I2a1b2a1 (I-CTS10228) - a strong marker of Slavic expansion

My prediction -
CTS10228 = Urnfield
Y3120 = Bastarnae or Dacian
PH908 = only this major line has a chance of being white croats but again it also has presence in Bulgarians etc which kind of rules it out. Maybe there are a couple of lines under this that can be linked to white croats
If the Bastarni brought any branch of I2a to the Balkans, then the ancestral I2a branches which exist in the Balkans would not have originated in the White Croatia and the Carpathians, but these branches would have originated in the Balkans, for now there is not a single archaeogenetic, and data based on living genetics which would prove such a scenario.
 
If the Bastarni brought any branch of I2a to the Balkans, then the ancestral I2a branches which exist in the Balkans would not have originated in the White Croatia and the Carpathians, but these branches would have originated in the Balkans, for now there is not a single archaeogenetic, and data based on living genetics which would prove such a scenario.

Bastarnae were not in the Balkans though they did attack Roman Balkans several times
 
Bastarnae were not in the Balkans though they did attack Roman Balkans several times
According to the ancient written sources, the Bastarnae, by the end of the third century inhabiting the area north of the Danube confluence, first came to the Central Balkans in 179 BC.

The I2a branches that exist in the Balkans cannot be part of these migrations because they are not yet born in southeastern Poland. Older branches may be and part of Bastarnes in the area of eastern Ukraine, but this has nothing to do with the source of the I2a branch in southeastern Poland.

When the Bastarnae settled area of the northern shore of the lower Danube in the third century BC, the I-Y3120 mutation that is, a common TMRCA ancestor was not yet born. When it was born, it was in the area of southeastern Poland, not in eastern Ukraine.


"The importance of the Bastarnae to the history of the lower Danube should not be doubted, as their existence was noted by sources dating from the third century B.C. to the fourth century A.D. Indeed, they are found to be present in nearly all the central historical events which receive detailed treatment by the sources, both north and south of the Danube."

On Getic and Sarmatian Shores: Ovid's Account of the Danube Lands
R. M. Batty
 
Last edited:
According to the ancient written sources, the Bastarnae, by the end of the third century inhabiting the area north of the Danube confluence, first came to the Central Balkans in 179 BC.

The I2a branches that exist in the Balkans cannot be part of these migrations because they are not yet born in southeastern Poland. Older branches may be and part of Bastarnes in the area of eastern Ukraine, but this has nothing to do with the source of the I2a branch in southeastern Poland.

When the Bastarnae settled area of the northern shore of the lower Danube in the third century BC, the I-Y3120 mutation that is, a common TMRCA ancestor was not yet born. When it was born, it was in the area of southeastern Poland, not in eastern Ukraine.


"The importance of the Bastarnae to the history of the lower Danube should not be doubted, as their existence was noted by sources dating from the third century B.C. to the fourth century A.D. Indeed, they are found to be present in nearly all the central historical events which receive detailed treatment by the sources, both north and south of the Danube."

On Getic and Sarmatian Shores: Ovid's Account of the Danube Lands
R. M. Batty

Look at ftdna for the tmrca. For example this branch is 350bc -
 
Look at ftdna for the tmrca. For example this branch is 350bc -
Ftdna has its own tree, but YFull also has its own tree. In any case, the YFull tree is more accurate for now because it has more samples within the specified branch, so it can determine the age more accurately. However, if this situation remains, nothing changes with the origin of the other I2a branches.

Otherwise, the migration direction of Bastarne is the Lower Danube - eastern Balkans. I don't know how many branches show such a direction of migration. Based on the current TMRCA state on the YFull tree, I don't think any branche show it yet. When this happens in the future, we can discuss it.

Until then, we have nothing to discuss when we have no evidence.
 
Ftdna has its own tree, but YFull also has its own tree. In any case, the YFull tree is more accurate for now because it has more samples within the specified branch, so it can determine the age more accurately. However, if this situation remains, nothing changes with the origin of the other I2a branches.

Otherwise, the migration direction of Bastarne is the Lower Danube - eastern Balkans. I don't know how many branches show such a direction of migration. Based on the current TMRCA state on the YFull tree, I don't think any branche show it yet. When this happens in the future, we can discuss it.

Until then, we have nothing to discuss when we have no evidence.
Currently yfull is not more accurate. They are still in process of rebalancing the tree for Z17855 for example.
 
Ftdna has its own tree, but YFull also has its own tree. In any case, the YFull tree is more accurate for now because it has more samples within the specified branch, so it can determine the age more accurately. However, if this situation remains, nothing changes with the origin of the other I2a branches.

Otherwise, the migration direction of Bastarne is the Lower Danube - eastern Balkans. I don't know how many branches show such a direction of migration. Based on the current TMRCA state on the YFull tree, I don't think any branche show it yet. When this happens in the future, we can discuss it.

Until then, we have nothing to discuss when we have no evidence.

Without ancient DNA it will always be difficult to figure this all out. I think these i2 people were cremating in bronze age and also iron age as was most of eastern Europe. We know Lusatians were cremating, Pomeranian culture, Dacians, and maybe Bastarnae too -
"Scholars have identified two closely related sedentary "cultures" as possible candidates to represent the Bastarnae (among other peoples) as their locations broadly correspond to where ancient sources placed the Basternae: the Zarubintsy culture lying in the forest-steppe zone in northern Ukraine-southern Belarus, and the Poieneşti-Lukashevka culture in northern Moldavia.[47][48] These cultures were characterised by agriculture, documented by numerous finds of sickles. Dwellings were either of surface or semi-subterranean types, with posts supporting the walls, a hearth in the middle, and large conical pits located nearby. Some sites were defended by ditches and banks, structures thought to have been built to defend against nomadic tribes from the steppe.[49] Inhabitants practiced cremation."
 
Last edited:
Currently yfull is not more accurate. They are still in process of rebalancing the tree for Z17855 for example.
Surely, in this sense, everything is possible. But for now, we're sticking with what we've got. When there is another TMRCA results, then we can analyze each branch separately.

For now we have and ancient connections of branch Z17855 (Vinkovci 1879, Bezdanjača Cave 18719, Bezdanjača 18721, Ilipinar 10430, Pohansko 36, Pohansko 41, Pohansko 44, Karos 2-16, Karos 2-52, Karos 3-12) but we have no connection with the area of the upper Danube or eastern Balkans.
 
Without ancient DNA it will always be difficult to figure this all out. I think these i2 people were cremating in bronze age and also iron age as was most of eastern Europe. We know Lusatians were always cremating, Pomeranian culture, Dacians, and maybe Bastarnae too -
"Scholars have identified two closely related sedentary "cultures" as possible candidates to represent the Bastarnae (among other peoples) as their locations broadly correspond to where ancient sources placed the Basternae: the Zarubintsy culture lying in the forest-steppe zone in northern Ukraine-southern Belarus, and the Poieneşti-Lukashevka culture in northern Moldavia.[47][48] These cultures were characterised by agriculture, documented by numerous finds of sickles. Dwellings were either of surface or semi-subterranean types, with posts supporting the walls, a hearth in the middle, and large conical pits located nearby. Some sites were defended by ditches and banks, structures thought to have been built to defend against nomadic tribes from the steppe.[49] Inhabitants practiced cremation."
Connecting Bastarne and I2a or individual branches of I2a is very difficult considering that this group has its own area of living and migration. For now, I2a genetics does not fit into that context. Maybe in the future, some branch of I2a will be related to Bastarne, but this has yet to be seen and proven.
 
Surely, in this sense, everything is possible. But for now, we're sticking with what we've got. When there is another TMRCA results, then we can analyze each branch separately.

For now we have and ancient connections of branch Z17855 (Vinkovci 1879, Bezdanjača Cave 18719, Bezdanjača 18721, Ilipinar 10430, Pohansko 36, Pohansko 41, Pohansko 44, Karos 2-16, Karos 2-52, Karos 3-12) but we have no connection with the area of the upper Danube or eastern Balkans.
Was there any Y DNA research on Getae and Dacians?

I just find it strange and less probable to be related to (White) Croats, as its the most frequent among Macedonians from Southwestern Macedonia (Struga/Ohrid/Debar regions), Albanians mostly from Korce district (that historically might be related to Macedonians), Western Bulgarians, Southeastern Serbia (with Kosovo), Bosniaks from Sanjak, and some Greeks of Bulgarian or Macedonian descent. Among Western Balkans its found only one subclade that is related to family that moved to Bosnia and Croatia from Macedonia during medieval time.
 
Last edited:
Was there any Y DNA research on Getae and Dacians?

I just find it strange and less probable to be related to (White) Croats, as its the most frequent among Macedonians from Southwestern Macedonia (Struga/Ohrid/Debar regions), Albanians mostly from Korce district (that historically might be related to Macedonians), Western Bulgarians, Southeastern Serbia (with Kosovo), Bosniaks from Sanjak, and some Greeks of Bulgarian or Macedonian descent. Among Western Balkans its found only one subclade that is related to family that moved to Bosnia and Croatia from Macedonia during medieval time.
If you mean specifically about the branch I-Z17855 (formed 2100 ybp, TMRCA 1750 ybp), then this TMRCA context can be related to White Croats or related to common ancestors of White Croats. Older than that is more difficult to prove a connection with White Croats. Except that they have a common ancestor in the area of southeastern Poland.

What we can assume for now is that some I2a branches separated earlier from Southern Poland and headed towards Ukraine, from where they later coming with Slavic groups to the Balkans, mainly in the direction of Bulgaria, Greece.
 
R1a is proto Slavic, i2a-dinaric isn't. They picked it up in central Europe

Archeology has shown that I2 was the only Y-DNA outside Russia during the Eneolithic.

I believe that if they're "Yugo-Slavs", they most likely come from the I2 that used to be 100% of the men in "Belarusian" and "Ukrainian" land, rather than from Central Europe.
 
Last edited:
Archeology has shown that I2 was the only Y-DNA outside Russia during the Eneolithic.

I believe that if they're "Yugo-Slavs", they most likely come from the I2 that used to be 100% of the men in "Belarusian" and "Ukrainian" land, rather than from Central Europe.
I don't think they were 100% Balto-Slavic. Surely they had medium to high Balto-Slavic input, but not entire.

Compare the paths of two most prevalent I2a subclades of South Slavs, the Z17855 and PH908:
Z17855.png

PH908.png


They don't seem to go that far north (or northeast to be more specific). Its more probable that some groups split from what's now northern Romania or western Moldova and moved toward Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Russia, and the Balkans.
 
Compare the paths of two most prevalent I2a subclades of South Slavs

Its more probable that some groups split from what's now northern Romania or western Moldova

The point I'm trying to make is that the I2 remains aren't far away from the R1a, it's the opposite, they share a border.
You don't need to go to Central Europe to find them.

In fact, even if the Baltic States lack larger numbers of I2 haplogroup, WHG ancestry peaks there.
This proves that I2 has a long history in E. Europe itself, rather than only in Central Europe.


It's more Romania/Moldava than Ukraine/Belarus? Possibly.
But also, it's been said that the highest diversity of I2a1b in the Balkans is from Ukraine, Slovaquia, Czechia, Poland, Moldova, Belarus...
 
The point I'm trying to make is that the I2 remains aren't far away from the R1a, it's the opposite, they share a border.
You don't need to go to Central Europe to find them.

In fact, even if the Baltic States lack larger numbers of I2 haplogroup, WHG ancestry peaks there.
This proves that I2 has a long history in E. Europe itself, rather than only in Central Europe.


It's more Romania/Moldava than Ukraine/Belarus? Possibly.
But also, it's been said that the highest diversity of I2a1b in the Balkans is from Ukraine, Slovaquia, Czechia, Poland, Moldova, Belarus...

The I2a-L621 which is a parent branch of all East European I2a is, at the moment, first found in Early Bronze Age Bulgaria, and then 3000 years later its found in Central Europe (Slavs and Magyars of eastern Hungary and southern Poland), about 1000 years ago:
L621.png

I doubt that I2a Bronze Age Bulgarians had high WHG
 
I doubt that I2a Bronze Age Bulgarians had high WHG

High WHG have the Balts. And they have it instead of high I2 quantities.

I don't remember the exact name of the paper.
But in the Baltic countries (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) lived the Western Hunter Gatherers.
That was until the Late Eneolithic(I think, I don't remember the exact era, but was like 6000 years ago).


Where I want to reach, is that, I2 extended through all of Europe but Russia.
All European republics at the border (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova) are separated from Russia in the same place that separated WHG and EHG.



The I2a-L621 which is a parent branch of all East European I2a is, at the moment, first found in Early Bronze Age Bulgaria,
L621.png

PS, Link to that paper, please.
 
I don't think they were 100% Balto-Slavic. Surely they had medium to high Balto-Slavic input, but not entire.

Compare the paths of two most prevalent I2a subclades of South Slavs, the Z17855 and PH908:
Z17855.png

PH908.png


They don't seem to go that far north (or northeast to be more specific). Its more probable that some groups split from what's now northern Romania or western Moldova and moved toward Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Russia, and the Balkans.

Not sure how accurate these maps are, most i2 survived in central Europe and expanded with Urnfield -

i2 was all over Europe but when Anatolian Farmers moved in i2 almost disappeared from South Europe and then when the Indo Europeans moved in it was outnumbered everywhere except for small pockets in Central Europe and North Europe, it was almost completely gone in West Europe.

You are definitely right that i2 has never had much presence in Russia and that's where R1a has mostly remained, that is why R1a picked up i2a somewhere in East or Central Europe, I think in the Slavic case these i2a would have been around Poland, Hungary, Ukraine which was the land of Dacians, Bastarnae and Lusatians in the iron age
 
Last edited:
High WHG have the Balts. And they have it instead of high I2 quantities.

I don't remember the exact name of the paper.
But in the Baltic countries (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) lived the Western Hunter Gatherers.
That was until the Late Eneolithic(I think, I don't remember the exact era, but was like 6000 years ago).


Where I want to reach, is that, I2 extended through all of Europe but Russia.
All European republics at the border (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova) are separated from Russia in the same place that separated WHG and EHG.





PS, Link to that paper, please.
If I am not mistaken its this paper:

The individuals found with I2a were from Yunatsite site. They have about 75% Neolithic farmer DNA and the rest is fair split between WHG and CHG

PS. I think the EBA Bulgaria sample I provided was from Tell Kran, also in Bulgaria, it was discussed on this forum here: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/bronze-age-bulgarian-sample.31526/
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 74314 times.

Back
Top