why were I2a people exterminated in Italy and not in the Balkans ?

spongetaro

Elite member
Messages
717
Reaction score
42
Points
0
Were the Balkans so technologically advanced to resist both Middle East Neolithic farmers (J2, G...) and Indo European ?
What happened to I2A in Italy ??
 
I'm not sure if this is actually accurate or has been verified, but as far as I know, the peak of I2 on the Balkans is due to a founding effect from the migrations period.
 
I2a in balkan came from Moldavia, Ukraine, Belorusia etc.

It is a "friend" of R1a, they together form the Slavic race.
 
I2a in balkan came from Moldavia, Ukraine, Belorusia etc.

It is a "friend" of R1a, they together form the Slavic race.

More likely that the original Proto-Slavic people had an admixture of R1a and I2a, and that the current frequencies of the Haplogroups are a result of a founder effect in the wake of the Slavic migrations.
 
More likely that the original Proto-Slavic people had an admixture of R1a and I2a, and that the current frequencies of the Haplogroups are a result of a founder effect in the wake of the Slavic migrations.
Exactly. For example, the village Brandefor has johnson families, and mcdonalds families.

But later, only johnson families migrate to new colony. That doesnt mean that new colony actually is the cradle.
 
I2a in balkan came from Moldavia, Ukraine, Belorusia etc.

It is a "friend" of R1a, they together form the Slavic race.

Neander
I in the Balkans came from Anatolia before 25000 years.

You didn't give sources but you can read:

Kalevi Wiik

Where Did European Men Come From?

Journal of Genetic Genaology, 2008

Cit.

(7) About 25 kya the “Middle Eastern” Clan F sent another branch to Anatolia and further to the Balkans, and a new sub-Clan I emerged.


Cit.

Clan I had spread into Europe before the emergence of effective domestication of wild plants and animals (i.e. the beginning of agriculture and cattle raising) in the Middle East. Because of their early departure, they were still hunter-gatherers at the time of the arrival of the Early Farmers in the Balkans, and they were taught to cultivate land and raise cattle by their ”Middle East brothers” after the ”reunion of the family” in the Balkans. Accordingly, Clan I represents the “Old Europeans”


About R1a haplogroup:

Cit.

(5) About 30 kya Clan R was split into R1 and R2, and Clan R1 moved to the steppe area between the Ural mountains and the Caspian Sea.

Cit.

(6) About 25 kya one branch of Clan R1, Clan R1b, reached Iberia and the Atlantic Coast, and somewhat later Clan R1a branched from R1 and became common in the present-day Ukraine.


You can see that I and R1a are completely different clans.

And it can be seen on any graphical representation of haplogroup tree.

R1a is considered as Slavic but Old European I can not be Slavic, because it is completely different.
 
I have to agree with Neander and Taranis.

I believe I2a2a-Dinaric is Y-DNA which was spread by Slavs from its core in Polesia. Here are my main reasons:
1. There is historical evidence that Illyrians were migrating to Italy in 1st millennium BC so it is not possible that it was present in the Balkans at that time. If that would be the case then I2a2a-Dinaric would today be found in South and Middle Italy.
2.Second important reason is TMRCA of I2a2a-Dinaric estimated to 500 BC - 1000 BC. Since we know what was happening in Europe from that moment until today, there is no other explanation how I2a2a-Dinaric could inhabit so large territory as it does today, but the one about Slavic expansion.

Regarding R1a, most of it (almost all younger branches) was also spread by Slavs, but its homeland in Europe does not correlate to the Slavic. I'm not 100% sure about this but it is likely that R1a people were slavicized, meaning this is not original Slavic marker. If your reaction is - "that is not possible!", try to find out yourself where was the Slavic homeland.
 
I have to agree with Neander and Taranis.
I believe I2a2a-Dinaric is Y-DNA which was spread by Slavs from its core in Polesia. Here are my main reasons:
1. There is historical evidence that Illyrians were migrating to Italy in 1st millennium BC so it is not possible that it was present in the Balkans at that time. If that would be the case then I2a2a-Dinaric would today be found in South and Middle Italy.
2.Second important reason is TMRCA of I2a2a-Dinaric estimated to 500 BC - 1000 BC. Since we know what was happening in Europe from that moment until today, there is no other explanation how I2a2a-Dinaric could inhabit so large territory as it does today, but the one about Slavic expansion.
Regarding R1a, most of it (almost all younger branches) was also spread by Slavs, but its homeland in Europe does not correlate to the Slavic. I'm not 100% sure about this but it is likely that R1a people were slavicized, meaning this is not original Slavic marker. If your reaction is - "that is not possible!", try to find out yourself where was the Slavic homeland.

I agree that Slavs carried dominant I2a2...
but I am not sure I2a2 was not present before their arrival... in fact, I am inclined to believe it was widely spread along Danube from Black sea to Bohemia, and that with expand of Roman empire it was pushed north...

btw. regarding time when I2a2-Dinaric came to existance check again presentation on Ken Nordtvedt web site.... now I2a2-Dinaric corresponds to branch that splits from I2a* at 16000 years ago, I2a2-Isles is just side branch of I2a2-Dinaric that splits of it like 13000 years ago and I2a2-DIsles is another subbranch that splits from it 200 generations or round 6000 years ago...
date of edit is 3rd February 2011... so much about reliability of establishing oldness of haplogroups...

http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/WarpedFounderTree.ppt
http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/
with those changes he completely undermine your reasoning as it was based on assumptions derived from his erroneous previous calculations... but are this now correct? or with more data available we can expect that estimations will again change and indicate that I2a2-Dinaric is even older?
 
I agree that Slavs carried dominant I2a2...
but I am not sure I2a2 was not present before their arrival... in fact, I am inclined to believe it was widely spread along Danube from Black sea to Bohemia, and that with expand of Roman empire it was pushed north...
btw. regarding time when I2a2-Dinaric came to existance check again presentation on Ken Nordtvedt web site.... now I2a2-Dinaric corresponds to branch that splits from I2a* at 16000 years ago, I2a2-Isles is just side branch of I2a2-Dinaric that splits of it like 13000 years ago and I2a2-DIsles is another subbranch that splits from it 200 generations or round 6000 years ago...
date of edit is 3rd February 2011... so much about reliability of establishing oldness of haplogroups...
http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/WarpedFounderTree.ppt
http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/
with those changes he completely undermine your reasoning as it was based on assumptions derived from his erroneous previous calculations... but are this now correct? or with more data available we can expect that estimations will again change and indicate that I2a2-Dinaric is even older?


The split you are writing about is Identical ancestors point.
TMRCA is something else: Wikipedia
 
What I don't understand is why it is absent in Poland, Lithuania etc.
It seems that Corded Ware culture was just R1a and not I2a...

spongetaro
Many Serbs and other I peoples in the Balkans loves to connect themselves with the Slavs due to cultural links, also to be clarified why the nations of the Balkans speaking Slavic languages.

Although I think the Klyosov little helped to figure out this question because he found that R1a in the Balkans is 11,000 years, then it is quite possible that it was cultural convergence due to the long co-existence of I and R1a in the Balkans.

I people are in the Balkans (and in Asia Minor) since 25,000 years ago and it was published in scientific journals and I gave an example of Kalevi Wiik in my previous post.

But your theme is excellent and I will answer you as I read about it only just need a little time to prepare.

Take into account that the inhabitants of Lydia, Thrace, Rascia and Etruscans are all I people.

The Etruscans called themselves Rasena.

You also have the linguistic similarity:

Thracians, Rascians (Serbs, state Rascia) and Rasen (Etrurians).
 
I people are in the Balkans (and in Asia Minor) since 25,000 years ago and it was published in scientific journals and I gave an example of Kalevi Wiik in my previous post.

Studying human history by using genetic research is relatively new approach. In that sense 2008 can be considered "old date".

I can bet Kalevi Wiik didn't even know about I2a2a-Dinaric branch at the time he was writing. I also doubt that his knowledge about Balkans history was enough to understand what actually happened.
 
Studying human history by using genetic research is relatively new approach. In that sense 2008 can be considered "old date".

I can bet Kalevi Wiik didn't even know about I2a2a-Dinaric branch at the time he was writing. I also doubt that his knowledge about Balkans history was enough to understand what actually happened.

Shetop
This is very serious, extensive and detailed scientific study.

And not only Kalevi Wiik, it is almost a general agreement among researchers that I carriers came from Anatolia to the Balkans about 25,000 years ago (less or more).

Therefore, I people were called the Old Europeans.
 
Shetop
This is very serious, extensive and detailed scientific study.
And not only Kalevi Wiik, it is almost a general agreement among researchers that I carriers came from Anatolia to the Balkans about 25,000 years ago (less or more).
Therefore, I people were called the Old Europeans.
For me person which made this site has the best research results when it comes to combining history and genetics: http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/slavs.shtml
The point is it is constantly up to date with the newest findings. Ignoring new results is the main mistake of many people including highly educated people.
 
For me person which made this site has the best research results when it comes to combining history and genetics: http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/slavs.shtml
The point is it is constantly up to date with the newest findings. Ignoring new results is the main mistake of many people including highly educated people.

Shetop
Ok. I can set some Russian or Western sites that explain completely different situation.

However, if you noticed, I most like to post the pure scientific papers published in reputable scientific journals.
 
The split you are writing about is Identical ancestors point.
TMRCA is something else: Wikipedia
...
For me person which made this site has the best research results when it comes to combining history and genetics: http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/slavs.shtml
The point is it is constantly up to date with the newest findings. Ignoring new results is the main mistake of many people including highly educated people.
thanks for links
I will read it...

Take into account that the inhabitants of Lydia, Thrace, Rascia and Etruscans are all I people.

The Etruscans called themselves Rasena.

You also have the linguistic similarity:

Thracians, Rascians (Serbs, state Rascia) and Rasen (Etrurians).

this tribal name Thracians/Rascians, Tyrhsenians/Rasena... also Sardis in Thrace and Lydia...

might be about R1a people...
there is no I2a2 in area settled by Etruscans, but there is R1a hotspot that matches their spread...

493px-Etruscan_civilization_map.png

R1A_map.jpg


The Lydians have very nearly the same customs as the Hellenes, with the exception that these last do not bring up their girls the same way. So far as we have any knowledge, the Lydians were the first to introduce the use of gold and silver coin, and the first who sold good retail. They claim also the invention of all the games which are common to them with the Hellenes. These they declare that they invented about the time when they colonized Tyrrhenia [i.e., Etruria] , an event of which they give the following account. In the days of Atys the son of Manes, there was great scarcity through the whole land of Lydia. For some time the Lydians bore the affliction patiently, but finding that it did not pass away, they set to work to devise remedies for the evil. Various expedients were discovered by various persons: dice, knuckle-bones, and ball, and all such games were invented, except checkers, the invention of which they do not claim as theirs. The plan adopted against the famine was to engage in games one day so entirely as not to feel any craving for food, and the next day to eat and abstain from games. In this way they passed eighteen years.
Still the affliction continued, and even became worse. So the king determined to divide the nation in half, and to make the two portions draw lots, the one to stay, the other to leave the land. He would continue to reign over those whose lot it should be to remain behind; the emigrants should have his son Tyrrhenus for their leader. The lot was cast, and they who had to emigrate went down to Smyrna, and built themselves ships, in which, after they had put on board all needful stores, they sailed away in search of new homes and better sustenance. After sailing past many countries, they came to Umbria, where they built cities for themselves, and fixed their residence. Their former name of Lydians they laid aside, and called themselves after the name of the king=s son, who led the colony, Tyrrhenians.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/etrucans2.html


Etruscans are considered to have spoken non-indo european langauge...
there are theories that it was alike to language of Magyars (Hungarians)
and I think that might be correct as I am pretty sure that proto-Magyars were also R1a dominant people....

btw. note the hole in R1a spread in Lydia, which is location from which Etruscans departed...

Lydia also has I2a2, but it must have been later spread, as it is not present in Etruscan settled areas...
good explanation is on site quoted by Shetop

The appearance of I2a2a in Turkey is of interest. Some Antae and Sclaveni served as auxiliaries in the Byzantine army in the 6th century, so a few may have elected to settle in Byzantium. More importantly some 30,000 Slavs were transferred to Asia Minor by Byzantine Emperor Justinian II in the late 680s, after his offensive in Macedonia that temporarily restored imperial control.36 In the Middle Ages the Byzantine Empire fell to the Ottoman Turks, who gradually acquired control of much of the Balkans. This was another period of probable movement of I2a2a into Turkey. Slavery was a key part of life in the Ottoman Empire. Christian boys from conquered countries were taken away from their families, converted to Islam and enlisted into a special branch of the Ottoman army - the Janissaries - until their abolition in 1826.
http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/slavs.shtml

tribal names Thracians/Rascians/Rassians/Rasena might be R1a signature...
however, R1a is also related to Serb-like tribal name as there are two ancient old pockets of R1a - south Siberia and Serb settled areas in Balkan...
thus Sardis in Thrace and Lydia would be about R1a people...

in same time tribal name Serbs correlates with haplogroup I tribal names
Swedes/Suebi/Serbs/Sardinians ...

Serbs are dominantly haplogroup I people, but Sorbs (Wends, Lusatians or Serbja/Serbi as they call themselves) of east Germany are dominantly R1a people...

iapetoc hinted me that the name from which Serb is derived was perhaps not about origin but about profession of warriors... he might be right there...
 
Were the Balkans so technologically advanced to resist both Middle East Neolithic farmers (J2, G...) and Indo European ?
What happened to I2A in Italy ??

Well was extensive genetic testing done in Italy?
I doubt.
Some areas of Italy have higher percentage of R1b but some do not.
Besides,ancient romans were allowed to make a family after they were finishing their service in the army of Roman Empire.
So only those who were surviving a lot of years in the wars,cause Roman Empire was participating in lots of wars,could had a family and kids after.
Besides,in Roman Empire plenty of celtics and germanics were taken as citisens and settled.
You do realise that Roman Empire did not trusted germanics of first generation,to give them weapons and make them soldiers.
Guess from 2nd generation they were trusted as Roman Empire citisens,because now they were speaking as maternal language latin.
 

This thread has been viewed 56941 times.

Back
Top