How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?

How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?


  • Total voters
    230
I am going to say this as simply as possible. If you can't get this then there is no point holding intellectual discussions with you.

I have never said, nor would I ever say, that Croats don't have ancestry from the people who brought the Slavic languages to the Balkans. I think that 50% figure is about right.

The point is that there is another 50% to be accounted for...which comes from people who inhabited those lands before the migrations of the Slavic tribes in the Early Middle Ages.

Do you get it now?????

Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend when it is so blindingly obvious to anyone who has studied population genetics for fifteen minutes?

I agree, problem with the balkans is most people either claim to be hard core slavs or have nothing to do with them. Southern slavdom is schyzophrenic.
 
I agree, problem with the balkans is most people either claim to be hard core slavs or have nothing to do with them. Southern slavdom is schyzophrenic.

I can't upvote your post, but I would if I could. :)
 
This is the second infraction that I got for a benign reason. It is time for the owners of this forum to think about the quality of the moderation. Moderators should not use infractions as a tool to discourage members whose posts do not fit into their political agendas. Instead a culture of dialogue and tolerance towards different views should be promoted. I got this infraction because I reacted to the clearly chauvinistic series of posts of a member who is a moderator at the same time and it is the least person who should promote such a practice. At that point I do not care whether I am going to get another infraction. If I am not welcome here, there are other very good forums around. No big deal.

You have received an infraction at Eupedia Forum

Dear Wonomyro,

You have received an infraction at Eupedia Forum.

Reason: Insulted or provoked a Team Member
-------
You have insulted and provoked a team member.

Keep it up and you know the consequences.
-------

This infraction is worth 4 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.
 
For instance?
You have to admit many members of former jugoslavian countries either claim to be the original slavs or claim to be illyrians and genetically not slavic at all. Ive also seen numerous threads on forums of serbs and croatians arguing non stop about how they speak either the same or completely different languages. Im not saying there arent reasonable southern slavs but when ancestry and language comes up on a thread when dealing with croats or serbs its constantly the same arguments.

Sent from my KIW-L21 using Tapatalk
 
You have to admit many members of former jugoslavian countries either claim to be the original slavs or claim to be illyrians and genetically not slavic at all. Ive also seen numerous threads on forums of serbs and croatians arguing non stop about how they speak either the same or completely different languages. Im not saying there arent reasonable southern slavs but when ancestry and language comes up on a thread when dealing with croats or serbs its constantly the same arguments.

There are many low quality discussions around, that’s true. Some of the main reasons for the mass disagreement whether the south Slavs are (genetically) autochtonous lays in the early ideas of the origin of their dominant I2a haplotype. It was believed that the hg was Illyrian and is present in Dalmatia since Paleoloitic. In an meantime it was discovered that the South Slavic clade is too young and its origin is most probably somewhere more North and it led to a new conclusion that the hg must have came with the Slavic migrations. The knowledge in this field is changing so rapidly that not all people can follow. You can see it even in the Eupedia articles on the I2a haplogroup, only 2 or 3 years ago, the story of the origin of I2a haplogroup was completely different (and nobody, of course, should call Eupedia schizophrenic for that).

Just check the votes presented on the top of this page. It speaks for itself.
 

The point is that there is another 50% to be accounted for...which comes from people who inhabited those lands before the migrations of the Slavic tribes in the Early Middle Ages.

Who are these people through male line ie. which haplotypes ?

https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

I2a 37%
R1a 24%
I1 5,5%

It is 66,5% populations that have nothing to do with the Balkans or with period before two thousand years ago, since Slovenes have a strong west types of R1b it is very possible that a part of the Croatian R1b is not Balkan origin, it means that E1b and J2b types remains as Balkans origin, however in E1b haplogroups there is one branch or subclade PH1246 which probably comes with Slavs.

This means that Croats on the male line have around 25% Y haplotypes (aboriginal) from Balkans mostly assimilated from Vlah-Albanians three hundred years ago.
 
I agree, problem with the balkans is most people either claim to be hard core slavs or have nothing to do with them. Southern slavdom is schyzophrenic.

About 25% of the Croat by the male line has no connection with the Slavs (most of them assimilated before three hundred or two hundred years ago), it does not mean that I can not say that Croatians are Slavs.
 
You have to admit many members of former jugoslavian countries either claim to be the original slavs or claim to be illyrians and genetically not slavic at all. Ive also seen numerous threads on forums of serbs and croatians arguing non stop about how they speak either the same or completely different languages. Im not saying there arent reasonable southern slavs but when ancestry and language comes up on a thread when dealing with croats or serbs its constantly the same arguments.

Sent from my KIW-L21 using Tapatalk

Only tribe whom genetics confirmed historical record and migration to Balkans are Croats, the rest is logic (language, etc..).
 
Who are these people through male line ie. which haplotypes ?

https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

I2a 37%
R1a 24%
I1 5,5%

It is 66,5% populations that have nothing to do with the Balkans or with period before two thousand years ago, since Slovenes have a strong west types of R1b it is very possible that a part of the Croatian R1b is not Balkan origin, it means that E1b and J2b types remains as Balkans origin, however in E1b haplogroups there is one branch or subclade PH1246 which probably comes with Slavs.

This means that Croats on the male line have around 25% Y haplotypes (aboriginal) from Balkans mostly assimilated from Vlah-Albanians three hundred years ago.

I was talking about autosomal dna, not yDna. Ydna only accounts for about 2% of your total genetic make-up.

Once again, let me use an extreme example. The herders in some areas of the Cameroons almost all carry R1b. This is what they look like...
Cameroon_1.jpg


Y dna does not tell the whole story where individuals are concerned.

The fact that Croats may carry only 25% non "Slavic" y dna doesn't mean they are 75% "Slavic", or, said, another way, that they are only 25% non-Slavic.

It doesn't work that way.

Perhaps if you read this you'll understand it better...

"There are three major types of genealogical DNA tests: Autosomal and X-DNA, Y-DNA and mtDNA.

  • Autosomal tests look at chromosomes 1–22 and X. The autosomes (chromosomes 1–22) are inherited from both parents and all recent ancestors. The X-chromosome follows a special inheritance pattern. Ethnicity estimates are often included with this sort of testing.
  • Y-DNA looks at the Y-chromosome, which is inherited father to son, and so can only be taken by males to explore their direct paternal line.
  • mtDNA looks at the mitochondria, which is inherited from mother to child and so can be used to explore one's direct maternal line.[1]
Y-DNA and mtDNA cannot be used for ethnicity estimates, but can be used to find one's haplogroup, which is unevenly distributed geographically.[2] Direct-to-consumer DNA test companies have often labeled haplogroups by continent or ethnicity (e.g., an "African haplogroup" or a "Viking haplogroup"), but these labels may be speculative or misleading.""

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_DNA_test
 
I was talking about autosomal dna, not yDna. Ydna only accounts for about 2% of your total genetic make-up.

Once again, let me use an extreme example. The herders in some areas of the Cameroons almost all carry R1b. This is what they look like...
Cameroon_1.jpg


Y dna does not tell the whole story where individuals are concerned.

The fact that Croats may carry only 25% non "Slavic" y dna doesn't mean they are 75% "Slavic", or, said, another way, that they are only 25% non-Slavic.

It doesn't work that way.

Perhaps if you read this you'll understand it better...

"There are three major types of genealogical DNA tests: Autosomal and X-DNA, Y-DNA and mtDNA.

  • Autosomal tests look at chromosomes 1–22 and X. The autosomes (chromosomes 1–22) are inherited from both parents and all recent ancestors. The X-chromosome follows a special inheritance pattern. Ethnicity estimates are often included with this sort of testing.
  • Y-DNA looks at the Y-chromosome, which is inherited father to son, and so can only be taken by males to explore their direct paternal line.
  • mtDNA looks at the mitochondria, which is inherited from mother to child and so can be used to explore one's direct maternal line.[1]
Y-DNA and mtDNA cannot be used for ethnicity estimates, but can be used to find one's haplogroup, which is unevenly distributed geographically.[2] Direct-to-consumer DNA test companies have often labeled haplogroups by continent or ethnicity (e.g., an "African haplogroup" or a "Viking haplogroup"), but these labels may be speculative or misleading.""

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_DNA_test

Let's say that Croats come from White Croatia and all the way to Turkish times have northern autosomal genetics, then come Vlachs and bring Balkan, African autosomal genetics. Which conclusions we can conclude ?, whether the Croats came from White Croatia or Africa, Greece, Albania etc.

I'm interested in migration and confirmation of historical records, this autosomal genetics does not determine.
 
Now the Vlachs brought AFRICAN autosomal genetics to Croatia? Where do you find African autosomal genetics in the Balkans?

There were so many Vlachs migrating into Croatia that they now account for 50% of the autosomal inheritance of Croatians?

Croatia was absolutely empty until the Slavs migrated into the area in the early Medieval period? Where do you get that?

"Remnants of several Neolithic and Chalcolithic cultures were found in all regions of the country.[2] The largest proportion of the sites is in the northern Croatia river valleys, and the most significant cultures whose presence was discovered include Starčevo, Vučedol and Baden cultures.[3][4] The Iron Age left traces of the early Illyrian Hallstatt culture and the Celtic La Tène culture.[5]
Much later, the region was settled by Liburnians and Illyrians, while the first Greek colonies were established on the Vis and Hvarislands.[6]"

Sound familiar?

Were you taught they were all exterminated?

The genetics say otherwise.
 
What I see here is you were writing about White Croatia. But in your previous post you wrote:

Only tribe whom genetics confirmed historical record and migration to Balkans are Croats, the rest is logic (language, etc..).

White Croatia is one thing and migration from White Croatia is another thing. So I have to ask again - which is the historical record which contains information about migration of Croats to the Balkans?
 
Now the Vlachs brought AFRICAN autosomal genetics to Croatia? Where do you find African autosomal genetics in the Balkans?

There were so many Vlachs migrating into Croatia that they now account for 50% of the autosomal inheritance of Croatians?

Croatia was absolutely empty until the Slavs migrated into the area in the early Medieval period? Where do you get that?

"Remnants of several Neolithic and Chalcolithic cultures were found in all regions of the country.[2] The largest proportion of the sites is in the northern Croatia river valleys, and the most significant cultures whose presence was discovered include Starčevo, Vučedol and Baden cultures.[3][4] The Iron Age left traces of the early IllyrianHallstatt culture and the CelticLa Tène culture.[5]
Much later, the region was settled by Liburnians and Illyrians, while the first Greek colonies were established on the Vis and Hvarislands.[6]"

Sound familiar?

Were you taught they were all exterminated?

The genetics say otherwise.

It does not matter whether it is African or Greek, when people with E1b types come to the Balkans they probably come from Africa, autosomal genetics detected this and relatives from Africa, that's what I'm thinking. If E1b does not come from Africa to Balkans I'm wrong.

There were so many Vlachs migrating into Croatia that they now account for 50% of the autosomal inheritance of Croatians?

Male descendants who have nothing to do with migration of Croats to Croatia(6,7 century) have about 25% today Croatian population. For mitochondrial DNA I do not know.

Since autosomal genetics can not confirm or dispute migration of peoples, I do not follow the same, sorry.
 
That's it. Done.

I have news for you. We all are the descendants of people who came out of Africa.

E-V13 carriers are no more "African" than I2a carriers. In fact, "E" probably formed "Out of Africa", and then returned, but see you wouldn't know that because you're afraid to study genetics for fear it will disturb your conditioning.

If you have no interest in science and genetics as a branch of science I have no idea what you're doing here.
 
What I see here is you were writing about White Croatia. But in your previous post you wrote:



White Croatia is one thing and migration from White Croatia is another thing. So I have to ask again - which is the historical record which contains information about migration of Croats to the Balkans?

All proofs of White Croat migration to Croatia and wider are on that link. First post.
 
Hrvatt22 having that y DNA doesn't mean you're African or from there. The r1b Cameroon Angela posted isn't from Ireland.
 
That's it. Done.

I have news for you. We all are the descendants of people who came out of Africa.

E-V13 carriers are no more "African" than I2a carriers. In fact, "E" probably formed "Out of Africa", and then returned, but see you wouldn't know that because you're afraid to study genetics for fear it will disturb your conditioning.

If you have no interest in science and genetics as a branch of science I have no idea what you're doing here.

Autosomal genetics can not prove migration of tribe and can not confirm or deny historical records. Y haplotype can only do this, for that reason Y haplotype is essential for the history of a nations or tribes etc.

Y haplotype belongs to genetics. If we talk about history and genetics in this forum that's the only proof, at least in migration of peoples or tribes.
 

This thread has been viewed 1068728 times.

Back
Top