather than Germnaic. Or it can be Pre-Slavic.
    I1 is also Pre-Germanic (it was probably absorbed by Proto-Germanic Indo-Europeans from LBK culture).
    Please... Germanic peoples are linguistically Indo-Europeans, ethnically (or should I say genetically) they are mix of Indo-Europeans and proto-Europeans. Slavic peoples are mainly Indo-European both linguistically and ethnically.
    BTW Germanic languages have lots of words of non-Indo-European origin.
    I2 and I1 were indeed formed before Germanic, Balto-Slavic, Celtic or any of European peoples were formed.
    But when I2a1b Din branch was formed it was already a part of proto-Germanic peoples, and since it was most likely brought to Balkans by east-Germanic tribes, I see no problem in calling it "Germanic".
    I don't need to explain anything. I already did (see previous posts).
    I saw your explanations of Slavic origin, but I did not hear explanation of why I2a Din grows as we approach Dinaric Alps and R1a drops to very small numbers (5 percent). Some members said it is "pure coincidence", but such pattern is impossible, especially when we consider the fact that modern east-Slavic populations of Ukraine have about 11 (some regions are higher) percent of it, while at same time they are huge in R1a.

    I just posted theory of Bastarnae origin, but it still cannot explain it very well. If Bastarnae slavicized (in terms of language) and settled in Balkans as separate tribe, it would make sense, but since they just blended in east-Slavic population it makes no sense.
    That is why, in my opinion, I2a Din was brought by some other east-Germanic tribe (in this case Goths), as they were known to have settled in this area since 370's. According to medieval sources all of pre-Slavic populations in Yugoslavia retreated before Slavs and Avars to inaccesible areas (they collectively were called "Vlasi"). Also I explained that only Gothic soldiers went to Italy and settled there as its conquest was purely political (re-establishment of Roman administration and removal of Odoacer by account of emperor Zeno).
    Plus there are plentiful of our medieval sources that describe settling of Goths here. And also anthropological similarity to other Germanic peoples...


    And about "attacking Slavdom": haplogroup diversity does not mean genetical diversity, nor does it mean that peoples with haplogroup diversity are "mongrels" (as it is non-functional part of DNA), and it certainly does not mean that Slavs are not diverse. Just compare Bulgarians and Poles for example. And Slavs are still largest European group of peoples and largest in territory, too... I don't see why are you offended by this.

    The problem at us is many times when someone does not like a theory- he prohibits it (by force). Here is part from famous Yugoslav song "Uz Maršala Tita" (With Marshal Tito):
    "[...]Of an ancient kindred we are, but Goths we are not
    Part of ancient Slavdom are we.
    Whoever says otherwise slanders and lies,
    will feel our fist."

    "Rod prastari svi smo, a Goti mi nismo,
    Slavenstva smo drevnoga čest.
    Ko drukčije kaže, kleveće i laže,
    Našu će osjetit' pest"
    In Yugoslavia it was prohibited to speak about it, and even after fall of it, as one of our historians say, if you research on it you will most likely be stigmatised as "fascist and traitor".


    Sweden should be higher up. The average male height is 181.4 cm.
    Yes, that's why I put it as higher (but I recalled it bad so I circled it at 182).

  12. #837
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    @clintCG
    Dacians are said to have been very tall people also.
    As for Jordanes telling that Dacians and Goths were same,I am not that sure about it.
    And Dacians were also mountain people. And Goths I do not think were mountain people.
    Since you are from Montenegro,I heard that from all Slavs,only Montenegrins,Serbians,Bosnians have some folk customs related to wolves and some of the Serbians telling that a folk custom tells that Serbians are descending from a grey wolf . Dacians = wolf people.
    So another theory is that Romanians are Dacians latinized as language and mixed more with different populations,Serbians,Montenegrins,Bosnians,Dacians with strong Slavic language influence (Romanians have part Slavic influence,in language).There is known that lots of Dacians moved south of Danube,after Roman Empire conquest,fearing barbarian invasions.
    I do not know about Croatians but I understand that Serbians,Bosnians,Montenegrins are all mountain loving people and they also have quite closed paternal lines.

  13. #838
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    @Tormenable:
    Go do a little research about consonants/vowels number in Serbo-Croatian and Russian,Ukrainian,Polish.
    If I remember exactly,Serbo-Croatian has like 46% consonants,54% vowels,being a very melodious language.
    Russian has like 60% consonants,now how come Russian and Serbo-Croatian are said to be from same group of IE languages,I have no idea.

  14. #839
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-13
    Posts
    774


    Country: Sweden



    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    @clintCG
    Dacians are said to have been very tall people also.
    As for Jordanes telling that Dacians and Goths were same,I am not that sure about it.
    And Dacians were also mountain people. And Goths I do not think were mountain people.
    Since you are from Montenegro,I heard that from all Slavs,only Montenegrins,Serbians,Bosnians have some folk customs related to wolves and some of the Serbians telling that a folk custom tells that Serbians are descending from a grey wolf . Dacians = wolf people.
    So another theory is that Romanians are Dacians latinized as language and mixed more with different populations,Serbians,Montenegrins,Bosnians,Dacians with strong Slavic language influence (Romanians have part Slavic influence,in language).There is known that lots of Dacians moved south of Danube,after Roman Empire conquest,fearing barbarian invasions.
    I do not know about Croatians but I understand that Serbians,Bosnians,Montenegrins are all mountain loving people and they also have quite closed paternal lines.

    http://www.imninalu.net/myths-Vlach.htm

    The supporters of the Daco-Roman continuity assert that the Dacians were colonized by Romans in such a way that they adopted Latin language and became the ancestors of present-day Romanians (or even dare to say that the Dacians' language was close to Latin, which is utterly improbable). The occupation lasted about 160 years only, a period that was characterized not by an idyllic relationship between the two peoples but by violent rebellions of the Dacians against the invaders with consequent retaliation and repression. After the Romans evacuated Dacia because of the imminent Barbaric invasions, which actually happened, the hypothetical Daco-Romans were supposed to have survived for about a millennium hidden in caves and forests in Transylvania, not being noticed by the different peoples that populated the land in successive waves of immigration. Of course, there is not a single document that might prove such a theory, and from a logical viewpoint is quite unlikely that an entire people would be completely ignored by all Germanic and Eurasian settlers for such a long period.

    http://www.ceupress.com/books/html/H...ciousness.html

    This book stems from the idea that there is a considerable difference between real history and discourse history. Boia points out that history is constantly reconstructed, adapted and sometimes mythified from the perspective of the present day, of present states of mind and ideologies. Boia closely examines the process of historical culture and conscience in nineteenth and twentieth century Romania, particularly concentrating on the impact of the national ideology on history. Based upon his findings, the author identifies several key mythical configurations and analyses the manner in which Romanians have reconstituted their own highly ideologized history over the last two centuries.
    The strength of History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness lies in the author's ability to fully deconstruct the entire Romanian historiographic system and demonstrate the increasing acuteness of national problems in general, and in particular the exploitation of history to support national ideology.

  15. #840
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-12-14
    Posts
    45


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Quote Originally Posted by mihaitzateo View Post
    @clintCG
    Dacians are said to have been very tall people also.
    As for Jordanes telling that Dacians and Goths were same,I am not that sure about it.
    And Dacians were also mountain people. And Goths I do not think were mountain people.
    Since you are from Montenegro,I heard that from all Slavs,only Montenegrins,Serbians,Bosnians have some folk customs related to wolves and some of the Serbians telling that a folk custom tells that Serbians are descending from a grey wolf . Dacians = wolf people.
    So another theory is that Romanians are Dacians latinized as language and mixed more with different populations,Serbians,Montenegrins,Bosnians,Dacians with strong Slavic language influence (Romanians have part Slavic influence,in language).There is known that lots of Dacians moved south of Danube,after Roman Empire conquest,fearing barbarian invasions.
    I do not know about Croatians but I understand that Serbians,Bosnians,Montenegrins are all mountain loving people and they also have quite closed paternal lines.
    Of course Goths were not mountain people, but they, as a pre-Slavic population of western Balkans settled mountains and unaccessible areas when Slavs and Avars came, and that is where we find up to 70 percent of I2a1b (Herzegovina Croats, west Montenegro, etc...). In other words, they inhabited mountains out of necessity.
    When we start moving towards plains we see R1a increase and I2a Din decrease.

    Don't be offended, but most of your post is BS pseudo-history. Paleolithic continuity theory is dead anyways.
    Last edited by clintCG; 09-03-15 at 19:52.

  16. #841
    Regular Member Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,115

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    I'm not familiar with this theory. I have read that the emergence of the Zarubintsy culture is associated with an eastward migration of people belonging to the Pomeranian culture into territory occupied by people of the Milograd culture, and the subsequent mixture between those cultures, which lasted for quite a long time (W. W. Siedow, Седов В. В., Славяние верхнево Поднепровья и Подвинья). The Zarubintsy culture is considered by some scholars Proto-Slavic as it seems to correspond with archaic Slavic hydronymy (Третьяков П. Н., Памятники зарубинецкой культуры). Milograd culture is considered by many scholars Balto-Slavic (before its differentiation into Proto-Slavic, West Baltic and East Baltic) or West Baltic, but Siedow wrote: "В лингвистической литературе высказывались предположения о формировании праславянского на основе одного из окраинных западнобалтийских диалектов или, наоборот, о происхождении западнобалтийских диалектов от одной из групп праславянских говоров." Also Bernstein wrote: "Нет сомнения в том, что балто-славянская сообщность охватила прежде всего праславянский, прусский, ятвяжский язык". So Proto-Slavic and West-Baltic were more closely related than was Proto-Slavic with East Baltic (let's remind you that according to more recent theories, there was no such a thing as a unified Baltic, which later splint into West Baltic and East Baltic - but there was Balto-Slavic which split directly into three branches: West Baltic, Slavic and East Baltic). By the end of the 1st century AD the Zarubintsy culture - according to Siedow - was conquered by Sarmatians, but part of their population escaped northward as refugees and settled in Prussia (archaeological prove of this are supposed to be the type of fibulae which had been previously produced by the Zarubintsy culture, and which start to appear in Prussia in the 2nd century AD). Before that, the Lusatian culture fell to Scythians (see page 76 here: http://www.parzifal-ev.de/uploads/media/gimbutas.pdf), so most likely the Pomeranian culture - which evolved out of the Lusatian culture (see below) had some Scythian admixture as well.

    https://archive.org/details/TheBalts

    If we add also your info about contribution of Gubin culture (I guess it contributed more to southern part of that culture than to its northern part), then we have a picture of Proto-Slavs emerging from a mixture of the following archaeological cultures: Milograd (West Balts? or Balto-Slavs?), Pomeranian ("Lusatian" - whoever those Lusatians were - mixed with Scythians) and Gubin (Germano-Celtic Bastarnae?). This would mean that those four peoples contributed to the ethnogenesis of Slavs. So they would be ancestors of Slavs, not some later addition to Slavs. So even if Bastarnae (or maybe Celts who influenced them) originally carried I2a-Din, then still it was part of Slavs since the beginning of their ethnogenesis. A later addition to Slavs - on the other hand - would be Sarmatians, to which the Zarubintsy culture fell by the end of the 1st century AD (according to Siedow). When it comes to the Pomeranian culture:



    But it evolved as the result of Scythian influence on the Lusatian culture (see Marija Gimbutas in the link above).

    The study by Haak et. al. 2015 found R1a Z280 in an individual of the Lusatian culture from Halberstadt in Germany.

    I quoted all the details about that Z280 individual here (what is interesting, that guy was probably a redhead):

    http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post451553

    R1a Z280 is today present in all Slavic and Baltic populations in frequencies between ca. 10% and ca. 50% of all males.

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

    All of this suggests that Proto-Slavs evolved out of an interesting mix of Balts (or Balto-Slavs as they are also called - but Balto-Slavic language was rather more similar to modern Baltic languages than to modern Slavic), Lusatians (maybe they spoke some unknown Indo-European language - Venedic, if such a language existed - some scholars hypothesize the existence of Venedic languages as yet another branch of IE), the Bastarnae or Peucini (Germano-Celtic), Scythians and - the final addition - Sarmatians.

    I am probably starting to sound like Germanophiles who see "Germanicness" everywhere.

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

    As for the Balto-Slavic past. There are several theories about this:



    The graph illustrates several models of Balto-Slavic interactions, trying to explain similarities between the two groups (Schleicher - common ancestral language separating into Baltic and Slavic; Endzelins - two separate languages which came under influence of each other at some point; Rozwadowski - common ancestry, then separation, followed by becoming close neighbours again; Meillet - prolonged close influences despite lack of common ancestry; Kromer - common ancestry with Baltia never constituting a linguistic unity, but East Baltic and West Baltic groups separating directly from Balto-Slavic). Rozwadowski's model is also interesting.

    Currently the mostly commonly accepted model when it comes to differentiation of Baltic is this first suggested by Kromer in 2003 - namely that there was no unified Baltic language (from which later West Baltic and East Baltic emerged), but that Balto-Slavic (which, however, was more similar to Baltic than to Slavic) split directly into three parts - West Baltic (now extinct), Slavic and East Baltic.

    Here the theories of Schleicher and Endzelins are outlined:



    There is also no perfect agreement on when did the separation of Slavic and Baltic (or both Baltic groups) take place.

    Proposed dates range from ca. 1500 BCE to ca. 500 BCE (3500 - 2500 years ago):

    Atkinson - 1400 BCE
    Novotná & Blažek - 1400–1340 BCE
    Sergei Starostin - 1210 BCE
    Chang et. al. - 600 BCE (http://www.linguisticsociety.org/fil...AlPreprint.pdf)

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



    Or maybe something like this:





    Except that I2 is Non-Indo-European and Germanic people are Indo-European (despite Non-IE admixtures).

    So it can only be Pre-Germanic rather than Germnaic. Or it can be Pre-Slavic.

    I1 is also Pre-Germanic (it was probably absorbed by Proto-Germanic Indo-Europeans from LBK culture).


    https://www.academia.edu/4835555/Gallo-Scythians

    referred as Bastanae

    https://www.academia.edu/4118437/Med...ravetz_Culture


    Who Were The Bastarnae ?

    Filed under: Archaeology, History, Numismatics1 Comment
    March 26, 2014










    ‘…the Bastarnæ, the bravest nation of all’.

    (Appianus, Mithridatic Wars 10:69)





    The most enigmatic ‘barbarian’ people to appear in southeastern Europe in the late Iron Age are undoubtedly the Bastarnae (Βαστάρναι / Βαστέρναι).

    While archaeological/numismatic evidence indicates that the Bastarnae tribes had reached the Danube Delta as early as the second half of the 4th c. BC, they first appear in historical sources in connection with the events of 179 BC as allies of Philip V of Macedonia in his war with Rome (Livy 40:5, 57-58), and remain a constant factor in the history of southeastern Europe for over 500 years. Due to the fact that archaeologists have failed to associate a particular archaeological culture with the Bastarnae, the ethnic origin of this people has hitherto remained shrouded in mystery, with a lack of clarity on whether they were initially of Scythian, Germanic or Celtic origin. However, as illustrated below, a chronological analysis of the ancient sources relating to the Bastarnae in general, and archaeological, numismatic and linguistic evidence from the territory of the Bastarnae Peucini tribe in particular, enables us to finally shed some light on this question.






    Bastarnae ‘Huşi-Vovrieşti type’ tetradrachms from the Celtic settlement at Pelczyska, Poland (2nd c. BC)
    (see Balkancelts ‘The Celts in Poland’ article)






    THE SOURCES


    Later authors such as Dio Cassius (3rd c. AD – Dio LI.23.3, 24.2) and Zosimus (late 5th/early 6th c. AD – Zosimus I.34) define the Bastarnae as ‘Scythians’, and to a great extent this is true. By the late Roman period the Bastarnae tribes had been living in the region vaguely referred to as ‘Scythia’ for over half a millennium, and mixing with the local tribes (‘mixed marriages are giving them to some extent the vile appearance of the Sarmatians’ – Tac. Ger. 46). Thus, they were by this stage indeed Scythians, in the same way, for example, the Celtic Scordisci in Thrace are referred to in Roman sources as ‘Thracians’, having inhabited the region of Thrace for a number of centuries. However, as with the latter case, geographical situation by no means indicates ethnic origin.





    Facial Reconstruction of a Bastarnae woman found in Burial # 9 at the Celtic settlement in Pelczyska, Poland

    (see Balkancelts ‘Face of a Stranger’ article’)





    While sources such as Strabo (early 1st c. AD – see below), and Tacitus (circa 100 AD; Tac. Ger. 43), are often cited to support the view that the Bastarnae were of Germanic origin, in fact, a closer analysis of the testimony of both these sources reveals that neither is in fact certain about who the Bastarnae were. While Strabo informs us that the Bastarnae lived mixed with the Thracian and Celtic tribes in Thrace, both north and south of the river, he also admits, ‘I know neither the Bastarnae, nor the Sarmatae nor, in a word, any of the peoples who dwell above the Pontus’ (Strabo VII, 2:4). Tacitus states the following:

    Peucini, quos quidam Bastarnas, vocunt sermon cultu, sede ac domiciliis ut Germani agunt’ (Tac. op cit.)

    i.e. – he informs us, not that the Bastarnae were Germani, but that they were ‘similar to the Germani’. In this case one should bear in mind that many of the Celts who migrated into southeastern Europe and Asia-Minor from the end of the 4th c. BC onwards originated from the Belgae group of Celtic tribes (see also ‘Galatia’ article), who are described in ancient sources as being most like the Germani.

    The other ancient authors are clear on the ethnic origin of the Bastarnae. The earliest source, Polybius (200-118 BC; XXIV 9,13) refers to them as Celtic (Galatians), while Livy (59 BC – 17 AD) tells us that they had the same customs and spoke the same language as the Celtic Scordisci, and also mentions close military and political ties between the Bastarnae and Scordisci (Livy 40:57). Plutarch (46 – 120 AD; Aem. 9.6) refers to them as ‘Gauls on the Danube who are called Bastarnae’.





    THE BASTARNAE IN THRACE



    It was in the wake of the aforementioned events of 179 BC that the Peucini, the southern branch of the Bastarnae, were drawn south of the Danube into Thrace. They were at this stage a powerful military and political force in southeastern Europe, which is illustrated by the enthusiasm that Philip V of Macedonia showed at the prospect of being allied to them:
    ‘The envoys whom he had sent to the Bastarnae to summon assistance had returned and brought back with them some young nobles, amongst them some of royal blood. One of these promised to give his sister in marriage to Philip’s son, and the king was quite elated at the prospect of an alliance with that nation’ (Livy 40:5).
    Although Philip’s sudden death meant that the joint attack on Rome by the Macedonians and Bastarnae came to nothing, by this time a large group of the (Peucini) Bastarnae had already migrated into Thrace, and a group of 30,000 of them subsequently settled in Dardania; another larger group of Bastarnae returned eastwards and settled in the area of today’s eastern Bulgaria (Livy 40:58), where Bastarnae kingdoms were established in the Dobruja area. At the beginning of the 1st c. AD Strabo (VII, 3:2) mentions that the ethnic make-up of this area consisted of a complex mix of Thracians, Scythians, Celts and Bastarnae:
    the Bastarnae tribes are mingled with the Thracians, more indeed with those beyond the Ister (Danube), but also with those this side. And mingled with them are also the Celtic tribes…”.

    A thriving ‘barbarian’ culture emerged in this area (southeastern Romania/northeastern Bulgaria) during the 2nd/ 1st c. BC, based on a symbiotic relationship between these various groups and the Greek Black Sea colonies – a culture which was brought to a brutal end in the mid 1st c. BC by the destructive rampage of the Getic leader Burebista, which also paved the way for the Roman conquest of the Dobruja.







    Bronze issue of the (Peucini) Bastarnae king Aelis (s. Dobruja region, Bulgaria – c. 180-150 BC).
    - Jugate heads of the Dioskouroi right, in wreathed caps / jugate horse heads right; monogram & ΠΕ (for Peucini) below

    (see also ‘Balkancelts ‘Peucini’ article)





    In summary, an analysis of the ancient sources would appear to indicate that the Bastarnae tribes were initially of Celtic (Belgic) origin. This is confirmed by numismatic, archaeological, and linguistic evidence from the territory of the Bastarnae Peucini tribe in n.e. Bulgaria, s.e. Romania, Moldova and Ukraine. One should also note that the first archaeological/numismatic evidence of the presence of the Bastarnae in s.e. Europe (2nd half of the 4th c. BC) corresponds chronologically with the Celtic migration into the region.
    It would therefore appear, based on the available scientific data, that the elusive Bastarnae tribes were not some mysterious Germanic people who appeared in southeastern Europe during this period, but that they, like the Galatians, were tribes of the Belgae group who migrated into the area during the Celtic expansion at the end of the 4th / beginning of the 3rd c. BC. Scientific evidence from the Dobruja region (loc cit) further indicates that the original Celto-Germanic (Belgic) nature of this culture subsequently underwent a fundamental metamorphosis due to prolonged contact and co-existence with the Hellenistic and Scythian cultures, the resulting fusion of Celtic, Hellenistic and Scythian cultural elements culminating in a unique and distinct Bastarnae ethnicity by the Roman period.



    In the later Roman period the policy of ethnic engineering further strengthened the Bastarnae presence south of the Danube. Under the Emperor Probus (276-82) 100,000 of them were settled in Thrace (Historia Augusta Probus 18), and shortly afterwards Emperor Diocletian (284-305) carried out another ‘massive’ transfer of the Bastarnae population to the south of the Danube (Eutropius IX.25; see Balkancelts ‘Ethnic Engineering’ article). Thus, the Bastarnae presence on the territory of today’s Bulgaria, already well established since the 2nd c. BC, was further reinforced by the policies of both Probus and Diocletian.
    có che un pòpoło no 'l defende pi ła só łéngua el xe prónto par èser s'ciavo

    when a people no longer dares to defend its language it is ripe for slavery.

  17. #842
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    I am not offended,but if someone would study Romanian and South Slavic will find cognates that are not found in other Slavic or IE languages.
    I found a very strange cognate,Sardinian,Serbo-Croatian and Romanian has it and maybe,also some Albanian dialect,about a product made from sheep or pig intestines.
    I also read a study about how the bride is taken,from her parents home and that is almost identical to what is happening in Transylvania,Romania.
    A study about Serbo-Croatian people customs (Serbians,Montenegrins,Bosnians,Croatians and Slovenians).
    I have a personal theory that Bosnians,Serbians,Croatians are coming from Transylvania,they were Dacians occupied by Roman Empire and moved on South of Danube,when Roman Empire retired.
    Who knows,maybe most closed language from today languages to Dacian language is Serbo-Croatian?
    Montenegrins I think are Dacians from South of Danube.
    The fact that Albanians,Montenegrins,Serbians,Croatians,Bosnians are about 90% or more Dinarids,as phenotype shows they did not received too much genetic input in last thousands of years.
    At Romanians,only 33% are Dinarids.
    However,I think in mountain villages,percentage increases.

  18. #843
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    13-01-12
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    943

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    proly R1B

    Ethnic group
    Romanian
    Country: Romania



    Gyms,only Romanians from a part of South Romania were called "Vlachs".
    From wikipedia:
    "The word Vlach is ultimately of Germanic origin, from the word Walha, "foreigner", "stranger", a name used by ancient Germanic peoples to refer to Romance-speaking and (Romanized) Celtic neighbours"
    See Welsh,Wallons also,as example.
    But they were not calling themselves "Vlachs" foreign people were calling them like that,because of their Romance language.
    They were calling themselves "Munteni".
    Go get a clue,Olt,a major river in Romania,from which another group of Romanians are taking their name,Olteni,is a word of Celtic origin,cognate to Olten district from Switzerland.
    What is telling that?
    That the name is preserved at least from the time of Dacians.
    There 7 large areas of folklore in Romania,Moldova being one of them,which covers Moldova from Romania,Bessarabia and Bukovine.
    These people are called "moldoveni" no one ever called them "Vlachi" because their accent have a little of Eastern Slavic sonority.
    They also had a lot of contact to Eastern Slavs (especially Ukrainians) and they are having very few J2 and E-V13,but having high I2-din and also about 20% or even more R1A.
    You should know that the term in Romanian ,even old Romanian,for Germans is "nemtzi" cognate to Slavic "nemczi" which means strangers.
    Also in both Serbo-Croatian and Romanian (old Romanian) Italians are called "Taliani" - in Serbo Croatian "Talieni" in Romanian - plural form.

  19. #844
    Elite member
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,428

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6a

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Please... Germanic peoples are linguistically Indo-Europeans, ethnically (or should I say genetically) they are mix of Indo-Europeans and proto-Europeans
    You are not up-to-date with new findings. Germanic peoples are ethnically mostly Indo-Europeans.

    Both light skin and lactase persistence in European populations were spread by Indo-European migrations:

    "High frequency of lactose intolerance in a prehistoric hunter-gatherer population in northern Europe":


    http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/10/89

    http://link.springer.com/article/10....471-2148-10-89

    Here we investigate the frequency of an allele (-13910*T) associated with lactase persistence in a Neolithic Scandinavian population. From the 14 individuals originally examined, 10 yielded reliable results. We find that the T allele frequency was very low (5%) in this Middle Neolithic hunter-gatherer population, and that the frequency is dramatically different from the extant Swedish population (74%).

    We conclude that this difference in frequency could not have arisen by genetic drift and is either due to selection or, more likely, replacement of hunter-gatherer populations by new immigrants.
    The most probable reason for this, is the population replacement in Scandinavia - as revealed by genetic studies:

    "Ancient DNA Reveals Lack of Continuity between Neolithic Hunter-Gatherers and Contemporary Scandinavians":

    http://www.cell.com/current-biology/...2901694-7?cc=y

    Lactose tolerance was spread by Indo-Europeans, who were pastoralists and whose diet largely consisted of dairy (milk):



    Lactase persistence gene allows you to consume more dairy products and drink more milk.

    That's what Proto-Indo-European pastoralists did.


    So modern Scandinavians are descendants of Indo-European immigrants, not of prehistoric Scandinavians.

    Archaeology only confirms this conclusion, that Scandinavia was colonized by IE immigrants:

    http://dienekes.blogspot.fi/2015/02/...-for-indo.html

    “Two thousand years ago, we started having Kurgan graves in Scandinavia,” said Ellingvag. The commonalities between burial mounds in Norway and Scythian/Saka mounds in Kazakhstan are striking, he said. “[The Scythian people] had these ornaments, these animal ornaments, which are very, very important in Scandinavian art … and the ornaments are actually quite similar, which is striking, it’s very special.”

  20. #845
    Elite member
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,428

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6a

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Lactase persistence is more common in Northern Europe than in Southern Europe today.

    This is in agreement with recent findings that Northern Europeans have more of Indo-European ancestry.

    By contrast Southern Europeans have more ancestry from Middle Eastern Neolithic farmers.

  21. #846
    Elite member arvistro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-14
    Posts
    1,004


    Country: Latvia



    According to this map
    http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.o...t/366/1566/863
    it actually looks like Germanic (or Germano Celtic?)/non-Germanic, rather than North/South in Europe. With Baltic states and East Slavs looking as yellow, as Spain and other South Euros. Not sure where exactly Poland borders are, it looks like part of it is drawn yellow too.

    Indeed, LP frequency can vary from 15–54% in eastern and southern Europe to 62–86% in central and western Europe, and to as high as 89–96% in the British Isles and Scandinavia (from text in link above)

  22. #847
    Elite member
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,428

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6a

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Percent of lactose intolerance in Southern Europe is much higher than in Eastern Europe:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactase...e#Distribution

    Percent of Lactase Persistence (according to Bersaglieri 2004):

    Sardinians (Italy) 7.1%
    Tuscans (Italy) 6.3%
    North Italians 35.7%
    French (France) 43.1%
    French Basques 66.7%
    Orcadians 68.8%
    Swedes and Finns 81.5%
    Irish people 90.0%

    Since Irish, Basques and Finnish people are not Germanic (or at least no more than Orcadians or Swedes), I don't see any correlation.

    And Basques are a strange case, since their Y-DNA is Indo-European even though they speak a Non-Indo-European language.

    BTW:

    Lactose intolerance is a little different. Before the genetics of lactose digestion were understood, the test for lactose tolerance/intolerance was rather artifical and involved drinking a measured amount of milk of a certain quality and seeing the effects. It had been noted that individuals varied considerably. Some could drink half a glass of milk happily whlist others got sick from the smallest amount. Others could of course consume large quantities of the stuff with no ill effects whatsoever. Whatever the merits of the tolerance/intolerance tests, it was a line, however artificial. So, whilst Bersaglieri's data show 92.9% of Sardinians are Lactase non persistent, Lactose intolerance tests show 86% of Sardinians to be Lactose intolerant.

  23. #848
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    21,699


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Gentlemen, I have no personal stake in the matter at hand, but perhaps it's as well, in this as in all matters, to be a little more precise and not make generalizations that are not actually supported by the data? Haak et al:
    https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-d...al_Fig_3_small.

    So, while Corded Ware and other LN/EBA people in elite burials were mostly "Yamnaya Indo-European", northern Europeans today are about 50% Yamnaya, which is about half EHG and half "Armenian" like. Actually, I would maintain that their "Yamnaya" percentage is inflated even at 50%, but that's a topic for another thread.

    As for the "Yamnaya Indo-Europeans" spreading some of the light pigmentation genes, Yamnaya Indo-Europeans from Samara were dark haired, dark eyed, and not particularly fair skinned (lots of SLC24A5, but very little SLC42A5 and some other light pigmentation genes.) I don't quite see how that particular group could have done much spreading of light pigmentation. It's of course true that Yamnaya people from more westerly areas or more northerly areas than Samara might have had a different and more "light" set of alleles, more similar perhaps to the Samara HG rather than to the Karelia HG. We'll have to wait and see. We may be seeing a series of localized founder effects.

    Looking at the distribution of light pigmentation alleles in Genetiker's work (I make no personal assertions as to its 100% accuracy) to which Fire-Haired directed our attention, it seems that in terms of skin pigmentation SLC42A5has a "hot spot" in the SHG of Scandinavia (Motala) If this result is duplicated in the forthcoming paper, perhaps it spread from there by various processes and at various times? (Interesting that WHG should lack these alleles, and then they show up in a WHG/ANE hunter group, but mutations happen where they happen. Also interesting that this Motala group should have samples with alleles that correlate with fair hair and fair skin, and also code for the EDAR Mongoloid mutation (4/7). Ancient dna always surprises.)

    See:
    https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...storic-europe/

    Lactase persistence is another issue. Yamnaya and EHG were lactose intolerant as were the Neolithic farmers. The gene first shows up in central Europe. This is the data from the genetiker site. Only the bold is the derived allele.
    CM6, rs182549, ability to digest milk Alberstedt LN I0118 CC
    Corded Ware LN I0103 CC
    Esperstedt MN I0172 CC
    LBK EN I0054 CC
    Spain EN I0410 CC
    Spain EN I0412 CC
    Spain MN I0408 CC
    Unetice EBA I0047 CC
    Yamnaya I0231 CC
    Yamnaya I0443 CC
    MCM6, rs4988235, ability to digest milk
    Alberstedt LN I0118 GG
    Baalberge MN I0560 GG
    Baalberge MN I0807 GG
    Bell Beaker LN I0108 GG
    Bell Beaker LN I0111 GG
    Bell Beaker LN I0112 GA
    Bell Beaker LN I0806 GG
    BenzigerodeHeimburg LN I0058 GG
    BenzigerodeHeimburg LN I0059 GG
    BenzigerodeHeimburg LN I0171 GG
    Corded Ware LN I0103 GG
    Corded Ware LN I0104 GG
    Esperstedt MN I0172 GG
    Halberstadt LBA I0099 GG
    Karelia HG I0061 GG
    LBK EN I0022 GG
    LBK EN I0025 GG
    LBK EN I0026 GG
    LBK EN I0046 GG
    LBK EN I0054 GG
    LBK EN I0100 GG
    LBK EN I0659 GG
    LBK EN I0821 GG
    Motala HG I0011 GG
    Motala HG I0012 GG
    Motala HG I0013 GG
    Motala HG I0014 GG
    Motala HG I0015 GG
    Motala HG I0016 GG
    Motala HG I0017 GG
    Samara HG I0124 GG
    Spain EN I0409 GG
    Spain EN I0410 GG
    Spain EN I0412 GG
    Spain EN I0413 GG
    Spain MN I0405 GG
    Spain MN I0406 GG
    Spain MN I0407 GG
    Spain MN I0408 GG
    Unetice EBA I0047 GG
    Unetice EBA I0114 GG
    Unetice EBA I0116 GG
    Unetice EBA I0117 GG
    Unetice EBA I0164 GA
    Yamnaya I0231 GG
    Yamnaya I0357 GG
    Yamnaya I0370 GG
    Yamnaya I0429 GG
    Yamnaya I0438 GG
    Yamnaya I0443 GG
    Yamnaya I0444 GG


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  24. #849
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-12-14
    Posts
    45


    Country: Yugoslavia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    You are not up-to-date with new findings. Germanic peoples are ethnically mostly Indo-Europeans.
    Both light skin and lactase persistence in European populations were spread by Indo-European migrations:
    "High frequency of lactose intolerance in a prehistoric hunter-gatherer population in northern Europe":
    Sorry, what I meant to say is that by haplogroups they are mix of Indo-Europeans and proto-Europeans, not by autosomal DNA...
    I do not know much about lactose tolerance so I'm going to skip that part.
    But part when you claim that light skin gene is of only Indo-European origin is a big lie. European light skin is of Neanderthal origin
    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...asian-science/

    "For example, the Neanderthal version of the skin gene POU2F3 is found in around 66 percent of East Asians, while the Neanderthal version of BNC2, which affects skin color, among other traits, is found in 70 percent of Europeans".

    "Two studies published concurrently in Nature and Science on Wednesday suggest that while the Neanderthal contribution to our genomes was modest, it may have proved vitally important.

    Some parts of non-African genomes are totally devoid of Neanderthal DNA, but other regions abound with it, including those containing genes that affect our skin and hair. This hints that the Neanderthal gene versions conferred some benefit, and were kept during evolution".

    You can not survive for a long time in northern climate with dark skin... Neanderthals had light skin, and quite often they had light eyes and hair, and it is obvious that European genes for light pigmentation is of Neanderthal origin.

    I will quote Peter Frost on hair and eye pigmentation:
    "For others still, this color diversity arose through random factors: genetic drift, founder effects, relaxation of natural selection, etc. But these factors could not have produced such a wide variety of hair and eye hues in the 35,000 years that modern humans have inhabited Europe. The hair-color gene (MC1R) has at least 7 alleles that exist only in Europe and the same is probably true for the eye-color gene (OCA2). If we take the hypothesis of a relaxation of selection, nearly a million years would be needed to accumulate this amount of diversity. Moreover, it is odd that the same sort of diversification has evolved at two different genes whose only point in common is to color a facial feature".




    But let's not go in off-topic further and further.


    My point is that I2a1b Din was already common among proto-Germanic peoples, just like clades of some other haplogroups were, regardless of whether they are proto-European (Indo-Europeanized) or Indo-European.
    Area where Isles, Disles and Dinaric split from I2a M423 does not match eastern Europe. Nor can its concentration gradient in Yugoslavia be explained with Slavic migration...

  25. #850
    Elite member
    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    5,428

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L617
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6a

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    But part when you claim that light skin gene is of only Indo-European origin is a big lie. European light skin is of Neanderthal origin
    Sorry but Neanderthals lived across most of Eurasia, from the Altai Mountains (bones found recently) to Iberia. Maybe even in China.

    But the 8000-year-old Loschbour hunter (from what is now Luxembourg) had dark skin, for example.

    So apparently not everywhere people interbred with Neanderthals. There were only few instances of interbreeding.

    Ancestors of Indo-Europeans and East Asians could interbreed with Neanderthals - ancestors of other Non-Indo-Europeans perhaps did not.

    It is possible that only later Indo-Europeans spread Neanderthal genes from one corner of Eurasia to most of the continent.

Page 34 of 70 FirstFirst ... 24323334353644 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1581
    Last Post: 21-08-22, 18:01
  2. Replies: 35
    Last Post: 25-07-22, 01:43
  3. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 24-01-19, 19:08
  4. I2a-Din in Motala12?
    By Syky in forum I2
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 30-05-17, 18:41
  5. (OFFTOPIC from I2a-Din on the Balkans)
    By how yes no 3 in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 24-04-12, 16:03

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •