Geneticka istrazivanja drevnih naroda

a common ancestor of the Eurasian R1a1 haplotype lived between 4,100 and 4,900 years ago.
An exception is presented only in the Balkans (Serbia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Bosnia), where a
common ancestor is significantly more ancient, about 11,500 years bp. This will be explored
below in this section.

The data shown above suggests that only about 6,000-5,000 years bp bearers of R1a1 began to
mobilize and migrate to the west toward the Atlantics, to the north toward the Baltic Sea and
Scandinavia, to the east to the Russian plains and steppes, to the south to Asia Minor, the
Middle East, and far south to the Arabian Sea. All of those local R1a1 haplotypes point at their
common ancestors who lived from 4,800 to 4,000 years bp. On their way through the Russian
plains and steppes the R1a1 tribe presumably sat up the Kurgan archaeological culture,
apparently domesticated the horse, advanced to Central Asia and left the “Aryan population”
which dated to 4,500 years bp. They then moved to the Ural mountains about 4,000 years bp
and migrated to India as the Aryans circa 3,600-3,500 years bp. Presently, 16% of the male
Indian population, or approximately 100 million people, bear R1a1 haplogroup’s SNP mutation,
with their common ancestor of 3,675 years bp. The current Indian R1a1 haplotypes are
practically indistinguishable from Russian, Ukrainian, and Central Asian R1a1 haplotypes, as
well as from many West and Central European R1a1 haplotypes. They correspond closely to the
Indo-European language family.

The earliest Greek alphabet was made by the Pelasgians, it was lost and later reintroduced by
Kadmus to Boeotia. Another Pelasgian, Evander of Arcadia introduced writing to the Italians.
This script was used to make the first fifteen characters of the Latin script according to Pliny and
Plutarch.

However, I now look at genetics. Genetically area matching exactly the core of ancient
Macedonia is misfit in Greece. Compare the map of ancient Macedonia above with Figure 1
from http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/italy.pdf... exactly the same shape differs from the rest
of the Greece:

1) R* without R1a is much larger in rest of Greece

2) R1a is much larger in ancient Macedonia
3) I2a2 is much larger as well
4) G2a has hotspot in southeastern part of the area

this could indicate that ancient Macedonians were predominantly R1a and I2a2 which is typical
combination for east-European people from whom later Slavic nations appeared...

Capital of the country was Pella, which is strikingly similar to pre-Greek population of Greece -
Pelasgians. In fact, Herodot places Pelasgians in area of ancient Macedonia...

The ancient Slavs

Present-day Slavs are descended from Bronze Age Steppe cultures descended from the Corded
Ware culture (including the Catacomb and Srubna cultures), associated with the R1a-M458 and
R1a-Z280 people, as well as the Neolithic population of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture (I2a1b-
M423). Slavic Europeans belonged primarily to haplogroup R1a and I2. Southern Slavs
descended from the Thracians, Dacians and Illyrians have a much higher proportion of I2a1b.

Eastern Europeans from the Danubian basin and the Balkans have also inherited a sizeable
percentage of haplogroup E1b1b, G2a, J1, J2b and T from the expansion Neolithic farmers that
started from northern Greece 7,000 years ago. These lineages survived at a higher frequency in
non-Slavic populations of the Balkans, notably the Albanians, Romanians, Vlachs and Greeks.

The Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians

According to ancient sources, the Thracians were a fusion of Proto-Indo-European Steppe

people with the Neolithic inhabitants of the Carpathians (Cucuteni-Trypillian culture). As such
they probably belonged to R1a (about 30%), R1b (10%), I2a1b (25-30%), E-V13 (10-15%), G2a,
J1, J2a, J2b, and T1a. The Dacians were closely related to the Thracians and would have carried
a similar mixture of haplogroups. The Illyrians have more mysterious origins, but judging from
the modern haplogroup frequencies in the Dinaric Alps, they surely were predominantly a blend
of R1a and I2a1b.
There is a higher frequency of Haplogroup I in the samples taken from the Islands surrounding
Ragusa(Dubrovnik), and a lower frequency of Haplogroup I on the Croatian mainland where the
Slavic Croats settled.

Likewise we see a Higher Frequency of R1a on the Croatian mainland where the Croats settled
and a lesser frequency on the islands surrounding Ragusa.

I think this is pretty compelling evidence that the high frequency Haplogroup I (I2a-Din) is Pre-
Slavic in Croatia.

I think it is time to recapitulate the facts:

The highest I2a-Din frequency has been measured by Battaglia et al. (2008) for "Bosnian Croats"
at 73.3 %. While the text does not give details on where the samples were taken, the enclosed
map suggests Mostar as sampling region.
The next highest frequency is reported for the island of Hvar by Barac et al. (2003) at 65.9 %.
Pericic et al. (2005) report Herzegovina at 63.8 %. This relates to combined sampling from
Mostar and Siroki Brijeg. On the assumption that the frequency in Mostar is around 70%, as
suggested by the Battaglia result, we can infer a frequency around 55% in Siroki Brijeg.
Frequencies above 50% have furthermore been reported from Zenica in central Bosnia (52.2%,
Pericic et al.), and the islands of Brac (55.1 %) and Korcula (53.7 %).
Next comes "Bosniacs", reported by Battaglia et al. at 45.3% - the enclosed map suggests
Sarajevo as sampling location. Western Montenegro may have similar frequencies, as is
discussed here http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...montenegro-dna.
Frequencies around 30% have been reported for Bosnian Serbs (34.6 %, Battaglia, the enclosed
map suggests sampling around Tuzla), mainland Croatia (Battaglia 33.7%, Pericic after deeper
genotyping of Barac's data 32.2%), Belgrade (29.2%, Pericic), Skopje (29.1%, Pericic), Krk (28.4%,
Barac), and Ossijek Croats (27.6%, Battaglia). For the Croatian mainland, Barac mentions a
higher I frequency in the Southern and Eastern parts.

That is a strikingly regular, almost concentric pattern with its "epicentre" close to Mostar, and
frequencies above or close to 50% in an area that is approximately demarked by the cities of
Herceg Novi, Sarajevo, Zenica and Split.
Now, let's take a look how the high I2a-Din distribution has been affecting other relevant Y DNA
haplogroups:
E-M78 has obviously been largely unaffected by the I2a Din concentration. Generally regarded
as Albanian marker on the Balkans, the E-M78 frequency peaks at 45.6% among Kosovo
Albanians (Perisic) and 36% among FYROM-Albanians (Battaglia). (South-)Westward from there,
it declines steadily from a 27% average (with a westwards decline) in Montenegro, 20.4% in
Belgrade (Pericic), 19.8% in Tuzla (Battaglia), 13.1% in Sarajevo (Battaglia), 10.1% in Zenica
(Pericic), some 9% around Mostar (Battaglia, Pericic) to 5.6% on the Crotian mainland (Pericic,
Barac). The Croatian islands of Brac, Hvar and Korcula have a somewhat lower frequency of
around 4%, but that falls with measurement tolerance.
I1-M253, the Germanic marker, is generally reported around 5% throughout the region, e.g.
6.2% in Montenegro, 5.3% in Belgrade, 5.7% (Battagla) and 5.1% (Pericic) with FYROM
Albanians, 4.7% with Kosovo Albanians, 4.8% in Sarajevo. Unfortunately, Battagla and Pericic
differ when it comes to Herzegovina and mainland Croatia. Battaglia has no I1 in Mostar, but
7.9% in Croatia (excluding Osijek), while Pericic has Herzegovina at 4.95% and mainland Croatia
at just 2.8%. Both, however, point towards a drop in Northern & Central Bosnia (2.5% in Tuzla,
1.5% in Zenica). Rootsi et al. (2005) reports 5.3% for the Croatian mainland (312 samples) and
2.0% for Bosnians (91 samples). In summary, with the possible exception of Nothern & Central
Bosnia, especially the Zenica area, the I2a Din frequency pattern does not seem to have
influenced the rather constant I1 distribution across the area.
R1a, generally regarded as Slavic marker, OTOH, falls pronouncedly from the 30-35% level as
observed among Slovenes, the Croatian mainland and Macedonian Greeks. The R1a decline on
the Balkans is generally correlated to more E-M78. Thus Kosovo and FYROM Albanians have the
lowest frequencies of only some 2%. Belgrade's relatively low R1a share of 15,9% may as well
still be related to a higher E-M78 share there..
Hovewer, in the I2a-Din core area, the negative correlation between R1a and E-M78 breaks.
Here, R1a frequencies range as low as 8.7% on Brac and 12% in Mostar (Battaglia) and the
Herzegowina (Periric), respectively, while E-M78 frequencies are also quite low (though not as
low as on the Croatian mainland).
R1b, generally seen as IE or Celitc marker, is affected most. While around 15%-18% among
Croatians, Albanians and Greek Macedonians, and 11% in Belgrade and Tuzla, it drops to below
4% in Sarajevo (3.6%), the Herzegovina (3.6%) and Mostar (2.2%), Korcula (1.5%), Zenica (1.4%),
and Hvar (1.1%).
I wonder how the I2a-Din pattern could have been brought about by Slavic expansion. More
specifically:
How could this expansion have strongly affected R1b, but left E-M78 and I1 untouched?
Why would this expansion have led to such a strong concentration of I2a Din around Mostar,
while reducing, instead of simultaneously enhancing, R1a in the area?

To me, it rather looks like a traditional co-existence of I2a-Din (more north-westwards) and E-
M78 (more south-eastwards) that has been overformed by successive incursions of R1b (Celts),
I1 (Goths, Heruli etc.) and Slavs (R1a), with the Goths and Heruli mostly sparing out Central
Bosnia, while Celts hardly and Slavs only to a limited extent made it to Herzegovina and the
adjacent Dalmatian coast.

That would point to Palaeolithic continuity, if there weren't the TMRCA and diversity issues
ported out by Sparkey. I don't feel qualified to comment on the former. As concerns I2a-Din
diversity, however, both Rootsi and Periric report it to be high in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
respectively. In fact, both suggest diversity to be highest there, within a wide area of high
diversity that comprises most of central-eastern Europe from the Czech Republic towards
Western Ukraine (Rootsi even has the high diversity area stretching as far to the North-East as
Estonia, but his analysis includes other I2 clades aside from I2a-Din). The following picture
shows I2a-Din frequency distributions (A/C) and the corresponding variance surfaces (B/D) that
Periric determined from own sampling in the Balkans (A/B) and by incorporating results from
other studies across Europe (C/D):
Click image for larger version.
Name: Periric I2a_Din.jpg
Views: 11
Size: 50.7 KB
ID: 6448
In short, after reviewing available research, I think that I2a-Din has already been present in the
Dinaric Alps before the Slavic expansion, probably already before Roman times. The question is
just whether it originated there, or expanded from further north, maybe the Carpathians
around the sources of Dniester and Tisza, sometimes in the Neolithic, the bronze or the iron
age. Judged by the diversity maps, an arrival by sea looks quite unlikely.
Sources:
http://www.draganprimorac.com/wp-con.../Battaglia.pdf
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/conten.../1964.full.pdf (Periric)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181996/ (Rootsi)

I wonder how the I2a-Din pattern could have been brought about by Slavic expansion. More
specifically:
How could this expansion have strongly affected R1b, but left E-M78 and I1 untouched?
Why would this expansion have led to such a strong concentration of I2a Din around Mostar,
while reducing, instead of simultaneously enhancing, R1a in the area?
1. There are two different R1b populations in the Balkans.
The older one R1b-M269(xL51) which has nothing to do with Celts and its distribution pattern is
almost identical with E-V13 (you wrote E-M78 which is ancestral to E-V13). They even correlate
in Italy.
The second one is R1b-U152, which indeed could be connected to Celts, and as you correctly
noticed it is significantly more frequent in Western Croatia and Slovenia. This haplogroup is
more interesting because it is young enough to be one more argument for late arrival of I2a-Din.
It clearly drops in frequency in the area where I2a-Din settled, and that can be easily explained
with I2a-Din coming after R1b-U152.

These two mentioned R1b populations have to be analysed independently.

And at the end I don't quite understand your first question, because I see opposite - all these
are affected: E-V13, R1b-M269(xL51) and R1b-U152. If you are asking why are E-V13 and R1b-
M269(xL51) less frequent West of I2a-Din, it is because when I2a-Din came, E-V13 and R1b-
M269(xL51) retreated towards Southeast.
2. Because I2a-Din and R1a were never 50:50 mix. I2a-Din was always more frequent as you go
South (but was not present in the Balkans until Early Middle Ages). I see nothing amazing there.

I'm surprised that Paleolithic continuity is getting such a strong hearing so far. I have a strong
feeling that an ancestor clade of I2a-Din passed through the Balkans or at least the Carpathian
Basin, quite possibly I* or early I2* or I2a* or even IJ. But I2a-Din is waaay down the SNP tree,
with none of its cousin clades having their centers of diversity in the Balkans. Looking at
Nordtvedt's tree makes it clear how young the clade is. And the "S" cluster, which is more
common in the Balkans than the "N" cluster, is even younger than the clade as a whole.

So Paleolithic continuity requires either: (1) The STR dating is unreliable to the point of being
junk, and the date is wrong nearly tenfold. Or (2) a massive bottleneck down to clusters N and S
by ca. 2500 years ago, followed by an expansion of only N outside of the Balkans, followed by
another bottleneck of S, which then expanded in the Classical Age or later (maybe with the
Illyrians)? (1) seems very unlikely to me and (2) doesn't seem to fit what we know about the
history of the region or the other haplogroups in the region.
What migration pattern does fit the cluster dating? Well, an expansion out of a small subset of
an expanding population from the North during the 1st millennium CE would fit it. Sounds like
the Slavs, or at least a Southerly subset of them that mixed with I2a-Din people who could have
been there well before the R1a carriers.

"Or (2) a massive bottleneck"

*If* it is paleolithic continuity then there would need to be a reason why y dna I survived where
it did and not elsewhere. The first most obvious factor is mountains, terrain unsuitable for
neolithic farming, thus providing a refuge. However even if they had a refuge the population
density of the surviving HGs would be much lower than the adjacent farmers which makes me
wonder how the percentage of I in the total population could be so high even in the refuge
areas of Scandinavia and the Dinaric Alps.
So it seems to me some kind of bottleneck would be expected where some of the surviving HGs
adapt to agriculture in some way that allowed their population to expand. Otherwise as farmers
gradually improved their crops and techniques over the centuries they would eventually have
expanded into the terrain they previously ignored swamping the surviving HGs.
It seems to me ultimately there has to be a HG to farmer transition in refuge terrain **before**
the outside farmers adapt to that terrain and spread into it.
In which case the importance of the refuge isn't so much the refuge in itself but the **time** it
gave to allow the local HG population to adapt - the difference between adapt within 100 years
or die and adapt within 1000 years or die.
So the Din bottleneck may be the descendants of a family of HGs who adapted to farming in
some way - either something physical like lactose tolerance or cultural like taking up herding
thus allowing HG-Farmer population expansion.
For example, some HG taken as a child and made into a slave shepherd / cowherd and later
escaped back to his own people with some stolen sheep/cows.

I think you are on to something, since you seem to be on a roll

with the explanations, tell me how the slavs brought I2a1b to
Mesolithic Sweden in 6000 B.C.

Thanks for a great post FrankN, I really enjoy the thought you put in to it and read it thoroughly.
As to your quote about an origin point, I would like to refer to the Battaglia study's section on
Variance. Greater variance in an area pointing to a clade being older there of course. I-M423
being older in Western Ukraine than Croatia/Bosnia where we find it in greater frequencies
today. This matches my Goth theory.

Goti I srbi

Hello,
I must revive this thread because about few pages before I saw some talk about Gothic theory,
and most did seem to agree that spread of I2a2 Dinaric fits perfectly in Gothic migrations, but
were highly sceptical because they didn't have enough of evidence that ex-Yugoslavians are of
Gothic origin- but read this post closely and you will find that Gothic theory of I2a Din is more
than plausible.
I will start with first literary work among Yugoslavians, it is called "Chronicles of Priests of
Duklja". From beginning it tells about two Gothic brothers, Totila and Ostroyllus. Totila conquers
Italy, while Ostroyllus rules over Roman provinces Dalmatia (Bosnia and Croatia) and his capital
is in Prevalis (Montenegro). He sent his son with most of army to conquer remaining of Panonia
while he remained in Prevalis. Army of Byzantines came and pillaged his lands. When Senudial,
son of Ostroyllus heard that he returns from Panonia to avenge father's death but he finds no
Byzantines in Prevalis. From then on it talks about Gothic rulers and how they are ancestors of
medieval Croat and Montenegrin rulers and people.
Don't forget that before that there were more migrations of Goths to this area: first one was in
370's when Goths fled from Huns to Balkans.

Dr. Rus in Ljubljana in 1914 even mentions migration of slavicized Goths from Vistula in 7th
century to Balkans.
It is worth saying that in interwar period German historians Ludwig Glumpowitz and L.
Hauptmann regarder Gothic origin of us as correct.

Not only Priest of Duklja but also Thomas the Archdeacon of Split in his "Historia Salonitana" in
13th century also writes about our Gothic origin, and about same Gothic migrations.

Venetian doge Andrea Dandolo writes about one mission of Neretvians in Venetia in 830. :
"...Quia a Gothis originem traxerunt", which means "...which are descended from Goths".

Montenegrin town of Niksic was founded by Goths in 6th century. Our original name of that
town in Onogosht, which is derived from Germanic name Anegast. At Skadar Gothic coins and
buckles were found. Some linguists think that nearby clan of Hoti has some connection to
Goths.
In Budva, too, Gothic material remnants were found, and also in early Christian basillica near
Bijelo Polje where Gothic buckles and traces of destruction were found. Material remnants of
Goths are also found all over Croatia and Bosnia.
Early christian basillica in Breza, Bosnia, is particularly interesting because there was found
stone pillar with Gothic runic inscription.
And now about Gothic toponyms. Here are some from Bosnia and Montenegro, from book of
Croatian historian Ivan Mužić: Onogošt, Ostrog, Gacko (also clan Gačani), Vareš, Hrgud, Brotnjo,
Hardomilje, Argud, Otilovci, Konogovo, Gudelji... there are more of them which I don't
remember.

Now let's look at Gothic remains in our languages. Our language, except for Scandinavian ones
and Estonian, is only in Europe with pitch accent, and since Goths originate in Scandinavia it is
very possible they brought it. There are also many Gothic words in our language, sadly many of
them were removed during Kingdom of Yugoslavia. Here are some:

stijena-stains (Gothic): rock, brijeg-bjarg (Old Norse): hill, saian-sijati (Gothic): to sow, plaisan-
plesati (Gothic): to dance, volja-vilja (Gothic): will, smokva-smakka (Gothic): fig, svrbjeti-
swairban (Gothic): to itch, vrijedan-wairthan (Gothic): worthy, vještica-weihitha (Gothic): witch,
stvoriti-stiurjan (Gothic): to create, trnje-thaurna (Gothic): thorns, wopjan-vapiti (Gothic): to cry
out for help, svekrva/svekar-swaihra (Gothic): mother/father in-law, nećak-nithjus (Gothici):
nephew, hrpa-haupaz (proto-Germanic): pile; bunch, ljekar-lekeis (Gothic): healer;doctor,
frizura/češljanje-frisiaz (Gothic): hairstyle, bljesak-blason (proto-Germanic): blaze etc etc...
There are over 1000 Gothic words in Chakavian dialect gathered by Croatian historian Mihovil
Lovrić.

Now one interesting thing is connection between official religion of Bogomilism in medieval
Bosnia and Arian heresy of the Goths. Gregor Cremosnik in 1937 is first historian to claim
connection between Bogomilism and Arian heresy, because Bogomilism only appears there
where Goths settled. It is interesting that popes often called Bosnians "arian heretics".

Stanko Guldescu:
"Both Tvrtko and Stjepan Tomašević (King Stephen of Bosnia) placed curiously ornate Gothic
letters beneath the Bosnian crown and coat of arms. On many shileds found in Bosnia, and
which antedate Muslim conquest, the typical device represented is that of moon and star, the
design which appears on shield of Theodoric and other Ostrogothic kings, as well as on the
mossaics that date from period of Ostrogothic rule at Ravenna. Also there is to be found on
many of the oldest Bosnian gravestones (stećci) shields with this same device which was so
popular among Ostrogoths. The German consul in Sarajevo in the last century was inspired by
the noted historian, Theodor Mommsen, to undertake a study of Bosnian antiquities. He
deduced a definite connection between strange-appearing Bosnian tombstones (stećci) and the
Ostrogoths who ruled the area..."

I can also say that Slavs are most likely to have settled in parts of country fertile for agriculture,
that is, in northern parts of Yugoslavia, while southern parts, in which I2a Din is more frequent
was settled with Goths. Agriculture is EVERYTHING for Slavs. But in Croatia, Bosnia and
Montenegro it is contrary. French general Viala de Somier, when he visited Montenegro in 1820
observed that population has very limited use of farming, that men leave hardest agricultural
works to women while their only duty is war, raiding and herding cattle.

I will also mention anthropological research. According to Priest of Duklja, core of Goths resided
in Prevalis (Montenegro).
In 1939 book "The Races of Europe" Carleton Coon lists Montenegrins as tallest and heaviest
men in Europe, and finds out that most of them belong to Borreby subrace, which is most
numerous in northern Germany and western Norway.

Sorbs have R1a M458 and Croats R1a Z280....That there was a migration from area of Lusatian
Sorbs to the Balkan that would be visible in our genes.....Therefore there is no migration outside
the White Croatia to the Balkan and to Croatia..

Skiti .
First I want to reply to obvious BS stating that "R1a might be Turkmen/Scythian/whatever" and
not Slavic, while I2a Din is true proto-Slavic. It is FAR, FAR from thruth.
Since 19th century Russian and Polish historians argue that Scythians were in fact Slavs. German
elites back in then tried to prove that Scythians are in fact ancestors of modern day Ossetians
and classified Scythian language as "Iranian". First problem with this is that proto-Slavic kurgan
culture Scythians were R1a1 people while Ossetians are mainly J2, G, K and R1a1 is practically
ABSENT in them. In recent research conducted in 6 Ossetian groups only 1 percent of them
were R1a.
How, therefore, is it possible that the Scythian language was classified as Iranian dialect, close to
the Ossetian one? What exactly do we know about the language of Scythians? In fact, we know
nothing, or very little.
There are no written Scythian texts left. We know nothing about the Scythian grammar. The
only source are the inscriptions with toponyms and names, and a few names from Herodot. This
is what the so called ‘’linguistic analysis’’ which connected Scythians with Iranians was based
upon.
Let’s put the linguistic speculations aside, though. What is truly important is that Iranians and
Ossetians are NOT people of light skin complexion. We know from Herodot that Royal Scyths
who lived North of the Black Sea were characterized by fair skin complexion. This is confirmed
by genetic research of Indo-European tribes , including the Scythians, which invaded Asia.
Quote from one recent genetic study:
"To help unravel some of the early Eurasian steppe migration movements, we determined the Y-
chromosomal and mitochondrial haplotypes and haplogroups of 26 ancient human specimens
from the Krasnoyarsk area dated from between the middle of the second millennium BC. to the
fourth century AD. In order to go further in the search of the geographic origin and physical
traits of these south Siberian specimens, we also typed phenotype-informative single nucleotide
polymorphisms. Our autosomal, Y-chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA analyses reveal that
whereas few specimens seem to be related matrilineally or patrilineally, nearly all subjects
belong to haplogroup R1a1-M17 which is thought to mark the eastward migration of the early
Indo-Europeans. Our results also confirm that at the Bronze and Iron Ages, south Siberia was a
region of overwhelmingly predominant European settlement, suggesting an eastward migration
of Kurgan people across the Russo-Kazakh steppe. Finally, our data indicate that at the Bronze
and Iron Age timeframe, south Siberians were blue (or green)-eyed, fair-skinned and light-haired
people and that they might have played a role in the early development of the Tarim Basin
civilization. To the best of our knowledge, no equivalent molecular analysis has been
undertaken so far. "

Migration of people originating from the Slavic kurgan culture, that is light-skinned people
carrying the R1a1 gene is considered proven by the modern science. May I add that this
particular kind of science is based not upon linguistic speculations but entirely on genetic
research, then it cannot be distorted, adjusted or manipulated like the linguistic analysis.

Another quote related to the research on the ancient Scytho-Siberian DNA and skeletons:
"The assignment method was performed from only the allelic frequencies of the seven STR loci
considered in the consensus genotype. The probability of observing an individual with the Kizil
skeleton STR profile was the highest in the two eastern European populations (Russia and
Poland). Indeed, the likelihood that the Kizil skeleton STR profile occurred in these two
populations was 10 times higher than in other European populations, 100 times higher than in
eastern Asian populations, and about 100,000 times higher than in Indian populations."

This study hence entirely excludes the similarity of Scythians and Asians. At the same time, it
points out the similarity of Scythian and Slavic skeletons.
The skull studies prove the same conclusion. Those of modern "Caucasoids" from Eastern
Europe cluster very closely with crania from the Karasuk culture. They're also pretty close to all
the other purported Indo-Iranians.
As for the R1a1 gene, it is most concentrated among the Slavs- mostly the Poles, the Russians
and the Lusatians. All genetic research conducted so far show that Indo-European people
migrating into Asia in Bronze and Iron Age, including the Scythians, share R1a1 haplogroup,
have fair skin complexion and are genetically closest to the Slavs. Hence, we know that
Scythians and other tribes which originated from the kurgan culture did not come from Asia but
migrated into Asia. We know that their fatherland was situated North from the Black Sea and
was geographically inter-related with the Slavic land. Moreover, the description of the Scythians
matches that of the Slavs.
According to the fourth book of Herodot’s Histories, North from the so called Royal Scyths – the
principal Scythian tribe- lived the Scythian farmers and Scythian ‘’ploughmen’’. If those two
tribes were also considered Scythian, it means that they most likely looked like the Royal Scyths,
had similar behavioural patterns to the Royal Scyths and spoke a similar language to that of the
Royal Scyths. The only languages that ever existed in this particular geographical area, and exist
until this day, are Slavic languages.

I wasn't talking about diversity pattern, what I meant was concentration. You can perfectly see
how concentration steadily increases when we follow their migrations from oldest to most
recent homeland, and it is pretty logical IMO.
Now diversity pattern is a little tricky, AFAIK ancestors of many people who today live in
southern Poland actually lived in western Ukraine in some point of time.
First division of Dinaric was by STR448=20 (North) and STR448=19 (South) by Nordtvedt.
Afterwards new SNP's CTS34002, CTS10936, CTS11768 were found that clearly separate Disles
from Dinaric, and after that comes Polish "Dinaric cousin", but since it is negative on two SNP's
(CTS5966 and CTS10228) while Din is positive, and also on STR565=11 while other Dinaric have
STR565=9, it is obvious that Dinaric cousin is separated from Dinaric by few thousand years and
therefore he's not relevant to our discussion.
Only a few months ago SNP S12750 was found and it was positive on all of Dinaric South, and
also in most of North while smaller part of North had it negative, which confirms thesis that
South is just a younger branch of North and that both came relatively recently from north.
As I already said diversity part is messy. So if we have in mind that many of southern Poland
residents came from Ukraine it is safe to assume that DS and DN actually were not
geographically separated so much, and also in ex-Yugoslavia we can find both DN and DS
although DS has prevalence.
BTW many Montenegrins have STR448=18 so I wonder if it could mean new branch of DS.
But if we follow concentration pattern and also have in mind regional distribution of I2a Din and
R1a in Yugoslavia we will see that it corresponds very well to Gothic migrations.

R1 raspodela

IIRC Ken Nordtvedt and Vadim Verenich estimate the age of formation of I2a1b1 as 2800 years
ago and its TMRCA as 2500 years ago. Place of formation was Eastern or East-Central Europe
according to them. This young age combined with its presence among Slavic (especially East
Slavic and South Slavic) populations and its lack of presence among Baltic populations, suggests
that this mutation originally formed in one of members of the Proto-Slavic community around
year 800 BCE. The time when the Balto-Slavic community split (an event illustrated by the graph
below), forming Proto-Slavs and the other two groups (Proto East Balts and Proto West Balts -
according to Kromer's 2003 theory) has been variously estimated at between 1500 BCE and 500
BCE, but most authors place it between 1400 and 1200 BCE:

Atkinson - 1400 BCE

Novotná & Blažek - 1400–1340 BCE
Sergei Starostin - 1210 BCE
Chang et. al. - 600 BCE

If this mutation is younger than the split of the Balto-Slavic community, then this fact nicely
explains why I2a1b1 is present among Slavs but not among Balts. Had this lineage been present
among Balto-Slavs before they split some 3400 - 3200 years ago, it should be present among
both Balts and Slavs today (unless it was so small in numbers that - just by chance - only Slavs
inherited it, and not Balts).

Now when it comes to R1a:

Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22

The point is that Croats belong R1a Z280
This claim is completely wrong.

Data from Underhill 2014 shows that Croats have the highest proportion of M458 in entire R1a
among South Slavs (read below).

Among Slavic and Baltic populations, when it comes to people with haplogroup R1a, two major
clades dominate - Z280 and M458.

The age of these two clades is:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1a/

Z280:
Time when mutation emerged (in one male) - ca. 5000 years ago (95% probability that in period
5600 - 4400 y.a.).
Time of the most recent common ancestor - ca. 4800 years ago (95% probability that in period
5400 - 4200 y.a.).

M458:

Time when mutation emerged (in one male) - ca. 5000 lat temu (95% probability that in period
5600 - 4400 y.a.).
Time of the most recent common ancestor - ok. 4500 lat temu (95% probability that in period
5400 - 4200 y.a.).

=================================================

Distribution of percentage shares of these clades within all of R1a forms an interesting
continuum (but also a clinal distribution in some areas).

If individuals with R1a haplogroup in each population = 100%, then respective shares of Z280
and M458 within that R1a are:

Population (R1a Z280 / R1a M458 / other clades of R1a) - according to Underhill 2014 (+
Ukrainians from Lviv & Lithuanians from another - Russian - source, as well as alternative data
for Russians, Poles and Belarusians from the same Russian source):

WeS = Western Slavs

SoS = Southern Slavs
EaS = Eastern Slavs
Balt = Balts
[WeS] Czechs-----------------------------(20,2 / 79,8 / 0,0)
[WeS] Czechs Utah------------------------(19,9 / 70,0 / 10,1)
[SoS] Croatia interior-----------------------(32,0 / 68,0 / 0,0)
[WeS] Poland------------------------------(42,0 / 58,0 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Cherkassy-----------------(46,9 / 53,1 / 0,0)
[WeS] Poland (another source)--------------(51,7 / 48,3 / 0,0)
[WeS] Slovakia-----------------------------(52,1 / 46,2 / 1,7)
[WeS] Poles Wroclaw-----------------------(56,8 / 43,2 / 0,0)
[SoS] Bulgaria------------------------------(51,2 / 42,0 / 6,8)
[EaS] Ukrainians Lviv------------------------(58,2 / 41,8 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Ivano-Frankivsk-------------(60,0 / 40,0 / 0,0)
[EaS] Belarusians Brest----------------------(61,4 / 38,6 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Kostroma--------------------(62,6 / 37,4 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Donetsk--------------------(67,4 / 30,4 / 2,2)
[EaS] Belarusians (another source)-----------(69,7 / 30,3 / 0,0)
[SoS] Macedonians--------------------------(72,7 / 27,3 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Pskov------------------------(72,6 / 25,8 / 1,6)
[EaS] Russians Oryol-------------------------(76,4 / 23,6 / 0,0)
[SoS] Serbia---------------------------------(64,9 / 23,2 / 11,9)
[EaS] Belarusians (Underhill)------------------(76,8 / 23,2 / 0,0)
[SoS] Bosnia--------------------------------(80,2 / 19,8 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians (another source)--------------(80,8 / 19,2 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Belgorod----------------------(81,2 / 18,8 / 0,0)
[Balt] Lithuanians----------------------------(81,8 / 18,2 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Khmilnyk---------------------(84,3 / 15,7 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Akkerman--------------------(88,4 / 11,6 / 0,0)
[SoS] Slovenia-------------------------------(83,9 / 10,7 / 5,4)
[SoS] Herzegovina----------------------------(93,8 / 6,2 / 0,0)

This still doesn't explain it and perfectly supports my theory. Why is there so much difference
between Hezegovina and Slavonia Croats? Don't they all descend from same Slavs? Why do
then Slavonians have over 50 percent of R1a and Herzegovinians and Montenegrins have only
about 6 percent of R1a?

It is because Slavs settled in northern Yugoslavia, in lands suitable for farming (R1a carriers), and
Goths (I2a1b) settled in Dinaric Alps. If they were all Slavic as modern history claims they would
all have same amount of HG's. It is just like our medieval history sources tell us...

Reason why there is some I2a1b in Ukraine is because it comes from Gothic leftovers. As we
know from history bigger part of Goths migrated over Danube to Balkans while smaller part was
subdued by Huns and remained on Black Sea coast. Even Gothic dialect was spoken in Crimea
until 19th century.

Assumption that it is Slavic comes from the fact that today carriers of I2a1b are linguistically
Slavic, which they were not in the past.

Also 3-4 thousand years of I2a1 continuity in Neolithic hunter-gatherer Scandinavians support
my theory (from Motala to Ajvide), as well as evidence for depopulation at that time.
It is clear that I2a1 got to Poland from Scandinavia, not from eastern Europe, and I2a1b in
Poland existed long before any Slavic or proto-Slavic tribe entered it.

BTW no chance there is so much R1a even in northern Croatia as you listed it on map.

I2 najstariji nalazi
There was lack of continuity between Neolithic Scandinavians and Scandinavians of Bronze & Iron Ages
(see: Malmström et. al. 2009).

Also, there is a very long long way from I2a1 to I2a1b1. For example Sardinians are I2a1a, not I2a1b (and
certainly not I2a1b1).

I2a was present not only in prehistoric Scandinavia but in most of Mesolithic and Neolithic Europe.

Check for example I2a1 from Loschbour (5960-5750 BCE) or I2a from Tiszaszölös-Domaha'za in Hungary
(5780-5650 BCE).

And more anient I2a in Hungary was discovered at Apc-Berekalja I (Lengyel culture), dating to 4490-4360
BCE.

There is also Neolithic I2a1 from Starčevo culture in Croatia, at site Vinkovci Jugobanka, dated 5840-5480
years BCE.

Finally there is I2a1b L161+, CTS1293+ from Els Trocs in Spain, dated 5310-5206 BCE (see Haak 2015).

As well as I2a1b from Funnelbeaker culture dating to 3360-3086 BCE. And I2a1 from France (Treilles,
Aveyron) dated 3000 BCE.

Finally more I2a1 from Dolmen of La Pierre Fritte, Villeneuve-sur-Yonne in France, dated 2750-2725 BCE.

Martin Luther being I2a1b is not surprising. His ancestors were from Thuringia. Eastern Thuringia
was settled by Slavs during the Migration Period - and those particular Slavs from Thuringia did not suffer
any major demographic losses, as they were Christianized early on (already by Charlemagne IIRC) and
without bloodshed. So Luther family could be paternally descended from Germanized Slavs.
Hrvati
Croats mostly belong R1a Z280

http://pereformat.ru/2013/10/kolybel...j-civilizacii/

I. Rozhansky

2013/10/18

Croatia haplogroup R1a represented almost exclusively by the Central Eurasian subclade Z280

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/dinaric_alps_dna/default.aspx?section=ymap

https://www.familytreedna.com/public...x?section=ymap

As for I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983 haplotype which has a majority of Croats.. it comes from White
Croatia, today southern Poland and has a mutation I2a1b2a1a S17250/YP204...

So far, most or all of those who are negative for S17250 have patrilineage
originating near the Carpathians, particularly southeastern Poland and
extreme western Ukraine.

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I/2014-05/1400615460

I2a1b2a1a S17250/YP204
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a* -
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a1 Z16971
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a2 Y4882
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983

This means that all those who have this mutation I2a1b2a1a S17250 / YP204 are White Croatian
origin...Today people with this mutation I2a1b2a1a S17250 / YP204 are located in the Ukraine,
Czech Republic, Belarus, Poland, Croatia, Russia, etc ... which proves that the migration of Croats
went in different directions and that historical data for Greate Croatia were reality....
http://yfull.com/tree/I2/

Thracians spoke Balto Slavic language

Theory

Thracians/Dacians were I2a/R1a people.

There are various hypothesis however it is logical that I2a/R1a people have similar languages to
some extent.

Thracian/Dacian as Illyrian has same or similar words as Balto Slavic languages.

There is one of theory that Thracian is Baltic language, and that theory has basis.

For example:

balios (Thracian), baltus (Luthuanian), belo (Serbian), white (English)

zilma (Thracian), zelme (Latvian), zelen (Serbian), greens (English)
udra (Thracian), ūdra (Lithanian), vidra (Serbian), otter (English)
gin (Thracian), gnins (Latvian), gnjiti (Serbian), spoil, decay (English)
brink (Thracian), brinkti (Lithuanian), breknuti (Serbian), swell (English)
kiri (Thracian), giria, gire (Lithuanian), gora (Serbian), mountain forest (English)
saltas, zaldas (Thracian), zelt (Latvian), zlato (Serbian), gold (English)
zum, zuml (Thracian), zmaj, zmija (Serbian), dragon, snake (English)
laza (Thracian), laz, lazina (Serbian), clearing in forest (English)

Etc.

There are a lot of authors who claim that Thracian is Balto Slavic language, and it is not new, for
example several authors and books:

Neroznak, V. Paleo-Balkan Languages. Moscow, 1978.

Fasmer, M. Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language. Moscow, 1986.
Duridanov, I. Ezikyt na trakite, Sofia, 1976.

If someone sees geography he identifies that Balto Slavic people and Thracians easily can be
linked geneticaly and linguistic:

Balto-Slavic people and Thracians are R1a/I2a people, and they spoke languages which belong
Balto-Slavic group.

It is so logical.

It is very difficult that Illyrians were not R1a/I2a people, so and Illyrians spoke Balto Slavic. But
here is topic: Thracians.

But Macedonians maybe, it is possible that Macedonians were mostly E-V13/J2 people.

Today's Serbs, Bulgarians, Romanians, etc. are partly descendants of Thracians. Romanians are
romanized, but old language Dacian was one of Thracian branch and Balto Slavic too.
When Slavic people enter in today's Serbia, Bulgaria etc. the local residents are already talking a
similar language. They were similar origin, similar haplogroups and they had similar language.
We will not speculate about numerous impact Slavs but it is possible that was about 5% Slavs,
and all others were local residents (Thracians etc.).

When asked where the Thracians lost answer is: nowhere, they remain where they were
(today's Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania etc.).

It is topic to provoke discussion. The theory is very logical according to genetic, liguistic and
hystoric sources.

Braterais (Thracian), brala (Latvian), braća, bratstvo (Serbian), brothers (English)

Darsioi (Thracian), drasus (Lithuanian), drčan (Serbian), brave (English)
Diesema (Thracian), divizma (Serbian), mullein (English)
Diza (Thrachian), zid, zidati (Serbian), wall (English)
Dinupula (Thracian), dinja (Serbian), wild pumpkin (English )
Sica (Thracian), seći (Serbian), cut (English)
Berzas (Thracian), beržas (Lithuanian), breza (Serbian), birch (English)
Burt, burd (Thracian), brod (Serbian), sheep (English)
Ana (Thracian), ant (Lithuanian), na (Serbian), on (English)
Bruzas (Thracian), bruožti (Lithuanian), brz, brzo (Serbian), fast, walk fast (English)
Dama (Thracian), dom (Serbian), place for dwelling (English)
Bebrus (Thracian), dabar (Serbian), Bebrs (Latvian), beaver (English)

Berga(s) (Thracian), breg (Serbian), hill (English)

Beras (Thracian), ridj (Serbian), beris (Lithuanian), brown, sorrel (English)
Briza (Thracian), riža, pirinač (Serbian), ryžis (Lithuanian), rice (English)
Dumas (Thracian), taman (Serbian), tumšs (Latvian), dark (English)
Gaidrus (Thracian), izražen (Serbian), giedras (Lithuanian), clear (English)
Ketri (Thracian), četiri (Serbian, pron. similar as kyetiri), četri (Latvian), four (English)
Lingas (Thracian), livada (Serbian), lanka (Lithuanian), meadow (English)
Pras (Thracian), prati (Serbian), praustas (Lithuanian), wash (English)
Ramus (Thracian), miran (Serbian), ramus (Lithuanian), calm (English)
Trausoi (Thracian), trošan (Serbian), trausls (Latvian), friable, friagle (English)
Tarpo (Thracian), trap (Serbian), tarpos (Lithuanian), gap, interspace (English)

It is very interesting thinking. I would like to see precisely by the regions

deployment haplogroups in Romania. Because this territory can be key for a lot of
issues. Romania and Bessarabia link Balkan with Baltic, Pontic steppe, Caucauss
etc.

Catacomb culture can be Armenian or Greek Armenian. In that case Catacomb

language probably was Satem, as Greek and Armenian. But I think that Phrygian
from Asia Minor isn't in that group because it is Centum.

Armenians have significant R1b. But it is R1bht35, which researchers label as

Armenian haplotype. It would be interesting to know where R1bht35 is distributed
today in Romania because researchers found that it is significant, over 10%.

R1b carriers in Europe all have Centum languages, but R1bht35 have Satem
language. Not only Armenian. For example, Albanians who have 16% R1bht35 have
Satem language too.

From today's perspective Albanians originate somewhere from Romania. Albanians

have E-V13 at the most, and J2 and R1bht35 significant. Maybe we can roughly
locate area in today's Romania, Bessarabia or somewhere in region where
Albanians originate. Albanians are completely different people compared to the
Dacians but they lived close to them and adopted a lot of Dacian/Balto Slavic
words.

For me theory that Thracian/Dacian is Balto Slavic that it has many proponents is
logical. Of course, if it is true, we can imagine a complex relations between many
different tribes (carriers of different of haplogroups) in time of expansion Thracians
in the Balkans.
Yes, Illyrian ic Centum.
Centum and Satem are mutually exclusive, therefore for example Illyrian and Albanian have no
connection.
And respectable Albanian linguist Henrik Bariqi says that Albanian as Satem language cannot
have link with Illyrian.

Since the Illyrian is undoubtedly Centum R1b carriers from North had big impact among
Illyrians, while R1b carriers didn't have impact at Thracians (language of Thracians is Satem as
Balto Slavic).

Illyrians probably were mix R1b/R1a/I2a carriers.

I can kind of understand the connection Maciamo see's with Y DNA R1a and mtDNA U4. But the
R1a and U4 ratio is not constant. If a people group has low R1a but the highest R1a in their area
and good amount of U4 Maciamo uses them as evidence. Usually Maciamo theory's make a lot
of sense but so far what he says about his mtDNa maps is total BS. He generalizes Indo
Europeans for example in Iberia he should be saying Celts. And the early Indo Europeans around
Russia, Ukriane, and Caucus 6,000-8,000ybp were not unified genetically. Proof of this is 5,000
and 6,000 year old Yamna people in southern Russia and Ukraine were very dark eyed(click
here). But Andronovo culture(3,800-3,400ybp) in south central Siberia descended from Yamna
and probably spoke Indo Iranian language had mainly light eyes and light hair same with
pigmentation genes from all Indo Iranians in Asia from bronze and iron ages(Indo Iranian and
Tocherian DNA). They came straight out of Europe 5,000 years ago there were no light
Europeans in Asia they could have inter married with.

U4 is pretty popular in Mesolithic and Neolithic European hunter gathers(Ancient Eurasian

DNA), much more popular than anywhere in the world today. There is also samples of U4 in
Neolithic Europe before mainly R1a1a1b1 Z283 Indo European Corded ware culture(spoke
ancestral language to Balto Slavic) spread in eastern and central Europe, and Scandinavia. So
probably the vast majority of U4 in Europe are just Mesolithic hunter gather lineages. R1a1a
M17 most likely originated in Europe(click here) and probably is descended from a hunter gather
lineage and its decendant R1a1a1 M417 spread with Balto Slavic and Indo Iranian languages
and possibly partly with other Indo European languages. So with this Macimo makes an
argument that U4 Is connected with R1a because and is own explanation on how it could still
have partly spread with R1a he should say R1a1a1 M417 to be more specific.
There are plenty of samples of people with Y DNA R and mtDNA U in ancient DNA. Probably
around 10% of modern west Europeans have this mix. You forgot to mention all K which is really
U8b2 so Grahm is also a member. You, me, Artex, and callmyname have very ancient European
lineages. U5 and U4 where the two most dominate haplogroups in European hunter gatherers
but Grahm has K a farmer haplogroup that probably arrived about 9,000 years ago. R
descendants probably didn't become widespread in Europe till the copper age. So far only Y
DNA I and C-V20 have been found in Mesolithic Europe, F-96 can maybe also be connected as
the original Y DNA of U5, U4, and U2e people.

MA1(24,000 year old Siberian) who had R* and U*(his own distinct lineage), both
R1a1a's(mtDNA K1 and U5b1a'b) from Corded ware culture in Eulau Germany dating to
2,600BC, One of two the R1b's(one had K1) from Bell beaker culture in Kromsdorf, Germany
dating to 2,600-2,500BC, both R1a1 early Indo Iranians(U2e and U5a1) in Siberia from
Andronovo culture dating to 1,400-1,800BC, One of two of the R1a1's(U) in Germany from
Urnfield culture dating to 1,000BC, an R1a1 Mongol(probably Indo Iranian descended and had
mtDNA U2el) from Mongolia dating to 300-100bc, an R(XR1a) sample in northern Spain from
807-974AD also had mtDNA U5a, an R1a1-M458 samples in Germany from 1200ad also had
mtDNA K.