|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 2:35:07 GMT -5
^Seems more Oceanic than Indian, perhaps diaspora Serbs from Australia? lmao
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 13, 2011 2:55:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 3:48:51 GMT -5
as for I2a2, it is a mistery where to place it and to what tribe(s) is it related... its high variance above Black sea (see figure bellow) strongly indicates that it should be placed in area above Black sea, where at that time we find Sarmatae tribes... alternatively, strong variance of I2a2 above Black sea reflects later settlement of Goths around that area... it could also reflect people assimilated by Goths and/or Sarmatians...alternatively spread of I2a2 in Balkans may reflect proposed Sarmatian origin of Serbs and Croats...
tribe named Serbi is part of Asiatic Sarmatia in Caucasus imediatelly northeast of Alani tribeOsetians who are iranian speaking group of Caucasus, and considered to origin from Alans, do have in their northern towns Ardon and Digora respectively 32% and 13% of haplogroup I www.eva.mpg.de/genetics/pdf/N....AnHG.2004.pdf such local peaks indicate assimilated neighbouring population living north of them... that tribe could have easily been Sarmatian Serbi that were probably speaking similar or more likely same iranian language as all Sarmatians did... Hehe Exactly what I've been talking about
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 4:16:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Jan 13, 2011 6:25:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Jan 13, 2011 6:29:43 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_populationYou are up to your old tricks again hey. Linking articles that are not exactly relevant and then pretending that they concur with your point of view.
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Jan 13, 2011 6:31:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 7:25:52 GMT -5
^Arso if there's one thing I know, it's that you know what you're talking about! Samo naprijed brate
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 13, 2011 8:40:14 GMT -5
Its worth of mention that all of I haplogroups are native in Europe. Also G2a has probably to do with Alans, and another possibility is that N & Q could been carried by Magyars
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 8:45:57 GMT -5
^I is at 34% in Iran, and present among the Sarban tribe in Afghanistan
Long live Sarmatia
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 13, 2011 9:30:12 GMT -5
Interesting, so far I found just this on Iranians:
Iranians (North Iran) R1b 15.2% R1a 6.1% I 0.0% E1b1b 0.0% E1b1a 0.0% J 33.3% G2 15.2% N 6.1% T 0.0% L 3.0%
Iranians (South Iran) R1b 6.0% R1a 16.2% I 0.0% E1b1b 5.1% E1b1a 1.7% J 35.0% G2 12.8% N 0.9% T 3.4% L 6.0%
There are some gaps but research was done some 5 years ago or so, but anyway there is not enough gap for 34% of I, maybe just 5-10%. Still quite non-plausible to claim the connection
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 9:58:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ulf on Jan 13, 2011 10:23:53 GMT -5
Such a shame that our morons couldn't do professional research(or even better a research at all). These folks made a region-city based research in order to determine better which groups are present and where.
Anyway back to the point. It occurs the its really small part of total Iranian population, much like we have total sample of haplogroup J, which indicates that it was far more recent date.
I've checked at Eupedia, Iranians don't have anything more then other people in the region (3-5% thought the Arabian peninsula) of the already mentioned haplogroup
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 13, 2011 10:54:16 GMT -5
^Tehran's by far the largest city in Iran, and is a mix of Persians mostly northern Iran...so i'd say its decently representative
You must also remember, that southern/eastern Iran was much more affected by the Arab conquest and had it's genetic makeup changed accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 13, 2011 13:05:22 GMT -5
I2 map This confirms my idea that this is about Illyrians and Thracians and it is an additional Greek type (I would also add now danubian proto-Hellenic Hyperboreans). Reasons why I say that? 1) Southern Italian Adriatic coast was populated by Messapians who are from Dalmatia and the area has this genetic influence. 2) Highest concentrations are in FYROM and Dalmatia/Hercegovina (Illyrians) and Moldova/Ukraine ( Thracians + Vlachs+Greek colonists) while very very weak presence in North Caucasus (Sarmatian area) 3) Again noticeable presence in overall Greece and western Turkey. 4) Noticeable presence in former Armenian parts of eastern Turkey (Armenians are of Phrygian origin who are in Turn Thracian Brygians from area of today's FYROM) 5) Additional thing to consider is Danubian factor. Danubians are what appears to be proto-Hellenes ( Hyperboreans). Slavs are of neo-danubian type which is a stabilized blend between Hyperborean Danubians and Ladogans. Ladogans live in Baltic sea /Ural mountains proximity. I2 decreases substantially as it approaches Baltic sea and Urals (where Sarmatians also lived) Thracians Vlachs Hyperboreans This puts this to rest and eliminates conclusively Sarmatians which would have been a tiny ruling minority among the Slavs to begin with concerning the invading Slavs.
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Jan 13, 2011 13:11:39 GMT -5
Hyperboreans "proto-hellenes"? lol, Aadmin seems to make chit up along.
I think I should have voted him in as one of the biggest quacks of the forum in the older topic.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 13, 2011 13:44:17 GMT -5
To put a final nail in this coffin lets concentrate on this link www.cmj.hr/2005/46/4/16100752.htm which is about Genetics in Croatia with clear maps. Croatia Genetics en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IapydesR1a follows Slavs perfectly in Europe. Ossetians are 42.6% R1b1b (dominant in western Europe), 34% J (Dominant in south Arabia) , 6.4% E1b (Greeks had colonies as close as Georgian coast) and 2.1% R1a (Slavs) according to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_European_populations . Nothing about even having I2a much less about I2a being their type and this is where Sarmatians Alans (including Serboi and Haruvati) came from.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 13, 2011 13:47:59 GMT -5
Well something, anything, is written about them same way how something, anything, is written about anyone in the past unless you are of course Albs and you appear like a magical trick (out of no-where) in 1200s. ;D
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku on Jan 13, 2011 14:06:42 GMT -5
Aadmin, Im not going to fall into your silly games. Lets just say you have a lot to learn, a lot. Its too bad that you are already too old. Beginning with that statement above. Learn some logical fallacies: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring. Your about the biggest lunatic of the forum. Not only do you not seem to have the most remote possible concept of a "life", but your one of the most pseudo-intellectuals that the internet can produce. Your not a geneticist, your not a historian, your not anything to do with the world of science. Your a lowlife webmaster of a fledgling forum. You, most likely, have no real formal education but rely on the weakest form of it: wikipedia. Please go on with your self-gratifying nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 13, 2011 14:21:17 GMT -5
I am just discussing and I do not have to be a geneticist or an expert historian or a scientist or even an intellectual to make a connection via mere observation between certain genes in their geographic distribution (of course taking their age as a factor) and certain nations in the past.
Wikipedia is actually posted by the people themselves (versus potentially cemented propaganda coming from whatever source) and anyone can alter whatever content if they find it inaccurate and as long as sources are posted which they are my obviously book smart 'friend' and hyper emotional one at that. I am not looking to interact with you nor do I find you interesting to be honest (it is not like I am seeking you out in whatever forum or something else you might have created on the net). I am merely responding to something that was addressed to what I wrote.
Your negative emotions are stemming from realization that Balkans is firmly a Hellenic ground from east to west and from north to south and you come from a nation is overwhelmingly Hellenic even by genetic output in terms of origin.
You seem to have some psychological issues since only someone with those would insult someone out of blue unprovoked (kind of like a rabid dog foaming at the mouth).
It is not easy child. I understand.
|
|