donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Jan 12, 2011 12:30:43 GMT -5
;D ;D It corroborates what we've said all along, that the men of Brda are just Slavicized Albs
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 12, 2011 12:38:38 GMT -5
They do not add up to 100% but neither do they add up to 100% in many of the populations listed bellow en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_European_populations------ How can smaller population impose language on a larger population?You guys are way too emotional and unable to see what really happened here. Byzantines were fighting wars of survival in Anatolia against first Persians ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine%E2%80%93Sassanid_Wars#Climax ) and then shortly afterwords Arabs ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine-Arab_Wars#Opening_conflicts ) . This is used by Slavs and Turkics (Bulgars, Avars etc) who attack Balkans provinces of which many are left undefended (being that Byzantines were at their weakest). By this time the Persians had conquered Mesopotamia and the Caucasus, and in 611 they overran Syria and entered Anatolia. A major counter-attack led by Heraclius two years later was decisively defeated outside Antioch by Shahrbaraz and Shahin and the Roman position collapsed; the Persians devastated parts of Asia Minor, and captured Chalcedon on the Bosporus.[61] Over the following decade the Persians were able to conquer Palestine and Egypt (by mid-621 the whole province was in their hands[62]) and to devastate Anatolia,[63] while the Avars and Slavs took advantage of the situation to overrun the Balkans, bringing the Roman Empire to the brink of destruction.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine%E2%80%93Sassanid_Wars#ClimaxThe withdrawal of large numbers of troops from the Balkans to combat the Persians and then the Arabs in the east opened the door for the gradual southward expansion of Slavic peoples into the peninsula, and, as in Anatolia, many cities shrank to small fortified settlements.[52] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire#Heraclian_dynasty--------- Interaction with the Balkan population
Prior to the advent of Roman rule, a number of native or autochthonous populations had lived in the Balkans since ancient times. There were, of course, the Greeks south of the Jireček line. To the north, there were Illyrians in the western portion (Illyricum), Thracians in Thrace (modern Bulgaria and eastern Macedonia), and Dacians in Moesia (northern Bulgaria and northeastern Serbia) and Dacia (modern Romania). They were mainly tribalistic and generally lacked awareness of any greater ethno-political affiliations. Over the classical ages, they were at times invaded, conquered and influenced by Celts, Greeks and Romans. Roman influence, however, was limited to the cities, which were concentrated along the Dalmatian coast, in Greece, and a few scattered cities inside the Balkan interior particularly along the river Danube (Sirmium, Belgrade, Niš). Roman citizens from throughout the empire settled in these cities and in the adjacent countryside. The vast hinterland was still populated by indigenous peoples who likely retained their own tribalistic character.[10]
Following the fall of Rome and numerous barbarian raids, the population in the Balkans dropped, as did commerce and general standards of living. Many people were killed, or taken prisoner by invaders. This demographic decline was particularly attributed to a drop in the number of indigenous peasants living in the rural countryside. They were the most vulnerable to raids and were also hardest hit by the financial crises that plagued the falling empire. However, the Balkans were not desolate. Only certain areas tended to be affected by the raids (lands around major land routes). People sought refuge inside fortified cities, whilst others fled to remote mountains and forests, joining their non-Romanized kin and adopting a transhumant pastoral lifestyle. The larger cities were able to persevere, even flourish, through the hard times. Archaeological evidence suggests that the culture in the cities changed whereby Roman-styled forums and large public buildings were abandoned and cities were modified (i.e. built on top of hills or cliff-tops and fortified by walls). The centerpiece of such cities was the church. This transformation from a Roman culture to a Byzantine one was paralleled by a rise of a new ruling class: the old land-owning aristocracy gave way to rule by military elites and the clergy.[12]
In addition to the autochthons, there were remnants of previous invaders such as "Huns" and various Germanic peoples when the Slavs arrived. Sarmatian tribes (such as the Iazyges) are recorded to have still lived in the Banat region of the Danube.[10]
As the Slavs spread south into the Balkans, they interacted with the numerous peoples and cultures. Since their lifestyle revolved around agriculture, they preferentially settled rural lands along the major highway networks which they moved along. Whilst they could not take the larger fortified towns, they looted the countryside and captured many prisoners. In his Strategikon, Pseudo-Maurice noted that it was commonplace for Slavs to accept newly acquired prisoners into their ranks. Despite Byzantine accounts of "pillaging" and "looting", it is possible that many indigenous peoples voluntarily assimilated with the Slavs. The Slavs lacked an organised, centrally ruled organisation which actually hastened the process of willful Slavicisation. The strongest evidence for such a co-existence is from archaeological remains along the Danube and Dacia known as the Ipoteşti-Cândeşti culture. Here, the villages dating back to the 6th century represent a continuity with the earlier Slavic Pen'kovka culture; modified by admixture with Daco-Getic, Daco-Roman and/or Byzantine elements within the same village. Such interactions awarded the pre-Slavic populace protection within the ranks of a dominant, new tribe. In return, they contributed to the genetic and cultural development the South Slavs. This phenomenon ultimately led to an exchange of various loan-words. For example, the Slavic name for "Greeks", Grci, is derived from the Latin Graecus presumably encountered through the local Romanised populace. Conversely, the Vlachs borrowed many Slavic words, especially pertaining to agricultural terms. Whether any of the original Thracian or Illyrian culture and language remained by the time Slavs arrived is a matter of debate. It is a difficult issue to analyse because of the overriding Greek and Roman influence in the region.
Over time, more and more of the Latin-speaking natives (generally referred to as Vlachs) were assimilated (such that, in the western Balkans, Vlach came be a socio-occupational term rather than ethnic term.[13] The Romance speakers within the fortified Dalmatian cities managed to retain their culture and language for a longer time, Dalmatian was spoken until the high Middle Ages. However, they too were eventually assimilated into the body of Slavs. In contrast, the Romano-Dacians in Wallachia managed to maintain their Latin-based language, despite much Slavic influence. After centuries of peaceful co-existence, the groups fused to form the Romanians. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Slavs#Interaction_with_the_Balkan_population
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 12, 2011 12:52:44 GMT -5
;D ;D It corroborates what we've said all along, that the men of Brda are just Slavicized Albs
It is a type that originated (~ 4500 years ago) in Peloponnese Greece (higher percentage then in Kosovo) and was spread by Greeks so it proves Albs are Greeks as I stated many times. ( thats cool my Hellenic brother in denial, I will keep that between us) ;D ;D ;D What is life if not to dance (Zorba) OPAAAA lolwww.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26152
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Jan 12, 2011 17:48:29 GMT -5
;D ;D It corroborates what we've said all along, that the men of Brda are just Slavicized Albs You could be wrong, you could be right. Clearly Montenegro as a whole does not pull more towards Albos though. Using your same logic though it's just as easy to claim a large amount of Albanians as slavs, and that's just what has been happening. I keep thinking iGINEA may actually be not far off the money.
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Jan 12, 2011 17:50:00 GMT -5
Admin the figures you posted do not add up to 100%. They add up to 82.2%. Amateur dude. I2a2 - 29.2% E1b1b - 27% R1b - 9.4% R1a - 7.4% J2a - 4.7% J2b - 4.5% Are you going to try and fix this? It's hardly worth taking seriously when nearly 20% is missing.
|
|
|
Post by Username on Jan 12, 2011 21:28:42 GMT -5
I2 is not a 'gene'
Why are you using outdated, unscientific terms shunned by modern day geneticists? (i.e. Dinaroids, Armenoids).
Just a few things that I caught in your posts that are load of baloney. Clearly, you shouldnt even be talking about the subject.
My bet is that those numbers are from different sources; hence why they're not adding up to 100%. No one knows the exact composition of Y-DNA haplogroups in Montenegrin men (it would be too costly to do).
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 13, 2011 0:18:30 GMT -5
Y-DNA Haplogroups Serbia Montenegro I1 7.8% 6.2% I2b1 1.67% 1.73% I2a2 38.5% 29.2% E1b1b 17.3% 27.0% R1a 14.5% 7.4% R1b 4.5% 9.4% J1 0.6% 0.5% J2a 3.3% 4.7% J2b 1.7% 4.5% G2a 2.2% 2.5% N 3.3% 1.5% Q 1.7% 2.0% H 2.2% 1.5% L 0.6% 1.2% source: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.21235/suppinfo
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 13, 2011 0:30:39 GMT -5
All of the I haplogroups probably have nothing to do with following nations: Greeks, Illyrians, Thracians and Sarmatians. I haplogroup is common in some populations of East, West, but mostly in all South Slavs and Germanics.
E1b1b is found in bigger numbers(over 25%) among following European population: Albanians, Greeks, South Italians, and as it seems Montenegrins.
R1a found in almost all Eastern European countries in big number(I read somewhere its very present among Croats, Slovenians and south Macedonians and North Greeks all about 35%)
R1b - .... Western European countries
G2a - population of Caucasus
N - Baltic countries
Q, H, L - found mostly in Asia
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 13, 2011 0:41:36 GMT -5
My theory...
E1b1b, along with J populates Balkan in it earliest phase creating early Greek culture in Balkan, and early Roman culture in Italy.
Celts brought R1b culture, and some small part of R1a was brought by possibly these people. Also Romans had lot of subjugated Celts in their armies so its another possibility.
Gothic invasions brought various I types.
Hunnic & Avaric invasions brought Q,H,L
Slavic invasions brought the rest of R1a & N
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 13, 2011 1:04:33 GMT -5
Also some of I haplogroup could be brought by Celts and Slavs as well, but to a lesser degree
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 1:19:12 GMT -5
Haplogroup, w/e. Sure they might be old however they still stand as quite accurate, matching up with the haplogroups quite well. So buzz off, jerk.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 13, 2011 1:57:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 13, 2011 2:00:05 GMT -5
Simplified Summary for Montenegro
1-Greeks.............................38.4% 2-Dinaric natives?................29.2% 3-Celts (Romans?)..............9.4% 4-Germanics.......................7.93% 5-Slavs................................7.4% 6-Anatolians/Arabs.............3% 7-'Gypsies'/Indians..............2.7% 8-Turkics.............................2% 9-Uralics.............................1.5% ---------------------------- 1,2,3 are pre-slavic populations and they compose 77% (~4/5) (Slavs, Germans, Turkics and Uralics came well before Ottomans)
Simplified Summary for Serbia 1-Dinaric natives?................38.5% 2-Greeks.............................22.3% 3-Slavs................................14.5% 4-Germanics.......................9.47% 5-Celts (Romans?)..............4.5% 6-Uralics.............................3.3% 7-Anatolians/Arabs.............2.8% 8-'Gypsies'/Indians..............2.8% 9-Turkics.............................1.7%
1,2,3 are pre-slavic populations and they compose 65.3% (~2/3) (Slavs, Germans, Turkics and Uralics came well before Ottomans)
|
|
|
Post by Username on Jan 13, 2011 2:05:43 GMT -5
Haplogroup, w/e. Sure they might be old however they still stand as quite accurate, matching up with the haplogroups quite well. So buzz off, jerk. Well let's further put a dent in your silly theories. Physical characteristics are carried on autosomal DNA (and NOT Y-DNA, which is what those haplogroups are all about). You can't attribute physical characteristics to Y-DNA. While genes are carried down from father to son, physical characteristics are a result of the random mixture of BOTH the mother's and father's genes, and if you look at the composition of mitochondrial haplogroups in Europe, you'll see that they're evenly spread throughout Europe... and after thousands and thousands of years of intermixing between different groups, a person's physical characteristics are all about luck... So there is no common look that a man carrying Y-DNA haplogroup I2a2 may have. They might look like someone from Scandinavia - blonde hair and blue eyes, or they might have darker skin, hair and eyes. I think you're seeing what you want to believe. If Balkanic peoples happen to look more like people from the Middle East, that may be more a result of geography than anything else... assuming that they're related peoples because of it is underestimating the importance of cause and effect. Bottom line is that you're jumping to conclusions, and it's really not THAT simple. P.S. the presence of sub clades of R1b is much higher in Asia and Africa (specifically Chad and Cameroon I believe), than the presence of the sub clades of I (the same is true for R1a). So by your logic, Western Europeans should "look" like Middle Easterners and people from Chad and Cameroon.. is that really the case?
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 2:22:11 GMT -5
Admin what about K in Serbia? I read someplace it was at about 7%
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 13, 2011 2:28:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 2:29:01 GMT -5
Username - I completely agree with you, however tell me is this luck Just where it so happens to be the most Dinarics. No, it isn't.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 2:30:46 GMT -5
www.jogg.info/41/Wiik.pdfTest from 2005, it has Serbs down for 7.4%, the highest of all Balkan peoples (Montenegrins weren't done in the test it seems).
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 13, 2011 2:31:11 GMT -5
I see what you are talking about about K (seems also Indian) K* Important in Indigenous Australians from Arnhem Land=30%, Great Sandy Desert=17%[4] and other parts of Australia=42%.[5] High frequency in micronesians from Kapingamarangi=67% and Majuro=64%.[6] In Melanesia 21%,[7] specially in Vanuatu=58%. In Filipinos=45%.[8] In Northeast India=8.3%.[9] In Europe found in Macedonians=1.3% ; Serbians=7.1 , Croatians=0.9 and Herzegovinians=2.8[10] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_K_%28Y-DNA%29
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 13, 2011 2:33:11 GMT -5
Regarding I2 Moldova has 20-30 percent and Herzegovina has over 60%.
I2 looks more and more like it is an additional Greek type.
Is covers mainly Illyrians (Hellenophones) and perhaps Thracian (Hellenophones) as well as Dacian (Dacians being branch of Thracians). It mainly covers Illyria (hellenophones), Thrace (hellenophones) and Dacia.
It also covers obviously hellenophone northern Greece which borders there areas and parts of Anatolia (also formely Hellenophone areas) which gravitate towards Thrace.
Moldavia is a Vlach region like Romania and it received massive influx of Balkan Latinophone Vlachs (often from central Balkans) which explains the genetic similarity in percentage frequency between central Balkans (ex. FYROM) and Moldova.
|
|