# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  Illyria

## Elias2

Zajaz the stage is yours.

----------


## Zajaz

Thanks Elias for creating this topic, which I guess has many things to be exposed. 

To start off, the maps you brought up have a primary flaw. The southern boundary does not fit at all with the ancient descriptions. Surprisingly it ignore that Epirus had a considerable Illyrian element which is emphasized by every serious historian. The boundaries drew by the designer of map are pretty erroneous since it gives to Hellas a wide territory in the contrary with the historical evidences. 




> Upper Macedonia (Greek: Ἄνω Μακεδονία, Ánō Makedonía) is a geographical and tribal term to describe the regions that became part of the kingdom of Macedon in the early 4th century BC. From that date, its inhabitants were politically equal to Lower Macedonians. Upper Macedonia was divided in the regions of Elimeia, Eordea, Orestis, Lynkestis, Pelagonia and Deuriopus.
> *Hecataeus and Strabo identified these mountain Macedonia kingdoms as of Epirote stock.* Two of the most important Hellenistic dynasties originated from Upper Macedonia: Lagids from Eordea and Seleucids from Orestis.
> *Some names of Upper Macedonians look not apparently Greek (Arrhabaios, Arrhidaios, Derdas, Sabattaras), and some scholars such as Eugene N. Borza argue that the inhabitants of Upper Macedonia retained many of the supposedly non-Hellenic original Macedonian names later lost among Lower Macedonians.* Others argue these names may be Hellenic although many do not yet have clear Hellenic etymologies, *while others argue that the names were borrowed from Thracians and/or Illyrians.*.





> Many tumuli (burial mounds) containing Illyrian objects made of bronze and iron were discovered at Glasinac (Bosnia), Koman (Albania), and other parts of southeastern Europe. *At the height of their expansion the Illyrians extended their frontiers from the Danube River to the Gulf of Ambracia and from the Adriatic Sea to the Shar Mountains.*
> 
> The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, Volume 1, 1987, pg. 212


In addition with these evidences the following maps seems to be more plausible:





Now I shall confirm the Illyricity of some 'contested' tribes which does not exist any firm consensus between scholars. Who were the Peaonians?




> Peonians
> 
> *Another illyrian community that in its political development reached a higher degree of political organization, were the Peonians.* They inhabited the region of today's southern (In addition: Rep.)Macedonia (upper 'Vardar', Stobi and 'Crna Rijeka'), but its borders were changing through a longer period of time. On the east towards the Thracians the border went with the river 'Mesta' from its mouth to its source 'Arda', and from there towards 'Krdjolsko' lake and further towards north. Accoring to sources from some writers (Strabon, VI, 331, 11; 'Plinije'(=Plinius?), IV, 35; 'Livije'(=Livius?), XL, 33, 14), it can be concluded that in its earlier era that their area covered much wider area, including here the parts of northern Greece, on the expense of some of the local communities there. They resided in also Halkidiki. 
> 
> That the Peonians were belonging to a community of older and more important Balkan peoples that were politically and culturally were much more advanced from other Balkan communities , it can be witnessed by the fact that they are mentioned by Homer as participants of the Trojan war, were they were fighting on the side of Trojans ( ILL. XVII , 350). During Philip II , Peonians recognized Macedonian rule ('Diod.' XVI , 4). After his death they incited rebellion and Alexander had to stop it.
> 
> Peonians being direct neighbour of the Greeks maintained close trade religions and as a result fell early under their cultural influence. Thanks to that they were among the first Illyrian communities to have stepped towards civilisational events. Close relations with Greece is confirmed by data that states that certain Peonian rulers were granted honored citizenship rights ('proksenija'='proxenia'?) by some Greek states. That was given in order to thank them for certain services (assistance in wheat, monetarily, military aid and similar). Such relations were especially strong with Athens, which in its own foreign politics and relations with Macedonia was frequently relying on connections with Illyrian and Thracian kings.
> 
> Original sources tell us of names of three peonian kings. At the year of 357. B.C. the throne was occupied by 'Agis'. His heir was 'Likpej' (='Likipeas'?) , and at the year of 306. B.C. on the throne was king 'Audoleont' (='Autoleantos'). His son was 'Ariston' , while 'Dropion' was contemporary of Macedonian king 'Demetrije'(='Demetrius'?) II. 4 
> ...

----------


## Zajaz

The Illyrian vestiges have also been detected in the north of Greece i.e Acarnania and Aetolia. This is somehow implied by Thucydides. He wrote as well:




> «τὸ γὰρ ἔθνος μέγα μὲν εἶναι τὸ τῶν Αἰτωλῶν καὶ μάχιμον, οἰκοῦν δὲ κατὰ κώμας ἀτειχίστους, καὶ ταύτας διὰ πολλοῦ, καὶ σκευῇ ψιλῇ χρώμενον οὐ χαλεπὸν ἀπέφαινον, πρὶν ξυμβοηθῆσαι, καταστραφῆναι. ἐπιχειρεῖν δ᾿ ἐκέλευον πρῶτον μὲν Ἀποδωτοῖς, ἔπειτα δὲ Ὀφιονεῦσι καὶ μετὰ τούτους *Εὐρυτᾶσιν*, ὅπερ μέγιστον μέρος ἐστὶ τῶν Αἰτωλῶν, *ἀγνωστότατοι δὲ γλῶσσαν* καὶ ὠμοφάγοι εἰσίν, ὡς λέγονται» (ΘΟΥΚΥΔΙΔΗΣ III.94)
> 
> III,94: The Aetolian nation, although numerous and warlike, yet dwelt in un-walled villages scattered far apart, and had nothing but light armor, and might, according to the Messenians, be subdued without much difficulty before succors could arrive. The plan which they recommended was to attack first the Apodotians, next the Ophionians, and after these *the Eurytanians, who are the largest tribe in Aetolia, and speak, as is said, a language exceedingly difficult to understand, and eat their flesh raw.*


The 'Barbarians' to which Thucydides is referring are beyond any doubt, Illyrians. 




> Aetolia (in the Roman sense of the name) had not been greatly affected by Hellenic civilization when the Romans conquered it. Five Aetolian cities, evidently Hellenic and distinguished, figure in Homer. *But Thucydides and the Greeks of the classical age regarded the Aetolians as barbaric.* […] They extended their rule over tribes to the north whom the Greeks of the great age looked upon as savages. *In the pages of Livy, Philip V of Macedon is made to admit the Hellenic character of some Aetolians, but to deny that the greater part of those who bore the name were Greeks. The Aetolians were natural enemies of the more civilized Greek peoples…*
> 
> The Municipalities of the Roman Empire, p. 412


Even the renowned Roman historian, Livy asserts that Aetolians aren't genuine Greeks:




> This pretentious harangue called up Aristaenus, the captain-general of the Achaean League. "I pray," he began, "that Jupiter Optimus Maximus and Queen Juno, the tutelary deities of Argos, may never allow that city to be a bone of contention between the tyrant of Lacedaemon and the robbers of *Aetolia*, or suffer more after you have recovered it than it did when he captured it. No intervening sea protects us from these brigands. What, then, will be our fate, T. Quinctius, if they make a stronghold for themselves in the very heart of Greece? *They have nothing Greek about them but the language,* any more than they have anything human about them but the form and appearance of men; their customs and rites are more horrid than those of any barbarians, nay, even than those of savage beasts. We ask you therefore, Romans, to rescue Argos from Nabis and settle the affairs of Greece in such a way that you may leave this country at peace and security even against the robber practices of the Aetolians." (44, 24)


The Illyrian vestiges have also been detected in the north of Greece i.e Acarnania and Aetolia. This is somehow implied by Thucydides. He wrote as well:




> «τὸ γὰρ ἔθνος μέγα μὲν εἶναι τὸ τῶν Αἰτωλῶν καὶ μάχιμον, οἰκοῦν δὲ κατὰ κώμας ἀτειχίστους, καὶ ταύτας διὰ πολλοῦ, καὶ σκευῇ ψιλῇ χρώμενον οὐ χαλεπὸν ἀπέφαινον, πρὶν ξυμβοηθῆσαι, καταστραφῆναι. ἐπιχειρεῖν δ᾿ ἐκέλευον πρῶτον μὲν Ἀποδωτοῖς, ἔπειτα δὲ Ὀφιονεῦσι καὶ μετὰ τούτους *Εὐρυτᾶσιν*, ὅπερ μέγιστον μέρος ἐστὶ τῶν Αἰτωλῶν, *ἀγνωστότατοι δὲ γλῶσσαν* καὶ ὠμοφάγοι εἰσίν, ὡς λέγονται» (ΘΟΥΚΥΔΙΔΗΣ III.94)
> 
> III,94: The Aetolian nation, although numerous and warlike, yet dwelt in un-walled villages scattered far apart, and had nothing but light armor, and might, according to the Messenians, be subdued without much difficulty before succors could arrive. The plan which they recommended was to attack first the Apodotians, next the Ophionians, and after these *the Eurytanians, who are the largest tribe in Aetolia, and speak, as is said, a language exceedingly difficult to understand, and eat their flesh raw.*


The 'Barbarians' to which Thucydides is referring are beyond any doubt, Illyrians. 




> Aetolia (in the Roman sense of the name) had not been greatly affected by Hellenic civilization when the Romans conquered it. Five Aetolian cities, evidently Hellenic and distinguished, figure in Homer. *But Thucydides and the Greeks of the classical age regarded the Aetolians as barbaric.* […] They extended their rule over tribes to the north whom the Greeks of the great age looked upon as savages. *In the pages of Livy, Philip V of Macedon is made to admit the Hellenic character of some Aetolians, but to deny that the greater part of those who bore the name were Greeks. The Aetolians were natural enemies of the more civilized Greek peoples…*
> 
> The Municipalities of the Roman Empire, p. 412


Even the renowned Roman historian, Livy asserts that Aetolians aren't genuine Greeks:




> This pretentious harangue called up Aristaenus, the captain-general of the Achaean League. "I pray," he began, "that Jupiter Optimus Maximus and Queen Juno, the tutelary deities of Argos, may never allow that city to be a bone of contention between the tyrant of Lacedaemon and the robbers of *Aetolia*, or suffer more after you have recovered it than it did when he captured it. No intervening sea protects us from these brigands. What, then, will be our fate, T. Quinctius, if they make a stronghold for themselves in the very heart of Greece? *They have nothing Greek about them but the language,* any more than they have anything human about them but the form and appearance of men; their customs and rites are more horrid than those of any barbarians, nay, even than those of savage beasts. We ask you therefore, Romans, to rescue Argos from Nabis and settle the affairs of Greece in such a way that you may leave this country at peace and security even against the robber practices of the Aetolians." (44, 24)


I'm pretty sure that the above maps I've brought up are very realistic. I shall put forward an another proof in favor of my thesis (Illyrian being of Epirotes)




> Suliones were another Chaonian tribe, named by the poet Rhyanus who is quoted by Steph. Byzantinus (v. Συλίονες). Their name recall to mind the famous Suliotes during the wars for Greek independence.


I think that Suliones are the same with the Selloi, who dwell around Dodona and were ranked as barbarians by Strabo.




> Selloi were inhabitants of Epirus of ancient Greece,in a region between Dodona - where existed the oldest reported oracle - and Achelous river.


My point is that Albanian tribe of Suliotes (who use to live in southeast of Jannina) are nothing else but descendants of Συλίονες or Selloi. At least this is suggested by their tribal name: *SUL = Συλί -->Σελλοί* (who served as well as priests in Dodona sanctuary). To back up my theory I'll present to you John Lee Comstock's opinion regarding this:

----------


## how yes no 2

> Zajaz the stage is yours.


How likely is it that area of influence of Illyrians from map above is not related to spread of I2a2 on map bellow?

----------


## Zajaz

Here I've got an another anthropological map regarding southern areas of Illyria i.e Epirus. According to this map it is said that Albanians are one the oldest inhabitants in Europe:

----------


## Neander

> How likely is it that area of influence of Illyrians from map above is not related to spread of I2a2 on map bellow?


It is simple; Slavs came in the lands of Illyrians in the 7 century, therefore their haplogoup is !2a2.

Illyrian distribution in Italy was so strong that they were more then itself italics, but the percentage of I2a2 there is desperate.

----------


## how yes no 2

> Here I've got an another anthropological map regarding southern areas of Illyria i.e Epirus. According to this map it is said that Albanians are one the oldest inhabitants in Europe:


maybe you do not know where Albania and Kosovo are, but black spots are matching Montenegro and Epirus... 

this map suggest that there was continuity of old inhabitants from Montenegro to Epirus but than it was interrupted in middle by arrival of some not so old people, which would be ancestors of Albanians, as Albania is between Epirus and Montenegro....

btw. I am not convinced this map is correct...
what is the source?




> It is simple; Slavs came in the lands of Illyrians in the 7 century, therefore their haplogoup is !2a2.
> 
> Illyrian distribution in Italy was so strong that they were more then itself italics, but the percentage of I2a2 there is desperate.


yes, I believe as well that early Slavs (who are of race of Veneti) were dominantly I2a2, but that is not a prove that earlier wave of I2a2 was not already there...

as for Italy, spread of I2a along Adriatic coast on map above matches very nice colonies of Illyrians from map above it, while is mismatch for south Slavs that never settled there... isn't that indication of I2a2 component in Illyrians?




> in the land of Scythia to the westward dwells, first of all, the race of the Gepidae, surrounded by great and famous rivers. For the Tisia flows through it on the north and northwest, and on the southwest is the great Danube. On the east it is cut by the Flutausis, a swiftly eddying stream that sweeps whirling into the Ister's waters. (34) Within these rivers lies Dacia, encircled by the lofty Alps as by a crown. Near their left ridge, which inclines toward the north, and beginning at the source of the Vistula, the *populous race of the Venethi dwell, occupying a great expanse of land. Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes.* (35)


Jordanes - the origin and deeds of Goths 
http://people.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/.../jordgeti.html




> Many tribes originally thought to have been Illyrians, such as Carni, Histri and Liburni, were actually related to Veneti.[3]
> ...
> 3. ^ *Wilkes*, J. J. The Illyrians, 1992,ISBN 0-631-19807-5. Page 183: "... We may begin with the Venetic peoples, Veneti, Carni, Histri and Liburni, whose language set them apart from the rest of the Illyrians. ..." Page 81: "... " In Roman Pannonia the Latobici and Varciani who dwelt east of the Venetic Catari in the upper Sava valley were Celtic but the Colapiani of the Colapis (Kulpa) valley were Illyrians ( ..."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriatic_Veneti

----------


## Neander

> as for Italy, spread of I2a along Adriatic coast on map above matches very nice colonies of Illyrians from map above it, while is mismatch for south Slavs that never settled there... isn't that indication of I2a2 component in Illyrians?


In Italy is antoher hot spot of Ev 13, but only in Croatia, it is very low, which is proof that Slavs drove out Ev13 carriers.

In Italy, the low percentage of I2a2, is because of interchange population beween croatia and Italy during medieval.

In the times of Illyrians I2a2 was not there.

The strong presence of Illyrians in Italy, is not acfording to low and wek presence of I2a2.

Sorry but your theory is no-where.

----------


## Zajaz

> maybe you do not know where Albania and Kosovo are, but black spots are matching Montenegro and Epirus...


It doesn't seem to be interrupted at all. Anyway you can see a narrow strip (across todays Myzeqe coastal) plain matching Northern Albania and Montenegro with Epirus. 




> this map suggest that there was continuity of old inhabitants from Montenegro to Epirus


...as well as a strong continuity between historical inhabitants of Illyria with Epirus ones.




> but than it was interrupted in middle by arrival of some not so old people, *which would be ancestors of Albanians*, as Albania is between Epirus and Montenegro....


The bold underlined sentence is just a vague assumption of yours because there is no historical evidence suggesting any arrival of Albanians in their lands. The "interruption" as far as I see is caused mostly by the spreading of "Dinaric", "Nordics" and "dark Mediterraneans" as it is written in the legend of map. This is perhaps not very elaborative!? If the author of map was suggesting that the central Albania was peopled from the same race as Slaves, then he is totally wrong. The presence of Slavs isn't well attested in central Albania which is mainly a mountainous region without any fertile plain. 

In order to understand properly the above map we have to corroborate it with other available anthropological studies done by American researchers who asserted that Albanians have the highest brachycephalic index in the whole Europe. This bracycephalic zone starts variously from Switzerland (and by some evidences from Southern Bosnia) and stretches up to the Corinthian bay. 




> btw. I am not convinced this map is correct...
> what is the source?


A mate of mine emailed to me a days ago. I have to ask him for the source he brought from!

----------


## how yes no 2

> In Italy is antoher hot spot of Ev 13, but only in Croatia, it is very low, which is proof that Slavs drove out Ev13 carriers.
> In Italy, the low percentage of I2a2, is because of interchange population beween croatia and Italy during medieval.
> In the times of Illyrians I2a2 was not there.
> The strong presence of Illyrians in Italy, is not acfording to low and wek presence of I2a2.
> Sorry but your theory is no-where.


you got the good case for E-V13 as Illyrian also for Croatia as E-V13 has high variance in Croatia which indicates that once upon a time it was in high frequency there as well..

but, that still doesnot exclude I2a2 as present in area...

I am thinking of Veneti and Pannoni as source of I2a2 in Illyria and Pannonia and of Scordisci as source of it in Serbia and Pannonia...

Pannoni settled Illyria after it was emptied by Dacians (during their wars with Celtic tribes)




> I shall first describe *Illyria*, which approaches close to the Danube, and to the Alps which lie between Italy and Germany, taking their commencement from the lake in the territory of the Vindelici, Rhæti, and Helvetii.7 [2]
> The *Daci depopulated a part of this country in their wars with the Boii and Taurisci,* Keltic tribes whose chief was Critasirus. The Daci claimed the country, although it was separated from them by the river Parisus,8 which flows from the mountains to the Danube, near the Galatæ *Scordisci,* a people who *lived intermixed with the Illyrian and the Thracian tribes.* The *Illyrians were destroyed by the Daci, while the Scordisci were frequently their allies.* 
> The *rest of the country* as far as Segestica,9 and the Danube, towards the north and east, *is occupied by Pannonii,* but they extend farther in an opposite direction.


http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...r=5&highlight=

Strabo (63/64 BC – ca. AD 24) - Geographica

this *historical record clearly shows* that *Illyria was depopulated* but *not by Slavs* (as *erroneously claimed by politically motivated* ideologists of Albanian nationalism), *but by Dacians* much much before arrival of Slavs (if such arrival was ever massive)

Pannoni and Scordisci I think were I2a2 and Thracians R1a

Scordisci being mixed with Thracians and Illyrians, might be about I2a2 proto-Serbs mixed with Illyrian E-V13 and with Thracian R1a

Illyria was repopulated by Pannoni....

why I search proto-Slavs in Pannoni, Thracians and Scordisci...
because of this clue...




> After the destruction of the tower and the division of the nations, the sons of Shem occupied the eastern regions, and sons of Ham those of the south, and the sons of Japheth the western and the northern lands. Among these seventy-two nations, the *Slavic race is derived from the line of Japheth, since they are the Noricians, who are identical with the Slavs*. 
> *Over a long period the Slavs settled beside the Danube, where the Hungarian and Bulgarian lands now lie.* From *among these Slavs*, parties scattered throughout the country and were known by appropriate names, according to the places where they settled. Thus some came and settled by the river Morava, and were named Moravians, while others were called Czechs. Among these same Slavs are included the *White Croats, the Serbs, and the Carinthians.* For *when the Vlakhs attacked the Danubian Slavs, settled among them, and did them violence, the latter came and 
> made their homes by the Vistula*, and were then called Lyakhs. Of these same Lyakhs some were called Polyanians, some Lutichians, some Mazovians, and still others Pomorians. Certain Slavs settled also on the Dnipro, and were likewise called Polyanians. Still others were named Derevlians, because they lived in the forests. Some also lived between the Pripet' and the Dvina, 
> and were known as Dregovichians. Other tribes resided along the Dvina and were called Polotians on account of a small stream called the Polota, which flows into the Dvina. It was from this same stream that they were named Polotians. The Slavs also dwelt about Lake Il'men', and were known there by their characteristic name. They built a city which they called Novgorod. 
> Still others had their homes along the Desna, the Sem', and the Sula, and were called Severians. Thus the Slavic race was divided, and its language was known as Slavic


http://www.utoronto.ca/elul/English/...selections.pdf

(translation of early medieval Russian document from year 1113th that narrates about history of Slavic people...read more on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_Chronicle)

note that in time it is written Bulgaria and Hungary were neighboring states, which means this is about proto-Slavic people area around Danube from Black sea to Bohemia including parts of Serbia and Romania around Danube... this in antic people matches Thracians, Scordisci (or Serdi), and Pannoni.... 

note that also I2a2 shows spread along Danube from Black sea to Bohemia, and also spread along Carpathian mountains which is where it was pushed with advance of Roman empire...
now, if Scordisci and Pannoni were I2a2, reason I ask whether I2a2 could have been present already in Illyrians, is that in Greek mythology Scordisci and Pannoni origin from Illyrians...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrius

so, it could have been that already among Illyrians there were some I2a2 tribes...

and I find link in Venetic tribes (for whom I independently from this am sure are I2a2)...
link is that early Slavs are in historic records recorded as people who origin from populous race of Veneti




> the populous race of the Venethi dwell, occupying a great expanse of land. Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes.


http://people.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/.../jordgeti.html

----------


## how yes no 2

> The bold underlined sentence is just a vague assumption of yours because there is no historical evidence suggesting any arrival of Albanians in their lands.


nope that sentence is not vague... Albanians live between Epirus and Montenegro...discontinuity on that (probably fake) map of old people is centered between Epirus and Montengro...thus this discontinuity is due to people who settled area between Epirus and Montenegro... and these people are obviously ancestors of Albanians... what is so difficult to understand there?
once you stop thinking with your wishes and start searching for truth, life will become easier for you...

----------


## Zajaz

> thus this discontinuity is due to people who settled area between Epirus and Montenegro... and these people are obviously ancestors of Albanians... what is so difficult to understand there?


I'm really not in the mood to go in the same circles again and again. The reason why the author erroneously made an interruption may be attributed to the exaggeration of Slavic presence in central Albania. I try to be concise as much as I can: I assure you on behalf of all evidences that central Albania (as well as North Albania) were distant regions which were touched little by Slavic waves. I'm not saying that there were no Slavs in Albania but their slight presence can be attested only in some fertile plains along river valleys in Shkodra for instance or along valleys in nearby of Ohrid. That's the story of Slavs in Albania who unlike their kins in Greece, Macedonia or somewhere else couldn't extent effectively their presence because mountainous nature of Albanian hardly attract them to settled in. 




> Between 600 and 650 the main body of the immigrants occupied Illyria (see Servia: History; and Slavs). It consisted of Croats and Serbs, two groups of tribes who spoke a single language and were so closely related that the origin of the distinction between them is obscure. *The Croats settled in the western half of Illyria, the Serbs in the eastern; thus the former came gradually under the influence of Italy and Roman Catholicism, the latter under the influence of Byzantium and the Greek Church.* Hence the distinction between them became a marked difference of civilization and creed, which has always tended to keep the Illyrian Slavs politically disunited.
> 
> The Croats and Serbs rapidly absorbed most of the Latinized Illyrians. *But the wealthy and powerful city-states on the coast were strong enough to maintain their independence and their distinctively Italian character. Other Roman provincials took refuge in the mountains of the interior; these Mavrovlachi, as they were called (see Dalmatia: Population; and Vlachs), preserved their language and nationality for many centuries.* *The Illyrian tribes which had withstood the attraction of Roman civilization remained unconquered among the mountains of Albania and were never Slavonized. With these exceptions Illyria became entirely Serbo-Croatian in population, language and culture.*
> 
> http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/.../Illyria*.html


I have the honor to present to you the scientific assertions of a renowned expert on that matter:




> T*he Epirotes, like their neighbors the Toscs, have an extremely high cephalic index mean, 88,* and *there seems to be a strongly brachycephalic zone running down the western slopes of the mountain core from Albania to the Gulf of Corinth*, and perhaps beyond.
> 
> The races of Europe, Carleton Stevens, CoonGreenwood Press, 1972





> once you stop thinking with your wishes and start searching for truth, life will become easier for you...


buddy take aside jokes! I am not wishfully thinking because all of my posts up to now are very well-attached with references, books and sources.

----------


## how yes no 2

> buddy take aside jokes! I am not wishfully thinking because all of my posts up to now are very well-attached with references, books and sources.


nope, that's not really true...
your posts are mainly references to interpretations of historical facts, not to facts themselves...

when I quote Strabo or Jordanes, that is about real person who recorded real events around them...

when you quote story of Serbs and Croats assimilating Illyrians, you are quoting recent interpreter of ancient history who based his interpretation on assumpition that Illyria = place where Illyrian people lived...

but if we go back to historic sources, Strabo who lived in 1st century AD clearly indicates that Illyria was depopulated and Illyrians destroyed before that time..so, clearly Roman province of Illyria has not much to do with original Illyrians as erroneously assumed by much later interpreter of history whom you are quoting...... what he call Illyrians are in fact Veneti and Pannoni tribes... 

if both assumption that Illyrians were E-V13 (and thus ancestors of Albanians) and the interpreter of history whom you quote are correct, Croatians would have around 30% of E-V13 as e.g. Montenegro people do... they do not because either 
1) E-V13 Illyrians were cleaned up much before their arrival by Dacians as indicated by Strabo
or 
2) because E-V13 is maybe pre-Illyrian in Croatia and Illyrians are I2a2

I think option 1) is correct because ancestors of Slavs (according to Russian primary chronicle) lived along Danube and in Noricum (Adriatic Veneti?) and not in Illyria, but I do not exclude completely option 2) as I am pretty sure that ancient Veneti were I2a people, so nearby Illyrians might have been related afterall...

btw. read this opinion of mine about origin of Albanian language and why it doesnot map to few preserved Illyrian words, but instead shares part of vocabulary with Romanian

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showpos...1&postcount=35

----------


## Regulus

> In Italy is antoher hot spot of Ev 13, but only in Croatia, it is very low, which is proof that Slavs drove out Ev13 carriers.
> 
> In Italy, the low percentage of I2a2, is because of interchange population beween croatia and Italy during medieval.
> 
> In the times of Illyrians I2a2 was not there.
> 
> The strong presence of Illyrians in Italy, is not acfording to low and wek presence of I2a2.
> 
> Sorry but your theory is no-where.



I am just still a learner, but in looking at DNA questions, perhaps we should consider the quite substantial settlements of Illyrians along almost the entire Adriatic coast of Italy between the 13th and 10th centuries BCE.

They seem to have been in control of the entire heel and in some parts as far inland as the mountains.

----------


## Elias2

> My point is that Albanian tribe of Suliotes


Hmm are you saying albanians are the decendents of Illyrians? 
*The Illyrian tribes which had withstood the attraction of Roman civilization remained unconquered among the mountains of Albania and were never Slavonized. With these exceptions Illyria became entirely Serbo-Croatian in population, language and culture.*

No one escaped romanization during the roman empire. Illyria was one of the first areas to be subjected to Roman rule. Even england, one of the last roman conqured areas was well romanized when the anglo-Jutes-saxans came from denmark. I'm talking about the area of albania was under the control of Roman culture from 220BC to the 15th century when the Ottomans came, thats 1700 years. If you want to know more about the emergence of albanian ethos I think you need to look at the years during Ottoman occupation.

And on your points about the 'barbarian' label. You automatically assum that means Illyrian, why is that? 

You also didn't say anything on what it means to be Illyrian, you seem to be obsessed though in trying to make Epirots into this undifined thing, and using a political insult in ancient greece to define what it is to be Illyrian. Maybe the northern Hellenic people didn't live in as sofiticated socieities as the well established southern greeks, which would prompt southern greeks to look at them as more barbaric, but this never occured to you? Do you see what it as fault with your logic? you assume to many variables without proper primary evidence to back it up. its all just speculation based on *some, not all,* written evidence about epirots and Illyrians.

----------


## Elias2

> It is simple; Slavs came in the lands of Illyrians in the 7 century, therefore their haplogoup is !2a2.
> 
> Illyrian distribution in Italy was so strong that they were more then itself italics, but the percentage of I2a2 there is desperate.


Yet it has been discused on these forums that maybe the slavic invasion wasn't so massive as once thought do to genetic findings, so your ethnicity definition of people doesn't hold much wieght, as albanians don't have much genetically in common with the inhabitants of the old areas of Illyria, which would mean Illyrians were probably just a label that encompased peoples who lived in this set geographical area.

----------


## iapetoc

EPEIRUS IS NOT ILLYRIA

EPEIRUS is Mycenean Culture and proves are the tombs of Mycenean



as also Pseudoskyllax Geography




*EPEIROS IS NOT ILLYRIA

ILLYRIA STARTS FROM ΑΥΛΩΝ VLORE AND NORTH*  *
THE ECHELEIANS AND TAULANTI ARE THE MOST SOUTH ILLYRIANS
the tribes of Amantes and Bylliotes are Illyrian Tribes who were Hellenized at 400-200 BC but could be Albanized today

Paionians are not Illyrians but Greco-Thracians and has connection with Greek Area of Agrinion due to Endymion
Paions or SiroPAioKes are considered Thracians different from Odrysse 
their tribes like Agrianes Syntikes odomandetikes are Thracians But we find similarity with Greek King Names, that is because Thracians probably have have a link with pelasgic culture
Besides Paiones Paioples Paiakes (remember Phaiakes) in Far ancient Means nation,
Probably Pelasgic-Thracians

but Siropaiakes as Agrianes the Greek name for Sirakes could connect them with proto-Serbians cause we know that Sirakes are considered Proto Serbians

Ancient God Sirris godess of agricultural, Perso-Thracian godess (Greek Dimeter)
Sir = agrianas in Greek

In fact that is still a mystery How Agrinio and Paiones with Greek names are worshippng godes Sirris which is Mesopotamian-Persian Godess,
Probably that connection with Skudra Skodra


As Infact Greeks Name Illyria the area from Αυλον-Vlore to Λαβεατες today Budva 
Above Illyria was Επιδαυρος Φαρος and Adra sea.

The roman Named Illyria that Area Illyricum that is show in the map
Dalmatia was not Illyria for Greeks
*

----------


## Zajaz

[QUOTE=how yes no;366156]




> when I quote Strabo or Jordanes, that is about real person who recorded real events around them...
> 
> you are quoting recent interpreter of ancient history who based his interpretation on assumpition that Illyria = place where Illyrian people lived...


The reason why I chose as a reference them is because they're more recent scholars who are more familiar with the new scientific results. I can go further by citing a lot of real persons (as you would say) of Byzantine provenience who firmly asserts that Albanians are an Illyrian race. Whereas many others identified Albanians as Macedonians or Epirotes. The Turks regarded Albanians as ‘Arnauts’, Greeks as ‘Arvanites’. If ancestors of modern Albanians were of Asiatic descent (as many wish to be), the Byzantine, Turkish, Serb and Greek historians would named Albanians under the termination of any Asiatic tribe. On the contrary, the very often names to marks ancestors of us were Illyrians, Arvanites, Arnauts, specifically Epirotes and more rarely Macedonian. 




> 1. Polybius mentions a city on modern central Albania called Arbon (its peoples he called Arbanios and Arbanitai)
> 2. Pliny mentions an Illyrian tribe named Olbonenses (Pannonia)
> 3. Ptolemy the geographer recorded a city called Albanopolis (according to his coordinates it may be found near Durrës territory). He named its inhabitants as Albanoi in his chapter about Macedonia.
> 4. Stephanus of Byzantium wrote for a population called abroi from Adria Taulantii and a city in Illyria called Arbon,




I don't want to comment any further on genetics since I'm not very familiar with that field.

----------


## Zajaz

> And on your points about the 'barbarian' label. You automatically assum that means Illyrian, why is that?


Because Greeks applied frequently this term to denote both Illyrians, Macedonians, Epirotes, Thracians, etc. So if you maintain the view that 'barbarian' term had the connotation of 'backward' Greek, then you're making all Illyrians, Thracians etc as backward Greeks!!! I am pretty convinced that both of these peoples were related closely with one another. How can be explained that ancients frequently confuse them with one another. For example, one author said that X tribe is Illyrian, others says that this tribe is Epirotean. You can't figure any sharp distinction between Illyrian and Epirotes, while in other hand, Greeks themselves reckoned Epirotes as non-Greeks. 




> No one escaped romanization during the roman empire. Illyria was one of the first areas to be subjected to Roman rule. Even england, one of the last roman conqured areas was well romanized when the anglo-Jutes-saxans came from denmark. I'm talking about the area of albania was under the control of Roman culture from 220BC to the 15th century when the Ottomans came, thats 1700 years. If you want to know more about the emergence of albanian ethos I think you need to look at the years during Ottoman occupation.


Nowhere I said that Illyrians escaped completely from Romanization. Even certain parts of Albania (especially the coastal ones and fertile plains) were Romanized as many evidences proves that. But I'd like to notice the very fact that however the southern mountanious Illyrian tribes were able to withstand Romanization. So they retained their Illyrian identity into Albanian one. Check it up the following conclusion:




> *The native Illyrians and Thracians* of the occupied regions *retired into the mountains, where they remained unnoticed till the eleventh century*, *when they emerged as Albanians and Vlachs*
> 
> ETHNIC CHANGES IN THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE IN THE SEVENTH CENTURY" 
> PETER CHARANIS

----------


## Sprinkles

If R1a carriers were in the Balkans 11,5000 years ago, and the E-V13 subclade only split from an African subclade 16,000 years ago. i find it very difficult to assume that they existed there prior to the indigenous Neanderthal populations.

Since we know now that E-V13 is African, there's neanderthal admixture in European populations (closely resembling the the frequency of haplogroup R), that I is indigenous to Europe, that E is indigenous to Africa - it's retarded to say that E carriers were the oldest people of Europe. Retarded.

Anyone making this claim is a moron.

The capital of Illyria was in Stolac, Hercegovina, where I2a2 has the highest frequency in the world.



> At the delta of Neretva, there was a strong Hellenistic influence on the Illyrian tribe of Daors. Their capital was Daorson located in Ošanići near Stolac in Herzegovina, which became the main center of classical Illyrian culture. Daorson, during the 4th century BC, was surrounded by megalithic, 5 meter high stonewalls (as large as those of Mycenae in Greece), composed out of large trapeze stones blocks. Daors also made unique bronze coins and sculptures. The Illyrians even conquered Greek colonies on the Dalmatian islands. Queen Teuta was famous for having waged wars against the Romans.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrians

You Albanian retards are making your people look stupid. The same can be said for various fractions of Balkan populations, but it's obvious that Albanians take the cake.

This fictional rendition of your history is not helping your public image. It may help you, internally, as a clan. But if it does, keep it there, because once you spew it outward, your stupidity reeks to the world.

----------


## Sprinkles

> In Italy is antoher hot spot of Ev 13, but only in Croatia, it is very low, which is proof that Slavs drove out Ev13 carriers.
> 
> In Italy, the low percentage of I2a2, is because of interchange population beween croatia and Italy during medieval.
> 
> In the times of Illyrians I2a2 was not there.
> 
> The strong presence of Illyrians in Italy, is not acfording to low and wek presence of I2a2.
> 
> Sorry but your theory is no-where.


Are you the idiot who thinks E-V13 is an indigenous European haplogroup?

Are you serious? Do you know that it's an African branch. That every person with an E-V13 haplogroup had a pure black African ancestor? This is fact. There's no, maybe our ancestor was Neanderthal or some other hominid, your ancestor was black from Africa.

Europe was colonized way before E-V13 even came to existence. You were still in Africa singing your tribal songs and doing tribal dances, without any weapons or shelter. You probably lived as nomads because you weren't smart enough to build shelter.

Now shut your stupid mouth and come back to reality.

Europe was colonized way before E-V13 arrived.

Are you so dumb that you can't see this?

----------


## Sprinkles

E-V13 never made it to Croatia because of the Dinaric Alps and the difficulty in conquering or even traveling through that route. 

Did you even take an introductory course to biology?

Do you know that gene flow is hindered by geographic isolation?

******* seriously. You want to talk about evolution, population flows, etc, and you don't even know anything about biology?

----------


## Elias2

Sprinkles you don`t have to use name calling.

----------


## Elias2

> Because Greeks applied frequently this term to denote both Illyrians, Macedonians, Epirotes, Thracians, etc. So if you maintain the view that 'barbarian' term had the connotation of 'backward' Greek, then you're making all Illyrians, Thracians etc as backward Greeks!!! I am pretty convinced that both of these peoples were related closely with one another. How can be explained that ancients frequently confuse them with one another. For example, one author said that X tribe is Illyrian, others says that this tribe is Epirotean. You can't figure any sharp distinction between Illyrian and Epirotes, while in other hand, Greeks themselves reckoned Epirotes as non-Greeks.


Again, you havn`t told me what it is to be Illyrian but you claim epirots are them. You say the biggest marker is language yet the Illyrian language is still a mystery because the lack of primary evidence about it. And I`ve metnioned plenty of times now that even though some called them non-greeks others did, so stop pretending to ignore these statements because they do not suit you.

_The 5th century BC Athenian historian Thucydides describes them as "barbarians",[15] as does Strabo.[16] Other writers, such as Herodotus,[17]Dionysius of Halicarnassus[18] Pausanias[19] and Eutropius,[20] describe them as Greeks_ 

and stop pretending they did not speak a dialect of North-west Greek. I don`t say that `barbarian`only means backwards greeks, that just one of the several connitations. It also ment non-greek like you said but for you interpret it to mean Illyrian when that is just *one* of several possible definitions of the word is an assumption.

P.S. I posted an article i found about the albanian language in the albanian language thread, check it out.

----------


## Elias2

Can we please stop talking about epirus and talk about Illyria, who were they, what were they like, how did they live, ect.

----------


## Sile

IMO

- Illyrians tribes are all different to each other and had no language similarities, the illyrians where created between Eastern austria and hungaria, sometimes the pannonians of hungarian soil are know as Illyrians. written History states they invaded the balkans from the north and slowly took land to finally be stopped by the macedonians of Alexander the great times. They did not participate in alexanders Persian wars because they where not "greek" . The epirotes of northern greece and albania went to fight the Persians with Alexander. The illyrians where absorbed by celtic migrations from the alps. the celts got as far as greece. Basically by the time the Romans arrived and Queen teuta fought them, the illyrians where a minor nuisance to the Romans, it was only their piracy thats was an issue. They where R1b in majority with some G.

- The thracians if we include the Dacians, Getae and their relatives the cimmerians where the most populous, I believe they brought I2a2 into the balkans after the scythians arrived on the northern parts of the black sea. The thracians would have also had the E and J markers. ( i am usure on any R but maybe as per mr. hammer it would be L11 from modern Bulgaria) The cimmerians fled to the plains of hungaria and serbia in 700BC ( not earlier)

----------


## Bardhyl

> No. The Illyrians, thracians, Dacians were ONlY I2a; separate from Slavs. The Slavic indo-European element arrived later. As for E-v13 and J2b they are more relevant to the ancient Greco-Albanian world; never having penetrated as north as Illyria in considerable frequency. Northern Albania though, WAS within the Illyrian sphere of influence, as Slovenia was to the north. We can imagine offshoots of Illyrians would also have went to Romania, parts of Greece or Hungary as well for example; they spread around regions such as Moldova or Ukraine as well, at much lower frequencies (5-15%). Nevertheless, they radiated from the Bosnian refuge as they had already been in Europe with the other men of I before that fatal LGM took place; they did not enter Europe during the Slavic conquest era with R1a men via the Ukrainian refuge r western plains of Russia; that would be false.


Honestly i am done here you CLEARLY didnt read once i2 haplogroup the whole article on eupedia, ehich states CLEARLY that it also IS CONNECTED with the slavic invasion. ukraine 21% i2a poland and czech republic 9% and also belarus and russia has i2a and also other slavic countries.

----------


## adamo

Pannonians where simply celticized Illyrians, the Illyrians were I2a2 and the Dacians and thracians derived from them; the original and still today inhabitants of the Dalmatian coast before the arrival of Slavs and then to a lesser degree celts.

----------


## Garrick

> No, I2a is. R1a arrived more recently, via the Ukrainian refuge. Whereas I2a finds it's ultimate spread point from the Bosnian refuge.


Scientists found three key movement R1a to Balkans:

1) Recolonization from the refugium, Ukrainen (geography) link 20,000-12,000 years ago; in the Balkans in Paleolithic or early Holocene,
2) Migrations from the Pontic steppe (Kurgan culture), from 3000 BC,
3) Slavic migrations, 5th-7th centuries.

----------


## Garrick

> IMO
> 
> - Illyrians tribes are all different to each other and had no language similarities, the illyrians where created between Eastern austria and hungaria, sometimes the pannonians of hungarian soil are know as Illyrians. written History states they invaded the balkans from the north and slowly took land to finally be stopped by the macedonians of Alexander the great times. They did not participate in alexanders Persian wars because they where not "greek" . The epirotes of northern greece and albania went to fight the Persians with Alexander. The illyrians where absorbed by celtic migrations from the alps. the celts got as far as greece. Basically by the time the Romans arrived and Queen teuta fought them, the illyrians where a minor nuisance to the Romans, it was only their piracy thats was an issue. They where R1b in majority with some G.
> 
> - The thracians if we include the Dacians, Getae and their relatives the cimmerians where the most populous, I believe they brought I2a2 into the balkans after the scythians arrived on the northern parts of the black sea. The thracians would have also had the E and J markers. ( i am usure on any R but maybe as per mr. hammer it would be L11 from modern Bulgaria) The cimmerians fled to the plains of hungaria and serbia in 700BC ( not earlier)


Of course. Because Illyria and Illyricum were only geographic terms from Greeks and Romans. In these coordinates lived many tribes, with different haplogroups. In the middle Illyria probably dominant were I2a + R1a carriers.

Thracians could have R1a, I2a, E-V13 and J markers.

----------


## adamo

Doesn't matter; the I2a men didn't need to recolonize via Ukraine; they waited out the LGM in the Bosnian refuge; and I would like to see sources indicating heavy R1a movement into Europe back/before/during the R1b/ I days of moving into Europe. (I men arrived earliest).

----------


## Bardhyl

> Pannonians where simply celticized Illyrians, the Illyrians were I2a2 and the Dacians and thracians derived from them; the original and still today inhabitants of the Dalmatian coast before the arrival of Slavs and then to a lesser degree celts.


why do you ignore the fact which is CLEARLY written, it doesnt hurt you to accept what is written, i2a is also derived from slavic invasion, (source eupedia I2 haplogroup) read and your eyes will get open, i dont get it why you are not reading it....just read the article thats all, read. ALL SLAVIC COUNTRIES OF TODAY carry i2a with them all without any exception. and all with over 5% and a lot more.

----------


## adamo

Yes, thracians may have been a mix....(still think they were I2a lol) but the Illyrians proper were certainly I2a2 people, very predominantly.

----------


## adamo

Yeah well, all Eastern Europe carries small levels of I2a2 without exception pretty much. "this phenomenon is explained by "contribution to the Y chromosomes of peoples who settled in the Balkan region before the Slavic expansion to the genetic heritage of Southern Slavs.." And "several groups have determined the common occurrence of this subclade in the South Slavic-speaking populations to be the result of "pre-Slavic" paleolithic settlement in the region"

----------


## Bardhyl

> Yeah well, all Eastern Europe carries small levels of I2a2 without exception pretty much.


are you from croatia or bosnia working in italy, that would explain why you are not reading i2 haplogroup properly on eupedia....

----------


## adamo

No loll, modern distribution is not indicative of place of origin and besides; if R1a HAD in fact spread via the Ukrainian refuge/ Russian plains, wouldn't it be more frequent in Slovakia,Czech republic, Belarus (like 40-50% like R1a?) instead we see a frequency decline in general as we move slowly from Bosnia (50%) Croatia (40%) Slovenia (40%) Albania (20%) Hungary (20%) Romania (20%) etc. they way it's spread with a big blob near the Adriatic coast makes no sense if it came from Ukraine with R1a. It is indigenous to Bosnian refuge and subsequently spread at lower % from there.

----------


## Sile

> are you from croatia or bosnia working in italy, that would explain why you are not reading i2 haplogroup properly on eupedia....


I don't think he is, more likely his T marker is from central Italy coming from crete or chios, previously cyprus and the levant.

I2a arriving from the slavs of ukraine in the darkages is a different line which was in the balkans from thracian/cimmerian line...........check KN

----------


## adamo

Which part of the levant in your opinion Sile? I am y-DNA T-L299 paternal, I2a maternal father and two mtdna H's all from Italy....only a small fraction of my genome but anyways....would you believe if I said I think the Phoenicians spread T? Peaks in Cadiz on Iberia , Ibiza islans, western Sicily, northern Corsica; all Phoenician colonies.

----------


## Bardhyl

> No loll, modern distribution is not indicative of place of origin and besides; if R1a HAD in fact spread via the Ukrainian refuge/ Russian plains, wouldn't it be more frequent in Slovakia,Czech republic, Belarus (like 40-50% like R1a?) instead we see a frequency decline in general as we move slowly from Bosnia (50%) Croatia (40%) Slovenia (40%) Albania (20%) Hungary (20%) Romania (20%) etc. they way it's spread with a big blob near the Adriatic coast makes no sense if it came from Ukraine with R1a. It is indigenous to Bosnian refuge and subsequently spread at lower % from there.


but it is a fact that south slavs carry more i2a and north slavs r1a, and both slavs carry of the respective other one with a smaller percentage, i am not inventing anything, it all says on eupedia i2 haplogroup, which says that the last i2a-din came also with the south slavs. but i dont get the feeling away that you are from dalmatia working in italy. it wouldnt be a shame to you.

just read i2 haplogroup it is written very clearly. dont deny it.

----------


## adamo

Moms dad is y-DNA I2a from Tuscany believe it or not; Pisa region.

----------


## Garrick

> Doesn't matter; the I2a men didn't need to recolonize via Ukraine; they waited out the LGM in the Bosnian refuge; and I would like to see sources indicating heavy R1a movement into Europe back/before/during the R1b/ I days of moving into Europe. (I men arrived earliest).


I can agree with you that probably I carriers were first in the Balkans, maybe 25,000 years ago, maybe earlier. But they moved. 

R1a carriers came to the Balkans about 10,000 ago or more? (scientists are dealing with large differences dating back Balkanic R1a in Paleolitic or early Halocene). It is mistake that for these first Balkans R1a carriers some members of forums think that they are Slavs.

R1a carriers massively came to the Balkans about 3000 years BC and after. And it is for debate whether they are Slavs. These R1a carriers are associated with Indo European Kurgan culture.

Naive observers think R1a=Slavs and R1a came to the Balkans only in seventh century. No. In the world there are a lot of R1a carriers who are not Slavs. And today's Slavic people are mixed R1a/I2a but and another haplogroups.

R1a is very old in the Balkans and scientists proved this. But some observer can notice that R1a is quitle evenly distributed among today's Balkan's people: Serbs, Greeks, Bulgarians, Albanians, Bosniacs, Romanians, etc. Somewhat higher in Croats and even greater in Slovenes (but Slovenes are not in the Balkans).

For example difference between Serbs/Bosniacs/Croats and Albanians is not so R1a. All people have R1a in some significant percent, including Albanians.

Main difference is I2a, because (Geg) Albanians have small percent I2a. Tosk Albanians have much more than Geges. Eupedia don't give right picture (you can see Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia) because in Albania there are no division Geges, Tosks, and in Macedonia there are no division Albanians, Macedonians. Kosovo is more realistic because Kosovo Albanians are Geges (there are no significant numbers of Tosks in Kosovo).

----------


## adamo

So why are all these Slavic languages like Slovene or Serbian distantly related to say, polish for example, if they don't all have that same R1a source? How could a mix of I2a and R1a people in the Balkans have developed a Slavic language/identity if it wasn't for Slavic R1a presence? Anyways, it sure wasn't those pre-indo-European I2a2 men. Their pre-indo-European language was replaced.

----------


## Sile

> Which part of the levant in your opinion Sile? I am y-DNA T-L299 paternal, I2a maternal father and two mtdna H's all from Italy....only a small fraction of my genome but anyways....would you believe if I said I think the Phoenicians spread T? Peaks in Cadiz on Iberia , Ibiza islans, western Sicily, northern Corsica; all Phoenician colonies.


Talk about this in T thread, but phoenicians is plausible, remember that T in Persia was known as the "phoenicians" of the indian ocean, migrating to arabia and east africa via sea. so they where mariners as well

----------


## adamo

Correct, it is also present in multiple individuals I know from Saudi Arabia.

----------


## Garrick

> So why are all these Slavic languages like Slovene or Serbian distantly related to say, polish for example, if they don't all have that same R1a source? How could a mix of I2a and R1a people in the Balkans have developed a Slavic language/identity if it wasn't for Slavic R1a presence? Anyways, it sure wasn't those pre-indo-European I2a2 men. Their pre-indo-European language was replaced.


Yes, it is good question. I told you, things are not so simple. Some I2a Serbs tried to find "lost" I2a language. I doubt they are on the right track. 

Generally I population once were much numerous in Europe. But I carriers have experienced decline. Someone can see I1 and I2 haplogroup in European countries, especially in Scandinavia and Balkans, but numbers of R1b and R1a carriers much higher.

It is possible that today's I2a-Din people never had hypotetical "lost" language. In other words, maybe they spoke same language as R1a.

Of course, answers are not easy. For me is very interesting what language had first R1a carriers in the Balkans (20-12 KYA). What language spoke R1a carriers in Balkans who came about 3KYA BC (Kurgan culture). Nobody gave satisfactory answers to these questions, only hypothesis.

----------


## Zemra

> Main difference is I2a, because (Geg) Albanians have small percent I2a. Tosk Albanians have much more than Geges. Eupedia don't give right picture (you can see Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia) because in Albania there are no division Geges, Tosks, and in Macedonia there are no division Albanians, Macedonians. Kosovo is more realistic because Kosovo Albanians are Geges (*there are no significant numbers of Tosks in Kosovo*).



I feel the need to explain the distinction, because everyone talks about Tosks and Ghegs like it knows everything

Ok, let me make it clear. Gheg and Tosk a dialect split, not tribes. Moving further, Tosk are split in (N to S) Northern Tosk, Lab, Cham, Arbëresh and Arvanitika. Gheg are split in (S to N) Southern Gheg, Central Albanians, Malësor, Dukagjin (or Kosovo since it's more numerous, but includes NE Albania too, so I'm using this name) and Albanci. There's also a transitional dialect between. Rivers are generally used to mark the (approximate) borders, but other factors too are considered (like being in Greece, Italy, Croatia or a high isolated terrain).

The main difference is the Tosk rhotacim, basically n>r eg _wine_ Gheg _venë_ > Tosk _verë_  and this is what give the people its name. There are other differences like:
Gheg has 17 vowels > Tosk has 7 vowels, substitites all Gheg long and nasal vowels with ë
or
Treatment of consonants and vowels, Gheg tends to assimilate, Tosk tends to add.
etc.
but the first is the most important as it's a feature in what makes Ghegs Gheg and Tosks Tosk. The secondary differences are used to make the distinction of minor dialects between each other.

So all Kosovo Albanians are Gheg. So are Central Albanans, despite Ghegs are generally considered to be Northern Albanians. North Albania is defined as North the Shkumbin river. However there's an exception in Albanians of Ukraine, they're Tosks not Gheg, despite Ukraine being much much more in N than Albanci of Croatia.

I listed all the names needed to know (repeat: Albanci, Dukagjinas/Kosovar, Malësor/Malsor/Malcor, Central Albanians, Southern Gheg, Transitional, Northern Tosk, Lab, Cham, Arbëresh, Arvanitika). 




> IMO
> 
> - Illyrians tribes are all different to each other and had no language similarities, the illyrians where created between Eastern austria and hungaria, sometimes the pannonians of hungarian soil are know as Illyrians. written History states they invaded the balkans from the north and slowly took land to finally be stopped by the macedonians of Alexander the great times. They did not participate in alexanders Persian wars because they where not "greek" . The epirotes of northern greece and albania went to fight the Persians with Alexander. The illyrians where absorbed by celtic migrations from the alps. the celts got as far as greece. Basically by the time the Romans arrived and Queen teuta fought them, the illyrians where a minor nuisance to the Romans, it was only their piracy thats was an issue. They where R1b in majority with some G.
> 
> - The thracians if we include the Dacians, Getae and their relatives the cimmerians where the most populous, I believe they brought I2a2 into the balkans after the scythians arrived on the northern parts of the black sea. The thracians would have also had the E and J markers. ( i am usure on any R but maybe as per mr. hammer it would be L11 from modern Bulgaria) The cimmerians fled to the plains of hungaria and serbia in 700BC ( not earlier)


That shouldn't be an opinion, that's a fact, it has been for a couple of decades now. They were different from each other. Dalmatians covered the narrow coastal strip of the Adriatic. This one https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...rigins_map.PNG Other regions seem to be independent of it, and have developed independently from it, despite all being included in the so called Roman Illyricum. Dardanians seemed to have been a distinct group of people, but they didn't have Tharcian toponyms to be considered Thracian so they were made Illyrians by default, which is illogical to me. So were Panonians (likely Celtic IMO) and all the others I've left without mentioning.


Whenever Illyria or Illyrians start as topics, the Albanian connection will start as well. 
As for Albanian origins, what's sure is that it was created somewhere between Germanic, Baltic, Scythian, Greek, Celtic, just to map it, not coastal, neither Adriatic nor Black sea. That basically means the non-Greek, non-coastal part of the Balkans which it's a pretty big place. Judging by the Latin traces in the language, Albanians were included pretty early in the Roman Empire (BC times). Proto-Albanian (pre Roman influence Albanian) shows two distinct times, Early PA, spoken much more closely to Baltic (not Slavic though, which makes me wonder where were thy located at this time), Late PA spoken much more closely to Greek (nowhere close to Armenian though). Majority were cattle-breeders, and in the waters around whirpools were common. Also, had a solar cult, more specifically a _sunset_ divinity was the central god. That's what you get only from lingustic testimony. That's what all the theories on the origin of Albanians agree on, it doesn't mention anyone in particular. That's what's expected to be expanded.

----------


## Garrick

> Ok, let me make it clear. Gheg and Tosk a dialect split, not tribes. Moving further, Tosk are split in (N to S) Northern Tosk, Lab, So all Kosovo Albanians are Gheg.


Yes, of course, Kosovo Albanians are Geg (Gheg) Albanians. There are some Tosks who came from Albania, but there are no "Tosk community".

Researchers found a pretty big difference between Geg and Tosk haplogroups, and the most difference is in I2a, Tosk Albanians have significant I2a but Geg Albanians have by far the least I2a among the nations in the Balkans.

It would be good to conduct more researches.

----------


## MOESAN

Oups! what a warm discussion (hot maybe?) - thanks to Zemra for some precious details about albanian languages and regions -
just my point here, to make, perhaps, the discussion clearer:
old opinions about Ilyyrians are out of date, really - Illyrians were not that ocean of people our old scholars believed and who colonized (supposedly) entire central Europe: it seems that very often Veneti and akin people were confused with true Illyrians - Veneti were closer to Italics, genuine Illyrians closer to Thracians and Getae/Dacians and some other intermediary people, maybe among them ancestors of Albanians- the Lusacian placenames or rivers had their "cousins" in places of the Illyricum coasts so ancient scholars took that as a proof of a link between Illyrians and first bearers of the Urnfields of Lusace, come from Hungary or N Croatia - Hallstatt birth was considered as the result of contacts between eastern alpine Celts and Illyrian - it seems to me with our today "knowledge" (separation of the roman Illyricum in two parts: N: Veneti or family, S: true Illyrians) that it is more evident (linguistically too) to consider Hallstatt as a Veneti or proto-Veneti impulse among Celtic tribes - -history of latine and osco-umbrian people is linked for a long time to N-Croatia Hungary at a first stage- 
concerning Y- HGs , a) we have no very ancient settlements in Dalmatia-Dinaric Alpes - b) Y-I2a1b seems ancient enough in central Europe and could have got down to Yugoslavia more recently that believed- c) Slavs (a bet) are for me proto-Balts modified by contacts with more southern people, I-E or not and it seems to me that, aside the 'mediterranean' neolithical heritage (before and during metals, because the first metallurgists were the first peasants or breeders: Starcevo,then Cucuteni-Tr.) they mixed a lot with previous Carpathians populations where I think Y-I2a2 was predominant (I think that at the "apotheose" of Cucuteni-Tripolje culture, these southern and carpathian elements were present far North until Bela-Russia : look at autosomals maps)- so Slavs of South could very well have send samples of this HG with them to Yugoslavia and to other places, reinforcing the first Y-I2a1b; only a peer study of downstream I2a SNPs in Yugolsavia and Balkans could give us a good picture -
but I'm not so smart as someones to predict exactly which tribe or people was pure I2a1b or pure R1a because at first sight, there were always some slight or heavy crossings in these populations -

----------


## Bardhyl

> Oups! what a warm discussion (hot maybe?) - thanks to Zemra for some precious details about albanian languages and regions -
> just my point here, to make, perhaps, the discussion clearer:
> old opinions about Ilyyrians are out of date, really - Illyrians were not that ocean of people our old scholars believed and who colonized (supposedly) entire central Europe: it seems that very often Veneti and akin people were confused with true Illyrians - Veneti were closer to Italics, genuine Illyrians closer to Thracians and Getae/Dacians and some other intermediary people, maybe among them ancestors of Albanians- the Lusacian placenames or rivers had their "cousins" in places of the Illyricum coasts so ancient scholars took that as a proof of a link between Illyrians and first bearers of the Urnfields of Lusace, come from Hungary or N Croatia - Hallstatt birth was considered as the result of contacts between eastern alpine Celts and Illyrian - it seems to me with our today "knowledge" (separation of the roman Illyricum in two parts: N: Veneti or family, S: true Illyrians) that it is more evident (linguistically too) to consider Hallstatt as a Veneti or proto-Veneti impulse among Celtic tribes - -history of latine and osco-umbrian people is linked for a long time to N-Croatia Hungary at a first stage- 
> concerning Y- HGs , a) we have no very ancient settlements in Dalmatia-Dinaric Alpes - b) Y-I2a1b seems ancient enough in central Europe and could have got down to Yugoslavia more recently that believed- c) Slavs (a bet) are for me proto-Balts modified by contacts with more southern people, I-E or not and it seems to me that, aside the 'mediterranean' neolithical heritage (before and during metals, because the first metallurgists were the first peasants or breeders: Starcevo,then Cucuteni-Tr.) they mixed a lot with previous Carpathians populations where I think Y-I2a2 was predominant (I think that at the "apotheose" of Cucuteni-Tripolje culture, these southern and carpathian elements were present far North until Bela-Russia : look at autosomals maps)- so Slavs of South could very well have send samples of this HG with them to Yugoslavia and to other places, reinforcing the first Y-I2a1b; only a peer study of downstream I2a SNPs in Yugolsavia and Balkans could give us a good picture -
> but I'm not so smart as someones to predict exactly which tribe or people was pure I2a1b or pure R1a because at first sight, there were always some slight or heavy crossings in these populations -


Thanks, finally someone who understands. 
i2a came with south slavs also.

Quote i2 haplogroup eupedia:
This branch is found overwhelmingly in Slavic countries. Its maximum frequencies are observed among the Dinaric Slavs (Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, Serbs, Montenegrins and Macedonians) as well as in Bulgaria, Romania, Moldavia, western Ukraine and Belarus. It is also common to a lower extent in Albania, Greece, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, and south-western Russia. I2-L621 (L147.2+) is also known as as I2a-Din (for Dinaric). (Eupedia.com i2 haplogroup)

The second great expansion of I2a-Din took place with the Slavic migration in the Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages. I2a-Din had started to mix with Proto-Indo-Euroepan.(Eupedia.com i2 haplogroup)

Nowadays northern Slavic countries have between 9% (Poland, Czech republic) and 21% (Ukraine) of I2a-L621, while southern Slavs have between 20% (Bulgaria) and 50% (Bosnia). The higher percentage of I2a-Din in the south owes to the cumulative effect of Bronze Age and Early Iron Age migrations (Dacians, Thracians, Illyrians) and the medieval Slavic migrations. The relatively high percentage of of I2a-L621 in non-Slavic people like the Hungarians (15% ), Albanians (12%) and Greeks (9%) dates from the Bronze Age (Eupedia.com i2 haplogroup)

----------


## Eldritch

> Oups! what a warm discussion (hot maybe?) - thanks to Zemra for some precious details about albanian languages and regions -
> just my point here, to make, perhaps, the discussion clearer:
> old opinions about Ilyyrians are out of date, really - Illyrians were not that ocean of people our old scholars believed and who colonized (supposedly) entire central Europe: it seems that very often Veneti and akin people were confused with true Illyrians - Veneti were closer to Italics, genuine Illyrians closer to Thracians and Getae/Dacians and some other intermediary people, maybe among them ancestors of Albanians- the Lusacian placenames or rivers had their "cousins" in places of the Illyricum coasts so ancient scholars took that as a proof of a link between Illyrians and first bearers of the Urnfields of Lusace, come from Hungary or N Croatia - Hallstatt birth was considered as the result of contacts between eastern alpine Celts and Illyrian - it seems to me with our today "knowledge" (separation of the roman Illyricum in two parts: N: Veneti or family, S: true Illyrians) that it is more evident (linguistically too) to consider Hallstatt as a Veneti or proto-Veneti impulse among Celtic tribes - -history of latine and osco-umbrian people is linked for a long time to N-Croatia Hungary at a first stage- 
> concerning Y- HGs , a) we have no very ancient settlements in Dalmatia-Dinaric Alpes - b) Y-I2a1b seems ancient enough in central Europe and could have got down to Yugoslavia more recently that believed- c) Slavs (a bet) are for me proto-Balts modified by contacts with more southern people, I-E or not and it seems to me that, aside the 'mediterranean' neolithical heritage (before and during metals, because the first metallurgists were the first peasants or breeders: Starcevo,then Cucuteni-Tr.) they mixed a lot with previous Carpathians populations where I think Y-I2a2 was predominant (I think that at the "apotheose" of Cucuteni-Tripolje culture, these southern and carpathian elements were present far North until Bela-Russia : look at autosomals maps)- so Slavs of South could very well have send samples of this HG with them to Yugoslavia and to other places, reinforcing the first Y-I2a1b; only a peer study of downstream I2a SNPs in Yugolsavia and Balkans could give us a good picture -
> but I'm not so smart as someones to predict exactly which tribe or people was pure I2a1b or pure R1a because at first sight, there were always some slight or heavy crossings in these populations -


First good post after a sea of madness.

----------


## Sile

> That shouldn't be an opinion, that's a fact, it has been for a couple of decades now. They were different from each other. Dalmatians covered the narrow coastal strip of the Adriatic. This one https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...rigins_map.PNG Other regions seem to be independent of it, and have developed independently from it, despite all being included in the so called Roman Illyricum. Dardanians seemed to have been a distinct group of people, but they didn't have Tharcian toponyms to be considered Thracian so they were made Illyrians by default, which is illogical to me. So were Panonians (likely Celtic IMO) and all the others I've left without mentioning.


dardanians are grouped with macedonians and Paeonians ( not pannonians) , they where taken to fight for Alexander in the Persian wars. No illyrians where taken as they where noted as barbarians and also Macedonai and an illyrian tribe had a truce after many years of war. 

this book is a good account of the areas in question .....main wars between macedonians and 2 illyrian tribes was around 350BC
*A Companion to Ancient Macedonia* edited by Joseph Roisman, Ian Worthington

----------


## adamo

None of that was madness, you guys just don't know better yet. The Illyrians were a homogenous group inhabiting the Bosnia region on the Adriatic coast; you will see I was right one day. Later on, celts and Slavs would assimilate with them as well (Slavs in particular) leading many to believe they were a "package" that came as one, which is false until more recent times.

----------


## adamo

The original Illyrians have nothing to do with the later ones in several locales that were celticized or slavicized by far more recent invaders to the region.

----------


## adamo

Secondly, both E-V13 and J2b have a very southern Balkanic distribution, never affecting the genetic hegemony of the Dalmatian alps region. Third, both R1b from the west and R1a from the east where much LATER arrivals that assimilated to a certain degree with the original Illyrians. In fact, most of their migrations into Illyrian territory can still be historically recounted; that's how recent. The men of I2a2 where lost into prehistory from the Bosnian/Croatian region. Also, derivatives of the Illyrians (thracians,Dacians) were known as having reddish hair and blue eyes; many had very European features, not that that last argument counts for anything lol but anyways.

----------


## kamani

@adamo, don't be fooled by the high concentration of I2a-din in Bosnia because Bosnia is only 3.7 million people. The Balkans were never able to hold too many people because there is a lot of mountains and the land is infertile. That's why the great Macedonians lost to the Romans, they had no more soldiers and resources as opposed to Rome that could always throw more soldiers in a fight. The Illyrians were very few compared to the Romans or the Slavs. The Byzantines did not know what to do at the time, because the Slavs were coming in large waves as economic immigrants.

----------


## adamo

Ok lol, doesn't change my argument, start reading from much earlier.

----------


## Garrick

> The original Illyrians have nothing to do with the later ones in several locales that were celticized or slavicized by far more recent invaders to the region.


A lot of Serbs has your opinion.

In the Balkans most numerous I2a carriers are Serbian men, about 1.300.000, (Croatian men about 850.000 and Bosniacs men about 500.000).

These Serbs say that I haplogroup is the oldest haplogroup in the Balkans, about 25.000 years ago, and Serbs are the the oldest people.

But it is not quite correct.

Because, I told you, once I haplogroup was most numerous in Europe, but I carriers had large decline.

That space filled carriers of other haplogroup.

We can debate when first R1a carriers came in the Balkans, in the late Paleolithic or early Holocene but, they came very early, at least 9.000 years ago.

Also, another carriers came to the Balkans, probably G carriers.

We can debate when E and J carriers came to the Balkans, 4.000 or earlier?, 3.000?, 2000? years BC or in historic times.

And R1b and new wave of R1a carriers etc.

But the fact is that I2a Dinaric is not so old as his older I ancestors. You and Serbs who have same theory as you have no answer.

As Serbs who search "lost I2a language". Are you and they sure that such language existed.

And another thing, Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats have same haplogroups and speak same language. Difference between them is not origin or language. Difference is religion.

Serbian researchers can search "lost I2a language" but I afraid that it is a waste of time and resources.

----------


## adamo

Yeah G passed by south-central Greece to arrive in southern Italy and then end up on Sardinia but G presence across Balkans? Extremely low frequency. E3b and J2 both arrived during the Neolithic period, same for G (5,000-10,000 years ago.) Again, I repeat, the men of I2a were the first to arrive in the Balkans; the indo-Europeans arrived much later, possibly even AFTER the Neolithic haplogroups (notably E-V13 and J2b) had arrived in certain parts of the southern Balkans.

----------


## Zemra

> dardanians are grouped with macedonians and Paeonians ( not pannonians) , they where taken to fight for Alexander in the Persian wars. No illyrians where taken as they where noted as barbarians and also Macedonai and an illyrian tribe had a truce after many years of war. 
> 
> this book is a good account of the areas in question .....main wars between macedonians and 2 illyrian tribes was around 350BC
> *A Companion to Ancient Macedonia*
> 
> edited by Joseph Roisman, Ian Worthington


Dardanians in Balkans are mostly outside the Greek sphere of influence. Remind me, Philip II, Alexander's father married a Dardanian princess/queen/leader (or whatever she was called) so that's what got him the support. Paeonians are another distinct group, also not Greek, but inside the Greek sphere of influence, as they seemed to have lots of Greek loans. Thraco-Illyrian is used to describe both, although Paleo-Balkanic it's a more proper term to describe all. I'm still pretty sure Pannonians were Celtic. 




> Secondly, both E-V13 and J2b have a very southern Balkanic distribution, never affecting the genetic hegemony of the Dalmatian alps region. Third, both R1b from the west and R1a from the east where much LATER arrivals that assimilated to a certain degree with the original Illyrians. In fact, most of their migrations into Illyrian territory can still be historically recounted; that's how recent. The men of I2a2 where lost into prehistory from the Bosnian/Croatian region. Also, derivatives of the Illyrians (thracians,Dacians) were known as having reddish hair and blue eyes; many had very European features, not that that last argument counts for anything lol but anyways.


As for the appearance, they were described as redhaired by people born in modern day Greece and Turkey (like Στράβων ). Colors are relative. What's called honey blonde (google it), it's not blonde for quite a few people, but brown. Red hair is widespread in Scotland. There's also the Udmurt people beyond the Ural mountains, but you said European looking so they're out. I'm pretty sure this was not the red hair they were describing, auburn would be a modern day definition. Or just brown. Or lighter than black. Not black. 

In 1848 James Henry Skeene described Albanians as "...preserving a marked distinction from the Greeks, in form and physiognomy, having light eyes and high cheek-bones..." when compared to Greeks and Turks. Paraphrasing: All three Greeks, Albanians, and Turks look different from each other: Albanians are the light featured ones, Turks are the asiatic looking ones, Greeks are Mediterranean looking. When compared to each other...It's all relative. Thracians were described as red haired and blue eyed compared to Ancient Greeks. Which makes sense for the region. Genes do not dissapear, example these are Tocharian genes in China: http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z...le/blonde2.jpg




> Yes, of course, Kosovo Albanians are Geg (Gheg) Albanians. There are some Tosks who came from Albania, but there are no "Tosk community".
> 
> Researchers found a pretty big difference between Geg and Tosk haplogroups, and the most difference is in I2a, Tosk Albanians have significant I2a but Geg Albanians have by far the least I2a among the nations in the Balkans.
> 
> It would be good to conduct more researches.


I2a reaches its peak in South East Albania, where there was once a significant Vlach community. However, J2b peaks in South West Albania were there was and is a significant Vlach community. There was a test done of Vlach people and they differed wildly depending where they were. There was no haplogroup connected specifically with Vlach people, so they might have had numerous founder effects to explain these differences. Here's a map http://www.farsarotul.org/images/NL26_1F.jpg Where it says Lunca to Moscopie is where I2a in Albania peaks http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif . Is that a good start?

----------


## adamo

Whoever dislike my comment explain why. The highest G frequencies in Greece by far are on the Thessaloniki region (12%) which was the way these men followed (G-P15+) from turkey into southeastern Europe then southern italy and northern Sardinia.

----------


## Sile

> A lot of Serbs has your opinion.
> 
> In the Balkans most numerous I2a carriers are Serbian men, about 1.300.000, (Croatian men about 850.000 and Bosniacs men about 500.000).
> 
> These Serbs say that I haplogroup is the oldest haplogroup in the Balkans, about 25.000 years ago, and Serbs are the the oldest people.
> 
> But it is not quite correct.
> 
> Because, I told you, once I haplogroup was most numerous in Europe, but I carriers had large decline.
> ...


Serbs claim I marker is older because they originate from the Thracian Triballi tribe, the serb nobility and government use the triballi Boar icon in their letters and documents.

They ( serbs) want to say the slavs have always been in the balkans

----------


## Sile

> Dardanians in Balkans are mostly outside the Greek sphere of influence. Remind me, Philip II, Alexander's father married a Dardanian princess/queen/leader (or whatever she was called) so that's what got him the support. Paeonians are another distinct group, also not Greek, but inside the Greek sphere of influence, as they seemed to have lots of Greek loans. Thraco-Illyrian is used to describe both, although Paleo-Balkanic it's a more proper term to describe all. I'm still pretty sure Pannonians were Celtic.


I have never said and will never say that the ancient Macedonians are greek.

Macedonians, dardanians and paeonians are all another seperate branch, *not greek, not thracian and definitely not illyrian* because Illyrians where the last to arrive in the area in question of these peoples.

----------


## Sile

> As for the appearance, they were described as redhaired by people born in modern day Greece and Turkey (like Στράβων ). Colors are relative. What's called honey blonde (google it), it's not blonde for quite a few people, but brown. Red hair is widespread in Scotland. There's also the Udmurt people beyond the Ural mountains, but you said European looking so they're out. I'm pretty sure this was not the red hair they were describing, auburn would be a modern day definition. Or just brown. Or lighter than black. Not black.


 *Venetian blond*[19] or *honey blond*: reddish blond.

Honey blond originally called venetian blond , name change by Americans. The blond has red in it and its noted that 60% of Veneti females originally had it during the times Venice was a separate nation. Apparently men do not get this type of colour.........I never checked why

----------


## Garrick

> Serbs claim I marker is older because they originate from the Thracian Triballi tribe, the serb nobility and government use the triballi Boar icon in their letters and documents.
> 
> They ( serbs) want to say the slavs have always been in the balkans


Yes, I know that Serbs have roots in some Thracian and Illyrian tribes.

There is problem time of the I2a in the Balkans, but it is less problem.

Because accuracy is not easy to determine and can vary over a wide range, also I2a derived from older I ancestors, and there are no dispute that haplogoup I generally is the oldest in the Balkans.

For researchers the biggest problem is language, and member of forum Adamo very well observed it.

Key problem is language of I2a carriers, whether someone should search "lost I2a language" or no, I think it is waste of time and resources because language of I2a and R1a carriers in the Balkans is same language.

----------


## Bardhyl

> Serbs claim I marker is older because they originate from the Thracian Triballi tribe, the serb nobility and government use the triballi Boar icon in their letters and documents.
> 
> They ( serbs) want to say the slavs have always been in the balkans


yes they (slavs) always will claim that they were first in balkan, older than ancient greek there, they are probably older than homosapiens too, in switzerland we call this Wunschdenken (wishthinking), believing things which they want to believe is true, this thinking no prove can change.
And they dont mention even once that i2a also came with slavs too, which you can see on the link below. And slavs r1a is not the one who came with slavs but the old one (wunschdenken), and their i2a is not the one which also came with slavs, but the old thraco-illyro-dacian one (wunschdenken), they always were there, they once were fighting with dinosaurs in the balkans, and thAts why you cant find dinosaurs bones in that region, because dinosaurs flee away.


http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml

----------


## Ike

That's pure disinformation! Nowhere in any school book written in Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian or Bulgarian can you find such claims. They all agree about Slav migration to Balkans in 6th century, and not knowing the origin of original inhabitants. There are multiple theories about Thracian, Dacian, Celtic, Pelasgian or llyrian origin and some of them have Africans, Amazons, Atlants, Aryans, Slavs, Semits and other participants, but those theories are reserved for internet forums and alternative content TV shows.

----------


## Zemra

> *Venetian blond*[19] or *honey blond*: reddish blond.
> 
> Honey blond originally called venetian blond , name change by Americans. The blond has red in it and its noted that 60% of Veneti females originally had it during the times Venice was a separate nation. Apparently men do not get this type of colour.........I never checked why


I'm saying hair color is relative. I don't think it's blond but light brown, but it's in the name. You can disagree if you want, it's fine, you're just proving what I said, that is relative. Just like people disagree on what's beautiful. Or the temperature, some say 20 degrees it's cold other say it's hot. People tend to agree on extremes though. Here's the hair color in question:





> I have never said and will never say that the ancient Macedonians are greek.
> 
> Macedonians, dardanians and paeonians are all another seperate branch, *not greek, not thracian and definitely not illyrian* because Illyrians where the last to arrive in the area in question of these peoples.


Not even Illyrians were all Illyrians, they were included in a territory called Illyria. They didn't even call themselves Illyrian. It's like nationality vs ethnicity today. If you read about their clothing, hairstyles, pottery etc. they were vastly different so they couldn't have been homogenous. But I do think they sounded alike to foreigners (Greeks, Romans etc.), thus being grouped together. The Balkan sprachbund is likely the reason why. Or a modern day example, people can recognize an accent as Eastern European, but they can't really pinpoint which country. Makes sense because they don't have the same exposure. Maybe that was a bad example because most EE are Slavic, but I think you understand my point.

If you can see, I'm more interested on the linguistic side.

----------


## adamo

On what grounds do they claim that the Illyrians where indo-Europeans? They have a few words here and there that they fail to classify (barely anything is known on Illyrian tongue) and make unsubstantiated claims that the Illyrians came out of PIE homeland as well; I'll never believe it.

----------


## Garrick

> yes they (slavs) always will claim that they were first in balkan, older than ancient greek there, they are probably older than homosapiens too, in switzerland we call this Wunschdenken (wishthinking), believing things which they want to believe is true, this thinking no prove can change.
> And they dont mention even once that i2a also came with slavs too, which you can see on the link below. And slavs r1a is not the one who came with slavs but the old one (wunschdenken), and their i2a is not the one which also came with slavs, but the old thraco-illyro-dacian one (wunschdenken), they always were there, they once were fighting with dinosaurs in the balkans, and thAts why you cant find dinosaurs bones in that region, because dinosaurs flee away.
> 
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml


Yes. Slavs lived before dinosaurs. And when dinosaurs emerged Slavs used dinosaurs as domestic animals and for menu. However, when mammals emerged, Slavs changed the menu and dinosaurs were no longer needed.

Science knows at least three waves of comings of R1a carriers to the Balkans in very long periods. I told more time, R1a carriers is not equal Slavs. There are a lot of R1a carriers in the world, and they are not all Slavs.

----------


## adamo

Well the Slavic incursions proper into Eastern Europe took place like about 1,000 years ago only; R1a may not even have been an element among ancient Greeks; it did not even represent a Greek tribe the way J2, E3b and I2a did. I think the Dorians were that continental invading R1b element that ruined Mycenean Greek culture.

----------


## adamo

The Minoans of Crete I feel fell prey to natural/environmental conditions such as earthquakes/volcanoes, they would have been J2a. The superseding Mycenaeans of Crete and southern mainland Greece where a mix of J2 ( a and b) plus E3b. There was a tribe as well in all this in north-central Greece representing I2a as well which would eventually even migrate towards the Peloponnese in very small numbers (the haplogroup). The Dorians I believe were that more recent Celtic group that pushed from the north eventually laying waste to the southern Balkans and invading Galatia of turkey.

----------


## mihaitzateo

> Yes. Slavs lived before dinosaurs. And when dinosaurs emerged Slavs used dinosaurs as domestic animals and for menu. However, when mammals emerged, Slavs changed the menu and dinosaurs were no longer needed.
> 
> Science knows at least three waves of comings of R1a carriers to the Balkans in very long periods. I told more time, R1a carriers is not equal Slavs. There are a lot of R1a carriers in the world, and they are not all Slavs.



Slavs are a linguistic group,that split from Balto-Slavic.
I do not think Slavic languages are older than 2000 years .
As for Balto-Slavic,no idea how old that language is.
The original land of Slavs is near Baltic Sea,a little lower on the map from where Lithuania,Latvia are now and were Old Prussia was,which were also Balts,lived and near.
Is clear that they moved mostly Eastern,where they mixed with Finnics and Ugrians and in lesser extent with Siberians and gave Russians.
In West,they could not move,since Germanics were there and these were hard to beat.
In North,no way,since Vikings were there and this were also a hard challenge.
Some of the Slavs that moved East,moved South,so they gave Ukraine.Some other Slavs,from Eastern part,allied with some Turkic tribes and moved to Balkans and they gave Bulgarians and some Slavs from Central Europe,that is Czech and Slovak and Poland moved South till Balkans,where they gave Serbians,Montenegrins,Croats,Bosnians and Slovenes.
I know that Slavs and Balts do not want to admit that they are coming from same people and language ,but this is the truth.
You can see clearly after paternal HGs how Slavs spread and with whom they mixed,in their road.
HG R1A1 shows that Slavs spread mostly East and South East,they could not spread in North or West,because the presence of Celto-Germanics there.
As for I2,yes,South Slavs have lots of it,but is not of Slavic origins,is from the people that lived in Europe before IE people came.

Is known there are also branches of R1A1 that are not Slavic,but Norse,but I think those people are coming from Balto-Slavic tribes that joined Germanics and got assimilated by those Germanic tribes.

----------


## Garrick

> Slavs are a linguistic group,that split from Balto-Slavic.
> I do not think Slavic languages are older than 2000 years .
> As for Balto-Slavic,no idea how old that language is.
> The original land of Slavs is near Baltic Sea,a little lower on the map from where Lithuania,Latvia are now and were Old Prussia was,which were also Balts,lived and near.
> Is clear that they moved mostly Eastern,where they mixed with Finnics and Ugrians and in lesser extent with Siberians and gave Russians.
> In West,they could not move,since Germanics were there and these were hard to beat.
> In North,no way,since Vikings were there and this were also a hard challenge.
> Some of the Slavs that moved East,moved South,so they gave Ukraine.Some other Slavs,from Eastern part,allied with some Turkic tribes and moved to Balkans and they gave Bulgarians and some Slavs from Central Europe,that is Czech and Slovak and Poland moved South till Balkans,where they gave Serbians,Montenegrins,Croats,Bosnians and Slovenes.
> I know that Slavs and Balts do not want to admit that they are coming from same people and language ,but this is the truth.
> ...


Do you notice contradiction in your write?

You say haplogroup R1a is Slavic (Balto-Slavic).

And Slavic languages are not older than 2000 years.

Do you know when haplogroup R1a appeared?

R1a appeared 20,000-25,000 years ago.

And carriers of R1a didn't speak 18,000-23,000 years and they began to speak 2,000 years ago.

You can read scientific journals that linguists discovered earlier signs of pre-IE language (R1a carriers) in Anatolia 9,600 years ago +- some period.

But R1a is very big haplogroup and it is mistake that someone think it is Slavic haplogroup. Only in Europe R1a have 38 branches.

You can see the picture where R1a distributed. Do you really think that in South, Central and West Asia live Slavs?

----------


## adamo

Garry is correct; all R1a is indo-European from PIE homeland but certainly not all branches are Slavic; he is correct; the Slavic linguistic branch of indo-European sprung up 2000 or so years ago.

----------


## mihaitzateo

Yes I have said that Slavic languages are not older than 2000 years .
Till than people were speaking Balto-Slavic and around 2000 years ago,or later,Slavic split from Balto-Slavic and later Slavic expansion started,event which triggered the split of Slavic in 3 branches,South Slavic,Western Slavic,Eastern Slavic.
It is clear that the split was not that far away since South Slavic languages are still mutually intelligible.
As for the fact that Bulgarian migrated from today Russia to Balkans,that is shown by the strong mutual intelligibility between Russian and Bulgarian.
How Balto-Slavic speakers got on today land of Poland,Baltic countries,there is another story.
Thing is,Slavs got into Balkans around 1400-1500 years ago,not earlier than that.
The fact that they do not have borrowings from Latin language is showing that they were not in Balkans,in the period Roman Empire was present here.

----------


## Garrick

> Yes I have said that Slavic languages are not older than 2000 years .
> Till than people were speaking Balto-Slavic and around 2000 years ago,or later,Slavic split from Balto-Slavic and later Slavic expansion started,event which triggered the split of Slavic in 3 branches,South Slavic,Western Slavic,Eastern Slavic.
> It is clear that the split was not that far away since South Slavic languages are still mutually intelligible.
> As for the fact that Bulgarian migrated from today Russia to Balkans,that is shown by the strong mutual intelligibility between Russian and Bulgarian.
> How Balto-Slavic speakers got on today land of Poland,Baltic countries,there is another story.
> Thing is,Slavs got into Balkans around 1400-1500 years ago,not earlier than that.
> The fact that they do not have borrowings from Latin language is showing that they were not in Balkans,in the period Roman Empire was present here.


But we here don't speak about 5th - 7th centuries.

We speak about R1a, I2a, E-V13 and another haplogroups whose carriers are comprised Illyrian (and Thracian and another) tribes in the Balkans.

----------


## Zemra

> Yes I have said that Slavic languages are not older than 2000 years .
> Till than people were speaking Balto-Slavic and around 2000 years ago,or later,Slavic split from Balto-Slavic and later Slavic expansion started,event which triggered the split of Slavic in 3 branches,South Slavic,Western Slavic,Eastern Slavic.
> It is clear that the split was not that far away since South Slavic languages are still mutually intelligible.
> As for the fact that Bulgarian migrated from today Russia to Balkans,that is shown by the strong mutual intelligibility between Russian and Bulgarian.
> How Balto-Slavic speakers got on today land of Poland,Baltic countries,there is another story.
> Thing is,Slavs got into Balkans around 1400-1500 years ago,not earlier than that.
> The fact that they do not have borrowings from Latin language is showing that they were not in Balkans,in the period Roman Empire was present here.


Earlier than that. Albanian shows to have been spoken particularly close to Baltic but not Slavic. They were likely spoken separated by Baltic speakers. Keep in mind Baltic was more widspread then. Yet Albanians were included early in the Roman Empire which perhaps makes the similarities not so obvious. This was written in 1993 http://www.lituanus.org/1993_2/93_2_05.htm but it soon became outdated a few years later when Vladimir Orel said the oppostite of what's mentioned there. Specifically, he said what I said in the second sentence. He also put Proto-Albanian homeland somewhere in Central or South-Eastern Europe, which is basically what everyone agreed on already. That said, adding to the observation made in the beginning of the paragraph, where were the Slavic speakers?

Also these theories https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...c_theories.svg 2 and 3 look quite likely to me, 3 moreso

----------


## Garrick

> Yes I have said that Slavic languages are not older than 2000 years .
> Till than people were speaking Balto-Slavic and around 2000 years ago,or later,Slavic split from Balto-Slavic and later Slavic expansion started,event which triggered the split of Slavic in 3 branches,South Slavic,Western Slavic,Eastern Slavic.
> It is clear that the split was not that far away since South Slavic languages are still mutually intelligible.
> As for the fact that Bulgarian migrated from today Russia to Balkans,that is shown by the strong mutual intelligibility between Russian and Bulgarian.
> How Balto-Slavic speakers got on today land of Poland,Baltic countries,there is another story.
> Thing is,Slavs got into Balkans around 1400-1500 years ago,not earlier than that.
> The fact that they do not have borrowings from Latin language is showing that they were not in Balkans,in the period Roman Empire was present here.


Don't get me wrong but language and origin are two completely different things, and language is not prove of origin.

In the world there are a lot of natives in Asia, Africa, Latin America etc. whose language is English or Spanish but they have nothing with Europe nor with R1b, I1, etc haplogroups in Britain or Spain.

It is very logical, a tribe for thousands of years speaks own language. But in some time this tribe be conquered by invaders. For example and conqueror and tribe are same race.

If conqueror succeeded in imposing language and culture this tribe can change own native language in only two or three generations.

Imagine two or three thousand years passes and nowhere ex language is written.

Descendants can imagine that it is their long-time language and that they have same origin as conquerors.

However their origin can be completely different as evidenced by haplogroups.

I see you are Romanian. Romanians and Serbs speak different languages.

However, if you see Romanian and Serbian haplogroups you can see that Romanians and Serbs are very similar, you can compare percents different haplogroups in Eupedia (Eupedia is the best because Maciamo took data from all relevant studies in scientific Journals).

For example:
I2a
Serbs 33%, Romanians 26%
R1a
Serbs 16%, Romanians 17.5%
E-V13
Serbs 18%, Romanians 15%
I1
Serbs 8.5%, Romanians 4.5%
R1b
Serbs 8%, Romanians 12%

You can see for example Italian haplogroups by regions and see much more differences.

Of course, we can enter in dept and explorer further, but and now we can see similarity Serbs and Romanians.

But it should not surprising because Serbs are descended from Thracians, Illyrians, and even older settlers of the Balkans , etc. and Romanians are descedents from Dacians, Thracians, and even older settlers of the Balkans too.

Dacians were people similar with Thracians.

Yes, Serbs and Romanians have similar origin but Serbs and Romans speak different languages.

But Dacian language is not today's Romanian language, because Romanian language is adopted in process of Romanization during early centuries AD. Dacian language is not alive and there are very little written evidence.

But the origin is written in haplogroups, not in language.

----------


## Bardhyl

> Yes. Slavs lived before dinosaurs. And when dinosaurs emerged Slavs used dinosaurs as domestic animals and for menu. However, when mammals emerged, Slavs changed the menu and dinosaurs were no longer needed.
> 
> Science knows at least three waves of comings of R1a carriers to the Balkans in very long periods. I told more time, R1a carriers is not equal Slavs. There are a lot of R1a carriers in the world, and they are not all Slavs.


Yes i agree with you that Y-R1a doesn't necessarily mean Slavic. Neither do other Y-HG necessarily mean a population, neither ancient nor actual.

----------


## Pirro

Dear Dian, 
I have some questions for You,
First, You have written to article before about berbers and albanian about**: what similarities have albanian word `ik`english word `quick`, and japanese `ik`. I recommend you to learn more english then word `ik` can be translated in english with go away or exit and not quick! Japanese have not this same significance.
Second , Did You make any haplo group to greek populations and if `yes` are these greek the same with old greeks?
Third You said that as conclusion albanians are from transylvanian. Question is: what kind of albanian group did you have make analysis? (I think is taken to analysis a group from albanian vlahs, and that was the result) or not? 
Waitng a honest answer
Pirro Prifti

----------


## Pirro

> Yes i agree with you that Y-R1a doesn't necessarily mean Slavic. Neither do other Y-HG necessarily mean a population, neither ancient nor actual.


I have question for You:
Which Haplo group have significance for ancient population, have significance for actual population, and which other haplo group have not significance for population (except Y-HG)?

----------


## Pirro

> But we here don't speak about 5th - 7th centuries.
> 
> We speak about R1a, I2a, E-V13 and another haplogroups whose carriers are comprised Illyrian (and Thracian and another) tribes in the Balkans.


CAN i ASK A QUESTION FOR YOU: What kind of haplo group are characteristic about actual albanians? because haplo groups: Y-R1a and Y-HG can be slavic...

----------


## Pirro

the map is in correct, because of have no evidence to any `hellenic` tribues. All tribues You emphsed with black are in fact illyrian- pellasgean tribues. That s confirmed by significance of their naems , gods, and places with albanian language.

----------


## Pirro

Chaonia - s labanian word- KA JON- NGA JONI- PRA NGA DETI jON- ine english language- (tribue) close to Jonian sea.
Mollosy- albanian-Malesi- in english- Montain. How is possible for this two tribues to be `greek`?! when word is albanian?

----------


## Ike

> Chaonia - s labanian word- KA JON- NGA JONI- PRA NGA DETI jON- ine english language- (tribue) close to Jonian sea.
> Mollosy- albanian-Malesi- in english- Montain. How is possible for this two tribues to be `greek`?! when word is albanian?


Don't know, ask Kevin Baugh.

"The name _Molossia is derived from the Spanish word morro which means "small rocky hill". Baugh has stated that the ancient Greek tribe of Molossians is unrelated."

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republi...cite_note-mo-4

----------


## Eldritch

According to the latest study on Eurasian genomes Bronze and Iron Age Montenegrin samples from Velika Gruda (Northern Montenegro not far from Dalmatia in Croatia) are autosomally just slightly east of Tuscans which on modern PCA maps coincides with North Greeks and Albanians. But i dont understand what culture do they belong too exactly, Illyrians were an iron age population right?

----------

