How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?

How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?


  • Total voters
    230
Very cool! Do you know what clade under L801 you are?
Just going off of Yfull it is mostly in north and north-west europe. I would agree its probably Vikings. More so Varangian Guard(which were stationed in Macedonia). Theres some clades that have more Slavs, perhaps those were East Germanics like Goths or Bastarnae that were assimilated into Slavs. I think in your case Varangian Guard is a good bet. They only showed up last 700-800 years though. How close are your matches outside of Albania? If they are further than 1000 years I would say Goths. They did settle cut through Western Macedonia. Normans are also a possibility. They cut through Dibra on both sides of the border. There is even a I2a1a Albanian from Diber Madhe in the project. According to our project results, I2-M223 makes up about 2 percent of Albanians. All the L701 are from Southern Albania. Did you do FTDNA or YSEQ? don't see you in the group. I imagine you're the first L801 in the group. Don't see any others in the results. The only Albanian from Macedonia in the project is the I2a1a sample I mentioned. So out of 33 Albanians from Macedonia it accounted for 3 percent.
Food for thought, I'd suggest you to spend some time reading about the Moesogoths and Pannonian Goths to begin with. Goths were actually recorded to have settled in high numbers in Moesia and Thrace, as well as Pannonia.

The Romanization (Vlachs) makes sense for the Gothic foederati in the Roman Empire, whereas the theory that the ruling Slavs come to a Greek speaking area and abandon farming for a nomadic lifestyle and suddenly acquire a Romance tongue sounds like a stretch.

Now of course I'm talking about who spread CTS10228 not the origin. For the origin I'd suggest reading about the Celts and check where they were settled in antiquity (maps).

Curiosity: if you check yfull you will notice CTS10228* in France.

Furthermore, you can do some more reading on the wars between Dacians, Carpi, etc. and the Romans and see in how many instances these Dacians were actually enslaved and settled South of Danube.

So you might have a point to attribute their spread to Slavic migrations, but that seems to apply more to their spread Northwards and Eastwards whereas the Balkans have far better candidates consisting of nations that were already around the Carpathians (Dacians) or the ones that arrived later (first Celts, throw in there the Bastarnae, and later Goths).

P.s. This applies to your clade and to that of Tutkun Arnaut too. I believe it's worth investing some time in other theories (stronger in my opinion, especially because of the Romanization factor) and not to obsess too much only the Slavic theory.

Serbia, Bosnia, Montenegro, and Croatia were flooded with Vlachs and their Romance tongue is what got them the name Vlasi, not the fact that it simply meant shepherd and it was applied to Serbs. That could have indeed happened later.
 
No I am afraid not. Romania has just as much slavic ancestry as their neighbors. I think they are most alike with Bulgarians. Dinaric C is actually younger than the other branches. Its dominance in Romanians doesn't make it native. Its age for the entire Dinaric C is only 1550 years old. It lines up perfectly with the Slavic migrations. Dinaric C is found predominantly in Romanians, Ukrainians, Bulgarians, Macedonians, and in Albanians and Greeks.

The fact a good majority of Albanian I2-Din is part of the Romanian cluster likely means that a majority of Albanian I2-Din is connected to Vlachs of Albania, a throng of which has Slavic ancestry and was likely latinized through co-mingling and similar professions. Even though the earliest ancestor is Slavic, the cluster likely indicates the recent ancestor was a Vlach in the case of Albanians. Or even a northern Greek depending on matching. I2-PH908 however, is dominant in Serbs, Bosnians and I think West Herzegovinian Croats. It is almost characteristic of a Serbian progenitor. It seems about 2 thirds of Albanian I2-Din is the Romanian cluster with the remainder falling in the Serbian PH908 and other I2-Din.


If it was from Vlahs we would have known since to my knoledge there were not many mixed marriages between Vlahs and Albanians. Until 1970 most marriages in Albania were arranged marriages. I have witnessed arranged marriages in my family and questions asked about the bride or bridegroom were mindblowing. There were questions like: Does any one in her tribe has any mental sicknees, did anyone died of heart failings, or how long people in that tribe live, or is any sickness common in that tribe or why his or her cousin has a dark skin? If failing anyone of this questions the marriage was in doubt. Being a Vlah would not have gone unnoticed! So until recently Vlahs lived in separate villages or towns. If it is as you are saying could be from early slaves.
 
Food for thought, I'd suggest you to spend some time reading about the Moesogoths and Pannonian Goths to begin with. Goths were actually recorded to have settled in high numbers in Moesia and Thrace, as well as Pannonia.

The Romanization (Vlachs) makes sense for the Gothic foederati in the Roman Empire, whereas the theory that the ruling Slavs come to a Greek speaking area and abandon farming for a nomadic lifestyle and suddenly acquire a Romance tongue sounds like a stretch.

Now of course I'm talking about who spread CTS10228 not the origin. For the origin I'd suggest reading about the Celts and check where they were settled in antiquity (maps).

Curiosity: if you check yfull you will notice CTS10228* in France.

Furthermore, you can do some more reading on the wars between Dacians, Carpi, etc. and the Romans and see in how many instances these Dacians were actually enslaved and settled South of Danube.

So you might have a point to attribute their spread to Slavic migrations, but that seems to apply more to their spread Northwards and Eastwards whereas the Balkans have far better candidates consisting of nations that were already around the Carpathians (Dacians) or the ones that arrived later (first Celts, throw in there the Bastarnae, and later Goths).

P.s. This applies to your clade and to that of Tutkun Arnaut too. I believe it's worth investing some time in other theories (stronger in my opinion, especially because of the Romanization factor) and not to obsess too much only the Slavic theory.

Serbia, Bosnia, Montenegro, and Croatia were flooded with Vlachs and their Romance tongue is what got them the name Vlasi, not the fact that it simply meant shepherd and it was applied to Serbs. That could have indeed happened later.


I don’t want to be closed to the alternative scenarios you suggest so it’s definitely possible. However absent ADNA, modern distribution suggests otherwise. of course there could be another theory. Something in the middle of what you suggest and what’s the popularly held opinion.

Perhaps some M458 and CTS10228 were from Goths, Dacians. Maybe the free Dacians or Getae that fled further north formed the ethnogenesis of Slavs who migrated later and then were recorded as “Sklavenoi”. This could explain why only a few surviving clades had a demographic boom and expanded out again as Slavs. Maybe when Roman writers called Sklavenoi Getae there was some truth to it.

The queation is how how do we confirm either scenario when it rests only on guess work? Also how do we reconcile the young ages of lineages? And if some of these are actually Gothic or Dacian then what’s left that’s “Slavic”?

personally I think Proto Slavs were northern cousins/neighbors of Dacians/Getae. Much like Scandinavians and Germans have a common ethno-linguistic origin I think the same in the case for Proto Slavs and Getae/Dacians.

Also I thought most diversity for CTS10228 is in Poland while L1029 is in Poland/East Germany/Belarus?
 
I don’t want to be closed to the alternative scenarios you suggest so it’s definitely possible. However absent ADNA, modern distribution suggests otherwise. of course there could be another theory. Something in the middle of what you suggest and what’s the popularly held opinion.

Perhaps some M458 and CTS10228 were from Goths, Dacians. Maybe the free Dacians or Getae that fled further north formed the ethnogenesis of Slavs who migrated later and then were recorded as “Sklavenoi”. This could explain why only a few surviving clades had a demographic boom and expanded out again as Slavs. Maybe when Roman writers called Sklavenoi Getae there was some truth to it.

The queation is how how do we confirm either scenario when it rests only on guess work? Also how do we reconcile the young ages of lineages? And if some of these are actually Gothic or Dacian then what’s left that’s “Slavic”?

personally I think Proto Slavs were northern cousins/neighbors of Dacians/Getae. Much like Scandinavians and Germans have a common ethno-linguistic origin I think the same in the case for Proto Slavs and Getae/Dacians.

Also I thought most diversity for CTS10228 is in Poland while L1029 is in Poland/East Germany/Belarus?

If I remember correctly, while I2a-Din shows highest SNP basal diversity in the region between Ukraine, Poland and Belarus, STR diversity is highest in northern Romania and Moldova. Perhaps a very distant early ancestor of the Slavs originally came from assimilated southern neighbours before the expansion.

We'll probably never know who these people were though. All kinds of tribes lived in the western steppe.
 
If I remember correctly, while I2a-Din shows highest SNP basal diversity in the region between Ukraine, Poland and Belarus, STR diversity is highest in northern Romania and Moldova. Perhaps a very distant early ancestor of the Slavs originally came from assimilated southern neighbours before the expansion.

We'll probably never know who these people were though. All kinds of tribes lived in the western steppe.

Very interesting. That is possible as well. Kind of related to the theory I suggested where some free dacians fled north and expanded out later with the Slavic migrations. Maybe A2512 is Bastarnae or a Dacian/Getae that stayed behind? Could explain its occurence in only Greeks and East European Jews. Seems to be older than the other I2-Din clades expanding out with Slavs. How about for M458, and possibly more specifically L1029? I have an Albanian founder effect in L1029 with all my Albanian matches having a MRCA 0f 1200ypb roughly. My matches outside my clade is at basal L1029 with 2000-2100ypb. In all likelihood it came with the Slavs too since the founder is 1200ypb among Albanians. My theory is that even if it was Gothic/Dacian/Bastarnae, that since the founder effect likely occurred around 800AD it probably expanded with the Bulgarian Empire.

As far as I understand from discussions on the matter, the highest SNP diversity for L1029 is Poland and East Germany/ South-West Belarus. However, some have stated highest R1a diversity is actually in Romania as well. I have not been able to find any actual published sources stating any of the above but it seems to be the common consensus. I am unsure if the diversity in Romania is more STR related like I2a-Din or SNP related.
 
Perhaps some M458 and CTS10228 were from Goths, Dacians. Maybe the free Dacians or Getae that fled further north formed the ethnogenesis of Slavs who migrated later and then were recorded as “Sklavenoi”. This could explain why only a few surviving clades had a demographic boom and expanded out again as Slavs. Maybe when Roman writers called Sklavenoi Getae there was some truth to it.

The queation is how how do we confirm either scenario when it rests only on guess work? Also how do we reconcile the young ages of lineages? And if some of these are actually Gothic or Dacian then what’s left that’s “Slavic”?
I didn't imply that it was the Goths who brought CTS10228 to the Carpathian area, but that they absorbed it and spread it in the Balkans before the Slavs.

It seems to me that the best candidates are the Celts who moved Eastwards and separated CTS10228 from his I2a-Disles cousin.
 
Bonjour ce sont des bulgaes (scythes) d ou le nom de serbes et croates .la premi?re migration c est faite ? l ?poque celtique et d autres par la suite
 
Hello there!
I've found an interesting article. I really can not decide is it something crazy bull****, or a valid theory. Bacisly, the author wrote that the I2a groups are connected with the Celts and Slavs. What do you think?
I mean I totally go it the I2a-Din group according to today's theory is a White Croatian/Slavic group, but who were they before the Slavicization? For me, the term "Slavic" is much more cultural and linguistic, than genetical.
I'm new here, so I cannot post a link, but you can find the article ,,Gavran and Golub ban" at the Oldeuropeanculture.blogspot site.
 
Hello there!
I've found an interesting article. I really can not decide is it something crazy bull****, or a valid theory. Bacisly, the author wrote that the I2a groups are connected with the Celts and Slavs. What do you think?
I mean I totally go it the I2a-Din group according to today's theory is a White Croatian/Slavic group, but who were they before the Slavicization? For me, the term "Slavic" is much more cultural and linguistic, than genetical.
I'm new here, so I cannot post a link, but you can find the article ,,Gavran and Golub ban" at the Oldeuropeanculture.blogspot site.
The admin of oldeuropeanculture is a nutcase serbian nationalist that nonstop lies and spreads misinformation.

He nonstop claims all other south slavs as serbian and makes ridiculous claims going all the way to india. Not somebody to take seriously
 
The big problem I guess here is that after the Cucuteni-Trypillia Culture we haven't got a special group for the I2a1b variants, until the times of Migration Period... So if I'm not mistaken we see one culture close to one specific group, but after this period they mixed with the "newcomers", Slavic, German or other. After some of them arrived for new locations, some of them stayed in place, I guess so.

The strange thing what I often see on forums or articles that somebody see only percentages, somebody see only numbers. Often forget the historycal backgrounds, or circumstances.

My main question is: is there any typical I2a1b culture, after the Cucuteni-Tyrpillia? Who were the "Din" people before the Slavic ethnogenesis? Do we, or can we know anything for sure? Just the science didn't give answers for this question, or the interpretations from amateurs made the chaos?

As you can see I'm corious mostly in cultural connections. If the I2-Din is typical Slavic, than it's Slavic, but I see too many question marks with this topyc. Goths, Illyrians, Dalmatae, Tracians, Dacians... and basicly, everybody else, according to the personal preferences are connected to this haplogroup.
 
Hello there!
I've found an interesting article. I really can not decide is it something crazy bull****, or a valid theory. Bacisly, the author wrote that the I2a groups are connected with the Celts and Slavs. What do you think?
I mean I totally go it the I2a-Din group according to today's theory is a White Croatian/Slavic group, but who were they before the Slavicization? For me, the term "Slavic" is much more cultural and linguistic, than genetical.
I'm new here, so I cannot post a link, but you can find the article ,,Gavran and Golub ban" at the Oldeuropeanculture.blogspot site.

http://oldeuropeanculture.blogspot.com/2014/05/bran-and-goluban.html

[h=2]Thursday, 22 May 2014[/h] [FONT=&quot]Here is something interesting about I2a2a1-M284 (formerly I2b1a) in Ireland. Ireland is very good for genetic genealogy research because of its clans and a long written history. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]I2a2a1 (M284) seems to have arisen in Britain, where it is most common.[/FONT]

Slavs and Croatians have I2a1 haplotype or other branch so the link between Celts and Slavs is very old or in time when Slavs and Celts do not exist. This article that you mention is outdated.
 
As you can see I'm corious mostly in cultural connections. If the I2-Din is typical Slavic, than it's Slavic, but I see too many question marks with this topyc. Goths, Illyrians, Dalmatae, Tracians, Dacians... and basicly, everybody else, according to the personal preferences are connected to this haplogroup.

I2-Din is not typical Slavic but branches of the same can be Slavic, Goth, Illyrian, Dalmatae, Tracian, Dacian etc, for now branch I-Y3120 can be Slavic and I-S17250 can be White Croatian.
 
Dibran, you have mixed branches. Branch L161 or so-called Isles has no expansion among Slavs. It is called Isles because many tested L161 people in I2a project come from the British Isles. It was found among ancient samples in Britain, but also in several places around Europe including Eastern Europe. Also. it is present in modern Europeans all around the continent in very small percentages. I do not know if there is a specific Slavic subclade of L161.
For Slavs important is parallel branch L621 which consist of Dinaric and Disles. Disles is very rare in Europe, almost non-noticeable. The name is given by a combination of Dinaric and Isles, but on the phylogenetic tree, it is closer to Dinaric or I-CTS10228. The supposed time of formation is 11200 ybp. with TMRCA 6500 ybp. Among modern Slavs there is the only expansion of I-CTS10228>>Y3120, supposed time of formation is 3.800 ybp with TMRCA 2200 ybp.
For prehistory and early history of young subclade Y3120č found mostly among modern Slavic population, the most important are early diverge branches of L621 that I mentioned above. Also very important is to find early diverged subclades of I-CTS10228. On the level of I-CTS10228 there are +25 known SNPs and on the level of Y3120 there are +6 known SNPs. Every SNP is a possible new branch, these branches might be present in modern populations of Europe or extinct. Before we found it in modern populations or ancient samples, we can only hypothesize about the origin of Y3120 before its expansion in Eastern Europe. We miss about 1500-2000 years on Yfull tree.

Problem is that many people take for granted theories spread on the internet that do not have any support in current results and researches from Population Genetics. Many times ****** spread it as ultimate proven truth. Unfortunately, there is no portal on the internet that summarizes information from public projects and scientific studies about L621 and other haplogroups.
Some theories you mentioned in your posts. One is that L621 took part in the division of Balto-Slavic languages. According to linguistic theories (which might not be true), the division between Baltic and Slavic language happened 3.500-3.300 ypb.
If there is a population/haplogroup that influenced that division, the TMRCA of that haplogroup might be at least 3.500 years, and bearers of that haplogroup had to have a significant number in that time.
Currently, we know that Slavic branches of I-Y3120 were formed 2.200 ybp. Yfull calculations are not perfect, we can feel free to push it a little back in the past e.g 2.500-3.000 years ago, but it hardly had a significant number of bearers in that time considering that it might survived a long time bottleneck.
For now, it is the most important to find early subclades, we know that some of them exist in the modern population of Upper Rhine basin, but it is not enough for the final conclusion.

About Bastarnae/Germanic origin it is useless to talk. Migration of Bastarnae is historically confirmed, but there are no early subclades in areal of early Germanic Cultures. As I mentioned those subclades are found in Upper Rhine basin. It might be some known historical migration but also prehistorical. The same thing about Celtic migration which might be more plausible.

About Y-STR diversity, there are not many papers about it.
Ken Notdvedt as an early researcher suggested that the highest diversity is on the of I-CTS10228 is on the borders of Ukraine, Belarus and Poland.
Dragan Primorac claimed the highest diversity in Dalmatia.
Olga Utevska, a Ukrainian scientist, in her dissertation suggested two regions, one is around Upper Tisza Basin, in general, North Carpathians (E. Slovakia, NE Hungary, W. Ukraine, SE Poland), other is Dnieper Basin. I shared maps and paper here.
According to public projects on FTDNA, the highest diversity of I-CTS10228 is around North Carpathians. Many subclades are confirmed there, but no any I-Y18331.

I do not know for any research that found the highest diversity in Moldova. There is only one paper with haplotypes without DYS448. Tested people were from NW Romania, Moldova and Ukrainians from Moldova.
There are 3 most common branches among modern Slavic populations I-S17250, I-Y4460 and I-Z17855. They have somewhat different dispersion and expansion rates. The most common is I-S17250 (about 60% of confirmed people and about half of them are I-PH908). The second one is I-Y4460 (about 40%), both branches can be found almost elsewhere, first is the most common in Balkan, West Slavs and Western Ukraine, while I-Y440 has high share in rest of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, but there are members of this branch in Balkan, Poland, CZ, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania etc. The third one is I-Z17855 with about 5%, the branch is found mostly in Serbia, Bulgaria, Montenegro and region of Macedonia.
There is no expansion of I-Z17855 in Romania, Ukraine and Russia. Up to some degree, it might be present in Transylvania and North Carpathians. Most of the tested Romanians belong to S17250 and Y4460.
There are confirmed Z17855 in Poland, Slovakia, CZ, Ukraine and Russia, but its share in I-CTS10228 is very low.

Maps shared here are not accurate at all and no reference how shares were calculated. Making maps is not easy, first, you need to find all data from scientific studies to see the percentage of haplogroups than find tested people on deeper subclades on FTDNA or elsewhere. Looking at maps I can say only that guy who made it did not know the difference between Hungarian and Romanian surnames in Romania. Most tested Z17855 are Hungarians. But even if you know surname you cannot know ethnic origin of a person on the paternal line if it is not self-reported. Several people with Romanian surnames said that their paternal line is non-Romanian, administration in the past changed their surnames in Romanian.
Also about maps of Hungary and Serbia. In Hungarian sample are calculated people of South Slavic and Rusyn origin. On the map of Serbia are included dinaric north results of Serbs from Croatia and Bosnia with a higher share of S17250, while Serbia and Montengro have about 7-9% percent of I-Z17855 which is similar to Bulgaria and Macedonia.
Albanians in anonymous studies have about 9% I-CTS10228, about 3% are DYS448=19 and 6% percent are dinaric north. Inthat 6% are surely people negative on Z17855 because some of them might belong to Y4460, S17250 and even one haplotype seems to be A2512. In the time when maps were made only one Albanian was confirmed as I-Z17855>A1221. So how did someone calculate 9% of Z17855 in Albania?
In the best case it is 4%-5%? I wrote a lot about the possibility that most of Albanian I-CTS10228 are Z17855, it is the only hypothesis based on STR matches.
Vlach people are a mystery, several of them are I-CTS10228 (both dinaric south and north), no one is tested on deeper subclades.

Greece has the highest diversity of I-CTS10228 in Balkan for now, at least a half ethnic Greeks with Dinaric results are I-Y18331. How this subclade finish in Greece nobody knows. Except for Greece and downstream Jews, two people from Russia are confirmed positive on this SNP.
Bastarnae lived in Moldova and settled in nowadays Bulgaria and Dardania. No one is these areas is confirmed to belong to this branch yet. Also no historical sources about the settlement of Bastarnae in Greece, especially in the southern part of the country.
Slavs were bearers of I-CTS10228 for sure, but I would not exclude many other possible migrations, some of them are Carpi, Costoboci (that overrun Greece), Huns, Goths, Kutrigurs and so on. It not clear if some branches were present North of Danube and Carpathians before Slavs entered the area.
 
“Greece has the highest diversity of I-CTS10228 in Balkan for now, at least a half ethnic Greeks with Dinaric results are I-Y18331. How this subclade finish in Greece nobody knows. Except for Greece and downstream Jews, two people from Russia are confirmed positive on this SNP.
Bastarnae lived in Moldova and settled in nowadays Bulgaria and Dardania. No one is these areas is confirmed to belong to this branch yet. Also no historical sources about the settlement of Bastarnae in Greece, especially in the southern part of the country.
Slavs were bearers of I-CTS10228 for sure, but I would not exclude many other possible migrations, some of them are Carpi, Costoboci (that overrun Greece), Huns, Goths, Kutrigurs and so on. It not clear if some branches were present North of Danube and Carpathians before Slavs entered the area.”

The parsimonious explanation for Y18331’s origin seems to be the northern Black Sea region or thereabouts. The Russian from Tobolsk and the Chuvash male who are Y18331 may have ancestral roots from there. How else could they be connected to the Greeks? The estimated MRCA of the Greeks and East European Jews in downstream A10959 (an exclusive Greco-Jewish branch) may have lived around 2,000 years ago.

There are no Y18331 Balkan Slavs so far.
 
Last edited:
Summary of current data

Since the idea that I2a-CTS10228>Y3120 might not be Slavic keeps coming back, I am posting a summary of what the current data tells about it's origins and arrival to the Balkans.

Ancient DNA:
1- The earliest I2a-CTS10228 found so far is a Polish 9th cent I-S17250. It's closest relative on the YFull tree is from Ukraine.
2- I2a is absent in a 5th-6th cent cemetery in Hungary. This was a Longobard cemetery in use during and after the Germanic migrations but before the Slavic ones. Small sample (21) but there were several Germanic lines, and even a few more southern ones, but no I2a.

Modern DNA:
1- SNP diversity
As can be seen on YFull. Out of 5 major I-Y3120 branches:
-2 are only found in in Eastern Europe (Y3120* & Y4460) -tmrca 2200 for Y4460
-1 is most diverse in Greece, secondly in Eastern Europe (Y18331) - tmrca 2200
-1 is pretty even in diversity between Eastern Europe & the Balkans (I-S17250) - tmrca 1800
-1 is more diverse in the Balkans, secondly in Eastern E. with MRCA equal/close to the whole branch (I-Z17855) -tmrca 1600

So Eastern Europe currently has more branches, more diversity within them, and more distant MRCAs.

2- STR diversity
It has been calculated (here, p.26) that haplotypes with:
- DYS448=19 (I2a-DinSouth) are most diverse in the Poland-Belarus area
- DYS448=20 (I2a-DinNorth) are most diverse in Ukraine


To summarize, current data suggest a huge expansion out of Eastern Europe which reached the Balkans no earlier than the 5-6th century CE.
 
-1 is most diverse in Greece, secondly in Eastern Europe (Y18331)

Questioning whether one branch was spread by Slavs in no way denies that much of CTS10228 was spread by Slavs. The East Europeans in Y18331 appear to be all Jewish men, and thus not “Slavs,” per se. Isn’t that peculiar, and doesn’t that raise a bit of a red flag? Why are all the Y18331 East Europeans Jewish males and not “indigenous” people? Jews migrated to East Europe.

The apparently Greco-Jewish branch, Y18331-A10959, further split an estimated 2,000 years ago into Greek Y66192 and Jewish Y23115 (the Jews are downstream of Y23115). Why are there no Jewish males in Y66192 and vice-versa? Why are there no East European Slavs or Balkan Slavs in the entire Y18331 branch? There’s one Chuvash male and one Russian male from the city of Tobolsk in Y18331, very far away from East Europe. Since the parent branch Y18331 is an estimated 2,200 years old, and the major subbranches are estimated to have split off very soon thereafter, could they not have been carried or spread by some other East European people? Not only Slavs lived in East Europe or north of the Black Sea, and the major branches formed a long time ago.
 
I gave ample evidence that I-Y3120 expanded out of Eastern Europe. I was not saying that every single line was spread by Slavs, but the overwhelming majority probably was, and the great expansion experienced by this branch was first and foremost due to the Slavic expansion and migration. Not everything is already set in stone, but I presented the likeliest scenario with the current data.

You raised a lot of questions but gave no alternative explanations. Yes, the ethnic origins of Y18331 may still be debated, but it probably started in Eastern Europe too.

Why are all the Y18331 East Europeans Jewish males and not “indigenous” people? Jews migrated to East Europe./QUOTE]

If you believe that the Y18331 in Eastern Europe is due to a Jewish migration, how do you explain the absence of this branch in the Middle East, or wherever you think these Jewish people moved from? Right now, it seems more likely that Y23115 started in Eastern Europe and was then spread by the descendants of a person or family who converted to Judaism there.
 
“You raised a lot of questions but gave no alternative explanations.”

In post #1435 above, I posited that the northern Black Sea region may have been where Y18331 formed. That might explain the connections to the Chuvash and Russian in Tobolsk, based on possible historical migrations. I do not believe that Y18331 formed in Greece, and that people migrated from there to East Europe. It seems pretty clear that Y3120 came from the north, and Slavs brought subbranches to the Balkans.

Maybe Y18331 is an eastern Slavic haplogroup, but major subbranches may have formed very quickly, per estimates. Maybe it’s a rare Slavic branch. The Greeks and Jews in Y18331-A2512-A10959 may have had a common ancestor an estimated 2,000 years ago. Where did that person live, and why are there no Slavs, if you will, in the haplogroup, either in East Europe or the Balkans? There is even a subbranch of A10959-Y66192 (Greek branch) that formed an estimated 1,000 years later, Y66804.
 
We also have an old scientific paper (2007) in which it is concluded that to Britain possible come some Roman soldiers from Balkans (E1b) and it is not mentioned I2a-CTS10228>Y3120.

http://www.jogg.info/pages/32/bird.htm

That I2a-CTS10228 peoples in that time exist in the Balkans then and they would probably come to Britain.

There is also lack of I2a-CTS10228 in the Italians and if at time of Ilirians I2a-CTS10228 exist among them this should be seen in today's Italians.






 

This thread has been viewed 1064409 times.

Back
Top