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

Beavrrit said:
Why do so many want or only can imagine/understand Haplogroup sub-clades as "identifiable" with or assigned to some known ethnicities of the last thousands years, or those that appear from the shadows into the extant written records of the Mediterranean Ancient Classic historical times? With all the changes in ethnic-identities even within a couple centuries, or one millenia -if to stretch it- as with transformations WITHIN an ethnicity or a morphed complex of many Y-dna/mt-dna combos.....WHY so many still want to identify as "themselves & un-changed" even the Myrmidons of Achiles or the Romans of Marcus Aurelius days.... to his modern city or county neighborhood residents? As if XV or XXV centuries and multiple immigrants waves haven't passed into their mix to become else new and ever more complex?Or as if we could identify modern results in % among haplogroups within a local segment of a modern population..... with whatever it WAS the average percents in any given portion of time in History?.... as if no populations tumbling and changes happened (and we know CHANGES DID and continue happening)?
Click to expand...

Because some people are too stupid to realise that when the ancients moved, be it hunters or farmers, they went together in many different haplogroups. When geneticists say or find a marker is associated with one area, it does not mean there where no other markers there at the same time as well. some people do not see this, they have a nationalistic approach , ie borders
 
Extremly important questions.As an example:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I/2014-01/1389215560

From: Rossa Mullen < [email protected]>
Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Update on Ancient I in Europe
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 14:16:58 -0800 (PST)
References: <A975ECF982EF4E0AB9B82FAC02DF4590@kenPC>
In-Reply-To: <A975ECF982EF4E0AB9B82FAC02DF4590@kenPC>
Did you find out any more info on the current Russian sample that was supposed to be similar to one of the old samples?

From: "Kenneth Nordtvedt" < [email protected]>
Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Update on Ancient I in Europe
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:27:31 -0700
References: <A975ECF982EF4E0AB9B82FAC02DF4590@kenPC><[email protected]>
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Yes, it is derived for the standard snp now for Dinaric I ------ CTS5966
 
Must be the American in me who mistrust that way of digging one roots or sees this as silly (or suspect it, even fascistic). We all belong to nationalities or ethnic minorities within larger federation/confederations. It may feel good... but it also may border or fall over the edge into the dangerous, such "Master-race" pseudo-romanticism. There were more than "warriors" or super-heroes "gods" in Historic times or the darker and murkier "Legend-times" before written o oral traditional tales, infecting the straight record or what much we possibly sift from those archaeological digs and blood samples genetic trail traces. I am aiming to welcome as much truth from it, not some feel-good dope off from "my (sad or not) reality". It may be entertaining at times to read these highly imaginative spinning comments from others, but sometimes it gets heavy to bear the blurring of fantasy-wanna-turn-as-if-reality clouds, etc... and they leave you wondering from which Chinatown smoke-lair they are writing from and WHAT and from where they puffed it. Or comic book of Marvel? But hey, thanks for the answer and refreshing welcoming warning to reboot and take it not at face value, as if a serious web-site?
 
Beavrrit said:
Must be the American in me who mistrust that way of digging one roots or sees this as silly (or suspect it, even fascistic). We all belong to nationalities or ethnic minorities within larger federation/confederations. It may feel good... but it also may border or fall over the edge into the dangerous, such "Master-race" pseudo-romanticism. There were more than "warriors" or super-heroes "gods" in Historic times or the darker and murkier "Legend-times" before written o oral traditional tales, infecting the straight record or what much we possibly sift from those archaeological digs and blood samples genetic trail traces. I am aiming to welcome as much truth from it, not some feel-good dope off from "my (sad or not) reality". It may be entertaining at times to read these highly imaginative spinning comments from others, but sometimes it gets heavy to bear the blurring of fantasy-wanna-turn-as-if-reality clouds, etc... and they leave you wondering from which Chinatown smoke-lair they are writing from and WHAT and from where they puffed it. Or comic book of Marvel? But hey, thanks for the answer and refreshing welcoming warning to reboot and take it not at face value, as if a serious web-site?
Click to expand...

Are you a bot?
 
Sile said:
Because some people are too stupid to realise that when the ancients moved, be it hunters or farmers, they went together in many different haplogroups. When geneticists say or find a marker is associated with one area, it does not mean there where no other markers there at the same time as well. some people do not see this, they have a nationalistic approach , ie borders
Click to expand...
That too, a good and hard to avoid Reality -submerged or conveniently ignored. And since most modern nationalities are of recent creation, included the state of Issreal -to exclude others at the seclusion of a (very complex and mixed up) unique ethnicity, however ancient its origins may be- as past human groups didn't have these "fixed barriers", and much less for the individuals or tribal families intermarrying neighbours or distant groups...WHY do so many imagine the Past as if modern times (or III Reich epic propaganda) and ignore the looooooonger and darker period of the human record, our common Past too before nationalities, before these "warrior-heroic-tribes" they want to identify with as if still around? Because those tribes sprouted and evolved from those many more millenias of darker ages without written records and much more little sedentary "states" with much common with others over large tracts of land ACROSS MANY MODERN NATIONS BORDER BARRIERS. As if even the Proto-Celtic or proto-Bell beaker ethnicities' few centuries of boiling changes were to be lasting until today, while the whole Neolithic or Mesolithic longer centuries that made them didn't matter. Because they had no written records, or Auto-bahn superhighways, that makes them assume no mobility or mixing of populations and rising and falling/evolution of new ethnic identities with patched work of the many around even back then?
 
What means a "bot"? Off the boat? Are you a Native American Indian to call me so?
 
Interesting psychological/anthropological analysis, Beavrrit, but I've yet to see anything substantive that actually disputes that haplogroup subclades can sometimes be "identifiable with or assigned to some known ethnicities of the last thousands years." I hold that many in the genetic anthropology community make these sorts of associations not because they want it to be so, but because it's what genetic diversity analyses indicate. Although not wholly divorced from the phenomenon of people making false identifications with ancient populations, such analyses are in no way dictated by such tendencies. I mean, why post such a thing in this thread to begin with? Do you think anybody here is associating a haplogroup subclade with an ancient population out of wishful thinking?
 
sparkey said:
Interesting psychological/anthropological analysis, Beavrrit, but I've yet to see anything substantive that actually disputes that haplogroup subclades can sometimes be "identifiable with or assigned to some known ethnicities of the last thousands years." I hold that many in the genetic anthropology community make these sorts of associations not because they want it to be so, but because it's what genetic diversity analyses indicate. Although not wholly divorced from the phenomenon of people making false identifications with ancient populations, such analyses are in no way dictated by such tendencies. I mean, why post such a thing in this thread to begin with? Do you think anybody here is associating a haplogroup subclade with an ancient population out of wishful thinking?
Click to expand...

well terms being used in this forum and others , as an example, R1a is slavic and I1 is germanic etc, is distorting the truth to gain, either some nationalistic lands or to prove that in old history ( ancients ) that they existed. Its to justify the existence of the nation they are in, not realising that nations only emerged in the 18th century.............pure paranoia
 
Sile said:
well terms being used in this forum and others , as an example, R1a is slavic and I1 is germanic etc, is distorting the truth to gain, either some nationalistic lands or to prove that in old history ( ancients ) that they existed. Its to justify the existence of the nation they are in, not realising that nations only emerged in the 18th century.............pure paranoia
Click to expand...

In many cases, it's perhaps less paranoia than a tendency to generalize. It should be obvious that some of us have a new-found interest in DNA, as a result of having our own DNA analysed recently, but are generalists without much knowledge of genetics.
 
I2a1 P37.2
I2a1b L178/S328, M423​
I2a1b1 M359.2/P41.2​
I2a1b2 L161.1/S185​
I2a1b3 L621/S392 (Former I2a2a in the Y2010 tree, L69.2)​
I2a1b3a L147.2 (din s/n)​


I-M423[edit]
Haplogroup I-M423 is the most frequent Y-chromosome Haplogroup I-M170 in Central and Eastern European populations, reaching its peak in the Western Balkans, most notably in Dalmatia (50-60%[1]) and Bosnia-Herzegovina (up to 71%,[17] avg. 40-50%[1]). A greater variance of this group has been found in Ireland and Great Britain, but overall frequency is very low (2-3%). Haplogroup I-M423 is virtually absent in Fennoscandia, Western and Southwestern Europe.

I-L69.2 (L69.2(=T)/S163.2) {rs9786274} is typical of the South Slavic populations of south-eastern Europe, being highest in Bosnia-Herzegovina (>50%).[1] Haplogroup I-L69.2 is also commonly found in north-eastern Italians.[12] There is also a high concentration of I-L69.2 in north-east Romania, Moldova and western Ukraine. Several groups have determined the common occurrence of this subclade in the South Slavic-speaking populations to be the result of "pre-Slavic" paleolithic settlement in the region. Peričić et al. for instance places its expansion to have occurred "not earlier than the YD to Holocene transition and not later than the early Neolithic”.


Can somebody help me to decide Which of those two are Illyrian, i. e. Bosnian moslems and Croats, M423 or L69.2, since L147.2 is probably original Croat, Serb and bosnian Serb?
 
Several groups have determined the common occurrence of this subclade in the South Slavic-speaking populations to be the result of "pre-Slavic" paleolithic settlement in the region.

This is outh ofdate.

Lazaridis, I. et al. (2013), Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for Europeans, pre-print online 23 December 2013. http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2013/12/23/001552


Analysis of ancient DNA can reveal historical events that are difficult to discern through study of present-day individuals. To investigate European population history around the time of the agricultural transition, we sequenced complete genomes from a ~7,500 year old early farmer from the Linearbandkeramik (LBK) culture from Stuttgart in Germany and an ~8,000 year old hunter-gatherer from the Loschbour rock shelter in Luxembourg. We also generated data from seven ~8,000 year old hunter-gatherers from Motala in Sweden. We compared these genomes and published ancient DNA to new data from 2,196 samples from 185 diverse populations to show that at least three ancestral groups contributed to present-day Europeans. The first are Ancient North Eurasians (ANE), who are more closely related to Upper Paleolithic Siberians than to any present-day population. The second are West European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG), related to the Loschbour individual, who contributed to all Europeans but not to Near Easterners. The third are Early European Farmers (EEF), related to the Stuttgart individual, who were mainly of Near Eastern origin but also harbored WHG-related ancestry. We model the deep relationships of these populations and show that about ~44% of the ancestry of EEF derived from a basal Eurasian lineage that split prior to the separation of other non-Africans.


Loschbour, Heffingen [LSB 1] (6220-5990 BC): dark hair, 50% probability of blue eyes. Y-DNA I2a1b* (L178+, M423+, P37.2+, L460+, M438+, L68+, P38+, M170+, M359.2-, L161.1-, L621-)

Motola males c. 6000 BC:

Motola 2: I* (P38+ , U179+ , L41+, M253-, L37-)
Motola 3: I2 (L68+, M258+, U179+, L181-, L417-)
Motola 9: I* (P38+, P40-)
Motola 12: I2a1b* (L178+, M423+, P37.2+, L460+, L68+, M170+, M258+, U179+, M359.2-, L621-)
(Jean M)
progress.gif
 
So, you claim that other Bosnians like Croats and moslems from I2a Happlotypes also belong, "just like 99% of the Serbs" to the I2a1b3a L147.2 (din s/n) subcluster?
 
gyms said:
Several groups have determined the common occurrence of this subclade in the South Slavic-speaking populations to be the result of "pre-Slavic" paleolithic settlement in the region.

This is outh ofdate.

Lazaridis, I. et al. (2013), Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for Europeans, pre-print online 23 December 2013. http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2013/12/23/001552


Analysis of ancient DNA can reveal historical events that are difficult to discern through study of present-day individuals. To investigate European population history around the time of the agricultural transition, we sequenced complete genomes from a ~7,500 year old early farmer from the Linearbandkeramik (LBK) culture from Stuttgart in Germany and an ~8,000 year old hunter-gatherer from the Loschbour rock shelter in Luxembourg. We also generated data from seven ~8,000 year old hunter-gatherers from Motala in Sweden. We compared these genomes and published ancient DNA to new data from 2,196 samples from 185 diverse populations to show that at least three ancestral groups contributed to present-day Europeans. The first are Ancient North Eurasians (ANE), who are more closely related to Upper Paleolithic Siberians than to any present-day population. The second are West European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG), related to the Loschbour individual, who contributed to all Europeans but not to Near Easterners. The third are Early European Farmers (EEF), related to the Stuttgart individual, who were mainly of Near Eastern origin but also harbored WHG-related ancestry. We model the deep relationships of these populations and show that about ~44% of the ancestry of EEF derived from a basal Eurasian lineage that split prior to the separation of other non-Africans.


Loschbour, Heffingen [LSB 1] (6220-5990 BC): dark hair, 50% probability of blue eyes. Y-DNA I2a1b* (L178+, M423+, P37.2+, L460+, M438+, L68+, P38+, M170+, M359.2-, L161.1-, L621-)

Motola males c. 6000 BC:

Motola 2: I* (P38+ , U179+ , L41+, M253-, L37-)
Motola 3: I2 (L68+, M258+, U179+, L181-, L417-)
Motola 9: I* (P38+, P40-)
Motola 12: I2a1b* (L178+, M423+, P37.2+, L460+, L68+, M170+, M258+, U179+, M359.2-, L621-)
(Jean M)
progress.gif
Click to expand...
So in a nutshell, the south-slavic I2a-Din did not exist 8000 years ago, because around that time all we find is its distant ancestors.
 
"So in a nutshell, the south-slavic I2a-Din did not exist 8000 years ago, because around that time all we find is its distant ancestors. "

Yes ,in Northern Europe and Scandinavia.
 
I actually think that Slaws were begotten through Sarmatians and Gets (Thracians) in Sarmizegetusa. Now, Thracians are a mix of a majority of I2a and R1a. Wasn't there any analysis of the skeletons of those preceeding populations?
 
gyms said:
"So in a nutshell, the south-slavic I2a-Din did not exist 8000 years ago, because around that time all we find is its distant ancestors. "

Yes ,in Northern Europe and Scandinavia.
Click to expand...

No, you cannot prove with the existence of an older branch that the younger branch doesn't exist, even in Northern Europe or Scandinavia. It doesn't logically follow.
 
"Now, Thracians are a mix of a majority of I2a and R1a. "
OK. but how do you know that?Is there any Thracian aDNA?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 556306 times.

Back
Top