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

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.
Riht.According to Ken Nordtvedt y haplogroup I2a1b3a is 2030 years old.
 
How did an I2a3* alpine (L233-) man end up in the Pisa region of Tuscany, any suggestions or info on this branch would be much appreciated. Which migrations could have brought it and where is it most frequent?
 
Would it have arrived via recent migration or is it a piece of italian pre-history?
 
How did an I2a3* alpine (L233-) man end up in the Pisa region of Tuscany, any suggestions or info on this branch would be much appreciated. Which migrations could have brought it and where is it most frequent?

Would it have arrived via recent migration or is it a piece of italian pre-history?

Nordtvedt places it at over 3000 years old, and its center of diversity seems to be north of Italy (although samples of it are sparse), indicating that it probably came from the north within the last 3000 years. I'm having trouble getting more specific than that. Perhaps a Cisalpine Gaul marker that drifted westward from the Senigallia area to the Pisa area in the Middle Ages or something? (Total speculation without much ground.)
 
So it's quite young....it's difficult cause there's a lot of Europe north of Italy on both sides lol, it doesn't seem to have anything to do with celts that's the particularity, there really isn't any info on this subclade it's depressing.
 
What region of Europe more or less is it found in? Germany, holland? At what frequency?
 
For me it is interesting to find out to which haplogroups belonged the members of old Balkan cultures, for example people who created the culture at Lepen Whirl, eastern Serbia (peak about 7,000 years ago). Skeletons of these people has been saved and probably it is possible to determine haplogroups (I started thread on it).

Also Vincha culture (Serbia, Romania) who had early period (7,500-6,800 years ago) and late period (6,800-6,200 years ago). Researches of this kind will surely be performed and we see results.

"After quite a number of old tested DNA from Neolithic sites in region Starcevo primarily as well as the surrounding Neolithic cultures, there is little doubt that the majority of the population consisted of Vinca population is predominantly belonged to haplogroup G2a. He is here and there to be some Cro-Magnon and I haplogroups. In autosomal dna today nearest formerly Vinca were the inhabitants of Sardinia."

This information is not 100% official
 
"After quite a number of old tested DNA from Neolithic sites in region Starcevo primarily as well as the surrounding Neolithic cultures, there is little doubt that the majority of the population consisted of Vinca population is predominantly belonged to haplogroup G2a. He is here and there to be some Cro-Magnon and I haplogroups. In autosomal dna today nearest formerly Vinca were the inhabitants of Sardinia."

This information is not 100% official
This seems to be right. Welcome to Eupedia Dule84.
 
I2a1b in Balkans is clearly of Slavic derivation and has nothing to do absolutely with indigenous Thraco Illyrians, which would have been mostly E-V13, J2 with probably a R1b elite.

Then how do you explain the I2a-Din in kurdish population and the hi % of I2a in Vlachs and Romanian all around in Balkans?
 
Did Dinaric anthropology is closer to Cro Magnon than any one from *old* I haplogrups.Something stink big time.
 
Then how do you explain the I2a-Din in kurdish population and the hi % of I2a in Vlachs and Romanian all around in Balkans?


Explanation: Before Slavs making it to the Balkans spend a lot of time in Romania. Many Slavs were absorbed in today's Romanian population. Its believed that the initial homeland of I2a is Ukraine-Romania border. Same thing for Kurd's its Slavic invasion.
 
Dinarics are often considered a sub-race of white race. They have physical traits that makes them distinguishable. But one can not say that I2 is responsible for Dinaricity. Dinarics are present all over Europe and if my observations are right Dinarics appear where early farmers are present. Dinaricity is not a Slavic trait. Its almost nonexistent in Poland, Russia, Belarus etc...
 
Dinaric for I2a... is a nickname invented by Ken Nordtvedt. It's nothing.
 
Never heard that before. You should change your friends.

Really! Google "Coon and races" and you will hear about it. Coon was an anthropologist at Harvard. Its not my invention. Dinaricity is a physical characteristic that I can not define, that distinguishes the person from other Europeans. Coon thought that Dinarics were byproduct of Mediterraneans meeting the Nordics or something like that. Other words hybrids of Mediterranean looking people with Celts or other European sub races. You never noticed that a German physically looks different from an Italian? My view was that Ia is not responsible for dinaricity since some south Slavic countries are not Dinarics.
 
Never heard that before. You should change your friends.

You appear indoctrinated beyond repair! I2a got the name for the reason I am saying. What do you think today genetics people do not read their predecessors?
 
You appear indoctrinated beyond repair! I2a got the name for the reason I am saying. What do you think today genetics people do not read their predecessors?
I have no idea what you're saying. Try again using prefrontal cortex.
 
Last edited:
Explanation: Before Slavs making it to the Balkans spend a lot of time in Romania. Many Slavs were absorbed in today's Romanian population. Its believed that the initial homeland of I2a is Ukraine-Romania border. Same thing for Kurd's its Slavic invasion.

Agree that slavs spent time in Romania, were absorbed in Romanian population and I agree that I2a initial homeland was Ukraine-Romania border.
But I want to ask you: If I2a homeland and slavs homeland it is not the same, how do you say that I2a -din is slavic? If slavs came to Romania with the I2a-din, than the procentege should pick in the slavs in balkan, not in the Romanian Vlachs. Bulgarians that are slavs have less I2a than Romanians, and their I2a is higher in north ar the border with Romania. In Greece, Albania, Macedonia also I2a from the vlachs. It must predate slavs. I believe it must have been Dacian, Thracian. Slavs never went to Kurdistan. The Thracians cold have arrived at some point in Kurdistan.
 
Agree that slavs spent time in Romania, were absorbed in Romanian population and I agree that I2a initial homeland was Ukraine-Romania border.
But I want to ask you: If I2a homeland and slavs homeland it is not the same, how do you say that I2a -din is slavic? If slavs came to Romania with the I2a-din, than the procentege should pick in the slavs in balkan, not in the Romanian Vlachs. Bulgarians that are slavs have less I2a than Romanians, and their I2a is higher in north ar the border with Romania. In Greece, Albania, Macedonia also I2a from the vlachs. It must predate slavs. I believe it must have been Dacian, Thracian. Slavs never went to Kurdistan. The Thracians cold have arrived at some point in Kurdistan.
"Nationalization" of haplogroups might harm :) By the same token if i follow your logic Romanians have higher R1a than Bulgarians and Macedonians who are Slavic,Moldavians even more? you will say that R1a is Slavic then,so you appear to carry more "Slavic" haplogroups as Romanians(Romance speakers) than Slavs themselves.
This is linguistic groups to be clear,to my knowledge the Thracians and Dacians did not spoke Latin language either,so your claim to fit the mythos of your own origin and your supposed "Thracianess" and "Dacianess" giving explanation of certain haplogrups is not at all higher than your neighbors.
Vlachs and Romanians dwell in different places despite both of them were Romanized,their "origin" or place of dwelling might not be some,i mean obvious geography and distribution of haplogroups.
Haplogroup does not equote language.
You are Romanian and forget the haplogroups,if you want to think that you are Dacian and I2 is Dacian,then you do think that way and you will be Dacian.

In Kurdistan could have migrated the Cimmerians who were neighbors of Thracians and no one else according to written sources,but i do not exclude possibility if this haplogroup in fact migrated from Anatolia in Balkans and spread further even if there is no such proofs,more testing can tell us.
 
"Nationalization" of haplogroups might harm :) By the same token if i follow your logic Romanians have higher R1a than Bulgarians and Macedonians who are Slavic,Moldavians even more? you will say that R1a is Slavic then,so you appear to carry more "Slavic" haplogroups as Romanians(Romance speakers) than Slavs themselves.
This is linguistic groups to be clear,to my knowledge the Thracians and Dacians did not spoke Latin language either,so your claim to fit the mythos of your own origin and your supposed "Thracianess" and "Dacianess" giving explanation of certain haplogrups is not at all higher than your neighbors.
Vlachs and Romanians dwell in different places despite both of them were Romanized,their "origin" or place of dwelling might not be some,i mean obvious geography and distribution of haplogroups.
Haplogroup does not equote language.
You are Romanian and forget the haplogroups,if you want to think that you are Dacian and I2 is Dacian,then you do think that way and you will be Dacian.

In Kurdistan could have migrated the Cimmerians who were neighbors of Thracians and no one else according to written sources,but i do not exclude possibility if this haplogroup in fact migrated from Anatolia in Balkans and spread further even if there is no such proofs,more testing can tell us.


I agree with almost everything you said, we only need to stereotype and stretch some ideas to explain the bigger picture.
We have no writen records of dacian language, from names and clues it seems dacian was a satem language related to iranian and baltic (R1a presence maybe), very different from latin. The big mistery is that Roman empire only conquered a small territory of Dacia for a short period of time, but their descendants the romanians (including vlachs, moldavians) are all homogeneous latin speeking population with hi % of I2a-din spread out from Dnieper to the Balkans fitting quite enough the dacian-thracian territory. The mystery is how a new haplogroup (I2a-din) aprox 300-500 BC fill in accurately this area with latin language. The only reasonable explication seems to be that Roman Empire conquered Dacia and assimilated linguisticaly a small specialised part of population, maybe dacian families of shepherds with a semi-nomadic life dealing with transhumance. They were constantly migrating from the mountains to the plains in winter and summer to the same predetermined routes, they must of have had same cultural advantage and a noncombativ caracter to survive. This explain why after so many migrations, populations replacement and wars in 2000 years they kept latin language in the same dacian teritory. Normaly Romania should be a slavic speaking country, if it wasnt for those I2a-din latin speeking shepherds.
So I believe I2a-din lineages should not be linked to the later slavic migration, but to the earlier thracian-dacian substratum, their rapid massive spread in Balkans being a boost of roman civilization and their way of life.
 

This thread has been viewed 565946 times.

Back
Top