Sarmatians, Serbs, Croats and I2a2

An anthropological paper about Croats:

https://ariets.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/15311416.pdf

(...) Our results showed marked craniometrical similarities between early medieval Croat and medieval Polish series. Among all of the 39 analyzed European sites, the two exhibiting the greatest similarities were Nin, a site representing the nucleus of the early medieval Croat state (72), and Cedynia, a Polish site located approximately 75 km south of the Baltic Sea. Conversely, the 5 analyzed Iranian sites exhibited no similarity with the early medieval Croat sites and were all located in the diametrically opposite part of the scatter plot. These results suggest that early medieval Croats were of Slavic ancestry, and that early medieval Croats and Poles at one time shared a common homeland. Recent genetic analyses of the nonrecombining Y chromosome from 25 extant European and Middle Eastern populations support the Slavic affiliation of the Croats, and also indicate significant genetic similarities between modern Croats and Poles (1). (...)
Click to expand...

The 5 analyzed Iranian sites included:

1. Early Saka culture Kazakhstan 5-4 cent. BC, Ginzburg and Trofimova (58)
2. Scythian culture Russia 5-4 cent. BC, Alekseev (59)
3. Sarmatian culture 1 Kazakhstan 4 cent. BC-2 cent. AD, Ginzburg and Trofimova (58)
4. Sarmatian culture 2 Russia 4 cent. BC-2 cent. AD, Firshtein (60)
5. Sarmatian culture 3 Russia 4 cent. BC-2 cent. AD, Firshtein (60)
 
After all the time which has passed since this topic was started and with all the data we now have, I think it is a good time to make some important conclusions:

1. Tribes of Croats and Serbs did come to the Balkans as Slavs in approximately 6th or 7th century
2. Their ancient homeland was North-Northeast of Carpathians
3. De Administrando Imperio is more or less good source for understanding early Croatian and Serbian history
4. The predominant haplogroup of early Croats was R-Y2613
5. The predominant haplogroup of early Serbs was I-PH908

Regarding #1, #2 and #3 it is important to understand that they were already claimed by the historical science. They have just been confirmed by the results from genetics.
 
Last edited:
" They have just been confirmed by the results from genetics."

Which results do you mean?
 
Eupedia is not "solid" evidence.There is no I2a1b-L621 in Cucuteni-Trypillian cuture as Eupedia suggest.

"The high concentration of I2a1b-L621 in north-east Romania, Moldova and central Ukraine reminds of the maximum spread of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture (4800-3000 BCE)..........it is likely that I2a was one of its main paternal lineages..."

They were G2a and E.

http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/09/135962

The Genomic History of Southeastern Europe - Mathieson, Reich, et al.
 
gyms said:
Eupedia is not "solid" evidence.There is no I2a1b-L621 in Cucuteni-Trypillian cuture as Eupedia suggest.

"The high concentration of I2a1b-L621 in north-east Romania, Moldova and central Ukraine reminds of the maximum spread of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture (4800-3000 BCE)..........it is likely that I2a was one of its main paternal lineages..."

They were G2a and E.

http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/09/135962

The Genomic History of Southeastern Europe - Mathieson, Reich, et al.
Click to expand...


I fully agree Cucuteni was wrongly predicted by Maciamo.
What I was talking about is Croat and Serb migrations only. It is more recent history and possibility to be wrong is significantly lower.
 
The only "solid" way to confirm the theory is through aDNA. Everything else is speculation.
 
gyms said:
The only "solid" way to confirm the theory is through aDNA. Everything else is speculation.
Click to expand...

There are results from bronze age Croatia and bronze age Bulgaria and there was no I-CTS10228 and no R-Z280 there.
 
Shetop said:
I fully agree Cucuteni was wrongly predicted by Maciamo.
What I was talking about is Croat and Serb migrations only. It is more recent history and possibility to be wrong is significantly lower.
Click to expand...
Could be small sample bias from one cave. Cucuteni interacted with steppe a lot, it is impossible that they were uniformly G2a. Some way as there was no R1b in older Hungarian samples. Now we are getting quite a bit of R1b in Balkans with more samples.
 
Shetop said:
After all the time which has passed since this topic was started and with all the data we now have, I think it is a good time to make some important "conclusions":
Click to expand...

1. It is unknown in which specific century tribes of Croats and Serbs came between 6th-8th centuries, if there was one or two waves of Slavic migration and if they made a separate migration, and when came to the Balkans if they were ethnogenetically homogenous Slavic tribes

2. It is unknown where was their specific ancient homeland from where migrated, actually the so-called White Croats partly were while White Serbs especially were not located North-Northeast of Carpathians

3. Otherwise it contradicts the source De Administrando Imperio

4. It is not known nor there is any evidence that the predominant haplogroup of early Croats was R-Y2613

5. It is not known nor there is any evidence that the predominant haplogroup of early Serbs was I-PH908

Actually, such conclusion about I-PH908 is spread by supporters of Serbian DNA Project who try to mix Serbian chauvinistic ideology with population genetics i.e. as I-PH908 is predominant among South Slavs proclaiming it as Serbian it would mean that majority of South Slavs are Serbs by origin, i.e. because of that they proclaim R-Y2613 as Croatian as well because it is widespread in Western and Northern Croatia which would be west of Virovitica–Karlovac–Karlobag line, boundary of Greater Serbia. Shameful abuse of population genetics for subtile spread and preservation of centuries old nationalistic and irredentistic ideas.

Shetop said:
There are results from bronze age Croatia and bronze age Bulgaria and there was no I-CTS10228 and no R-Z280 there.
Click to expand...

Only 7 out of 14 total samples, which age ranged from 6,400-1,500 BCE, which cultures ranged from Sopot and Cardial Neolithic (4) to Vučedol (2) and Bronze Age (1), had Y-DNA haplogroup results. Such argumentation on that small sample size, different cultures, local bias, is simply invalid.
 
Miroslav said:
If you do not care about nationalism then do not share nationalistic interpretations of population genetics.
Click to expand...

I do not see it as a nationalistic interpretation. I'm member of this forum since 2010, I have 300 posts here. You can check if I had any such intentions.
I simply believe that what I wrote corresponds to what happened in the early middle ages in the western Balkans.
 
Shetop said:
I simply believe that what I wrote corresponds to what happened in the early middle ages in the western Balkans.
Click to expand...

It simply does not correspond anyhow nor there can be made any such conclusion. What you wrote is a mash up of things typical for the supporters, mainly Serbs, of the Serbian DNA Project. If you do not see nationalistic abuse of population genetics then you're blindfolded or support such interpretation. Nothing more, nothing less. My last comment on this issue. Let's move on with the topic.
 
Miroslav said:
Let's move on with the topic.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree you should stop writing stuff which is meant only to discredit me, without having any real arguments.

And let me ask you something related to the topic - would you agree that the predominant R1a subclade in Croatia and Polish Galicia is R-Y2613?
 
Shetop said:
Yes, I agree you should stop writing stuff which is meant only to discredit me, without having any real arguments.
Click to expand...
I always found Shetop's posts very objective. I wish he spent more time around Eupedia. :)
 
LeBrok said:
I always found Shetop's posts very objective. I wish he spent more time around Eupedia. :)
Click to expand...

Thanks LeBrok. And I'd say you are the one who brings lots of positivity, especially when the forum needs it!
 
Shetop said:
Yes, I agree you should stop writing stuff which is meant only to discredit me, without having any real arguments.

And let me ask you something related to the topic - would you agree that the predominant R1a subclade in Croatia and Polish Galicia is R-Y2613?
Click to expand...

I corrected your "conclusions" with arguments. I did not meant to discredit you, yet things you wrote. There's an obvious difference between saying "predominant haplogroup of early Croats was R-Y2613" and "predominant R1a subclade in Croatia is ... R-Y2613". According to the most recent study (Šarac et al. 2016) the predominant subclade is R-M558 (R-CTS1211). Currently do not have the data to agree which R-CTS1211 subclade is predominant in Croatia. Yes, there's some speculation about R-Y2613, but as such I can not agree on something which is unproven.
 
Miroslav said:
There's an obvious difference between saying "predominant haplogroup of early Croats was R-Y2613" and "predominant R1a subclade in Croatia is ... R-Y2613".
Click to expand...

I fully agree.


Miroslav said:
According to the most recent study (Šarac et al. 2016) the predominant subclade is R-M558 (R-CTS1211). Currently do not have the data to agree which R-CTS1211 subclade is predominant in Croatia. Yes, there's some speculation about R-Y2613, but as such I can not agree on something which is unproven.
Click to expand...

I concur with that too, there is no proof yet.
However, we could speculate based on the data from Family Tree DNA - R1a1a and Subclades Y-DNA Project. Even though it is not a proper research it currently shows that the majority of R1a in Croatia is indeed Y2613+.

And here is the most interesting thing. There is this map:http://www.semargl.me/haplogroups/maps/2/
And there are also these words of Byzantine emperor:
The Croats who now live in the region of Dalmatia are descended from the unbaptized Croats, also called ‘white’, who live beyond Turkey (Hungary) and next to Francia
Click to expand...

I'd say that the correlation between the map and that historical text is striking.
 
Shetop said:
Yes, I agree you should stop writing stuff which is meant only to discredit me, without having any real arguments.

And let me ask you something related to the topic - would you agree that the predominant R1a subclade in Croatia and Polish Galicia is R-Y2613?
Click to expand...
The region of Galicia has nothing to do with Sarmatians of antiquity to begin with,your original post.But has much more to do culturally and archeologycally with the "Thraco-Cimmerian culture".Some historians specualte it had to the with the Thracian Getae.
Thraco-Cimmerian.png


However during "migration period" so called "Goths" were living there.That's all together another topic.

Sarmatians,Sauromates were living north of the Caucasus,north of Black sea.Herodotus say that Sarmatians are living east of Maeotis lake(Sea of Azov) and Tanais.So you should make your mind on ancient Greek geography.


The highland groups living there Boykos,Lemkos,Hutsuls are very "Balkan" shifted genetically according to Serbian project "poreklo" above 30% of E-V13 among the Boykos,i recall the source you yourself use "Administrando imperio" that the Serbs called their former land "Boyka".
Also this population is speculated to descend from the mythical White Croatia and or White Serbia.
1.How then you connect exclusively R1a or I2a1 with either population be them Serbs or Croats?
2.Were they genetically pure of R1a or I2a1 din?
3.What genetic material they brought to Balkans then?
4.Then the obvious question to the "migrations model" what was their number or genetic impact ?

Also i found it odd to connect that Serbs and as well as Croats were migrating hand in hand.This theories arosed in 19th century when idea of Yugoslavia was being set up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top