I2a-Din came to the Balkans and Dinaric Alps with the Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians

That's interesting to me, so if you have concrete data link etc...I would be grateful.
Sure.
1638
Frang Bardhi:The Pasha of Bosnia attacks Kelmendi

Report on the arrival of the Pasha of Bosnia in Albania with 15,000 men to destroy and annihilate the people of Kelmendi, in this year of our Lord 1638, at the beginning of the month of February.

... From such words and complaints, the Sultan grew angry with the people of Kelmendi and decided to attack them. He gave orders that a letter be sent to the Pasha of Bosnia to gather his forces as quickly as possible, as many men as he could muster, and to move on Albania without delay and destroy the Kelmendi, pardoning neither sex, and putting everything to fire and sword. With the order, he sent a rope and a turban. The rope was to remind him that if he did not destroy the Kelmendi, it would be used to hang him. The turban was purple cloth, a symbol of victory and the glory of victory. When the pasha received the order and reward from his lord, he set out to execute it. He gathered 15,000 men, continental Dalmatians, Croats, Serbs, Bulgarians and mostly Bosnians. All of them were large bearded men, but were unskilled in the art of warfare.
He summoned the sanjak beys of Shkodra and Dukagjin and ordered them to muster about a thousand Albanians, both Muslims and Christians, to join his 15,000 Slavs, or Harvats [Croats] as the Albanians commonly called them.
Source:
[Extracts from the report of Frang Bardhi [Francesco Bianchi], Relatione della venuta del Bassà di Bosna in Albania con 15 m. homini per destruger, e disfare i Populi di Clementi, ò Chelmendi nel corrente anno del Sig.re 1638 al principio del mese di febraro. Archives of the Propaganda Fide, Visite e Collegi 17, p. 153- 162. Relation II/30. Reprinted in: Peter Bartl (ed.), Albania Sacra, 3 (Wiesbaden 2014), p. 137-140; and in Injac Zamputti (ed.), Dokumente për historinë e Shqipërisë (1623-1653) (Sankt Gallen & Prishtina 2015), p. 193-198. Translated from the Italian by Robert Elsie.]
 
You may not understand in genetics, types I2a that exist in Greece, Bulgaria, Albania, Macedonia..not I2a.

If you think that I2-CTS10228 is Vlach origin then many Vlach settled in Zagorje because I2-CTS10228 is present in Zagorje/northwestern Croatia.

I2-PH908 does not exist among Croats from northwestern Croatia only CTS10228, on the other hand CTS10228 does not exist among Croats from Herzegovina only PH908. Among Dalmatian Croats CTS10228 exist around 10% but PH908 is much stronger.

If Serbs with CTS10228 are Vlach origin then Croats with CTS10228 are also Vlach origin.
 
Serbs were Croats only in your dreams.

Technically, such scenario is not quite impossible because:

The modern identity of Serbs is rooted in Eastern Orthodoxy and traditions. In the 19th century, the Serbian national identity was manifested, with awareness of history and tradition, medieval heritage, cultural unity, despite living under different empires. Three elements, together with the legacy of the Nemanjić dynasty, were crucial in forging identity and preservation during foreign domination: the Serbian Orthodox Church, the Serbian language, and Kosovo Myth.[25] When the Principality of Serbia gained independence from the Ottoman Empire, Orthodoxy became crucial in defining the national identity, instead of language which was shared by other South Slavs (Croats and Bosniaks). (...)
The origin of the ethnonym is unclear (…)

(...)

25. Ana S. Trbovich (2008). A Legal Geography of Yugoslavia's Disintegration. Oxford University Press, USA. pp. 69–. ISBN 978-0-19-533343-5.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbs
 
Sure.
1638
Frang Bardhi:The Pasha of Bosnia attacks Kelmendi


Source:
[Extracts from the report of Frang Bardhi [Francesco Bianchi], Relatione della venuta del Bassà di Bosna in Albania con 15 m. homini per destruger, e disfare i Populi di Clementi, ò Chelmendi nel corrente anno del Sig.re 1638 al principio del mese di febraro. Archives of the Propaganda Fide, Visite e Collegi 17, p. 153- 162. Relation II/30. Reprinted in: Peter Bartl (ed.), Albania Sacra, 3 (Wiesbaden 2014), p. 137-140; and in Injac Zamputti (ed.), Dokumente për historinë e Shqipërisë (1623-1653) (Sankt Gallen & Prishtina 2015), p. 193-198. Translated from the Italian by Robert Elsie.]

Thanks. Here is the fact that I know.

John Skylitzes, Latinized as Ioannes Scylitzes (1040-1101)
The Bulgarians ask Mihajlo, who then was ruler of those who were called Croats, who dwelt in Kotor and Prapratnici(Montenegro), and who had no small country under them, to help them and work with them, and to give them their son, which they will proclaim as Emperor of Bulgaria"
Mihailo, in Cyrillic Mihailo, the first king in Duklia and Montenegrin history, the head of the Dukedom state from the Vojislavljević dynasty from 1046 to 1081.
 
If you think that I2-CTS10228 is Vlach origin then many Vlach settled in Zagorje because I2-CTS10228 is present in Zagorje/northwestern Croatia.

I2-PH908 does not exist among Croats from northwestern Croatia only CTS10228, on the other hand CTS10228 does not exist among Croats from Herzegovina only PH908. Among Dalmatian Croats CTS10228 exist around 10% but PH908 is much stronger.

If Serbs with CTS10228 are Vlach origin then Croats with CTS10228 are also Vlach origin.

If Croats with mutation CTS10228 which has source in Greece and if this mutation comes to Croatia before 300, 200 years is indeed Vlach origin. If CTS10228 do not come with Vlachs before 300, 200 years and if it's there 1000 years then it is not Vlach origin

among Croats from northwestern Croatia

Source of Croats is in Dalmatia not in northwestern Croatia, all mutations behind https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ are White Croatian origin, so is and mutation I2-PH908.
 
Sure. 1638 Frang Bardhi:The Pasha of Bosnia attacks Kelmendi (...)

Thank you, @LABERIA, for this very useful source.

He summoned the sanjak beys of Shkodra and Dukagjin and ordered them to muster about a thousand Albanians, both Muslims and Christians, to join his 15,000 Slavs, or Harvats [Croats] as the Albanians commonly called them.
Italians don’t use the form “Harvat”. It is the Croatian archaic form. That could mean that Albanians got it very likely directly from Croats in earlier times, not mediated later via Venetians. The contact most likely occurred in medieval Dioclea (present day Montenegro and Western Albania).
 
What you write is the same nonsense which can be found at Serbian DNA Project (here by member Shetop, #442 at "Sarmatians, Serbs, Croats and I2a2") - no mention of White Croats, although are listed tribes who lived in the same territory as them, while making a ridiculous connection with Bastarnae and Celtic tribe Boii which related to the DAI connection of the White Serbia to the land of Boiki, regardless of ambiguity of the term Boiki, the same DAI you dismiss regarding the origin of Croats, the same chapters on Croats in DAI on which was based chapter on Serbs. If anything, it is really fascinating that people like you from Serbia use the account about White Serbia, yet ignore that the people who are really related to this mythical land, Sorbs, have about 65% R1a and almost no I2a-M423.

My theory about Bastarnae nothing to do with today's nations, South Slavic, Eastern Slavic, Western Slavic, nothing to do with Poreklo and I don't know what else. I never mentioned Boii. I have no idea how people link some things.

Really member Sile introduced Bastarnae as possible carriers of I-CTS10228. Never before that I thought about Bastarnae in this direction.

I was interested if Sile is right or no and started to explore. There are a lot of interesting things, and everything what was interesting to me I put in the forum.

Unfortunately without scientific papers everything is empty story. Internet sources, genealogy sites and thoughts in forums, what member Milan noticed, are not main evidence. Yes it can be interesting but without essence.

But finally voila! I found that Ukrainian scientists, especially Pachkova, proved that Zarubintsy culture was Bastarnaian. It is very important because Zarubintsy culture was predecessor of Kiev culture which was Slavic.

If we go back before Zarubintsy we can reconstruct all Bastarnae migrations and it can be linked with I-CTS10228 carriers.

Surely this doesn't mean crown proof only findings haplogroups of Bastarnae in areas where they lived and epochas when can prove or reject this assumption. But after findings of Ukrainian scientists about Zarubintsy culture weight that Bastarnae were I-CTS10228 carriers is significantly higher.
 
Your argumentation is basically "they are foreign and respectable scientists from institute hence have bigger authority", nevertheless they are not an even significant minority, nevertheless the criticism of their consideration, nevertheless they are not only scientists who have some kind of consideration regarding the subject, as if being scientist is exclusive to this handful of people. It is just a minority opinion considered by scientists you can number on fingers of one hand, yet you use in a way it is a legitimate and mainstream conclusion to negate Croatian ethnic origin or historical migration. The opinion itself is not even revolutionary, it is at least from the 1970s. No wonder that Borri was supervised by Pohl when he has a social interpretation of history - differently said, it is part of the Marxism influence on historiography which emphasized social rather than the ethnic viewpoint of history.

You should have more trust in scientists, scientific Institutes and science. Institute of Medieval Research, Vienna, a department of Austrian Academy of Sciences is serious scientific institution. Are you really think that some Western Balkan Institute is better?
 
You are correct, that it the word once I rechecked my information.................Venice used it only for the Serbs and also for the Serb kingdom of Zeta in modern Montenegro...there where some who thought the Morlacchi were the Bosnians

I cannot believe it. Didn't I write to not open this pandora's box, yet even worse, you state a totally fallacious conclusion about the use of the term by Venice, although you obviously do not know anything about it, actually, you did not even dare to read the article about Morlachs related to Vlachs in the history of Croatia at Wikipedia.
 
I2-PH908 does not exist among Croats from northwestern Croatia only CTS10228, on the other hand CTS10228 does not exist among Croats from Herzegovina only PH908. Among Dalmatian Croats CTS10228 exist around 10% but PH908 is much stronger.

Do you even understand what you write about? A person positive to PH908 (formed circa 1850 YBP) cannot be negative to CTS10228 (formed circa 5200 YBP) i.e. Croats from Herzegovina are CTS10228.
 
If we go back before Zarubintsy we can reconstruct all Bastarnae migrations and it can be linked with I-CTS10228 carriers.

Again, do you even understand genetics and archeology? Zarubintsy culture and Bastarnae are recorded circa since 3rd century BCE, while I-CTS10228 had TMRCA circa 3800 YBP i.e. circa 1800 BCE.
 
You should have more trust in scientists, scientific Institutes and science. Institute of Medieval Research, Vienna, a department of Austrian Academy of Sciences is serious scientific institution. Are you really think that some Western Balkan Institute is better?

How do you even dare to say that I do not trust scientists, institutes, and academies enough? Unlike you who don't trust some of them because of a consideration which ideologically doesn't fit your narrative? You cannot differentiate scientific opinion weight? Your argumentation is simply wrong and contradicting.
 
Again, do you even understand genetics and archeology? Zarubintsy culture and Bastarnae are recorded circa since 3rd century BCE, while I-CTS10228 had TMRCA circa 3800 YBP i.e. circa 1800 BCE.

Evidence Zarubintsy culture is Bastarnatian is very important, and in previous pages there is a lot about Bastarnae, their origin and movements, I don't want repeat.

For example in #1117 is sublimated, who wants to read.

Bastarnae are strong candidate as carriers of I-CTS10228.
 
How do you even dare to say that I do not trust scientists, institutes, and academies enough? Unlike you who don't trust some of them because of a consideration which ideologically doesn't fit your narrative? You cannot differentiate scientific opinion weight? Your argumentation is simply wrong and contradicting.

No.

Respectable Austrian Institute and scientists of this Institute are competent, neutral (not interested party) and much more reliable source than local scientists who really are much more biased.

If you notice I very rare, almost never, use Serbian sources, not because I consider them bad, but because of criteria of neutrality.
 
My theory about Bastarnae nothing to do with today's nations, South Slavic, Eastern Slavic, Western Slavic, nothing to do with Poreklo and I don't know what else. I never mentioned Boii. I have no idea how people link some things.

Really member Sile introduced Bastarnae as possible carriers of I-CTS10228. Never before that I thought about Bastarnae in this direction.

I was interested if Sile is right or no and started to explore. There are a lot of interesting things, and everything what was interesting to me I put in the forum.
Yes, here it is how Sile introduced the Bastarnae:
I have a work colleague, an Albanian heritage , who says ( was told by his gfather ) albanians originate as part the Bastanae ( mixed people ) and where part of the 80000 contingent that went from the south Carpathians mountain area to Macedonia to help Philip of Macedon defeat the advancing illyrians from the north .......I think it was about 350BC

I doubt that..........but the bastanae ....where a bastard people of different races
 
Yes, here it is how Sile introduced the Bastarnae:
yep and he provided me with
The most enigmatic ‘barbarian’ people to appear in southeastern Europe in the late Iron Age are undoubtedly the Bastarnae (Βαστάρναι / Βαστέρναι) tribes.
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.

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.
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 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.

A policy was implemented by the Macedonian King Philip V in 179 BC. In order to neutralize the Dardanii tribes, traditional Macedonian enemies, Philip struck a deal with the Celtic Scordisci and the Bastarnae, whereby the latter would be resettled in Dardania, thus eliminating the Dardanii threat, and ensuring Bastarnae help for Macedonia’s planned war with Rome (Livy 40:57, 41:19).
The Sevtopolis experiment failed miserably when, in the face of the Celtic advance, the Thracians simply abandoned the city and fled. Philip’s partially successful attempt to resettle the Bastarnae in Dardania produced no long term benefits for Macedonia, and following his death the Bastarnae refused to fight for Philip’s son, Perseus, in his war with Rome.
https://books.google.com.au/books?i...v=onepage&q=bastarnae and macedonians&f=false
What do you mean that there where no Bastanae in the balkans?
 
https://albanianstudies.weebly.com/dardanians.html
Even albanians sites are claiming links with the Dardanians..
..
But in my Opinion, the dardanii are the most northern genetic alignment we can see with the Albanians, .......albanians are genetically more greek than northern Balkan people
 
https://albanianstudies.weebly.com/dardanians.html
Even albanians sites are claiming links with the Dardanians..
..
But in my Opinion, the dardanii are the most northern genetic alignment we can see with the Albanians, .......albanians are genetically more greek than northern Balkan people
First, we don't know if the link provided by you is Albanian or not.
Second, this "My Albanian studies" sounds ridiculous, because all these so-called studies are just a collection of pages from Wikipedia, or better from the Anonymous of Wikipedia. Can you show me a study in the link provided by you that it's not just a copy paste from Wikipedia but it's a personal contribution of the person/s behind this blog?
And third, of course we Albanians claim links with Dardanians, Epirotes and other Illyrian tribes. Some toponyms, names, etc, are preserved by Albanians from antiquity in our days. For example, the name of the most famous Dardani King, Bardhyl or the name of Pirro of Epir, the name of the Illyrian Queen Teuta in the Albanian modern name Tefta, etc, continued to be used without interruption.
 

This thread has been viewed 568553 times.

Back
Top