Sarmatians, Serbs, Croats and I2a2


Gast! You make me a second ace! No offense, but I think you would have to learn more about paleolithic Europe - at first sight I believed for a while you were afrocentrist... I think sometimes we are far here from the question of Y-I2a2 and Samaratians and Cy...
 
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.

'White Croatia' should have been in the West part of 'Thraco-Cimmerian' culture, close to Bavaria and it should have meant North Croatia (it would have been West Croatia if we followed Turkic cardinal directions).
Those who create maps about 'White Croatia' use the only source they have about it but decide to improvise and place it in Poland, in spite of what the text says.
 
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.

I discarded Sarmatian theory more than 5 years ago, it can be seen in the posts in this topic. Though there still may be a certain connection with Sarmatians but that is irrelevant for what I wrote couple of days ago.


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 ?

1. I do not connect them exclusively. Check translation for the word "predominant" which I used.
2. See my answer to your first question.
3. It is hard to be precise but I believe we can identify predominant branches as I wrote couple of days ago.
4. I do not have an answer to that question.


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.

Maybe long time I wrote something what could make you think I support such view, but at the moment I do not think they were migrating "hand in hand" as you wrote.
 
I'd say that the correlation between the map and that historical text is striking.

I would not call it as striking, yet interesting and nothing more.

Those who create maps about 'White Croatia' use the only source they have about it but decide to improvise and place it in Poland, in spite of what the text says.

The vagueness of location of White Croatia and White Croats produced substantive debate by historians. As there's an issue whether existed political entity called as White Croatia or Croatia in that part of Europe prior or after the 7th century, the focus switched from White Croatia to tribes of White Croats who were mostly mentioned from Bohemia, Southern Poland, Galicia to Western Ukraine rather than in Bavaria i.e. Germany.

The highland groups living there Boykos, Lemkos, Hutsuls... De Administrando Imperio that the Serbs called their former land "Boyka".

According to De Administrando Imperio the Serbs former land was called as Boïki and usually, it is translated as Bohemia or etymologically related to the name of Celtic tribe Boii who lived in Bohemia and Bavaria, meaning west of White Croatia and Croats. Actually, as far I know, all other historical sources place Serbs, Sorbs, Servians west of Croats somewhere near or within Bavaria, and do not mention them in the east. This means that by location Boykos, Lemkos and Hutsuls could be related to White Croats and hence contemporary Croats, but can not be with Serbs whose ancestors should be Sorbs in Bavaria.

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 ?

1. There can not be made any exclusive connection between these haplogroups and populations
2. No
3. - 4. Depends whether those Croatian and Serbian tribes were or were not only elite tribes who managed or not to have many descendants, i.e. were in small number as mostly it is speculated they came in a smaller second wave migration dated to the 7th century (after first Slavs started to arrive already in the 6th century) and managed to impose political rule in the Western Balkan. Actually, if we are going to keep De Administrando Imperio by word, those migrant Serbs soon scattered around and their principality became depopulated due to war with Bulgars. In other words, a similar thing happened to Bulgars themselves - they were political elite in Bulgaria whose identity and descendants over the centuries vanished, being replaced by Slavic Bulgarians. They kept their name, but the people behind that were not Bulgars anymore. The similar thing could have happened to both Serbs and Croats. Hence, currently speculating on genetic material without broader perspective could be misleading.

mtDNA: according to Nikitin et al. 2009 and mtDNA analysis on Boykos, Lemkos and Hutsuls; Boykos had much lower frequency of hg-H, lower hg-J, but similar hg-U like mainland Croats from Croatia, Lemkos also had lower hg-H, similar hg-J and hg-U, and had high hg-I frequency like at island of Krk (c. 11%) implying local founder effect, Hutsuls very similar hg-H, similar hg-J, but lower hg-U. Overall, the Hutsuls were closest to mainland Croats from Croatia. However, they could not be so close to subclade frequency (particularly hg-H, as Croats have lower H1), and it is doubtful the percent of women among those migrant early Serbs and Croats.

Y-DNA: if, as according to Shetop, the subclade of R-M558 (R-CTS1211) was the predominant haplogroup of early Croats and not I-PH908, then it is ridiculous to consider that I-PH908 was the predominant haplogroup of early Serbs, and not some R1a subclade, as according to Behar et al. 2003, the Sorbs have over 63% of R1a1, the highest percent in Europe. Is it not "predominant" enough?

Also I found it odd to connect that Serbs and as well as Croats were migrating hand in hand. These theories arosed in the 19th century when the idea of Yugoslavia was being set up.

Once again, if we keep De Administrando Imperio by word then it is literally stated that the Croats came before the Serbs. However, they migrated in a similar period, probably during Samo's union (631–658) when was open border from river Elbe (Germany) in the north up to the region of Carniola (Slovenia) in the south, i.e. border with the province of Dalmatia.
 
Last edited:
'White Croatia' should have been in the West part of 'Thraco-Cimmerian' culture, close to Bavaria and it should have meant North Croatia (it would have been West Croatia if we followed Turkic cardinal directions).
Those who create maps about 'White Croatia' use the only source they have about it but decide to improvise and place it in Poland, in spite of what the text says.

White color signifies north in old Slavic writing, but you had red Croatia in old Slavic writings(red signifies south) compromising most of present day Montenegro,north Albania,parts of Herzegovina.Croatia was called the mountainous part of western Balkans according to Dandolo,Dinaric Alps,so not like present day.Different sources different geography,maybe time frame,source they used etc.Similarly we have White Russia or Belorussia of today.Also Dandolo place white Croatia north of red Croatia in northern Dalmatia,while red was the southern part.
 
We already have Sarmatian samples.

So far these Haplogroups have been found

1. G2a
2. R1a
3. J1
4. J2
5. R1b

edit: Why a Negrep Papadimitriou?
 
Last edited:
'White Croatia' should have been in the West part of 'Thraco-Cimmerian' culture, close to Bavaria and it should have meant North Croatia (it would have been West Croatia if we followed Turkic cardinal directions).
Those who create maps about 'White Croatia' use the only source they have about it but decide to improvise and place it in Poland, in spite of what the text says.
White color signifies north in old Slavic writing, but you had red Croatia in old Slavic writings(red signifies south) compromising most of present day Montenegro,north Albania,parts of Herzegovina.Croatia was called the mountainous part of western Balkans according to Dandolo,Dinaric Alps,so not like present day.Different sources different geography,maybe time frame,source they used etc.Similarly we have White Russia or Belorussia of today.Also Dandolo place white Croatia north of red Croatia in northern Dalmatia,while red was the southern part.
This map is improvisied Slavic state in the Balkans as written in the chronicle of Dioclea.So called "Svatopluk state" as written in the chronicle.Svatopluk is the king of "Moravia" as we know it in life of Methodius.Map by Nada Klaic concerning teritories from the chronicle of that time,is more or less is accurate map.
It was unified state divided by this names.
Croatia is the red mountainous part,while Serbia or Zagorje (behind mountains) is the more yellow part,further divided under Bosnia and Rascia(not present day borders).Transmontana in Latin.
Dandolo had similar view.
But red and white Croatia are both located on the Balkans.
Nada_Klai%C4%87_Crvena_Hrvatska.PNG


According to Dandolo
" Svatopluk, king of Dalmatia.... on Duvno field was crowned and his kingdom of Dalmatia is spread out into 4 regions: From the field called Duvno (Tomislavgrad), to Istra is called White Croatia... and from that field to Drac (Durrës in Albania) is called Red Croatia; and the mountainous side from the river Drina to Macedonia is called Rascia, and to that river to here is called Bosnia. The whole sea coast is called Dalmatia and its mountains are Croatia...

Interesting Administrando imperio,Chronicle of priest of Dioclea locate great Moravia in the Balkans,instead the modern myth that made Czech or Slovakia as Great Moravia.

[There] is Belgrade, in which is the tower of the holy and great Constantine, the emperor; then, again, at the running back of the river, is the renowned Sirmium by name, a journey of two days from Belgrade; and beyond lies great Moravia, the unbaptized, which the [Hungarians] have blotted out, but over which in former days [Svätopluk] used to rule. Such are the landmarks and names along the Danube river [...].
— Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio

Also written sources suggest a southward movement of the armies when mentioning the invasion of Moravia from the Duchy of Bavaria.
 
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.


There is no historical record that Serbs come as neighbors of White Croats to Dalmatia.

For that reason your statement
They have just been confirmed by the results from genetics.
is not correct.

The predominant haplogroup of early Serbs was I-PH908

Mutation https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ is White-Croatian origin, and same mutation confirms historical records for Croat migration to Balkans. For that reason mutation I-PH908 can only be exclusively Croatian origin, and all Ukrainians, Bosniaks, Slovenes, Greeks, Albanians, Bulgarians, Serbs, Montenegrins, Russians, Moldavians, Belarusians etc.. with mutation I-S17250 are White Croatian origin.

Forever and irrefutably.
 
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.


White Serbia do not exist, record that mention White Serbia do not exist .
 
hrvat22:Mutation https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ is White-Croatian origin, and same mutation confirms historical records for Croat migration to Balkans. For that reason mutation I-PH908 can only be exclusively Croatian origin, and all Ukrainians, Bosniaks, Slovenes, Greeks, Albanians, Bulgarians, Serbs, Montenegrins, Russians, Moldavians, Belarusians etc.. with mutation I-S17250 are White Croatian origin.

Forever and irrefutably.

...mutation I-S17250 are White Croatian origin,mutation I-S17250 are White Croatian origin,mutation I-S17250 are White Croatian origin...

Try this mantra:...I am rich,I am rich,I am rich...
 
hrvat22:Mutation https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ is White-Croatian origin, and same mutation confirms historical records for Croat migration to Balkans. For that reason mutation I-PH908 can only be exclusively Croatian origin, and all Ukrainians, Bosniaks, Slovenes, Greeks, Albanians, Bulgarians, Serbs, Montenegrins, Russians, Moldavians, Belarusians etc.. with mutation I-S17250 are White Croatian origin.

Forever and irrefutably.

...mutation I-S17250 are White Croatian origin,mutation I-S17250 are White Croatian origin,mutation I-S17250 are White Croatian origin...

Try this mantra:...I am rich,I am rich,I am rich...

I know you can not deny my statement, for that reason I-S17250 is White Croatian origin.

I am rich,I am rich,I am rich..

hahahhaa
 
I know you can not deny my statement, for that reason I-S17250 are White Croatian origin.

I am rich,I am rich,I am rich..

hahahhaa

There is nothing to deny,your statement is groundless.
But you are rich,you are rich...
 
There is nothing to deny,your statement is groundless.
But you are rich,you are rich...

Croats coming from White Croatia, genetic confirms only historical records for Croat migration from White Croatia.
In White Croatia, there are only mentioned Croats, everything else is logic which you can not deny.

Main Croatian ancestor is a person with mutation I-S17250, all behind him are White Croatian origin.

Who comes from White Croata to Balkan..? Chinese





I am rich,I am rich....

hahhaaha
 
AbstractThe article examines Constantine Porphyrogenitus' (913–59) witness on the arrival of the Croats in Dalmatia during the seventh century. The emperor's narrative proposes a migration from a land called White Croatia, located somewhere in central Europe, and a battle with the Avars in order to secure their new territory. The migration, although becoming an important element in nationalist thought, is not confirmed by any other source, neither contemporary, nor later, being reported only by Constantine. I propose that the migration was instead a literary pattern deployed by the emperor in order to explain the complex developments which brought a new elite, called Croats, to a leading position in tenth-century Dalmatia.
White Croatia and the arrival of the Croats: An interpretation of Constantine Porphyrogenitus on the oldest Dalmatian history. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/public...rphyrogenitus_on_the_oldest_Dalmatian_history [accessed Sep 19, 2017].
 
AbstractThe article examines Constantine Porphyrogenitus' (913–59) witness on the arrival of the Croats in Dalmatia during the seventh century. The emperor's narrative proposes a migration from a land called White Croatia, located somewhere in central Europe, and a battle with the Avars in order to secure their new territory. The migration, although becoming an important element in nationalist thought, is not confirmed by any other source, neither contemporary, nor later, being reported only by Constantine. I propose that the migration was instead a literary pattern deployed by the emperor in order to explain the complex developments which brought a new elite, called Croats, to a leading position in tenth-century Dalmatia.
White Croatia and the arrival of the Croats: An interpretation of Constantine Porphyrogenitus on the oldest Dalmatian history. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/public...rphyrogenitus_on_the_oldest_Dalmatian_history [accessed Sep 19, 2017].

De administrando imperio

But Croats at the time lived behind Bagibaree, where now are White Croats (Belohrobatoi).

Emperor Heraclius was sent, and brought from Rome, priests, and made of them an archbishop and a bishop and priests and deacons, and baptized the Croats.

Heraclius (Latin: Flavius Heraclius Augustus, Greek: Φλάβιος Ἡράκλειος' c. 575 – February 11, 641) was the Emperor of the Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empirefrom 610 to 641.[A 1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraclius

From the Croats who came to Dalmatia, one part separated, and occupied Illyricum (Illurikon) and Panonian (Pannonian), they also had their own independent prince.

Territory Ilirikuma stretches from the Drim River in today's Albania to Istria in Croatia and from the Adriatic coast to the Pannonian Basin. Salona near today's Split in Croatia was the center of the Roman province Ilirikum.

From a letter of Pope Gregory I (Grgur) 600. year

Because of the Slavs that threatens you, etc.. worried because they (Slavs) started entering Italy through Istria(Croatia).

Pope John IV (640-642)

He sent abbot Martin to Dalmatia and Istria to redeem prisoners who Pagans captured.


642.(from the letter of Paul Deacon)
Slavs near the city Siponta (southern Italy)...they come with ships from dalmatia.

Historia Salonitana 13th century..

From the Polish territories called Lingonia seven or eight tribal clans arrived under Totilo. When they saw that the Croatian land would be suitable for habitation because in it there were few Roman colonies, they sought and obtained for their duke...The people called Croats...Many call them Goths, and likewise Slavs, according to the particular name of those who arrived from Poland and Bohemia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_Salonitana


The Croatian R1a-Y2608 also expanded from Poland during the early medieval period, but via Czechia, Slovakia, Austria and Slovenia..



http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1a_Y-DNA.shtml
 
But Croats at the time lived behind Bagibaree, where now are White Croats (Belohrobatoi).
Emperor Heraclius was sent, and brought from Rome, priests, and made of them an archbishop and a bishop and priests and deacons, and baptized the Croats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraclius
From the Croats who came to Dalmatia, one part separated, and occupied Illyricum (Illurikon) and Panonian (Pannonian), they also had their own independent prince.
From a letter of Pope Gregory I (Grgur) 600. year
Because of the Slavs that threatens you, etc.. worried because they (Slavs) started entering Italy through Istria(Croatia).
Pope John IV (640-642)
He sent abbot Martin to Dalmatia and Istria to redeem prisoners who Pagans captured.
642.(from the letter of Paul Deacon)
Slavs near the city Siponta (southern Italy)...they come with ships from dalmatia.
Historia Salonitana 13th century..
From the Polish territories called Lingonia seven or eight tribal clans arrived under Totilo. When they saw that the Croatian land would be suitable for habitation because in it there were few Roman colonies, they sought and obtained for their duke...The people called Croats...Many call them Goths, and likewise Slavs, according to the particular name of those who arrived from Poland and Bohemia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_Salonitana
[FONT=&]The Croatian R1a-Y2608 also expanded from Poland during the early [/FONT][FONT=&]medieval[/FONT][FONT=&] period, but via Czechia, Slovakia, Austria and Slovenia..
[/FONT]
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1a_Y-DNA.shtml
While we agree that the white croats ( some say they are known as the Antes)entered Dalmatia no earlier than 610AD , we have no proof on what ydna they brought.
Since we have knowledge than illyrian origins are basically the lands of east-austria, slovenia, friuli, dalmatia and pannonia we know what ydna are basically in these areas pre-roman times in the early iron age from the 2014 paper by Francesca Brisighelli
Granted we do have a high mix of Illyrian and venetic ydna for these areas.
Since R1a, R1b, I1 is the majority in these areas in the early iron age , we have no idea what the white croats brought with them
 
While we agree that the white croats ( some say they are known as the Antes)entered Dalmatia no earlier than 610AD , we have no proof on what ydna they brought.
Since we have knowledge than illyrian origins are basically the lands of east-austria, slovenia, friuli, dalmatia and pannonia we know what ydna are basically in these areas pre-roman times in the early iron age from the 2014 paper by Francesca Brisighelli
Granted we do have a high mix of Illyrian and venetic ydna for these areas.
Since R1a, R1b, I1 is the majority in these areas in the early iron age , we have no idea what the white croats brought with them

When Slavs (White Croats) come to Dalmatia local people fled to Italy and Albania.

There are not many mutation I-S17250 in Italy, which means that in time of Croats arrival to Dalmatia they(local people) have not much I2a I-S17250.

I2a I-S17250 exist in south Italy, probably from escaped Croats during Turks occupation ... In that area currently live Croatian minority that escaped during Turks okupation.

In northwestern Albania exists I2a I-S17250, but there are records of Croatian state(Red Croatia) all the way Drač in today's northwestern Albania.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durrës

"And from the field of Dalmae (Duvno) (Southe Bosna) to the city of Dyrrachium (Durrës) (Albania) is Red Croatia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Croatia


As we can see genetics of Croats who fled from Croatia to Italy(Turkish occupation), also we should see genetics of local population fled from Dalmatia(White Croats occupation).






 
There is no historical record that Serbs come as neighbors of White Croats to Dalmatia.

For that reason your statement is not correct.


This land of the Zachlumi was under the emperor of the Romans, but when it and its folk were enslaved by the Avars, it was rendered wholly desolate. Those who live there now, the Zachlumi, are Serbs from the time of that prince who claimed the protection of the emperor Heraclius.

The country of the Terbouniotes and the Kanalites is one. The inhabitants are descended from the unbaptized Serbs, from the time of that prince who came out of unbaptized Serbia and claimed the protection of the emperor Heraclius until the time of Blastimer, prince of Serbia.

The country in which the Pagani now dwell was also previously possessed by the Romaniwhom the emperor Diocletian translated from Rome and settled in Dalmatia. These same Pagani are descended from the unbaptized Serbs, of the time of that prince who claimed the protection of the emperor Heraclius.

And since what is now Serbia and Pagania and the so-called country of the Zachlumi and Terbounia and the country of the Kanalites were under the dominion of the emperor of the Romans, and since these countries had been made desolate by the Avars (for they had expelled from those parts the Romani who now live in Dalmatia and Dyrrachium), therefore the emperor settled these same Serbs in these countries, and they were subject to the emperor of the Romans;

Quotes are from De Administrando Imperio .
 

Originally Posted by hrvat22There is no historical record that Serbs come as neighbors of White Croats to Dalmatia.


For that reason your statement is not correct.

You did not mentioned fact that Serbs coming to Dalmatia, for that reason your statement is not true.Serbs never came to Dalmatia from neighborhood of White Croats and that's a fact. There is no written record of it.

For this reason they can not be a source of I-PH908 and your claim
The predominant haplogroup of early Serbs was I-PH908
is incorrect.

It is true that in Serbians mutation I-PH908 is White Croatian origin and comes to Roman Dalmatia with Croats who later became Serbs and others.
 
Last edited:
hrvat22 is a same-titled ignorant trell from Croatian "Forum.hr". He does not know the difference between terms haplogroup (SNP) and haplotype (STR), he believes that Dinaric-South and Dinaric-North haplotypes are outdated terms related to nomenclature like I1, EU7 not in use anymore because he, literally, cannot find "Dinaric-South" on the phylogenetic tree at ISOGG, while repeatedly calling I-S17250 and other haplogroups as haplotypes. When citing YFull he does not how to cite it properly nor knows the difference between "formed age" and "TMRCA", hence considering that I-PH908 is older than I-S17250. He is basically spamming the threads with delusional and chauvinistic idea, see previous page, that the I-S17250 is "indefensible and ultimately", "exclusively", "forever and irrefutably" White Croatian mutation i.e. that all Slavs are of (White) Croatian origin, irrelevant the fact that the majority of South Slavs (including Croats) belong to Dinaric-South cluster and SNP I-PH908 (although until now was not found a single ancient sample to confirm such White Croatian hypothesis nor current age estimation support it), while the vast majority of I-S17250 is being made by Dinaric-North cluster and haplogroups. He is practically propagating an extremist pro-Croatian perspective in revolt to the extremist pro-Serbian perspective about I-PH908, but he expanded it to the I-S17250 also.
 

This thread has been viewed 434691 times.

Back
Top