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

[Balkanite]

Of 4 theories, I take Thracian theory for truth. I completely dismiss Illyrian theory and Slavic theory, and I am pure slav 99.5% East Europe on Ancestry DNA lol so i dont want to say this but Thracians could have had small genetic overlap with germans tribe who was in that region Goths for example. I2A still mostly Thracian genetic marker IMO. Originated Northwest Black Sea coast in modern Moldova, Romania, Ukraine then some spread out westward and southward, and some stayed there, my ancestors.

Why would the assumption that I2a-slav originated in the north of the black sea indicate thacian ancestry to you?
Dont you know that Thracia was much further south, all the way down at modern day bulgaria?
The place you are talking about was not a part of Thracia. It was just a brewing pot for barbarians luring at the gates of the Roman balkans.
Wouldn't surprise me if the proto-slavs were forming there too.

And you should not put so much weight on the modern diversity there. Just because the place with the most diverse pool of I2a-slav is located in western Ukraine today, does not mean that the most diversity was there before the slavic migrations. If slavs moved westwards, why shouldnt their core move westwards too? The spot with the most diverse array of I2a-slav could well have been northeast of the black sea.
That would also correlate better with what we know of slavic origins according to historians.

 

[Garrick]

If you check the recent paper on SE-Europe you will see that Malak Preslavets has only G2a and T1a1 samples from Neolithic times , this Malak Preslavets is in the bulgarian province of razgrad ...........check the modern bulgarian paper of 2014 for DNA , you will still see G2a and T1a1 as a high % ( although there is 2 other haplogroups which has passed these in % ) even today. The point is that haplogroups did not vacate areas in most cases , but left people behind.

Dacia - what did the dacians speak before using Latin?

I- CTS10228 could easily be sarmatian, eventually absorbed into gothic society and later into slavic society

- upper Moesia by the time of that map was already celtinized ( a mix of celts and thracians )

- illyria was only dalmatia and pannonia ............noricum was illyrian but by this stage was nearly all gallic-celtic

Sile if you and I could investigate further we could nail precisely a Thracian or German tribe where I-CTS10228 emerged.

But it is a serious research effort.

You could be right surely that I-CTS10228 was among Sarmatians, but only in western parts, if it was more frequent it spread to more eastern.

 

[LABERIA]

what do you mean by thracians?..........there are 4 groups
odyrssian from black sea bulgaria ......true thracians
moesians which incorporate some of serbia
dacian .............western romania
Getae which are coastal romanians mixed with Sychthians/sarmatians

Moesians are considered by the majority of modern scholars as Illyrians.

 

[Kingslav]

Why would the assumption that I2a-slav originated in the north of the black sea indicate thacian ancestry to you?
Dont you know that Thracia was much further south, all the way down at modern day bulgaria?
The place you are talking about was not a part of Thracia. It was just a brewing pot for barbarians luring at the gates of the Roman balkans.
Wouldn't surprise me if the proto-slavs were forming there too.

And you should not put so much weight on the modern diversity there. Just because the place with the most diverse pool of I2a-slav is located in western Ukraine today, does not mean that the most diversity was there before the slavic migrations. If slavs moved westwards, why shouldnt their core move westwards too? The spot with the most diverse array of I2a-slav could well have been northeast of the black sea.
That would also correlate better with what we know of slavic origins according to historians.

You right that Thrace was located around central Bulgaria, but not only there, also Thracians was settled in Moldavia, Romania, Serbia, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Northern Greece, maybe north Turkey. And they were nomadic so what make you think they stuck in one place Bulgaria only? Thracians is Iranian tribe and little mix of Goths. "Proto-Slav" is mix of Iranian tribes and Balts ( Nordicized Slavs ) you can see showing in my gedmatch oracles. Real Thracians and some Proto-Slavs similar they descended partly from Sarmatians. Proto-Slav was forming down there. R1A was forming down there in Bulgarians and Romanians 20% or more. Yes I2A Slav and so is R1A. What wrong with being Slav? Why is I2A 25-30% in Ukraine? Tell me your theory.

Serb_Serbia + Serb_Serbia + Estonian + Estonian
Croat_BH + Finn_West + Ukrainian_Center + Ukrainian_Center
Croatian + Estonian + Estonian + Greek_Thessaly
Finnish + Lithuanians + Lithuanians + S_Italian_Sicilian
Pole + Ukrainian_Center + Serb_Serbia + Finn_West

 

[Garrick]

Why would the assumption that I2a-slav originated in the north of the black sea indicate thacian ancestry to you?
Dont you know that Thracia was much further south, all the way down at modern day bulgaria?
The place you are talking about was not a part of Thracia. It was just a brewing pot for barbarians luring at the gates of the Roman balkans.
Wouldn't surprise me if the proto-slavs were forming there too.

And you should not put so much weight on the modern diversity there. Just because the place with the most diverse pool of I2a-slav is located in western Ukraine today, does not mean that the most diversity was there before the slavic migrations. If slavs moved westwards, why shouldnt their core move westwards too? The spot with the most diverse array of I2a-slav could well have been northeast of the black sea.
That would also correlate better with what we know of slavic origins according to historians.

You Albanians (here on the forum) unfortunately are marking themselves as pariahs.

You think if "invent" any nonsense as new haplogroup I2a-Slav that you will get some points.

No, it means you marks themselves as pariahs.

You can sing your songs or beating drums or play zurles between you, but externally these activities does not produce a result.

Moderators should not permit such "inventions" as I2a-Slav but maybe it is better because you put yourself in getho.

Generally you know who is poorest in the Balkans, but do you know why.

For example, cooperation and collaboration are a winning combination, in game theory some players can try cheat or something worse but after some time they are losers because others see it and become very competitive.

 

[Balkanite]

You Albanians (here on the forum) unfortunately are marking themselves as pariahs.

You think if "invent" any nonsense as new haplogroup I2a-Slav that you will get some points.

No, it means you marks themselves as pariahs.

You can sing your songs or beating drums or play zurles between you, but externally these activities does not produce a result.

Moderators should not permit such "inventions" as I2a-Slav but maybe it is better because you put yourself in getho.

Generally you know who is poorest in the Balkans, but do you know why.

For example, cooperation and collaboration are a winning combination, in game theory some players can try cheat or something worse but after some time they are losers because others see it and become very competitive.

I was trying if i could scout one single constructive sentence in you whole post. Unfortunately i found nothing at all, besides some anti-albanian sentiments wrapped in a package of broken english..

 

[Kingslav]

Why would the assumption that I2a-slav originated in the north of the black sea indicate thacian ancestry to you?
Dont you know that Thracia was much further south, all the way down at modern day bulgaria?
The place you are talking about was not a part of Thracia. It was just a brewing pot for barbarians luring at the gates of the Roman balkans.
Wouldn't surprise me if the proto-slavs were forming there too.

And you should not put so much weight on the modern diversity there. Just because the place with the most diverse pool of I2a-slav is located in western Ukraine today, does not mean that the most diversity was there before the slavic migrations. If slavs moved westwards, why shouldnt their core move westwards too? The spot with the most diverse array of I2a-slav could well have been northeast of the black sea.
That would also correlate better with what we know of slavic origins according to historians.

You right, Thrace was located in central Bulgaria but not only there Thracians settled in Moldavia, Romania, Serbia, Macedonia, Northern Greece, Even North Turkey. Thracians is Iranian Tribes mix with little Goths. "Proto-Slav" is Iranian tribes mix with Balts "Nordicized-Slavs" you can see my gedmatch oracle other pg. Real Thracians and Proto-Slav related both to Sarmatians. Yes there was Proto-Slav in Romania and Bulgaria +20% R1A Proto-Slav. Why is there 25% I2A in Ukraine? Tell me what your theory?

 

[Kingslav]

balkanite theory off, You right Thrace located in Central Bulgaria, but not only there Thracians settled in Moldavia, Romania, Serbia, Macedonia, Northern Greece, Even North Turkey. Thracians is Iranian Tribes mix with small amount Goths. I2A is modern Thracian marker. " Proto-Slav" is Iranian tribe mix with Balts "Nordicized Slavs" you can check my gedmatch next pg. Proto-Slavs and REAL Thracians is both related with Sarmatians. Yes there was Proto-Slavs in Romania and Bulgaria over 20% R1A. Why there is 25% I2A in Ukraine? Tell me your theory?

 

[Trojet]

Of 4 theories, I take Thracian theory for truth. I completely dismiss Illyrian theory and Slavic theory, and I am pure slav 99.5% East Europe on Ancestry DNA lol so i dont want to say this but Thracians could have had small genetic overlap with germans tribe who was in that region Goths for example. I2A still mostly Thracian genetic marker IMO. Originated Northwest Black Sea coast in modern Moldova, Romania, Ukraine then some spread out westward and southward, and some stayed there, my ancestors.

While anything is possible, by far the Slavic theory is the most likely, Kingslav.

Everyone who has the I2a-CTS10228 (I2a-Slavic aka Dinaric) mutation descends from the same patrilineal ancestor who lived only 2300 ybp. You can argue how accurate these estimates are, but YFull, Norvedt, etc, are giving the same estimates. Furthermore, ancient DNA has proven that YFull's estimates are pretty much spot on.

So, for the Thracian theory to make sense, you would have to assume they only expanded after 2300 ybp (mostly in the early middles ages) and basically exclusively throughout the Slavic countries. On the other hand, we know the Slavs expanded precisely during that time, and precisely in the areas where I2a-Slavic is found today.

 

[Kingslav]

I dismiss Slavic Theory Trojet, Proto-Slavs is R1A. I2A is Thracian. Proto-slavs are original Slavs first foremost but Thracians with I2A assimilated wth R1A Proto-Slavs to make modern Slavs. That why R1A and I2A are modern Slav markers. Not anything else.

 

[Trojet]

I dismiss Slavic Theory Trojet, Proto-Slavs is R1A. I2A is Thracian. Proto-slavs are original Slavs first foremost but Thracians with I2A assimilated wth R1A Proto-Slavs to make modern Slavs. Not anything else.

You have every right to dismiss it, but evidence is heavily pointing in that direction. There has been no I2a1-CTS10228 (Din) or I2a1-M423 (where I2a-Din stems from) found in Thracian remains or anywhere in the Balkans, instead I2a1-M423 has been found in Northern half of Europe.

What we have in Eastern Balkan Bronze Age in multiple remains (among others) was I2a2-M223 which splits from I2a1 during the Paleolithic. So there is absolutely no evidence Thracians carried any I2a1-CTS10228 aka Din.

 

[MarkoZ]

expanded after 2300 ybp (mostly in the early middles ages) and basically exclusively throughout the Slavic countries

What's the point of repeating the same distortions over and over again? The region with the highest basal diversity is not Slavic speaking.

I don't really understand why you'd have such a strong opinion on this, but it's clouding your judgement. Note that you did not reference as much as a single peer-reviewed paper and when they were cited you chose to ignore their conclusions.

 

[Trojet]

What's the point of repeating the same distortions over and over again? The region with the highest basal diversity is not Slavic speaking.

I don't really understand why you'd have such a strong opinion on this, but it's clouding your judgement. Note that you did not reference as much as a single peer-reviewed paper and when they were cited you chose to ignore their conclusions.

How many times did I reference the Genomic History of Southeastern Europe. How many times did I reference YFull. How many times did I reference FTDNA. I don't have time to do these things over and over.
It's not my problem that you may not like these facts.

And yes, I have a very strong opinion about this because evidence is pointing in every direction to what I suggest, and absolutely not in the direction of some "lost Thraco-Illyrian tribe".

What's the point of repeating the same distortions over and over again? The region with the highest basal diversity is not Slavic speaking.

You have not pointed a single "distortion" I said. It doesn't really matter where the region "with highest basal diversity" is, but we know it's not anywhere in the Balkans. What matters is that this clade it very young and most likely it expanded as a Slavic speaking marker considering all the evidence. Besides, there is a I-CTS10228* (basal) in Poland.

 

[Kingslav]

Exactly, they probably wont find remnants in Balkan. They will find forsure in East Europe and Steppes, they migrated from there, they are Sarmatians that mixed with other groups, that is debate. Every race has variation no race is ever pure or something, groups assimilated. They were nomadic and horse was crucial, warriors and especially bow arrow. Meat eaters not farmer types, also mixed with asiatic genes similar to modern Russians but most those genes diffused over centuries. Modern slav like me showing <1 Finland/Northwest Russia. Romanians and Bulgarians showing 1 or 2% asiatic genes and same with Croats and other I2A groups showing asiatic genes. Thats normal for Steppe people. When you drop the balkan stigma you see truth, these Nomadic people Thracians conquer lands of balkan they had to come from somewhere not originate there always that what u believe really why Belarussians have some I2A? Still no explains why 25% I2A-Din in Ukraine ?

 

[Garrick]

Of 4 theories, I take Thracian theory for truth. I completely dismiss Illyrian theory and Slavic theory, and I am pure slav 99.5% East Europe on Ancestry DNA lol so i dont want to say this but Thracians could have had small genetic overlap with germans tribe who was in that region Goths for example. I2A still mostly Thracian genetic marker IMO. Originated Northwest Black Sea coast in modern Moldova, Romania, Ukraine then some spread out westward and southward, and some stayed there, my ancestors.

Quality of this topic increased after correspondence I had with a Russian scientist.

He explained me four current theories in science and he gave me some evidence.

Yes Illyrian theory is not possible since I-CTS10228 could not emerged in the Balkans but younger clades, primarily I-PH908 could be Illyrian, it is possoble it emerged in Illyrian land somewhere in Dalmatia, Bosnia or Western Serbia.

German theory can be logical, especially Gothic tribes could have this haplogroup. Problem is what in some areas where Gothic tribes moved this haplogroup is not represented. But this doesn't mean proof, German theory can be plausible yet.

Slavic theory failures to explain how I-CTS10228 can be Slavic marker. We can ask where Slavs were in that time, if there were such a entity.

I am very grateful to Russian scientist to help me for understanding of this complex matter.

But honestly, perhaps it's to not fair to say, he didn't impressed me with Slavic theory. According his opinion maybe I-CTS10228 has link with Zarubintsy culture, although it is quite north, but even it has any connection, whose people constituted that culture. Sarmatians? Scythians? Some Slavic precursors? Who.

You can see Europe in Roman times 284 BC. Where are Slavs. Only Thracian, German and Sarmatian tribes.

Thracian theory is plasuable. I-CTS10228 was part of genetic fund of Thracian and it is undeniable fact. And scientist from Russia confirmed this. Now key question is if Thracians brought this haplogroup to the south among their Balkan brothers. What is logical, they could. Especially, whereas they were pushed from the north and east.

German theory is possible, too, although it would be a great irony. For example in two world wars Serbs had 3 million wictims. Is it possible that Germans were against their brothers. But of course in real world many things can be possible.

 

[MarkoZ]

How many times did I reference the Genomic History of Southeastern Europe. How many times did I reference YFull. How many times did I reference FTDNA. I don't have time to do these things over and over.It's not my problem that you may not like these facts.And yes, I have a very strong opinion about this because evidence is pointing in every direction to what I suggest, and absolutely not in the direction of some "lost Thraco-Illyrian tribe".

Only one of those is a paper, and it has little to do with the topic at hand. Why not give Krushniarevich (2015) and Varzari (2013) a shot since they relate directly to issue of contemporary populations in the Balkans?

I don't care for any of the Thraco-Illyrian hypotheses because they are much like your posts: mere conjecture. Unless you address the issue of the phylogeography of I2a we're not getting any closer to the truth. As I see it the facts leave two options: either I2a is not particularly Slavic or the Slavs expanded from Romania and Moldova.

EDIT: Ok I see you're back to picking singles on yfull or some other commercial site. Let's just leave it at that, then.

 

[Fatherland]

Exactly, they probably wont find remnants in Balkan. They will find forsure in East Europe and Steppes, they migrated from there, they are Sarmatians that mixed with other groups, that is debate. Every race has variation no race is ever pure or something, groups assimilated. They were nomadic and horse was crucial, warriors and especially bow arrow. Meat eaters not farmer types, also mixed with asiatic genes similar to modern Russians but most those genes diffused over centuries. Modern slav like me showing <1 Finland/Northwest Russia. Romanians and Bulgarians showing 1 or 2% asiatic genes and same with Croats and other I2A groups showing asiatic genes. Thats normal for Steppe people. When you drop the balkan stigma you see truth, these Nomadic people Thracians conquer lands of balkan they had to come from somewhere not originate there always that what u believe really why Belarussians have some I2A? Still no explains why 25% I2A-Din in Ukraine ?

Percentages don't really matter much to me. One can always raise the question if R1a was not as strong in Ukraine, how high would I2a1b be?
If we compare ACTUAL numbers to percentages we will see I2a1b reaches a much higher number in Northeast Europe than it does in the Balkans. Still, the TMRCA is young so this clade did expand rapidly, especially during Slavic migrations. Never underestimate founder effects.

You can't just bind Slavs to R1a, while Germanics were a mix of I1, I2a2, R1b and R1a themselves. Slavs who are more of a recent population were R1a, I2a1b-"Din" and some other minor haplogroups.

The same way Illyrians were J2b2, R1b and assimilated EV13.

J2b2 is also from the steppe, during Bronze Age but does not carry Asiatic genes.
What you are saying here is wrong. Most Asiatic genes in Southeastern Europe are actually from medieval Turko-Mongols.

 

[Trojet]

Only one of those is a paper, and it has little to do with the topic at hand. Why not give Krushniarevich (2015) and Varzari (2013) a shot since they relate directly to issue of contemporary populations in the Balkans?

I don't care for any of the Thraco-Illyrian hypotheses because they are much like your posts: mere conjecture. Unless you address the issue of the phylogeography of I2a we're not getting any closer to the truth. As I see it the facts leave two options: either I2a is not particularly Slavic or the Slavs expanded from Romania and Moldova.

I don't cite the papers you mention because oftentimes are outdated and their conclusions about diversity and such are based on low resolution STRs which can be very misleading.
In today's age of Next Generation Sequencing and ancient DNA, I cite precisely those sources, which trump any STR based "peer reviewed paper".

As I said before, I cannot agree with "Romania-Moldova expansion" of I-M423 or even I-CTS10228. I think you're basing this conclusion on some STR based "peer-reviewed paper", which as I said can be misleading about diversity and oftentimes outdated.

If you look at I-M423 phylogeny here, there is an ancient DNA sample there (I-M423*) from Loschbour, Luxembourg. So this is the clearest evidence that I-M423 was nowhere near Romania-Moldova when it expanded. Furthermore, the sister clade to I-L621, I-L161 has a phylogeographic distribution is NW Europe. And lastly, there have been numerous ancient DNA samples from around Moldova-Romania Bronze Age and earlier, and to date none have turned up I-M423 or related. So as I told you earlier, modern distribution can be very misleading.

 

[MarkoZ]

I don't cite the papers you mention because oftentimes their conclusions about diversity and such are based on low resolution STRs which can be very misleading and oftentimes outdated. In today's age of Next Generation Sequencing and ancient DNA, I cite precisely those sources, which trump any STR based "peer reviewed paper".As I said before, I cannot agree with "Romania-Moldova expansion" of I-M423 or even I-CTS10228. I think you're basing this conclusion on some STR based "peer-reviewed paper", which as I said can be misleading about diversity and oftentimes outdated.If you look at I-M423 phylogeny here, there is an ancient DNA sample there (I-M423*) from Loschbour, Luxembourg. So this is the clearest evidence that I-M423 was nowhere near Romania-Moldova when it expanded. Furthermore, the sister clade to I-L621, I-L161 has a phylogeographic distribution is NW Europe.

I thought it was clear that by I-M423 we mean I2a-din and haplogroups very close to it. The Paleolithic origin of the macrogroup is quite uninteresting in this regard. Must be Franco-Cantabria in any case.If you don't like the methods employed by researchers you might want to offer an actual explanation as to their weaknesses.

Even among amateurs picking singlets is not usually considered a credible methodology, so your evidence just isn't very useful. Are you willing to apply the same methodology to other major haplogroups? I bet not.

 

[Trojet]

I thought it was clear that by I-M423 we mean I2a-din and haplogroups very close to it. The Paleolithic origin of the macrogroup is quite uninteresting in this regard. Must be Franco-Cantabria in any case.

If you don't like the methods employed by researchers you might want to offer an actual explanation as to their weaknesses. Even among amateurs picking singlets is not usually considered a credible, so your evidence just isn't very useful. Are you willing to apply the same methodology to other major haplogroups? I bet not.

OK, so it seems you're not even familiar with I-M423 phylogeny, and yet you're questioning everything I say. I should not even waste my time then.
Therefore, to understand the more specific I-CTS10228 aka I2a-Slavic, I have discussed its expansion numerous times here, so I suggest you read those posts first since you were not familiar with I-M423 phylogeny up until now.

If you don't like the methods employed by researchers you might want to offer an actual explanation as to their weaknesses.

I already addressed the weaknesses of those outdated "peer-reviewed" papers you mentioned in my previous post.
For example, you had a "peer reviewed" paper in Battaglia et al study from 2009, which suggested I-M423 is a "Mesolithic Balkan marker". In today's age we know that's not true.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19107149