Were the Croatians originally Slavic?

zanipolo

Banned
Messages
2,071
Reaction score
65
Points
0
Ethnic group
Down Under
Y-DNA haplogroup
T1a2 - Z19945
mtDNA haplogroup
K1a4o
The question above has always been talked about when visiting croatian friends/families. The arguements range from being forced to become slavic or not. An alphabet ( slovenians as well) which has always been Latin based instead of Cyrillic based. A religion from the west roman empire - Catholic instead of the East Roamn Empire - Orthodox.

Anyway after reading many books, I decided to ask the question to the slavs in this forum. Link below is interesting

http://books.google.com.au/books?id...=onepage&q="ancient venetian origins"&f=false
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe the Croats where the goths, Avars and other non-slavic people which moved south after the slavic migration into central Europe after 500AD


There are a number of relevant conclusions that can be drawn from the croatian genetic data.
First of all it gives strong support to the theory that the region of modern day Croatia served as a refuge for northern populations during the last glacial maximum (LGM). Eastern Adriatic coast was much more to the south, northern and western parts of that sea were steppes and plains, while modern Croatian islands (rich with the archeological sites from Paleolithic) were hills and mountains. After the LGM, the offspring of these survivors (haplogroup I) repopulated much of central-eastern and southeastern Europe. Those who remained in the Balkans were the direct male-line ancestors of about 45% of modern day Croats in Croatia and 73% Croats in Herzegovina.[37]
It can be said that the Croats are "the most European people", as no other people have such high shares of this major (and likely the only) Paleolithic European haplogroup.
The second conclusion that can be drawn is that the theory of an Iranian origin has little genetic support. Modern-day Iranians have a significantly different haplogroup distribution, although Iranic speaking communities have lived in eastern Europe. The low frequency of Anatolian haplogroups suggests that agriculture spread into the region of Croatia primarily by way of cultural contact.[39]
And the third conclusion from the genetic evidence points to the fact Croats are genetically heterogeneous, pointing to a high degree of mixing of the newly arrived medieval migrant tribes (such as Slavs) with the indigenous populations that were already present in the region of the modern day Croatia.[40] Hence, most modern day Croats are directly descended from the original European population of the region and have lived in the territory by other names, such as Illyrians and their forebears. These original inhabitants also served an important role in re-populating Europe after the last ice age
 
First of all, sub variant of haplogroup I spread in western Balkan (and southern Croatia too) is I2a2 Dinaric and there is no single evidence that this haplogroup was in western Balkan since Lgm in continuity. On the contrary all proves suggests that it was spread primeraly with Slavic peoples in 6 th century. It is opinion of all leading geneticists and it was recently incorporated in wikipedia too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I2_(Y-DNA)
Croats have high percent of I2a2 Dinaric haplogroup, but only in southern parts of Dalmatia and in Herzegovina region. It is exactly the regions where during Ottoman reign were great migrations of population. Dalmatia for example, change almost entirely its previous medieval population. So, the medieval Croats which lived in Dalmatia moved mostly on islands or northward, or in Italia. New people (mostly I2a2 Dinaric ) came from region of Herzegovina and Montenegro and settled in Dalmatia, and hose were not ethnically Croats, they adopted Croatian name later. They simply called themselves Slavs, like it was in Dubrovnik and very often Serbs.
The real Croats you may today find in the region of chakavian dialect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect

and genetic analisys of island Krk (the real Croats) shows prevalance of haplogroup of R1a over I2a2. The same situation is for the rest of mainland Croatia. So, I do believe that it is possible that Croats were not Slavs initiallly (maybe some Sarmatian or Turkic component among the Slavs) and that they were predominantly R1a.
 
before the slavic invasions in the balkans they weren't.
they were much akin to neolithic italians i think.. at least those near the coasts, (Croatia and Dalmatia).
 
Never take Wikipedia seriously. It is written by those who support official history. Propaganda tool ...

iapodos said in short how things really are.

Who are Croats?

Well, some are croatised Serbs, some croatised Vlahs or Romanians, Goths, Celtcs, Sarmatians, Avars, and so on, and so on...
 
First of all, sub variant of haplogroup I spread in western Balkan (and southern Croatia too) is I2a2 Dinaric and there is no single evidence that this haplogroup was in western Balkan since Lgm in continuity. On the contrary all proves suggests that it was spread primeraly with Slavic peoples in 6 th century. It is opinion of all leading geneticists and it was recently incorporated in wikipedia too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I2_(Y-DNA)
Croats have high percent of I2a2 Dinaric haplogroup, but only in southern parts of Dalmatia and in Herzegovina region. It is exactly the regions where during Ottoman reign were great migrations of population. Dalmatia for example, change almost entirely its previous medieval population. So, the medieval Croats which lived in Dalmatia moved mostly on islands or northward, or in Italia. New people (mostly I2a2 Dinaric ) came from region of Herzegovina and Montenegro and settled in Dalmatia, and hose were not ethnically Croats, they adopted Croatian name later. They simply called themselves Slavs, like it was in Dubrovnik and very often Serbs.
The real Croats you may today find in the region of chakavian dialect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect

and genetic analisys of island Krk (the real Croats) shows prevalance of haplogroup of R1a over I2a2. The same situation is for the rest of mainland Croatia. So, I do believe that it is possible that Croats were not Slavs initiallly (maybe some Sarmatian or Turkic component among the Slavs) and that they were predominantly R1a.

so the theory that the croats where originally goths and with this had the I haplo is wrong?

If what you say is correct , then is the Chakavian dialect the ancient language of the illyrians or lubanini from histria , maybe mixed with latin and Venetian later on?
 
for it is more simple,

Today all area is named croatia, but from past it is 2 Sub areas, and probably in ancient times there where 2 people,
Thracians never passed the Dinaric Alps, while Greek settlers stay only in Adra sea,

to examine Croats better we must divide to 2 primary regions,
1 is Zagreb, main inland Croatia, and the other is Dalmatia,

I believe the Croat unification movement so to create a nation, lay between the religion and the language,
Dalmatians I don't Believe they were Slavic people, while Zagreb people I believe they were. the case of Avars or Huns or Oghurs, I can't tell, although I don't reject it,
 
for it is more simple,

Today all area is named croatia, but from past it is 2 Sub areas, and probably in ancient times there where 2 people,
Thracians never passed the Dinaric Alps, while Greek settlers stay only in Adra sea,

to examine Croats better we must divide to 2 primary regions,
1 is Zagreb, main inland Croatia, and the other is Dalmatia,

I believe the Croat unification movement so to create a nation, lay between the religion and the language,
Dalmatians I don't Believe they were Slavic people, while Zagreb people I believe they were. the case of Avars or Huns or Oghurs, I can't tell, although I don't reject it,

Dalmatians where illyrian people with there own language
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalmatian_language
 
Land around Zagreb, which are Zagorje, Medimurje, Gorski Kotar, western Slavonia etc., not the city itself.
 
though when provoked by Croat nationalists, I like to emphasize the clues indicating potential Turkic origin of Croats... I am pretty sure their tribal identity was Slavic, and before that probably Celtic... same holds for Serbs...

in fact I think I2 are Cimmerians/Gomer people and original Celts but more about that on link http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26549-Celtic-Serbian-parallels/


Russian primary chronicle enlists Croats (as well as Serbs and Carantanians (Slovene of today) in Danubian Slavs...according to it they have migrated to north due to pressure of Vlakhs (read Roman empire) to the lands of Lyakhs (read Lech or Poles)

Over a long period the Slavs settled beside the Danube, where the Hungarian and Bulgarian lands now lie. From among these Slavs, parties scattered throughout the country and were known by appropriate names, according to the places where they settled. Thus some came and settled by the river Morava, and were named Moravians, while others were called Czechs. Among these same Slavs are included the White Croats, the Serbs, and the Carinthians. For when the Vlakhs attacked the Danubian Slavs, settled among them, and did them violence, the latter came and made their homes by the Vistula, and were then called Lyakhs. Of these same Lyakhs some were called Polyanians, some Lutichians, some Mazovians, and still others Pomorians. Certain Slavs settled also on the Dnipro, and were likewise called Polyanians. Still others were named Derevlians, because they lived in the forests. Some also lived between the Pripet' and the Dvina, and were known as Dregovichians. Other tribes resided along the Dvina and were called Polotians on account of a small stream called the Polota, which flows into the Dvina. It was from
this same stream that they were named Polotians. The Slavs also dwelt about Lake Il'men', and were known there by their characteristic name. They built a city which they called Novgorod. Still others had their homes along the Desna, the Sem', and the Sula, and were called Severians.Thus the Slavic race was divided, and its language was known as Slavic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_Chronicle
http://www.utoronto.ca/elul/English/218/PVL-selections.pdf



Byzantine emperor historian places white Serbia in land they themselves called Boika thast he places beyond Turkia( = north of Hungary) neighbouring white Croatia and Frankia ...from many reasons this land can only be Bohemia... according to him they have also originally dwelt there and we know that Celtic Boii originally dwelt there and that Celtic Scordisci spread roughly from there to area of Serbia...and that from Serbia they entered Thrace and Asia minor as Celtic Serdi...

white Croatia would be Slavic settled area east of white Serbia ... roughly Slovakia, south Poland, west Ukraine.... the core of this white Croatia is more or less Galicia which is same as Bohemia local source of I2a2...

very term Galicia tells us that these people might have originally been Gals or Celts, perhaps a branch of Helveti... Celtic ancestors of Serbs on other hand would be Scordisci/Serdi /Boii..

Byzantine emperor historian tells us that both Croats and Serbs were called "white" prior to Balkan settlement... this could be same as Wends/Vindelici/Veneti.... Sorbs of east Germany (in Serbia known as Lusatian Serbs) are still called Wends.. Vindelici are Celtic people..

http://books.google.nl/books?id=3al...istrando imperio&pg=PA147#v=onepage&q&f=false

look at Galicia area in east Europe
term is clearly same origin as Galatia in Asia minor and Galia in France, that is about Celtic settlement ...

250px-Ukraine-Halychyna.png

250px-Galiz20.gif


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia_(Eastern_Europe)

those are cores of I2a areas...

Haplogroup_I2a.gif



white Croatia is considered more or less same area as Galicia... now look at early Slavic tribes... in Galicia are white Croats...

Kievan_Rus%27_historical_map_980_1054.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_early_East_Slavic_states
 
as per link

http://www.cmj.hr/2005/46/4/16100752.pdf

it seems, that croatians in the north , istria etc are R1b , the inland ones are R1a and the southern ones are I - P37 ( old illyrian marker )

are people sure the I2 marker does not originate form the I1 marker from scandinavia?
 
i can see you dont know much, Croatian write in latin, but original script was glagolithic
 
Maybe the Croats where the goths, Avars and other non-slavic people which moved south after the slavic migration into central Europe after 500AD


There are a number of relevant conclusions that can be drawn from the croatian genetic data.
First of all it gives strong support to the theory that the region of modern day Croatia served as a refuge for northern populations during the last glacial maximum (LGM). Eastern Adriatic coast was much more to the south, northern and western parts of that sea were steppes and plains, while modern Croatian islands (rich with the archeological sites from Paleolithic) were hills and mountains. After the LGM, the offspring of these survivors (haplogroup I) repopulated much of central-eastern and southeastern Europe. Those who remained in the Balkans were the direct male-line ancestors of about 45% of modern day Croats in Croatia and 73% Croats in Herzegovina.[37]
It can be said that the Croats are "the most European people", as no other people have such high shares of this major (and likely the only) Paleolithic European haplogroup.
The second conclusion that can be drawn is that the theory of an Iranian origin has little genetic support. Modern-day Iranians have a significantly different haplogroup distribution, although Iranic speaking communities have lived in eastern Europe. The low frequency of Anatolian haplogroups suggests that agriculture spread into the region of Croatia primarily by way of cultural contact.[39]
And the third conclusion from the genetic evidence points to the fact Croats are genetically heterogeneous, pointing to a high degree of mixing of the newly arrived medieval migrant tribes (such as Slavs) with the indigenous populations that were already present in the region of the modern day Croatia.[40] Hence, most modern day Croats are directly descended from the original European population of the region and have lived in the territory by other names, such as Illyrians and their forebears. These original inhabitants also served an important role in re-populating Europe after the last ice age

there was a goth theory, infact one of the early traveling writers from 11 century called us Goths (pop Dukljanin), we were those Ggoths that lived with Slavs(Sarmats) and formed early Rus' state.
 
First of all, sub variant of haplogroup I spread in western Balkan (and southern Croatia too) is I2a2 Dinaric and there is no single evidence that this haplogroup was in western Balkan since Lgm in continuity. On the contrary all proves suggests that it was spread primeraly with Slavic peoples in 6 th century. It is opinion of all leading geneticists and it was recently incorporated in wikipedia too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I2_(Y-DNA)
Croats have high percent of I2a2 Dinaric haplogroup, but only in southern parts of Dalmatia and in Herzegovina region. It is exactly the regions where during Ottoman reign were great migrations of population. Dalmatia for example, change almost entirely its previous medieval population. So, the medieval Croats which lived in Dalmatia moved mostly on islands or northward, or in Italia. New people (mostly I2a2 Dinaric ) came from region of Herzegovina and Montenegro and settled in Dalmatia, and hose were not ethnically Croats, they adopted Croatian name later. They simply called themselves Slavs, like it was in Dubrovnik and very often Serbs.
The real Croats you may today find in the region of chakavian dialect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect

and genetic analisys of island Krk (the real Croats) shows prevalance of haplogroup of R1a over I2a2. The same situation is for the rest of mainland Croatia. So, I do believe that it is possible that Croats were not Slavs initiallly (maybe some Sarmatian or Turkic component among the Slavs) and that they were predominantly R1a.

lol gypsy full of shit as always, on tests made on people from Zagerb, 64% of them where I2a2, as for Slavonia where is I the lowest(34%) was tested at Osijek, near Serbia and Hungary border, where people actually have most varied roots, as well as Istra , and NW near border

As for chakavian, it was earliest Croatian dialect, and its full of words with Gothic roots, and you dont even know to speak Serbian after turks and Karadžićevog prijepisa hehehe

Naime oko 1/5 do 1/4 germanizama koji su u Jugoslaviji pogrešno pripisani utjecaju Austro-Ugarske, ustvari su rani gotski arhaizmi predslavenskih Hrvata. Tih je najmanje u štokavštini, a puno više u kajkavskim i čakavskim govorima gdje su se većinom održali do danas.
Tek malobrojni primjeri tih gotskih arhaizama očuvanih u književnoj štokavštini su: bota (bod: čakav. bot), frisiaz (frizura-češljanje), lekeis (liječnik), lekinassus (ljekovit), nu (ali-no), pops (pop-svećenik), skrizis (križ), smakka (smokva), stiurjan (stvoriti: čakav. storit), swaikra (svekrva), swairban (svrbiti), thaurna (trnje: čak. tarnak), weihitha (vještica), wopjan (vapiti-zapomagati), weinagards (vinograd) i wraks (vrag-đavo).
Znatno ih je više (preko 100) bilo u javnom kultiviranom hrvatskom prije 1918, koji su sad uklonjeni ali su ih još zadržali čakavci i kajkavci (Lovrić i surad. 2005-2007): uz gore spomenute još npr. bandi (strana: ča. banda), daughtar (udavača: ča. dotarica), flodra (podstava: kaj. futar), hropjan (krkljati: kaj.ča. hropiti), ja (da-jeste: kaj.ča. ja), saj (taj: ča. sej), skiuban (očerupati: kaj.ča. skubiti), skura (mračno: kaj.ča. škuro), skuran (smrknuti: ča. škurit), tekan (dirati: kaj. teknuti), thiuda (mnoštvo: ča. čuda), wazgo (upaliti: ča. vazgat) ... itd.
 
before the slavic invasions in the balkans they weren't.
they were much akin to neolithic italians i think.. at least those near the coasts, (Croatia and Dalmatia).


not really, modern Italian and Croats are not similar
 
Never take Wikipedia seriously. It is written by those who support official history. Propaganda tool ...

iapodos said in short how things really are.

Who are Croats?

Well, some are croatised Serbs, some croatised Vlahs or Romanians, Goths, Celtcs, Sarmatians, Avars, and so on, and so on...

Hehe, Croats are in Upper part of homogeneity of Europe, Serbs are at the very bottom.

I mean with mentality you Serbs have, with stories where all Europeans descendant of Serbs, i am not surprised at all.

You know what that means in terms of assimilation?
 
so the theory that the croats where originally goths and with this had the I haplo is wrong?

If what you say is correct , then is the Chakavian dialect the ancient language of the illyrians or lubanini from histria , maybe mixed with latin and Venetian later on?

That gypsy is talking BS lol, its comparative to trash scavenger talking about quantum physics.

Usually from some standpoint of Serb farytails, where all white people on Earth are descendants of Serbs.

Funny thing is that Serbs were always called Vlach by us, even today in some areas its common.
They, with help of ottoman buddies were very active in Bosnia, they spread or assimilated like bacterial infection.

I can always recognize a true Serb, he looks like North African.
We see them as sort of malign gypsies.
They are like pests.
 
for it is more simple,

Today all area is named croatia, but from past it is 2 Sub areas, and probably in ancient times there where 2 people,
Thracians never passed the Dinaric Alps, while Greek settlers stay only in Adra sea,

to examine Croats better we must divide to 2 primary regions,
1 is Zagreb, main inland Croatia, and the other is Dalmatia,

I believe the Croat unification movement so to create a nation, lay between the religion and the language,
Dalmatians I don't Believe they were Slavic people, while Zagreb people I believe they were. the case of Avars or Huns or Oghurs, I can't tell, although I don't reject it,

Again, you are talking out of your ass
 

This thread has been viewed 251090 times.

Back
Top