Sarmatians, Serbs, Croats and I2a2

[LeBrok]

Really? 3 thousand years apart, but still the same. Did you see haplogroups of Assyrians? We have Iranians here.
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

They are rich in R1a and even contain 2.5% of N, the only country in the Middle East. It points strongly to Iranian's origin North of Caspian Sea or so.

 

[iapodos]

http://de-construct.net/?p=5447

 

[Maciamo]

I have been thinking about the presence of I1 and R1b in Croatia. I think that the most likely explanation is that both came during the Germanic migrations (Ostrogoths, Lombards, Bavaro-Austrians). I would need to know the subclades of R1b found in Croatia to confirm this. If most of it is R-U106/S21, then it will confirm a Germanic origin. If most of it is the Italo-Alpine R-U152/S28, then R1b has no relation to the Germanic migrations and I1 might have a different origin too. Unfortunately I don't have any study on Croatian subclades of R1b.

 

[Maciamo]

Most of the ancestors of today's Russians spoke Iranian also.

Iranian and Slavic languages descend from a common "Eastern" branch of Indo-European languages, but you can't say that Russians spoke Iranian at any point in history, except for the Scythians and Samartians in southern Russia ans Ukraine (but how much of them became the ancestors of modern Russians ?).

 

[LeBrok]

I was looking yesterday through some basic words vocabulary of Iranian and Armenian, and for a fist glance couldn't find any relation to Polish, Russian or Lithuanian. If not a word of experts I wouldn't guess that these languages were related, they are so different to me. My guess would be that the split between Slavic and Iranian happened about 5 000 years ago. 4000 or less would be pushing and would need strong outside influence.
If it comes to simple vocabulary Polish and Russian have more in common with German and Latin than with Iranian or others coming from Scythians or Sarmatians like Ossetians.
My conclusion is that Slavs for thousands of years resided on fringes of Scythia, most likely where steppe ends and forested aria starts, area of Czarnolas, the border of Ukraine, Poland and Belarus, with Balts farther north. They strongly interacted with Germanic tribes which preferred also forest areas. They also interacted with Celts, probably the Italic brunch, which had a very strong presence around Prague area (Czeks) till Slavic expansion assimilated them. Maybe even they bordered around Vistula river. After all Vistula is not a Slavic name and could be Celtic.

 

[Joro]

I have been thinking about the presence of I1 and R1b in Croatia. I think that the most likely explanation is that both came during the Germanic migrations (Ostrogoths, Lombards, Bavaro-Austrians). I would need to know the subclades of R1b found in Croatia to confirm this. If most of it is R-U106/S21, then it will confirm a Germanic origin. If most of it is the Italo-Alpine R-U152/S28, then R1b has no relation to the Germanic migrations and I1 might have a different origin too. Unfortunately I don't have any study on Croatian subclades of R1b.

I think there is no doubt I1 came with Goths.
And I believe that Borreby phenotypes, common in Croatia, are also of Germanic inspiration.

Concerning R1b...well, Croatia doesn't have it excessively much(13%), which is in my opinion lesser than expected taking in consideration Geographical location of Croatia.Particularly in Dalmatia, where the center of Gothic settlement was.
R1b is highest in western Croatia- Istria, Rijeka...in town of Delnice 32% of R1b was found.
If Slavic migration didn't take part,i believe western Croatia would have about the same R1b level as north-eastern Italy(+50%).

 

[Shetop]

How I2a2 came to Balkans

“At the time of Attila the Hun a portion of Alans living in the "Sarmatia of the Cimmerian Bosporus" moved northwest into the land of Venedes (according to M.A. Sabellico, J.A. de Thouand some others historians[22]), possibly merging with Western Balts there to become the precursors of historic Slav nations.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alans#Alans_and_Slavs

I strongly believe this is how it was. There are several articles which cover this issue and with some effort it is not hard to conclude that this version of events is correct and actually confirmed by genetics data. What was a historical assumption, that origin of South Slavs is somehow different has now found even stronger foundation in genetics.

For me personally this issue is finished. I’m just going to shortly repeat what is already written in different sources. I’m just a bit surprised no one earlier connected Sarmatians and I2a2.

- There are sources which place Sarmatians in Sarmatia Asiatica even 1200 BC
- They spoke a language which belongs to Iranian group of languages
- Around 300 BC Sarmatians conquered western Scythians and their land was from Carpathians to Caspian Sea
- In 3rd century AC Goths (Thervingi and Greuthungi) established their ascendancy northwest of Black Sea and divided Sarmatians to western (Antes, Taifals and others) and eastern, that is Alans which included Croats and Serbs.
- In 370 AC Huns won their first war and it was against Alans. Some Alans were killed, some retreated and finished somewhere in western Europe, and some became major allies of Huns. These allies included Serbs and Croats.
- It is crucial to understand that Huns turned half of the Europe upside down and before and after them nothing was the same.
- Huns had a role for Alans and other Sarmatians that they conquered later (Antes and others) and it was to put under control Venedes (Slavs). Sarmatians were placed along south boundaries of Slavic tribes territory (Czech republic, south Poland and western Ukraine) and governed some of their territories to the north.
- In 5th century Alans (including, Serbs, Croats), Antes started speaking Slavic language.
- After Hunnic Empire had fall, it is unknown to me did Sarmatians preserve their domination over Slavic tribes, but it is clear that they did not significantly change their geographical position. First migrations may have been towards Wallachian Plain by tribes close to Antes.
- In 7th century these Slavic speaking Sarmatian descendents settled all over Balkans including emptied territories in western Balkans. Areas in western Balkans were abandoned because of Avar invasions and because Byzantine Emperor Heraclius wanted Serbs and Croats to settle there.
- The difference in I2a2 haplotypes (Dinaric South and Dinaric North) can be explained with assumption that Dinaric South descends from Alans and Dinaric North from western Sarmatians (including Antes).

I apologize to all forum members, but I’m not sure how available I will be to answer possible questions. Anyway please try to find the data by yourself. You will believe it more that way.

 

[Maciamo]

I was looking yesterday through some basic words vocabulary of Iranian and Armenian, and for a fist glance couldn't find any relation to Polish, Russian or Lithuanian. If not a word of experts I wouldn't guess that these languages were related, they are so different to me. My guess would be that the split between Slavic and Iranian happened about 5 000 years ago. 4000 or less would be pushing and would need strong outside influence.

When I look at Slavic languages I can't see a lot of words in common with Romance or Germanic languages either (except recent loan words like 'television'). When I look at ancient or modern Celtic languages, I can hardly find any similarities between them and their closest relative, Romance languages. Yet, by deconstructing and analysing languages linguists have been able to retrace the "genealogy" of the Indo-European family and determine which language split from which and when. You are right, the split between the Slavic and Iranian branches is approximately 4000 years old. This is slightly older than the split between Italic and Celtic languages (around 3500 years ago).

My conclusion is that Slavs for thousands of years resided on fringes of Scythia, most likely where steppe ends and forested aria starts, area of Czarnolas, the border of Ukraine, Poland and Belarus, with Balts farther north. They strongly interacted with Germanic tribes which preferred also forest areas. They also interacted with Celts, probably the Italic brunch, which had a very strong presence around Prague area (Czeks) till Slavic expansion assimilated them. Maybe even they bordered around Vistula river. After all Vistula is not a Slavic name and could be Celtic.

This is in agreement with my views.

 

[Maciamo]

I think there is no doubt I1 came with Goths.

The Goths originated in Sweden and therefore probably had a higher proportion of I1 (and R1a) to R1b than the Lombards or the Franks, who came from the western end of the North German Plain (near Frisia).

Again the R1b subclades will tell us more about the story. If there is little Italo-Alpine or Frisian R1b, but more subclades resembling those of Scandinavia then the Goths are the most likely candidate. If there is a massive pocket of R-U106 in western Croatia, then it could be an extension of the Lombard settlements from the hills and mountains of northern Italy.

 

[Gusar]

There is Iranian theory of serbian origin but till now there is not genetic evidence for that. Because the early serbian dinasties emerged from tribes ruling castes it would be interesting to know their DNA. Everything else is a pure speculation. My assumption, according to genetic data and historical documents is that nowadays dinaric Serbs are descendents of White Serbs who were also I2a2 and who came to Balkan in 7th century. So to be clear I am talking about specific groups of Serbs which formed serbian medievial state and not about all Serbian nation which have more complex ethnogenesis.

Well you are not alone in this theory that is for sure. I for one support this possibility. So far in terms of accademics there is only one piece of pure and obvious Croat propaganda to proclaim I2a2 as Croat. First of all it's peak is in Hercegovina which is contemporarily and historically majority Serbian. Furthermore we can guess very confidently that its peak will extend into western Montenegro.

 

[Gusar]

Threre is also an interesting theory that I heard.That Red Croats(Herzegovina,Montenegro,most of Albania) came from Carpathians, and that's where the second largest concentration of I2a is.
White Croats(modern Croatia and Bosnia) would come somewhere from southern Poland/Czech republic.

Interesting theory you heard? There is no such thing as Red Croats. There is only such a thing as Red Croatia which essentially represents west Roman Catholic aspirations. There is no ethnic connotation what so ever with Red Croatia unless all Serbs & Albanians are really Croats.

 

[iapodos]

Well you are not alone in this theory that is for sure. I for one support this possibility. So far in terms of accademics there is only one piece of pure and obvious Croat propaganda to proclaim I2a2 as Croat. First of all it's peak is in Hercegovina which is contemporarily and historically majority Serbian. Furthermore we can guess very confidently that its peak will extend into western Montenegro.

The fact that I2a2 is much more prevalent in Serbs than in Croats could be very easily be checked if we analyze public Y search database. According to specific haplotypes there presented we can conclude that Serbs are more than 45% I2a2 and Croats about 35% I2a2. The croatian I2a2 surnames are mostly of Bunjevac and Herzegovinian origin. It is well known fact that Bunjevci are specific ethnic group of Serbs Catholics which were recently incorporated (not completely) in Croatian nation. So, as I state above I2a2 is very tightly conected with Serbs as nation. As a prove it is worth of looking two maps below.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Migration_of_Serbs.png
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

 

[LeBrok]

What interesting is that where Raska, main Serbian is, it corresponds with a lighter spot on I2 of 5-10% (the second map), but where the Sorbs are there is a darker spot of 15-20%.

 

[iapodos]

What interesting is that where Raska, main Serbian is, it corresponds with a lighter spot on I2 of 5-10% (the second map), but where the Sorbs are there is a darker spot of 15-20%.

Raska was just eastern frontier of the first serbian state on Balkan. Essential regions where Serbs were settled according to DAI were Zachulmia, Trabunia, Konavle, Pagania, Bosnia and Rascia. Later Serbian state mostly developed eastward conquering Byzantine lands. There is some more maps that shows the situation.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/20070716111140!Serb_lands_old_ver.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Nemanja_StefanP_Sebia200.jpg

 

[Shetop]

I agree that connecting I2a2 mainly to Croats is wrong.

If we take the number of Serbs in the Balkans (they live in Serbia, Bosnia, Montenegro and Croatia) and multiply it with percentage of I2a2 (respectively for each country) we get the number of around 2,500,000 Serbs with I2a2.

If we do the same with Croats (Croatia and Bosnia) the resulting number is around 1,800,000 Croats with I2a2.

 

[Gusar]

I agree that connecting I2a2 mainly to Croats is wrong.

If we take the number of Serbs in the Balkans (they live in Serbia, Bosnia, Montenegro and Croatia) and multiply it with percentage of I2a2 (respectively for each country) we get the number of around 2,500,000 Serbs with I2a2.

If we do the same with Croats (Croatia and Bosnia) the resulting number is around 1,800,000 Croats with I2a2.

:cool-v: Can you break down your method? I tried to come up with the same figures a while ago but gave up I think because some data was missing. Whatever the actual figures may become in such a breakdown though I think it's quite obvious that most I2a2's would be Serbs which is essentially the point you convey

 

[LeBrok]

Any idea when I2a2 got mixed with R1a1a7 and became Slavic?
Was I2a2 spreading together with R1a during Slavic expansion or was slavanized on arrival of R1a?
Looking at Slavic languages being so similar, scholars conclude that most likely it was one and same language 1 500 to 2 000 years ago, and it would mean that Slavs started in rather small area. If I2a2 was mixed already with R1a1a7, the way it is on Balkans, how one can explain rather I2a2 scarcity in Poland, Czech even Hungary?

 

[Gusar]

Any idea when I2a2 got mixed with R1a1a7 and became Slavic?
Was I2a2 spreading together with R1a during Slavic expansion or was slavanized on arrival of R1a?
Looking at Slavic languages being so similar, scholars conclude that most likely it was one and same language 1 500 to 2 000 years ago, and it would mean that Slavs started in rather small area. If I2a2 was mixed already with R1a1a7, the way it is on Balkans, how one can explain rather I2a2 scarcity in Poland, Czech even Hungary?

Perhaps it is also important to consider actual population figures rather than only percentages. Using for instance Poland at 9% I2a2 there would be roughly 3.4 million Poles with I2a2. Ukraine would have roughly 5.5 million. That's more than the 2.5 million figure for Serbs given by Shetop and so I'm not sure if speaking of scarcity is such an appropriate description within such a context.

 

[Shetop]

:cool-v: Can you break down your method? I tried to come up with the same figures a while ago but gave up I think because some data was missing. Whatever the actual figures may become in such a breakdown though I think it's quite obvious that most I2a2's would be Serbs which is essentially the point you convey

Let's call this assumption of figures my personal because there are different studies and different percentages. I would like to avoid discussion about numbers.

 

[Shetop]

I wanted to write my new view of historical events anyway, but LeBrook’s comments are a nice reason to do that now. It is actually unfortunate that scholars familiar with history of the Slavs are not using genetics to clarify some issues.
For me it was significant to have comprehensive theory about arrival of the Slavs to the Balkans so that is why I started this thread. At this moment I think that some of my first conclusions were wrong.

There were two things that couldn’t fit into the story:
1. Sorbs which live in the east Germany and have very high R1a. On the other side they are continuously related to Serbs which have low R1a.
2. Prague culture which apparently developed on the territory from which Slavs migrated to Balkans is by several archeologists described as conceived in region of Polesia.

After one member of one other forum pointed the Sorbs issue and again rethinking everything I think I was right about following:
Sarmatians (Alans) including Serbs and Croats did establish their domination over Slavs in the period of the Huns. It is also correct that those Sarmatian people accepted Slavic language as their new language.

But what I had wrong was determining prevailing haplogroups for those Sarmatians I2a2 and for Slavs R1a (or R1a1a7 later). Now I think that correct version is that Sarmatians (Alans) had R1a as prevailing haplogroup and Slavs had I2a2. The crucial point is that Slavs (I2a2 people) received new names form old R1a Serbs and Croats, not that numerous caste which apparently ruled over I2a2 people for unknown period. Explanation like this can be found in the book “The Sarmatians” by Tadeusz Sulimirski.

This is additionally supported by the fact that Krakow region in Poland which is marked by historians as the territory of the White Croatia has among highest R1a in Europe (similar as Sorbs). This R1a seems to be contributed by Sarmatians.

Similar story could be ascribed to Antes – originally Iranian R1a people which mixed with I2a2 Slavs and got Slavicised.

All preceding complies with data which we have from Ptolemy. This is Udaltsov interpretation of the Ptolemy’s text:

““This whole Scythia in the direction of the north, to the almost unknown land, is settled by the tribes which are called by a common name of Alans-Scythians, including Suobenoi, and Agathyrsi, and Suevs, then Aorses...”.

Suobenoi (Udaltsov – i.e. Suovens, or “Slovens”), and Agathyrsi (in Dacia), and Suevs (the German tribes, probably, Markomans and Quads in Czechia and Moravia) constitute a band of nations stretching from the east to the west, maybe, along the trading way from the Central Asia to the Middle Europe.”

http://www.s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/10_History/Ptolemy comments by Udaltsov En.htm

Further conclusion could be that I2a2 people may have been the “original” Slavs, in another word people which spoke Slavic languages first. North and northeast of them lived another group of people with prevailing R1a (today related to R1a1a7) and those would be ancestors of today’s Poles, Czechs, Slovaks. My assumption is that these people initially spoke Baltic languages and later received Slavic languages and that could happened some time before arrival of the Huns.

So some historians had already correctly understood historical events we just need to find out which one comply with the new data science have offered to us. All this implies that Polesia considered by historians as Slavic urheimat would be homeland of I2a2 people 2000 years ago. Later some of them migrated towards South so they received Romanic languages (Moldavia and Romania).