I2a2 M423+

Are you claiming that the frequency of i2a2 comes entirely from gene flow during the dark ages? If so, this claim is about as absurd as I have heard.


This is from your the beginning of your document document:
"East, respectively. In particular, whereas the Balkan microsatellite variation associated to J-M241 correlates with the Neolithic period, those related to E-V13 and I-M423 Balkan Y chromosomes are consistent with a late Mesolithic time frame. In addition, the low frequency and variance associated to I-M423 and E-V13 in Anatolia and the Middle East, support an European Mesolithic origin of these two clades. Thus, these Balkan Mesolithic foragers with their own autochthonous genetic signatures, were destined to become the earliest to adopt farming, when it was subsequently introduced by a cadre of migrating farmers from the Near East. These initial local converted farmers became the principal agents spreading this economy using maritime leapfrog colonization strategies in the Adriatic and transmitting the Neolithic cultural package to other adjacent Mesolithic populations. The ensuing range expansions of E-V13 and I-M423 parallel in space and time the diffusion of Neolithic Impressed Ware, thereby supporting a case of cultural diffusion using genetic evidence"
 
Let be whatever, it is not illyrian, definitely.
Funny, since the cultural capital of Illyria was in Stolac, Hercegovina. Secondly, haplogroup I2a2 has a high correlation with the presumed location of Illyrians, while, E1 does not show us any such correlation.

I think your post stands for itself in terms of synthesis and representation of information.
 
I don't see facts here.

It seems that in the time when other I subclades lived in the far North, I2a2 pop out with magic wind in the Balkan. Isn't this absurde??
 
Yes Stolac in Bosnia was capital of Illyrians
and in Bosnia is absolut most of I2a2.
 
Yes Stolac in Bosnia was capital of Illyrians
and in Bosnia is absolut most of I2a2.
Bosna was considered Croatian under various governments in the past, and still should be today.

I2a2 of Bosnian muslims is lower than that of Hrvati in Herceg-Bosna. The muslims in Herceg-Bosna show more gene flow than the Croats from other Y-haplogroups.

Stolac was the capital of Illyria. Stolac is in Hercegovina, not Bosna. This would mean that Illyrians would be a higher percent of I2a2 (which is found in the Croatian populations).
 
Herceg-Bosna ??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Hercegovina not Bosnia ??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH

I think Adolf Hitler is your Forfather :)

Herceg-Bosna is a dream od stupid radical Catholics in Bosnia
and the Croatians in Croatia laugh about this stupid catholics.

Bosnians are the Nativ People of this Region this is prooved Fact
croatians and serbs come many later in this Region.
The Name Bosnia is orgin Illyrian Bosona.

See you later Adolf HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH
 
There seems to be a great deal of confusion on this thread between the eastern and western forms of I2a2. According to ISOGG 2010 and the work of Ken Nordtvedt, I2a2a represents the 'Dinaric' form of I2a2 found in greatest numbers in the Balkans. Nordtvedt delineates between I2a2a-Dinaric North and I2a2a-Dinaric-South. These 'Dinaric' forms of I2a2 are effectively absent in western Europe and Britain/Ireland. Contrary to the theories of Rootsi et al [2004], Ken Nordtvedt has rejected a Balkan origin for these Dinaric forms, suggesting instead the Danube Basin.

There are three 'western' forms of I2a. Firstly, there is I2a3-Western, which is P37.2 positive and found near the north sea, in northern Germany and England.

Secondly, there is I2a2b-Isles which is positive for P37.2, M423 and L161. There are 8 separate subclades. Nordtvedt, who discovered them, suggests that the founder was on the north German plain. I2a2b-Isles is absent in eastern Europe except for a few hits in Poland. The bulk of the membership is in Ireland, Scotland and England [hence the 'Isles' tag] but there is now a decent, emerging continental membership with Germany in the lead, followed by France across the north European plain. Nordtvedt suggests a Neolithic origin for this Germany-founded I2a2b-Isles, and has said that 'Isles' may represent a genetic echo of some of the earliest post-LGM settlers. Conversely, Bryan Sykes [private correspondence] 'remains unconvinced by substantial dates' that I2a2 in Britain dates back this far. Sykes suggests instead that some of this I2a2b-Isles variety was carried by Anglo- Saxons. I also recently consulted Anatole Klyosov about this British/Irish I2a2; Anatole is of the view that most of it is 'ancient' but that some was brought by 'the invaders'.

Finally, there is the 'Disles' variety of I2a2a, called so by Nordtvedt because it is practically 'in the middle' of Dinaric and Isles varieties, leaning slightly towards the Dinaric. This variety has a hotspot in Scotland.
 
There seems to be a great deal of confusion on this thread between the eastern and western forms of I2a2. According to ISOGG 2010 and the work of Ken Nordtvedt, I2a2a represents the 'Dinaric' form of I2a2 found in greatest numbers in the Balkans. Nordtvedt delineates between I2a2a-Dinaric North and I2a2a-Dinaric-South. These 'Dinaric' forms of I2a2 are effectively absent in western Europe and Britain/Ireland. Contrary to the theories of Rootsi et al [2004], Ken Nordtvedt has rejected a Balkan origin for these Dinaric forms, suggesting instead the Danube Basin.

In my opinion, I2a2 were nomadic hunter-gatherers of South-East Europe, occupying both the Balkans and the Danube basin, possibly as far as the Dnieper to the north, and Greece to the south.

The Neolithic expansion brought Near Eastern settlers (E-V13 and J2b), who established the first permanent settlements in Greece, Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo, Serbia, parts of Bulgaria, and along the Danube across Germany as far as Belgium and northern France. They effectively cut the I2a2 territory in two, forcing the the hunter-gatherers out of their farmlands, and creating in eastern Moldovan branch and and western Dinaric branch of I2a2 people.

The I2a2 people progressively adopted agriculture and stock breeding themselves. The Moldovan branch thus formed the Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture, which later came into conflict with the Indo-European (southern) R1b1b2 and (northern) R1a1a steppe people, who relied mostly on stock breeding (but knew agriculture), rode horses and acquired early the knowledge of Bronze metallurgy, which eventually gave them the military superiority needed to conquer their neighbours.

The nomadic nature of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers (Y-haplogroup I) make it entirely possible that some tribes of I2a2 ended up in Western Europe, where I2b lineages predominated. Likewise, I1 tribes of northern Europe, who apparently did not just occupy Scandinavia but also Poland and perhaps the Baltic and parts of north-western Russia, could have ended up locked in a corner of Macedonia or Kosovo, explaining why some studies found 10% of I1 there. It also explains the 2-3% of I1 inn Serbia or Bosnia, and the 3% of I2b in Albania, all possible results of nomadic tribes of hunter-gatherers who remained stuck in the Balkans after Near Eastern farmers created a corridor of farms and towns all along the Danube.
 
Questions for both Yorkie and Maciamo:
Do you agree with what seems to be mainstream opinion about E-V13 movement to Britain during Roman period? If you do agree, how can there be no I2a2 Dinaric in Britain?
What are your arguments for placing I2a2 Dinaric south of Carpathians before migration period? Yes, we all can see high frequencies of I2a2 Dinaric in the Balkans today, but what is the basis for claims that in period which was historically well described it was different?

I have no doubt that work of Ken Nordtvedt is very valuable but with this particular assumption he is making a mistake. My view is that I2a2 originated in western Ukraine. It was proto-Slavic marker and was spread to Southwest with Slavs.

And one question for Maciamo – can you provide a reference for 2-3% of I1 in Serbia? Recent study which had the biggest number of samples actually showed 7.82% of I1 in Serbia. I1 is not the topic but since it was mentioned I’ll say what I think – 90% of I1 in the Balkans is of Gothic origin.
 
Questions for both Yorkie and Maciamo:
Do you agree with what seems to be mainstream opinion about E-V13 movement to Britain during Roman period? If you do agree, how can there be no I2a2 Dinaric in Britain?
What are your arguments for placing I2a2 Dinaric south of Carpathians before migration period? Yes, we all can see high frequencies of I2a2 Dinaric in the Balkans today, but what is the basis for claims that in period which was historically well described it was different?

I have no doubt that work of Ken Nordtvedt is very valuable but with this particular assumption he is making a mistake. My view is that I2a2 originated in western Ukraine. It was proto-Slavic marker and was spread to Southwest with Slavs.

And one question for Maciamo – can you provide a reference for 2-3% of I1 in Serbia? Recent study which had the biggest number of samples actually showed 7.82% of I1 in Serbia. I1 is not the topic but since it was mentioned I’ll say what I think – 90% of I1 in the Balkans is of Gothic origin.

I have never been wholly conviced that E-VI3 represents a genetic echo of the Romans in Britain. I am not completely against the idea, but remain open to persuasion.

Re the absence of I2a2a-Dinaric in Britain; this does indeed indicate to me that the Roman auxiliaries left few genetic traces in Britain. The clade is indeed absent, save for a puny list of around 9 people with British surnames who carry one of the 2 'Dinaric' varieties of I2a2. One suspects NPEs in these cases.

There is an I2a2a-Disles variety, which is 'mid-way' between I2a2a-Dinaric and the north Germany-founded I2a2b-Isles variety. Curiously, 'Disles' is slightly closer to Dinaric than to Isles. The hotspot for Disles is Scotland.

In my view, neither the Romans, Slavic peoples or 'Slavicised' Balkan peoples have made a significant contribution to the British gene-pool. I say that with respect and without wishing to cause offence.
 
There is this I2a2 issue going on for some time. It can be said it is a part of the bigger migration period story.

There are those who think migration period caused major population replacements in some parts of eastern Europe during migration period, and there are those who oppose it. When talking about I2a2 it is indicative that forum members from countries where I2a2 Dinaric is found, support the position of western Ukrainian origin of I2a2.

It would be in the interest of the people form Croatia, Bosnia, Slovenia, Serbia, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Montenegro to claim I2a2 is indigenous. But we don't do that, and the reason is simple - we all learned about Slavic migrations in the school.

As the matter affect, Balkans is the great region to understand the ways of Y-DNA in antiquity. Y-DNA was much more divided and correlation between languages and Y-DNA was very strong. Some would say it is simple way to look into the complex issue. But try to understand Balkans and you will see.

I will continue to insist that I2a2, I1, I2b, Q1b was absent from the Balkans before migration period. And R1a1 was present in much smaller frequencies.
 
In my opinion, I2a2 were nomadic hunter-gatherers of South-East Europe, occupying both the Balkans and the Danube basin, possibly as far as the Dnieper to the north, and Greece to the south.

The age of I2a2-Dinaric was estimated at 3600 years, then adjusted to 2550 years, now TMRCA ages are being recomputed
.
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=results

These two quotes don't go together. I know you were talking about I2a2 (not Dinaric), but how come only Dinaric is spread in the regions you described and Isles is not?

I2a2 Dinaric is that numerous and young at the same time, so we would have to know about movements of such a big number of people in recent history. Only explanation is Slavic migrations.
 
There is this I2a2 issue going on for some time. It can be said it is a part of the bigger migration period story.

There are those who think migration period caused major population replacements in some parts of eastern Europe during migration period, and there are those who oppose it. When talking about I2a2 it is indicative that forum members from countries where I2a2 Dinaric is found, support the position of western Ukrainian origin of I2a2.

It would be in the interest of the people form Croatia, Bosnia, Slovenia, Serbia, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Montenegro to claim I2a2 is indigenous. But we don't do that, and the reason is simple - we all learned about Slavic migrations in the school.

As the matter affect, Balkans is the great region to understand the ways of Y-DNA in antiquity. Y-DNA was much more divided and correlation between languages and Y-DNA was very strong. Some would say it is simple way to look into the complex issue. But try to understand Balkans and you will see.

I will continue to insist that I2a2, I1, I2b, Q1b was absent from the Balkans before migration period. And R1a1 was present in much smaller frequencies.

I believe that Nordtvedt has recently expressed some sympathy for the idea that Slavic migrations might have spread I2a2a-Dinaric. He appears to favour somewhere north of the Balkans as an origin such as the Danube Basin rather than Ukraine though.

When we are comparing I2a2a-Dinaric with I2a2b-Isles, we need to remember that their branch lines separated ways some 12,000 years ago, and that they are separated by two SNPs. We are talking about two very different population groups. Isles has nothing to do with the Balkans, is absent there, and was founded in north Germany. That is why the distribution is roughly so...

Ireland, England, Scotland , Germany, France.

As stated before the few Polish Isles members seem to be from former German territories, and at least one [Krause] has a German name.
 
In my opinion, I2a2 were nomadic hunter-gatherers of South-East Europe, occupying both the Balkans and the Danube basin, possibly as far as the Dnieper to the north, and Greece to the south.

The Neolithic expansion brought Near Eastern settlers (E-V13 and J2b), who established the first permanent settlements in Greece, Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo, Serbia, parts of Bulgaria, and along the Danube across Germany as far as Belgium and northern France. They effectively cut the I2a2 territory in two, forcing the the hunter-gatherers out of their farmlands, and creating in eastern Moldovan branch and and western Dinaric branch of I2a2 people.

The I2a2 people progressively adopted agriculture and stock breeding themselves. The Moldovan branch thus formed the Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture, which later came into conflict with the Indo-European (southern) R1b1b2 and (northern) R1a1a steppe people, who relied mostly on stock breeding (but knew agriculture), rode horses and acquired early the knowledge of Bronze metallurgy, which eventually gave them the military superiority needed to conquer their neighbours.

The nomadic nature of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers (Y-haplogroup I) make it entirely possible that some tribes of I2a2 ended up in Western Europe, where I2b lineages predominated. Likewise, I1 tribes of northern Europe, who apparently did not just occupy Scandinavia but also Poland and perhaps the Baltic and parts of north-western Russia, could have ended up locked in a corner of Macedonia or Kosovo, explaining why some studies found 10% of I1 there. It also explains the 2-3% of I1 inn Serbia or Bosnia, and the 3% of I2b in Albania, all possible results of nomadic tribes of hunter-gatherers who remained stuck in the Balkans after Near Eastern farmers created a corridor of farms and towns all along the Danube.

I can see the logic in your argument, Maciamo. I would love to talk to you via private email but for some reason I don't seem to be able to send messages on the site.

Your point about the nomadic nature of hunter-gatherers is a cogent one. You appear to be suggesting that the British/Irish and to some extent north European plain distribution of I2a2b-Isles could be down to this. The idea of I1 'locked in a corner' of Kosovo because of this same pattern of hunter-gatherer behaviour intrigues me too. Very, very interesting.
 
Let's assume I2a2 Din originated in the Danube Basin. Since you agree with Nordtvedt you agree that TMRCA of I2a2 Din lived 2550 years ago.

How many years would it take for I2a2 Din to grow in humbers enough so that it can spread in the large territory between Adriatic and Dnieper?

I would say it would take centuries. So it can't be I2a2 Din spread in both directions before the beginning of Common Era. Do you agree with that?

Has history described this period with regard to Danube Basin. I would say it had. In your opinion what event from history describes the spread of Slavs from the Danube Basin towards east?

There is no such event. With all do respect, your story is logically inconsistent.

I challenge you to answer me - what is logical inconsistency in the theory of spreading I2a2 Din from western Ukraine?
 
Let's assume I2a2 Din originated in the Danube Basin. Since you agree with Nordtvedt you agree that TMRCA of I2a2 Din lived 2550 years ago.

How many years would it take for I2a2 Din to grow in humbers enough so that it can spread in the large territory between Adriatic and Dnieper?

I would say it would take centuries. So it can't be I2a2 Din spread in both directions before the beginning of Common Era. Do you agree with that?

Has history described this period with regard to Danube Basin. I would say it had. In your opinion what event from history describes the spread of Slavs from the Danube Basin towards east?

There is no such event. With all do respect, your story is logically inconsistent.

I challenge you to answer me - what is logical inconsistency in the theory of spreading I2a2 Din from western Ukraine?

Firstly, please moderate your tone- there is no need to 'challenge' anybody. I never said that I agreed with Nordtvedt 100% on everything. After pondering the evidence I think Nordtvedt is actually wrong re the Danube Basin. I have changed my view over the last few months. I happen to agree with you that Ukraine is more likely. I also agree that the Slavic migrations are probably responsible for the spreading of I2a2a-Dinaric. There...you see...life is full of surprises isn't it?

I also agree with Sykes that I2a2b-Isles was most likely brought by Anglo Saxons to Britain as well as the Neolithic settlers Nordtvedt associates with Isles.

You see, Shetop, or should I say 'k', I do listen to your logical arguments sometimes. Ken is a brilliant researcher but I can form my own opinions. LOL.
 
I apologize, I shouldn’t have it written that way. The thing is, our voices are much more silent then those of Nordtvedt or Maciamo, and I guess I wanted to be heard. But in the end I believe we all have best intentions.

Though, I don’t quite understand this comment with ‘k’. If it is what I think it is, maybe it should be ‘n’.
 
I apologize, I shouldn’t have it written that way. The thing is, our voices are much more silent then those of Nordtvedt or Maciamo, and I guess I wanted to be heard. But in the end I believe we all have best intentions.

Though, I don’t quite understand this comment with ‘k’. If it is what I think it is, maybe it should be ‘n’.

That's ok. The reference to 'k' [made in good humour] was to an identity on another forum. Maybe I have the wrong poster?
 
I am Neba there... :rolleyes:

I must have mistaken you for someone else.

Re Isles and Dinaric- there may be 12,000 years between them, but they did share a common ancestor.

If Dinaric was founded in Ukraine, and Isles was founded in northern Germany, I wonder where I2a2a-Disles was founded? As previously outlined, this very small clade is slightly nearer to Dinaric than to Isles, and the hotspot is Scotland followed by Ireland.
 

This thread has been viewed 153767 times.

Back
Top