that model would still have 25% "Balkan" because Serbs in G25 are roughly 50% "Balkan", i believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mingle
Printable View
that model would still have 25% "Balkan" because Serbs in G25 are roughly 50% "Balkan", i believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mingle
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by Voight
Early Slavs were originally a very small group, and they were all genetically very similar to each other. They were like Belorusians, some groups maybe more similar to north Ukrainians, east Poles, or West Russians. but still 95% similar to each other. i'll just call it "Belarusian-like" genetics for simplicity's sake.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._centuries.png
a sample from near Moscow from 1200 ad was still 90% early Slavic, with very little local Finnic admixture.
Sorbs came to Germany around 550 AD, and brought Belarusian-like genetics. Then, around 620 AD, a part of them split and migrated to the Balkans, and also brought Belarusian-like genetics to the Balkans. They didn't have enough time to pick up any other admixture.
Those other tribes, which came to the Balkans through modern day Moldova and Romania, also brought Belarusian-like genetics with them.
Austrians, Czech, South Polish, and this man i posted, are Slavs + Celts + Germans, and not much else. Hungarians and Croats(north Croats in this case) are also Slavs + Celts + Germans, and they also have some Paleo-Balkan influence on top of that, but still pretty similar to Czechs and South Polish. they are all together in a "Central European" cluster. that's why this Sorb is close to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Voight
https://i.imgur.com/2WlxkSE.png
-
-
-
in the end, why complicate things this much? just take a look at the results i posted in the first post:
Mixed Mode Population Sharing:
# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 59.2% Ukrainian_Belgorod + 40.8% West_German @ 2.83
2 59.5% Southwest_Russian + 40.5% West_German @ 3.28
3 61.2% Ukrainian_Belgorod + 38.8% South_Dutch @ 3.31
the genetics of this man are very simple.
I'm not doubting that there was a "white serbia" nor "white croatia" during the Byzantine times; what I'm disputing is necessarily the notion that Serbs and Croats got their names from those places, rather than from an even earlier splitting off point somewhere eastern. When a tribe would have split, one would have gone west, and the other south. Then the Byzantine sources hear about the places that went "west", and then by virtue of them automatically assume that the Serbs and Croats right north of them derived from those that went west. That's the only thing that seems iffy to me, especially given that the west Sorbs had a bunch of other problems to deal with at the time, much bigger problems like the Franks.Quote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
And anyway, "Srbi" and "Hrvati" don't sound like slavic names to begin with, more like something Iranic or by extension Sarmatian, which would support the theory that they originally came from Slavicized Sarmatians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
Not all Croats have paleo-Balkan admixture though. "Greater Croatia" is made up of Dalmatia, Istra, Slavonia, Herzegovina, and Northwest Croatia. All of these subregions have more paleo-Balkan admixture, EXCEPT for Northwest Croatia, which is much more similar to west Slavs.
All I'm saying is that when given your theory, it's just as likely that "White Serbs" and "White Croats" got their namesake from a small coalition of "actual" Serbs and Croats from the south, as it is that your theory is likely. What I think though, is that neither of those theories are likelier than the theory that they split off from an eastern source.
well yes, that makes sense. but going by historical sources only, they came from Bohemia and East Germany.Quote:
Originally Posted by Voight
Aren't Sorbs mostly R1a-L260? Idk their Z280 levels, however, they also practically lack I2a1b-Y3120. Y3120 & Z280 are more dominant in Balkan Serbs. L260 is near insignificant. Also, Whilst L1029 is also present, I think total M458 in Serbs is like 5 percent, whilst the rest is Z280.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterski
Voight may be right that the tribe split from a more eastern positions and not directly from Sorbia. Otherwise it doesn't look like Sorbs left much of a mark in Serbs from a YDNA perspective.
I2a was already in the Balkans via someone else there was no tribe splitQuote:
Originally Posted by MagnusDark
Because White Croats base was always western Ukraine. Part moved to Czech Republic and southern Poland later on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mingle
Porfirogenet mentions two different locations of white Croatia, one in Bohemia and one much further east, which was frequently plundered by Pechenegs and between Baltic and Black seas.
Only relevant archeological remains of White Croats are found in Ukraine and not in Czech Republic.
Quote:
Sedov considered them as Southeastern neighbours of Dulebes living in the Northern and Southern area of Eastern Prykarpattia, and along B. O. Tymoshchuk argued that Slavic Gords in Bukovina were abandoned by Croats. Many other scholars also located the Croats in the territory of Galicia, and such localization is supported by DAI according to which they were plundered by the Pechenegs which would not be possible if the Croats were located further in the West like the Czech Republic. Ukrainian archaeologist and historian Orest Korchinsky attribute to White Croatia several big Gords, including Revno, Stiljsko, Zhydachiv, Kotorin complex, Klyuchi, Stuponica, Krylos, Pidhorodyshche, Terebovlia, Ganachivka, Solonsko among others.
Please don't make me laugh, calling this butchered banana land ''Greater Croatia''. And Herzegovina belongs to another country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Voight
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...of_Croatia.png
Croatia at the height of its power, 1024.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdo...%E2%80%931102)
there was probably a second White Serbia in Ukraine too, since it's mentioned that Hungarians passed through Serbia before coming to Pannonia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feiichy
A common match of me and the Sorb is a Rusyn with the surname "Boika". maybe it's connected with the alternate name of White Serbia "Boiki".
in the year 517 Slavs(Antae,Sclaveni) started invading Byzantium from the direction of modern day Romania. Serbs and Croats come around 100 later (yellow arrow)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick
https://i.imgur.com/qbfUa4r.jpg
i2a and r1a subclades which are found both in eastern and western Balkans are probably from these earlier Slavs.
"The Dacians (/ˈdeɪʃənz/; Latin: Daci; Greek: Δάκοι,[2] Δάοι,[2] Δάκαι[3]) were a Thracian[4][5][6] people who were the ancient inhabitants of the cultural region of Dacia, located in the area near the Carpathian Mountains and west of the Black Sea. This area includes mainly the present-day countries of Romania and Moldova, as well as parts of Ukraine,[7] Eastern Serbia, Northern Bulgaria, Slovakia,[8] Hungary and Southern Poland.[7] The Dacians spoke the Dacian language, a sub-group of Thracian, but were somewhat culturally influenced by the neighbouring Scythians and by the Celtic invaders of the 4th century BC."
Croatian branch of I2 mostly came from the Dacians. Some Iranic tribe arrived to Carpathians in the migration era. I guess this is "Horvat tribe" or whatever but to be specific they are branch of North Iranic people probably related with "Jassic" people or some other remnant nomadic population that also assimilated into various peoples of the Eurasian Steppe. They probably had female nomads with them, upon their arrival to Carpathian the Dacians assimilated bunch of Feiichys (manly behaving womans) and passed to their offspring Thracian Y-DNA I2. For example when I see western shifted Romanians picking up random "Croatia" region in 23andme but all the eastern shifted Romanians don't, I am confident in this connection
Haplogroup I2
Croatia (38%)
Possible place of origin: Eastern Europe (Balkans), possibly the Eastern Mediterranean
Croatian population 4.076 million, assume half are males 2.038 million, 38% of 2.038 million have I2 haplogroup, majority is PH908
"The Dacians (/ˈdeɪʃənz/; Latin: Daci; Greek: Δάκοι,[2] Δάοι,[2] Δάκαι[3]) were a Thracian[4][5][6] people who were the ancient inhabitants of the cultural region of Dacia, located in the area near the Carpathian Mountains and west of the Black Sea. This area includes mainly the present-day countries of Romania and Moldova, as well as parts of Ukraine,[7] Eastern Serbia, Northern Bulgaria, Slovakia,[8] Hungary and Southern Poland.[7] The Dacians spoke the Dacian language, a sub-group of Thracian, but were somewhat culturally influenced by the neighbouring Scythians and by the Celtic invaders of the 4th century BC."
Croatian branch of I2 mostly came from the Dacians. Some Iranic tribe arrived to Carpathians in the migration era. I guess this is "Horvat tribe" or whatever but to be specific they are branch of North Iranic people probably related with "Jassic" people or some other remnant nomadic population that also assimilated into various peoples of the Eurasian Steppe. They probably had female nomads with them, upon their arrival to Carpathian the Dacians assimilated bunch of Feiichys (manly behaving womans) and passed to their offspring Thracian Y-DNA I2. For example when I see western shifted Romanians picking up random "Croatia" region in 23andme but all the eastern shifted Romanians don't, I am confident in this connection
Haplogroup I2
Croatia (38%)
Possible place of origin: Eastern Europe (Balkans), possibly the Eastern Mediterranean
Croatian population 4.076 million, assume half are males 2.038 million, 38% of 2.038 million have I2 haplogroup, majority is PH908
in central Germany there's I2a2Dinaric>PH908>A356/Z16983 which is also found in Serbs. in core Sorb area there's are 2 I2a2 'Dinaric-S' without deeper subclades.Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnusDark
this match of mine is R1a, he didn't test deeper subclades.
so probably I-Z16983 and maybe one R1a subclade brought the Serb name to the Balkans, the other subclades are from those earlier Slavic tribes.
You have 2 Serbs in Z-16983 and they are the forefathers of Serbia, lolQuote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
You noticed I didn't mention Serbs with I2 haplogroup, because they shouldn't be connected in terms of origin
You have 2 Serbs in Z-16983 and they are the forefathers of Serbia, lolQuote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
You noticed I didn't mention Serbs with I2 haplogroup, because they shouldn't be connected in terms of origin
the common ancestor of all these people lived in 350 AD, yeah, he must've been a Dacian :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cumansky
https://i.imgur.com/OmfaFK7.png
Exactly, is not a joke, learn historyQuote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
That scenario makes alot more sense. PH908 would make perfect sense given its bottle-necking/founder effect. Seems to be the most common and probably came from an elite.Quote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
Nobody heard about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
Boiki is related to Celtic tribe of Boii in Czech Republic.
Information about White Serbia/White Serbs is extremely scarce in comparison with White Croatia, nobody even mantions it except DAI.
That's one of the theories. But Boii were long gone when Serbs came to that area, i think the theory is actually that "Boiki" was a distorted version of "Boiohaemia". And Serbs didn't settle exactly in Bohemia, but near it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feiichy
On the other hand, among east Slavs many words similar to Boiki exist, in Russian бойкий means "smart, quick or brisk" from which comes the nickname and surname "Boiko". Also, in Belarusian mythology , Boiko was one of the forefathers of Slavs, from whom 24 tribes originated.
"The position of northern Serbia seems to have been known to anotherQuote:
Originally Posted by Feiichy
Latin author (Frederick I, patriarch of Aquileia) since the beginning of the 10th century. Namely, in the
document written between ca. 900 and 921, it is said that the
Hungarians moved to Pannonia from Serbia (Ungarorum gens a Servia
egressa in Pannoniam)."
Who were there when they arrived? What happened to the scordisci the Goths, the supposedly pure paleo Balkan thracians etcQuote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
"Bojan" is also a very popular Yugoslav name. Probably just coincidence though and not related to the Boii tribe
Balkans got hugely depopulated by Justinian's Plague. We're talking once thriving metropolitan areas now completely empty and +50% people dead in a very short time. Slavs filled the power vacuum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick
By the way I don't believe Yugoslavs came from the east, most of them came from southern Poland through this place, a narrow passage between Alps and Carpathians.
https://i.imgur.com/OlX8rTx.png
About half of you is from them. They are living still.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick
Scordisci and Thracians were Romanised and Hellenized, so they were Greeks and Vlachs when Slavs arrived.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick
Goths left a pretty strong genetic influence imo, there is a lot of i1 and North Sea admixture all over the Balkans, even in more isolated areas. i think they refuged in the mountains from Avar invasions and the Justinian plague, and somehow assimilated into Vlachs and Albanians.
Luk :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukasz
That’s why I meant. The population was already mutty before slavs and not paleo BalkanQuote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
there were Slavs coming from both directions. read this article:Quote:
Originally Posted by War Chief
http://macedonia.kroraina.com/en/zvwas/zvwas_2.htm
http://macedonia.kroraina.com/en/zvwas/zvwas_043.jpgQuote:
One of the best-known finds on the territory of northern Yugoslavia, indicating links between the Baltic Slavs and the western Ukraine, are silver jewels from a prince's tomb at Čadjavica (seventh century).
yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick
Correct. In the case of eastern Slavs (Bulgarians) they are mostly Antes. Slavs with Gothic and Sarmatian substrate.Quote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
In fact I'm convinced Bulgarians would cluster west of Yugoslavs had Bulgarians not picked up lots of Byzantine west-Asian stuff during Byzantine era.
They could have originally come from the east, but through the Hungarian wayQuote:
Originally Posted by War Chief
The two concepts aren't mutually exclusive
Croats were merely brothers of Serbs, who chose to accept Latin influence as opposed to stay with their Slavic ethos.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feiichy
West herzegovines were part of this Croat ethnogenesis
Majority of Bosnia after the migration period was definitely still Serb though
There were already Slavs in present day Hungary ; Szolad samples
Historical Bosnia has nothing to do with most of territory of present day BiH.Quote:
Originally Posted by Voight
It should be obvious what I meant; majority of the territorial extent of what is now BiH was filled with people who considered themselves as Serbs post-migration periodQuote:
Originally Posted by Feiichy
Absolutely not. They are genetically closer to Croats.Quote:
Originally Posted by Voight
his cousin, uploaded by the same account is i-p37 (i2)Quote:
Originally Posted by vbnetkhio
Like I said, genetics means very little, because those who considered themselves as Serbs 1500 years ago converted to Bogomolism and Catholicism while Serbs spread their namesake to various different Romance and Balkan groups, solely because of extenuating circumstances like the Ottomans and OrthodoxyQuote:
Originally Posted by Feiichy
Nobody considered themself anything 1500 years ago, dumbass. Ethnic identity is 19th century concept.Quote:
Originally Posted by Voight