If the Croats came from some Iranic tribe, then why were the northern ones called "White Croats"?

[Voyt]

East_Slavic_tribes_peoples_8th_9th_century.jpg

It would seem to me, that the "original" ethnogenetive group would call itself by the simpler name, so they would simply be called "Croats". Why would the Croats that move south remove the "white" part of their name, if that truly was their entire ethnic name?

And it seems that I am on the right track here, as attested by Byzantine emperor of the 10th century:

"The Croats at that time were dwelling beyond Bagibareia (usually considered to be Bavaria), where the Belocroats are now. From them split off a family, namely of five brothers, Kloukas and Lobelos and Kosentzis and Mouchlo and Chrobatos, and two sisters, Touga and Bouga, who came with their folk to Dalmatia and found this land under the rule of the Avars. After they had fought one another for some years, the Croats prevailed and killed some of the Avars and the remainder they compelled to be subject to them... The rest of the Croats stayed over near Francia, and are now called the Belocroats, that is, the White Croats, and have their own archon; they are subject to Otto, the great king of Francia, which is also Saxony, and are unbaptized, and intermarry and are friendly with the Turks. From the Croats who came to Dalmatia, a part split off and took rule of Illyricum and Pannonia. They too had an independent archon, who would maintain friendly contact, though through envoys only, with the archon of Croatia... From that time they remained independent and autonomous, and they requested holy baptism from Rome, and bishops were sent and baptized them in the time of their Archon Porinos".[47]

So the ones that stayed in the North took on the name of "White Croats", while the ones who went down south retained their original name? Something's not right here. Perhaps they were originally from the South and then were forced to move north by the Romans centuries prior, and then changed their name to differentiate this new tribe that intermixed with the more pale-skinned peoples there? Food for thought.

[Cumansky]

The area in Carpathians modern western Ukraine "White Croats" occupied was annexed by Vlachs from Kingdom of Hungary shortly after recorded Dalmatia migration of this tribe.

What was origin of "White Croats" I don't know who they were many theories. People from Carpathians region in GEDmatch have affinities with modern Croatian samples tho.

[Voyt]

People from Carpathians region in GEDmatch have affinities with modern Croatian samples tho.

Well of course they would, if the theory is true that Croats moved northeast after being kicked out by Rome. But the theory that Croats came from Iran makes no sense.

[Cumansky]

Well of course they would, if the theory is true that Croats moved northeast after being kicked out by Rome. But the theory that Croats came from Iran makes no sense.

Croats Y-DNA mostly I2-PH no?

[Voyt]

Croats Y-DNA mostly I2-PH no?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneti...emporary_Y-DNA

40% paleo-European I1+I2, 30% Indo-European R1a (from the intermixed "White Croats" who went south) and 15% R1b (from the pre-Roman Celtic invasions)

" From the I2 subclade, the most prevailing is I2a1 (I-P37.2) i.e. its subclade I2a1b-M423 which is typical of the South Slavic populations of south-eastern Europe, being highest in Bosnia-Herzegovina (>50%)"

More interesting stuff:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbinum

If Serbs and Croats were originally from Iran, what's with this city that was attested to the second century, centuries before the Slavs+Serbs+Croats purportedly went south for the first time?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin...-Slavic_theory

https://youtu.be/PlCpvL13zpI

https://youtu.be/dW6WvZE-RYA

If you read all this you'll quickly come to realize that R1a was never originally a Slavic patrilineal line, but was rather influenced by the Balkan Slavs and adopted the language. Those R1a that went southeast to invade India were no different from their tyrannic and warlike R1b brethren.

[Cumansky]

If you read all this you'll quickly come to realize that R1a was never originally a Slavic patrilineal line, but was rather influenced by the Balkan Slavs and adopted the language. Those R1a that went southeast to invade India were no different from their tyrannic and warlike R1b brethren.

What do you mean the parts I bolded? I don't understand..

[Cumansky]

These Vlachs settled "White Croatia" few centuries after but by then land belong to Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth.

"The early 16th-century Moldo-Russian Chronicle, which contains the most detailed description of the foundation of Moldavia, described Dragoș as one of the "Romans" who had received estates in Maramureș from "King Vladislav of Hungary". According to the chronicle, the king invited the "Romans" to fight against the Tatars and settled them in Maramureș after their victory over the invaders."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Dragoș

[Voyt]

What do you mean the parts I bolded? I don't understand..

What I mean is that the proto-Slavic language was closest to modern Serbo-Croatian. If you look at Polish today you can see that its underlying phonemes are closer to Germanic. Russian is closer to what proto-Slavic would sound like, but it still contains some remnants of that Celto-Germanic way of gutteral and rough speaking. The major Russian city Moskva was originally a Finnish name, which suggests that the people there were originally Finno-Ugric, until R1a people took them over and intermixed with them. Which modern Slavic country is closest to Serbo-Croatian language? Well it's Slovakia, which isn't a surprise because that's the closest nation to "White Croatia".

[Cumansky]

What I mean is that the proto-Slavic language was closest to modern Serbo-Croatian. If you look at Polish today you can see that its underlying phonemes are closer to Germanic. Russian is closer to what proto-Slavic would sound like, but it still contains some remnants of that Celto-Germanic way of gutteral and rough speaking. The major Russian city Moskva was originally a Finnish name, which suggests that the people there were originally Finno-Ugric, until R1a people took them over and intermixed with them. Which modern Slavic country is closest to Serbo-Croatian language? Well it's Slovakia, which isn't a surprise because that's the closest nation to "White Croatia".

Serbo Croat language heavy Turkish cuz.

[Dick]

What I mean is that the proto-Slavic language was closest to modern Serbo-Croatian. If you look at Polish today you can see that its underlying phonemes are closer to Germanic. Russian is closer to what proto-Slavic would sound like, but it still contains some remnants of that Celto-Germanic way of gutteral and rough speaking. The major Russian city Moskva was originally a Finnish name, which suggests that the people there were originally Finno-Ugric, until R1a people took them over and intermixed with them. Which modern Slavic country is closest to Serbo-Croatian language? Well it's Slovakia, which isn't a surprise because that's the closest nation to "White Croatia".

Bulgarian is probably closest to proto-Slavic and I'm being very unbiased. Northern Slavic languages have zero to do with Celto-Germanic and are the worst sounding. I'd rather listen to fingernails scraping a chalkboard.