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

[Ed the Red]

I know I know, a topic for another thread

 

[RaciallyUnequivocal]

Looking at it racially - Croats from Bosnia are the biggest group of this variant. Croats in general are highly Dinaric to Noric (the last being a Dinaric and Nordic sub variant). I would even say 60 to 70 % of all the Croats overall have this appearance or at least strong strains of such. The Noric more light variant isn’t rare at all in BiH among Muslims and Croats nor is it that type rare over the borders of Croatia itself (close to the BiH region and in Dalmatia). I had blond hair as a child and so do all 7 children of my uncle for instance (and 5 still do while or near teenage now) and all have clear Dinaric features. The rest is chiefly Alpine and on the Coast of Croatia you will usually find more (Alto)-Meds with some East-Baltics as well (rare breed but there are some of them usually more Northwest of Croatia as well) – Croats overall racially show all types of European everywhere within the general population with as such numerous sub-types, but predominantly Croats are Dinaric then Alpine plus the Med - within Bosnia usually the Dinaric-Noric to Alpine type or variant overall being dominant.

Reading some present-day anthropologists, they tend to have the consensus that the Dinaric type is a mix of Med (predominantly - thus it being a sub variant of the European med race in reality) plus one with clear and strong Alpine and Nordic strains– creating the Dinaric type. This makes sense as Croats are genetically predominantly Southern-European. As such I believe that this mutation happened when a decent portion of Nordics intermixed heavily and continually with Alpines and especially European Med people in the Balkan region thousands of years ago. The incoming tribes to the region were likely Germanic and / or Proto-Slavic plus the European tribes mentioned in the OP. Nordics were generally Germanic (to this day the more Germanic nations are more Nordic racially overall) plus various European Med and Alpine tribes – creating the dominant Dinaric type. I don’t believe initially at least the amount of Nordic blood to have been little to our region. So this mutation happened due to heavy intermixing between these tribes / races.

With Croats now being Slavic linguistically due to numerous (central) Slavic immigration in the 7th century (chiefly to the North-West region). I believe these were mostly Alpine Slavs (the region there now is still mostly Alpine). Though I don’t believe it to be the dominant Croatian core at all. I don’t believe Croats are predominately Slavic racially - if you can speak of a “Slavic race.” It’s more of a linguistic term. Slavs tend to be Alpine to Neo-Danubian (Poland) and more East-Baltic eastwards predominately with some Dinaric and Nordic Slavic variants as well. With Meds more rare among Slavs. Croats are far more Med than the other Slavic races East. Our genes are predominantly Southern European (Dinaric - Med) and then central European (Alpine – Noric). We generally cluster closer to our neighbors for this reason and not Eastern-Slavs in any case. Culturally we are also far more Med European than (Eastern) Slavic imo as well, also due to the dominant Catholic religion for ages. Serbs have similar types, also having a good portion of Dinards with some Norics in lesser amounts. Though they have intermixed substantially more with Greco-(Anatolian) East-Meds and some Romanian tribes as such having a different appearance overall and they are simply different culturally as well. Czech, Slovaks, Slovenians and then Poles are the most similar other Slavic speaking groups to Croats after Bosnian-Bosniaks and then Serbs of course.

 

[MaxCRO]

Croats are genetically central European population, which means mixture of northern and southern genes.

We are not ''pred.'' southern Europeans and it wouldn't make sense if we were. However we have significant southern European admixture.

If this bothers other people, especially true southern Europeans we have no true relation with, it's their problem only.
I am personally far closer to Czechs and Slovaks autosomally, than to Bulgarians, and not to mention Italians or Greeks.

 

[MaxCRO]

@Wonomyro,

This is my last attempt:

Nowhere did I say that Croatians don't have ancestry from the migration period, i.e the Slavic migrations. Croatia is part of the Balkans, is it not? Didn't I, at quite some length, say that the Slavic migrations did impact the Balkans? Didn't I say that Croatia had more of that ancestry than the other Balkan nations? How many more ways and times can I say it?

What means ''balkans'' to you ? I am well educated, and it was originaly meant to represent Ottoman possesions in south-eastern Europe after Treaty of Karlowitz.
Now, what balkans represent today is different compared to it's original and historical meaning.

I will ask you to refrain using Croatia in relation with ''balkans'' because I find it offensive and degratory. We don't identify with ''balkans'', ''balkan nations'' and so on, perhaps the Italians or other foreigners do, but now when you know it's not so well accepted among mainstream Croatian society I politely ask you to change your approach.

 

[Angela]

What means ''balkans'' to you ? I am well educated, and it was originaly meant to represent Ottoman possesions in south-eastern Europe after Treaty of Karlowitz.
Now, what balkans represent today is different compared to it's original and historical meaning.

I will ask you to refrain using Croatia in relation with ''balkans'' because I find it offensive and degratory. We don't identify with ''balkans'', ''balkan nations'' and so on, perhaps the Italians or other foreigners do, but now when you know it's not so well accepted among mainstream Croatian society I politely ask you to change your approach.

Geographically, historically, politically, and in the eyes of the rest of the world Croatia is a Balkan country. As for Croatians themselves, I know quite a few and they view it similarly. Who are you to speak for a whole country?

Anyone interested in genetics knows that Croatians are less "southern" than people from some other parts of the Balkans. Only a racist like you would care.

 

[Wonomyro]

Balkan is a term with plenty of meanings.

Is Croatia a Balkan country/nation?


Historically? No.

Culturally? No. (with few exceptions)

Confessionally? No.

Politically? No.

Linguistically? No.

Self-declaratively? No.

Geographically? Only partly, if we accept the strict geographical definition, which is dubious.

And the most relevant for this thread - genetically? No.

 

[MaxCRO]

Geographically, historically, politically, and in the eyes of the rest of the world Croatia is a Balkan country. As for Croatians themselves, I know quite a few and they view it similarly. Who are you to speak for a whole country? Anyone interested in genetics knows that Croatians are less "southern" than people from some other parts of the Balkans. Only a racist like you would care.

Balkan is not a historically geographic term. Geograpically, Croatia is crossroads of central and southeastern Europe.However southestern Europe is not synonomous with balkans. Greece is best example for that. And even geographically cca. 45% of Croatia lies in southeastern Europe, the rest being central.Romania lies almost completely outside of southeastern Europe, however people usually refer to it as balkan country, because it was primarly geopolitical concept related with Ottoman occupation.Historically, Croatia became part of balkan geopolitically in 1918. However, so did Slovenia. I am not ignoring that part of history ofcourse, but since it was one unsucessful and painful episode we prefer to put emphasis on almost 1000 years before that. You must understand, our genetically related southern slavic neighbours have very different history, religion and culture than we do. Therefore, balkan identity is something very foreign to most of us.I have no idea what kind of Croats you met, but only Bosnian-Herzegovian Croats are balkan people, with balkan culture and history related with that part of the world.They are our link with that region. And not less Croat, nevertheless. Equally worthy, but simply very different as other balkan people are.I am absolutely anti-racist. Just don't want to be said what I am by foreigners with their prejudices and lack of knowledge. Croatian history and identity is quite complex topic.To say we are not genetically southern European people is not racism but simple fact. Europe is not split in north and south only, but there are many populations who fluctuate between the two, like Croats do, or like French do.

And genetics doesn't relate with culture and regional belonging. Some of closest people to Croats genetically are Bosniak muslims, who are as foreign as they can be culturally, historically and politically from us. Hope I made quality point.

 

[Angela]

Well, well, Davef, didn't you just post that you don't believe in signalling disagreement by giving downvotes, and believe disagreement should be posted so as to be direct and not passive aggressive? Guess you changed your mind?

I actually think you were originally correct. I give a lot of up votes, but I only down vote a post if it has the hallmarks of agenda, dishonesty, racism, or a blatant disregard for not only forum, but civilized conventions. Well, I also do it when someone is using them for a personal reason. Otherwise, I just argue the point as civilly as possible. Anything else smacks of passive aggression to me, as well as an acknowledgement that you can't win the debate.

Too bad you changed your stance. I actually respected it.

 

[davef]

.....Wait!!! I had to scroll back to find the post I downvoted (you can tell you voted on one if you can't vote it again) because I was unaware that I did, I may have accidentally tapped it on my phone as I was scrolling or (less likely) triggered it after putting it down face down. Ill just give you an upvote to cancel it out.

Very sorry for the mistake, let me know if this happens again

 

[MOESAN]

War again? Croatia is commonly packed along with Balkans (geographically spite unperfectly) by Western Europeans because of its ancient appartenance to old Yougoslavia, without being attached too tightly to a specific vision of culture/race etc... and its Dalmatian part is very much in the Wester Balkans geographic area, I think.
otherwise, Croatians on PCA's based on autosomes are almost everytime close to Hungarians, more Central Europe and less Southeastern Europe than Romanians, Bulgarians or Albanians, by instance, and it is not disputed, I believe. Their phenotypes as a whole evocate also more Central Europe than Southern Europe, this last term being very unprecise in itself concerning phenotypes.
But I find a bit too sensitive the reactions of someones as if to be "Balkan" would be kind f insult. Everyone with a little bit of culture knows that the region shelters a lot of different people which share nevertheless common parts of ancestry and of history (including numerous wars where they were sometimes on the same side, sometimes in the opposite ones), what does not mean they can be "reduced' to a signle pop.
So everyone can make some precisions without it would be obliged to turn into a verbal war.

 

[MaxCRO]

War again? Croatia is commonly packed along with Balkans (geographically spite unperfectly) by Western Europeans because of its ancient appartenance to old Yougoslavia, without being attached too tightly to a specific vision of culture/race etc... and its Dalmatian part is very much in the Wester Balkans geographic area, I think.
otherwise, Croatians on PCA's based on autosomes are almost everytime close to Hungarians, more Central Europe and less Southeastern Europe than Romanians, Bulgarians or Albanians, by instance, and it is not disputed, I believe. Their phenotypes as a whole evocate also more Central Europe than Southern Europe, this last term being very unprecise in itself concerning phenotypes.
But I find a bit too sensitive the reactions of someones as if to be "Balkan" would be kind f insult. Everyone with a little bit of culture knows that the region shelters a lot of different people which share nevertheless common parts of ancestry and of history (including numerous wars where they were sometimes on the same side, sometimes in the opposite ones), what does not mean they can be "reduced' to a signle pop.
So everyone can make some precisions without it would be obliged to turn into a verbal war.

Dalmatia lies completely in southeastern Europe. However ''western balkans'' is post-2000 geopolitical term for countries of ex-Yugoslavia + Albania, which still did not join euro-atlantic integrations. It has little historical value. Otherwise, there would exist ''northern'', ''eastern'' and ''southern'' Balkans as well, which of course does not.

 

[don_joe]

I am a Croat and I don't feel offended when people in Switzerland, here where I live call Croatia a Balkan country. What does it mean at all? Geographically? Yes, Balkan starts somewhere in the North-West. So where is the border? There are a few definitions but let's say it's the river Sava. Myself, I'm from northern Croatia, so techically I'm not even from Balkan. But many of my fellow countrymen are from the other side, I certainly have some ancestry from there too. What is so bad about being from Balkan? Are you a better person if you're from central Europe and not from Balkan? In the historical and cultural sense, Croatia is a part of Balkan (as well as of central Europe), at least a good part of it. Being Catholic and not Orthodox or Muslim doesn't make the difference, religion isn't the criteria here. I would recommend you to embrace this fact, to live with it in peace. Don't show yourself better than it is, there's no need for it. And if you doubt that Croatia is a Balkan country, just look at it's government.

 

[Sile]

Balkan is not a historically geographic term. Geograpically, Croatia is crossroads of central and southeastern Europe.However southestern Europe is not synonomous with balkans. Greece is best example for that. And even geographically cca. 45% of Croatia lies in southeastern Europe, the rest being central.Romania lies almost completely outside of southeastern Europe, however people usually refer to it as balkan country, because it was primarly geopolitical concept related with Ottoman occupation.Historically, Croatia became part of balkan geopolitically in 1918. However, so did Slovenia. I am not ignoring that part of history ofcourse, but since it was one unsucessful and painful episode we prefer to put emphasis on almost 1000 years before that. You must understand, our genetically related southern slavic neighbours have very different history, religion and culture than we do. Therefore, balkan identity is something very foreign to most of us.I have no idea what kind of Croats you met, but only Bosnian-Herzegovian Croats are balkan people, with balkan culture and history related with that part of the world.They are our link with that region. And not less Croat, nevertheless. Equally worthy, but simply very different as other balkan people are.I am absolutely anti-racist. Just don't want to be said what I am by foreigners with their prejudices and lack of knowledge. Croatian history and identity is quite complex topic.To say we are not genetically southern European people is not racism but simple fact. Europe is not split in north and south only, but there are many populations who fluctuate between the two, like Croats do, or like French do.

And genetics doesn't relate with culture and regional belonging. Some of closest people to Croats genetically are Bosniak muslims, who are as foreign as they can be culturally, historically and politically from us. Hope I made quality point.

Why is istria part of the balkans when it has part of the alps ......julian alps which slovenia has as well .................clearly the term balkans is based on national borders ( wrong system ) and not geography .
some also have Romania as part of the balkans and other do not

Clearly there are too many sensitive people who decide what is what based on if it will effect others feelings and not based on fact

 

[MaxCRO]

. And if you doubt that Croatia is a Balkan country, just look at it's government.

This is final proof of your own ignorance, because by implications Croatian government is ''bad'' you imply it's connection with balkan, which seem to you be negative.While I do not identify with balkan identity, I wouldn't be so foolish to imply balkan means everything negative. Italy is quite famous for it's unstable governments, does it sudenly makes it balkan country ? Can you elaborate us what is balkan about Croatian culture and history ? And the geographical definition by sava river does not hold any value, because quite a lot of territory south of sava belongs to panonnian plain, same unit as teritories north of it. From pure geographical pow, transition from central to southeastern Europe begins with dinaric mountain range.

 

[Wonomyro]

What is so bad about being from Balkan?

It is factually wrong, to start with. It is, however, your right to call yourself whatever you like, listen to music you like,...

 

[MaxCRO]

It is factually wrong, to start with. It is, however, your right to call yourself whatever you like, listen to music you like,...

For them, being less affluent and more corrupted than let say Switzerland, makes it balkan country, ignoring the fact, if Albania or Bulgaria suddenly become most developed countries in Europe, they would still remain balkan countries, because their identity is such.

Problem is this people who push balkan identity actually do not respect it like I do.
I do not consider central europe to be any better than balkan is, but simply that region is what I'm familiar with.
German or Czech criminal and rapist is still central european, and Albanian or Bosnian doctor or architect is still a balkan person.

Balkans does not equal povetry and wars, actually there were more wars in western Europe compared to Balkans in last 1000 years.
Balkan has spacific history and culture, which Croatia doesn't really belongs to, but not because it's ''better'' than it, but because it has simply very different cultural/historical development.

 

[Wonomyro]

This is final proof of your own ignorance, because by implications Croatian government is ''bad'' you imply it's connection with balkan, which seem to you be negative.

Well noticed! He unintentionally made the point more convincing that we would do!

 

[Johane Derite]

This is the only true and valid balkan litmus test:

 

[MaxCRO]

This is the only true and valid balkan litmus test:

Ćevapčići is bosnian dish, you can find them native in Serbia and few other countries too. In Croatia this food is not part of our traditional cusine.

 

[Wonomyro]

, I think. otherwise, Croatians on PCA's based on autosomes are almost everytime close to Hungarians, more Central Europe and less Southeastern Europe

When we are already comparing Croatia to Hungary as “indisputably Central European”, then look at some interesting facts about the capitals:

The Ottomans conquered Buda in 1526, as well in 1529, and finally occupied it in 1541.[79] The Turkish Rule lasted for more than 140 years.

Zagreb, Croatian capital, never fell under the Turkish Rule...