# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  Were the Croatians originally Slavic?

## zanipolo

The question above has always been talked about when visiting croatian friends/families. The arguements range from being forced to become slavic or not. An alphabet ( slovenians as well) which has always been Latin based instead of Cyrillic based. A religion from the west roman empire - Catholic instead of the East Roamn Empire - Orthodox.

Anyway after reading many books, I decided to ask the question to the slavs in this forum. Link below is interesting

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...ins%22&f=false

----------


## zanipolo

Maybe the Croats where the goths, Avars and other non-slavic people which moved south after the slavic migration into central Europe after 500AD


There are a number of relevant conclusions that can be drawn from the croatian genetic data.
First of all it gives strong support to the theory that the region of modern day Croatia served as a refuge for northern populations during the last glacial maximum (LGM). Eastern Adriatic coast was much more to the south, northern and western parts of that sea were steppes and plains, while modern Croatian islands (rich with the archeological sites from Paleolithic) were hills and mountains. After the LGM, the offspring of these survivors (haplogroup I) repopulated much of central-eastern and southeastern Europe. Those who remained in the Balkans were the direct male-line ancestors of about 45% of modern day Croats in Croatia and 73% Croats in Herzegovina.[37]
It can be said that the Croats are "the most European people", as no other people have such high shares of this major (and likely the only) Paleolithic European haplogroup.
The second conclusion that can be drawn is that the theory of an Iranian origin has little genetic support. Modern-day Iranians have a significantly different haplogroup distribution, although Iranic speaking communities have lived in eastern Europe. The low frequency of _Anatolian_ haplogroups suggests that agriculture spread into the region of Croatia primarily by way of cultural contact.[39]
And the third conclusion from the genetic evidence points to the fact Croats are genetically heterogeneous, pointing to a high degree of mixing of the newly arrived medieval migrant tribes (such as Slavs) with the indigenous populations that were already present in the region of the modern day Croatia.[40] Hence, most modern day Croats are directly descended from the original European population of the region and have lived in the territory by other names, such as Illyrians and their forebears. These original inhabitants also served an important role in re-populating Europe after the last ice age

----------


## iapodos

First of all, sub variant of haplogroup I spread in western Balkan (and southern Croatia too) is I2a2 Dinaric and there is no single evidence that this haplogroup was in western Balkan since Lgm in continuity. On the contrary all proves suggests that it was spread primeraly with Slavic peoples in 6 th century. It is opinion of all leading geneticists and it was recently incorporated in wikipedia too. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I2_(Y-DNA)
Croats have high percent of I2a2 Dinaric haplogroup, but only in southern parts of Dalmatia and in Herzegovina region. It is exactly the regions where during Ottoman reign were great migrations of population. Dalmatia for example, change almost entirely its previous medieval population. So, the medieval Croats which lived in Dalmatia moved mostly on islands or northward, or in Italia. New people (mostly I2a2 Dinaric ) came from region of Herzegovina and Montenegro and settled in Dalmatia, and hose were not ethnically Croats, they adopted Croatian name later. They simply called themselves Slavs, like it was in Dubrovnik and very often Serbs. 
The real Croats you may today find in the region of chakavian dialect

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

and genetic analisys of island Krk (the real Croats) shows prevalance of haplogroup of R1a over I2a2. The same situation is for the rest of mainland Croatia. So, I do believe that it is possible that Croats were not Slavs initiallly (maybe some Sarmatian or Turkic component among the Slavs) and that they were predominantly R1a.

----------


## julia90

before the slavic invasions in the balkans they weren't.
they were much akin to neolithic italians i think.. at least those near the coasts, (Croatia and Dalmatia).

----------


## Itas Argis

Never take Wikipedia seriously. It is written by those who support official history. Propaganda tool ...

iapodos said in short how things really are.

Who are Croats?

Well, some are croatised Serbs, some croatised Vlahs or Romanians, Goths, Celtcs, Sarmatians, Avars, and so on, and so on...

----------


## zanipolo

> First of all, sub variant of haplogroup I spread in western Balkan (and southern Croatia too) is I2a2 Dinaric and there is no single evidence that this haplogroup was in western Balkan since Lgm in continuity. On the contrary all proves suggests that it was spread primeraly with Slavic peoples in 6 th century. It is opinion of all leading geneticists and it was recently incorporated in wikipedia too. 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I2_(Y-DNA)
> Croats have high percent of I2a2 Dinaric haplogroup, but only in southern parts of Dalmatia and in Herzegovina region. It is exactly the regions where during Ottoman reign were great migrations of population. Dalmatia for example, change almost entirely its previous medieval population. So, the medieval Croats which lived in Dalmatia moved mostly on islands or northward, or in Italia. New people (mostly I2a2 Dinaric ) came from region of Herzegovina and Montenegro and settled in Dalmatia, and hose were not ethnically Croats, they adopted Croatian name later. They simply called themselves Slavs, like it was in Dubrovnik and very often Serbs. 
> The real Croats you may today find in the region of chakavian dialect
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect
> 
> and genetic analisys of island Krk (the real Croats) shows prevalance of haplogroup of R1a over I2a2. The same situation is for the rest of mainland Croatia. So, I do believe that it is possible that Croats were not Slavs initiallly (maybe some Sarmatian or Turkic component among the Slavs) and that they were predominantly R1a.


so the theory that the croats where originally goths and with this had the I haplo is wrong?

If what you say is correct , then is the Chakavian dialect the ancient language of the illyrians or lubanini from histria , maybe mixed with latin and Venetian later on?

----------


## iapetoc

for it is more simple,

Today all area is named croatia, but from past it is 2 Sub areas, and probably in ancient times there where 2 people,
Thracians never passed the Dinaric Alps, while Greek settlers stay only in Adra sea,

to examine Croats better we must divide to 2 primary regions,
1 is Zagreb, main inland Croatia, and the other is Dalmatia,

I believe the Croat unification movement so to create a nation, lay between the religion and the language,
Dalmatians I don't Believe they were Slavic people, while Zagreb people I believe they were. the case of Avars or Huns or Oghurs, I can't tell, although I don't reject it,

----------


## zanipolo

> for it is more simple,
> 
> Today all area is named croatia, but from past it is 2 Sub areas, and probably in ancient times there where 2 people,
> Thracians never passed the Dinaric Alps, while Greek settlers stay only in Adra sea,
> 
> to examine Croats better we must divide to 2 primary regions,
> 1 is Zagreb, main inland Croatia, and the other is Dalmatia,
> 
> I believe the Croat unification movement so to create a nation, lay between the religion and the language,
> Dalmatians I don't Believe they were Slavic people, while Zagreb people I believe they were. the case of Avars or Huns or Oghurs, I can't tell, although I don't reject it,


Dalmatians where illyrian people with there own language
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalmatian_language

----------


## Itas Argis

Land around Zagreb, which are Zagorje, Medimurje, Gorski Kotar, western Slavonia etc., not the city itself.

----------


## iapetoc

> Dalmatians where illyrian people with there own language
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalmatian_language



so you probably agree with me.




> Land around Zagreb, which are Zagorje, Medimurje, Gorski Kotar, western Slavonia etc., not the city itself.


yes that is what i mean.

----------


## Shetop

Croatian science about themselves: Croatian genetic heritage: Y-chromosome story

I'll refrain myself from comments.

----------


## how yes no 2

though when provoked by Croat nationalists, I like to emphasize the clues indicating potential Turkic origin of Croats... I am pretty sure their tribal identity was Slavic, and before that probably Celtic... same holds for Serbs...

in fact I think I2 are Cimmerians/Gomer people and original Celts but more about that on link http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthr...ian-parallels/


Russian primary chronicle enlists Croats (as well as Serbs and Carantanians (Slovene of today) in Danubian Slavs...according to it they have migrated to north due to pressure of Vlakhs (read Roman empire) to the lands of Lyakhs (read Lech or Poles)




> 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://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_Chronicle
http://www.utoronto.ca/elul/English/...selections.pdf



Byzantine emperor historian places white Serbia in land they themselves called Boika thast he places beyond Turkia( = north of Hungary) neighbouring white Croatia and Frankia ...from many reasons this land can only be Bohemia... according to him they have also originally dwelt there and we know that Celtic Boii originally dwelt there and that Celtic Scordisci spread roughly from there to area of Serbia...and that from Serbia they entered Thrace and Asia minor as Celtic Serdi...

white Croatia would be Slavic settled area east of white Serbia ... roughly Slovakia, south Poland, west Ukraine.... the core of this white Croatia is more or less Galicia which is same as Bohemia local source of I2a2...

very term Galicia tells us that these people might have originally been Gals or Celts, perhaps a branch of Helveti... Celtic ancestors of Serbs on other hand would be Scordisci/Serdi /Boii..

Byzantine emperor historian tells us that both Croats and Serbs were called "white" prior to Balkan settlement... this could be same as Wends/Vindelici/Veneti.... Sorbs of east Germany (in Serbia known as Lusatian Serbs) are still called Wends.. Vindelici are Celtic people..

http://books.google.nl/books?id=3al1...page&q&f=false

look at Galicia area in east Europe
term is clearly same origin as Galatia in Asia minor and Galia in France, that is about Celtic settlement ...




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia_(Eastern_Europe)

those are cores of I2a areas... 




white Croatia is considered more or less same area as Galicia... now look at early Slavic tribes... in Galicia are white Croats...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._Slavic_states

----------


## zanipolo

as per link

http://www.cmj.hr/2005/46/4/16100752.pdf

it seems, that croatians in the north , istria etc are R1b , the inland ones are R1a and the southern ones are I - P37 ( old illyrian marker )

are people sure the I2 marker does not originate form the I1 marker from scandinavia?

----------


## Dalmat

i can see you dont know much, Croatian write in latin, but original script was glagolithic

----------


## Dalmat

> Maybe the Croats where the goths, Avars and other non-slavic people which moved south after the slavic migration into central Europe after 500AD
> 
> 
> There are a number of relevant conclusions that can be drawn from the croatian genetic data.
> First of all it gives strong support to the theory that the region of modern day Croatia served as a refuge for northern populations during the last glacial maximum (LGM). Eastern Adriatic coast was much more to the south, northern and western parts of that sea were steppes and plains, while modern Croatian islands (rich with the archeological sites from Paleolithic) were hills and mountains. After the LGM, the offspring of these survivors (haplogroup I) repopulated much of central-eastern and southeastern Europe. Those who remained in the Balkans were the direct male-line ancestors of about 45% of modern day Croats in Croatia and 73% Croats in Herzegovina.[37]
> It can be said that the Croats are "the most European people", as no other people have such high shares of this major (and likely the only) Paleolithic European haplogroup.
> The second conclusion that can be drawn is that the theory of an Iranian origin has little genetic support. Modern-day Iranians have a significantly different haplogroup distribution, although Iranic speaking communities have lived in eastern Europe. The low frequency of _Anatolian_ haplogroups suggests that agriculture spread into the region of Croatia primarily by way of cultural contact.[39]
> And the third conclusion from the genetic evidence points to the fact Croats are genetically heterogeneous, pointing to a high degree of mixing of the newly arrived medieval migrant tribes (such as Slavs) with the indigenous populations that were already present in the region of the modern day Croatia.[40] Hence, most modern day Croats are directly descended from the original European population of the region and have lived in the territory by other names, such as Illyrians and their forebears. These original inhabitants also served an important role in re-populating Europe after the last ice age


there was a goth theory, infact one of the early traveling writers from 11 century called us Goths (pop Dukljanin), we were those Ggoths that lived with Slavs(Sarmats) and formed early Rus' state.

----------


## Dalmat

> First of all, sub variant of haplogroup I spread in western Balkan (and southern Croatia too) is I2a2 Dinaric and there is no single evidence that this haplogroup was in western Balkan since Lgm in continuity. On the contrary all proves suggests that it was spread primeraly with Slavic peoples in 6 th century. It is opinion of all leading geneticists and it was recently incorporated in wikipedia too. 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I2_(Y-DNA)
> Croats have high percent of I2a2 Dinaric haplogroup, but only in southern parts of Dalmatia and in Herzegovina region. It is exactly the regions where during Ottoman reign were great migrations of population. Dalmatia for example, change almost entirely its previous medieval population. So, the medieval Croats which lived in Dalmatia moved mostly on islands or northward, or in Italia. New people (mostly I2a2 Dinaric ) came from region of Herzegovina and Montenegro and settled in Dalmatia, and hose were not ethnically Croats, they adopted Croatian name later. They simply called themselves Slavs, like it was in Dubrovnik and very often Serbs. 
> The real Croats you may today find in the region of chakavian dialect
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect
> 
> and genetic analisys of island Krk (the real Croats) shows prevalance of haplogroup of R1a over I2a2. The same situation is for the rest of mainland Croatia. So, I do believe that it is possible that Croats were not Slavs initiallly (maybe some Sarmatian or Turkic component among the Slavs) and that they were predominantly R1a.


lol gypsy full of shit as always, on tests made on people from Zagerb, 64% of them where I2a2, as for Slavonia where is I the lowest(34%) was tested at Osijek, near Serbia and Hungary border, where people actually have most varied roots, as well as Istra , and NW near border

As for chakavian, it was earliest Croatian dialect, and its full of words with Gothic roots, and you dont even know to speak Serbian after turks and Karadžićevog prijepisa hehehe

Naime oko 1/5 do 1/4 germanizama koji su u Jugoslaviji pogrešno pripisani utjecaju Austro-Ugarske, ustvari su rani gotski arhaizmi predslavenskih Hrvata. Tih je najmanje u štokavštini, a puno više u kajkavskim i čakavskim govorima gdje su se većinom održali do danas.
Tek malobrojni primjeri tih gotskih arhaizama očuvanih u književnoj štokavštini su: bota (bod: čakav. bot), frisiaz (frizura-češljanje), lekeis (liječnik), lekinassus (ljekovit), nu (ali-no), pops (pop-svećenik), skrizis (križ), smakka (smokva), stiurjan (stvoriti: čakav. storit), swaikra (svekrva), swairban (svrbiti), thaurna (trnje: čak. tarnak), weihitha (vještica), wopjan (vapiti-zapomagati), weinagards (vinograd) i wraks (vrag-đavo).
Znatno ih je više (preko 100) bilo u javnom kultiviranom hrvatskom prije 1918, koji su sad uklonjeni ali su ih još zadržali čakavci i kajkavci (Lovrić i surad. 2005-2007): uz gore spomenute još npr. bandi (strana: ča. banda), daughtar (udavača: ča. dotarica), flodra (podstava: kaj. futar), hropjan (krkljati: kaj.ča. hropiti), ja (da-jeste: kaj.ča. ja), saj (taj: ča. sej), skiuban (očerupati: kaj.ča. skubiti), skura (mračno: kaj.ča. škuro), skuran (smrknuti: ča. škurit), tekan (dirati: kaj. teknuti), thiuda (mnoštvo: ča. čuda), wazgo (upaliti: ča. vazgat) ... itd.

----------


## Dalmat

> before the slavic invasions in the balkans they weren't.
> they were much akin to neolithic italians i think.. at least those near the coasts, (Croatia and Dalmatia).



not really, modern Italian and Croats are not similar

----------


## Dalmat

> Never take Wikipedia seriously. It is written by those who support official history. Propaganda tool ...
> 
> iapodos said in short how things really are.
> 
> Who are Croats?
> 
> Well, some are croatised Serbs, some croatised Vlahs or Romanians, Goths, Celtcs, Sarmatians, Avars, and so on, and so on...


Hehe, Croats are in Upper part of homogeneity of Europe, Serbs are at the very bottom.

I mean with mentality you Serbs have, with stories where all Europeans descendant of Serbs, i am not surprised at all.

You know what that means in terms of assimilation?

----------


## Dalmat

> so the theory that the croats where originally goths and with this had the I haplo is wrong?
> 
> If what you say is correct , then is the Chakavian dialect the ancient language of the illyrians or lubanini from histria , maybe mixed with latin and Venetian later on?


That gypsy is talking BS lol, its comparative to trash scavenger talking about quantum physics.

Usually from some standpoint of Serb farytails, where all white people on Earth are descendants of Serbs.

Funny thing is that Serbs were always called Vlach by us, even today in some areas its common.
They, with help of ottoman buddies were very active in Bosnia, they spread or assimilated like bacterial infection.

I can always recognize a true Serb, he looks like North African.
We see them as sort of malign gypsies.
They are like pests.

----------


## Dalmat

> for it is more simple,
> 
> Today all area is named croatia, but from past it is 2 Sub areas, and probably in ancient times there where 2 people,
> Thracians never passed the Dinaric Alps, while Greek settlers stay only in Adra sea,
> 
> to examine Croats better we must divide to 2 primary regions,
> 1 is Zagreb, main inland Croatia, and the other is Dalmatia,
> 
> I believe the Croat unification movement so to create a nation, lay between the religion and the language,
> Dalmatians I don't Believe they were Slavic people, while Zagreb people I believe they were. the case of Avars or Huns or Oghurs, I can't tell, although I don't reject it,


Again, you are talking out of your ass

----------


## Dalmat

> though when provoked by Croat nationalists, I like to emphasize the clues indicating potential Turkic origin of Croats... I am pretty sure their tribal identity was Slavic, and before that probably Celtic... same holds for Serbs...
> 
> in fact I think I2 are Cimmerians/Gomer people and original Celts but more about that on link http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthr...ian-parallels/
> 
> 
> Russian primary chronicle enlists Croats (as well as Serbs and Carantanians (Slovene of today) in Danubian Slavs...according to it they have migrated to north due to pressure of Vlakhs (read Roman empire) to the lands of Lyakhs (read Lech or Poles)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Its enough to go into Serbia, and look at the people, you guys(most of you) can pass as N. African, Levantine or Turk.
Your 3 fingers salute theory of Serbs was funniest one( since you even dont know recent history), as well your theories as Proto Serbs= ancestor of Germans.

That map of I2a2 is incorrect, since Serbs from Bosnia ( and they territoriality hold 50% of it) have less of it than Croatians from Slavonia.


Didn't even had the need to read rest of your post.
Your theoris in general, are typical for Serb, a nation without their own culture or language, infested with low self esteem, overcompensating in search for better past

----------


## Dalmat

> Dalmatians where illyrian people with there own language
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalmatian_language


Dalmatian, was used to communicate with latinized/Italian minority during middle ages, it is language similar to Venetian.
It was used longest in Dubrovnik, as they were independent City-state that had political contact with Venetians a lot.

Oldest artifacts, and texts written in Croatian glagolithic script are in fact from Dalmatian region, Dalmatian wasnt even called Dalmatia after Croats settled, it was called Croatia. Only after Venetian took over it was renamed Dalmatia.
It was a core of Croatia, and from dalmatia Croatians expanded northwards towards Slavinje/Zagreb.


____________________

you serbs are actually very similar to these guys, as i know one of your distinguished "historian" claimed Greeks also





... must be those "Egyptian" genes eh!

----------


## zanipolo

> Dalmatian, was used to communicate with latinized/Italian minority during middle ages, it is language similar to Venetian.
> It was used longest in Dubrovnik, as they were independent City-state that had political contact with Venetians a lot.
> 
> Oldest artifacts, and texts written in Croatian glagolithic script are in fact from Dalmatian region, Dalmatian wasnt even called Dalmatia after Croats settled, it was called Croatia. Only after Venetian took over it was renamed Dalmatia.
> It was a core of Croatia, and from dalmatia Croatians expanded northwards towards Slavinje/Zagreb.
> 
> 
> ____________________
> 
> ...


As for my question, are croats originally slavs. Can you answer this, 

its a pity that the croats renamed ragusa into dubrovnik , this distorts history, you do not see a name change for the veneti in ancient or modern times, you do not see much of a name change from etruscan to tuscan, sicel to sicilian, lombard to lombardia. ............. if in roman times the dalmatian coast was Dalmatae , it would always remain so named in italian people. Same as there is always a Constantinople and not a Istanbul.

----------


## Bodin

> First of all, sub variant of haplogroup I spread in western Balkan (and southern Croatia too) is I2a2 Dinaric and there is no single evidence that this haplogroup was in western Balkan since Lgm in continuity. On the contrary all proves suggests that it was spread primeraly with Slavic peoples in 6 th century. It is opinion of all leading geneticists and it was recently incorporated in wikipedia too. 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I2_(Y-DNA)
> Croats have high percent of I2a2 Dinaric haplogroup, but only in southern parts of Dalmatia and in Herzegovina region. It is exactly the regions where during Ottoman reign were great migrations of population. Dalmatia for example, change almost entirely its previous medieval population. So, the medieval Croats which lived in Dalmatia moved mostly on islands or northward, or in Italia. New people (mostly I2a2 Dinaric ) came from region of Herzegovina and Montenegro and settled in Dalmatia, and hose were not ethnically Croats, they adopted Croatian name later. They simply called themselves Slavs, like it was in Dubrovnik and very often Serbs. 
> The real Croats you may today find in the region of chakavian dialect
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect
> 
> and genetic analisys of island Krk (the real Croats) shows prevalance of haplogroup of R1a over I2a2. The same situation is for the rest of mainland Croatia. So, I do believe that it is possible that Croats were not Slavs initiallly (maybe some Sarmatian or Turkic component among the Slavs) and that they were predominantly R1a.


It is true that I2a2 is probably not hier since LGM because it would be more equaly disperced like mthDNA haplogroups that are in Europe since LGM . Few strong clusters of I2a2 could sugest and total apsence on other regions showing it is haplogroup that have mooved recently ( compared to LGM ) . Also it is to young to be hier since LGM , and there is not much divercity which should be expected if that is the case . But there is also no any evidence that I2a2 is Slavic , first Slavs are formed recently , Jordanes mentions they were called diferently ( Spores ) , so they would carry mainly Scythian R1a - around Pripyat were is probably originating place of Slavic languague , and some I2a2 received by mixing with Sarmatians who use to rule over them . I2a2 in Ukraine is of Roxolans who use to live there , in Moldavia and Romania from Ants also Sarmatian tribe - you can say by they names , in Hungary by Yaziges , in Czech, Bavaria and Saxonia Anhalt by Serbs and Croats , in Aragon in Spain , Sardinia and Lybia by Alans and Vandals , ... Pliny cleary says Serboi/Siraci and Haruatas were Sarmatians .
After they gain Dalmatia from Turks Austrians resetled Croats that have escaped in todays Slovenia back in Dalmatia , only small percentage of Dalmatian catolics are Serbs that converted to catholicism . Islands ( Krk) are actually better for observing situation before settling of Croats because they are the places were old population have survived Avar attacks.

----------


## Bodin

> That gypsy is talking BS lol, its comparative to trash scavenger talking about quantum physics.
> 
> Usually from some standpoint of Serb farytails, where all white people on Earth are descendants of Serbs.
> 
> Funny thing is that Serbs were always called Vlach by us, even today in some areas its common.
> They, with help of ottoman buddies were very active in Bosnia, they spread or assimilated like bacterial infection.
> 
> I can always recognize a true Serb, he looks like North African.
> We see them as sort of malign gypsies.
> They are like pests.


Serbs and Croats have same Sarmatian origins , so if Serbs are gypsies so Croats are . Yo u called Serbs Vlachs because it is specific millitary cast in Ottoman Turkic state - they dont pay all taxes , geting land for plaughing and make war for that . Because Serbs were brought to Croatia and Bosanska Krajina ( land setled by Croatians - speacked and writed Ikavski during Midle Ages) in that status by Turks you called them Vlachs .It is true that Serbs use to mix with indigenous populations more then Croatians ( E1b1b , J ,G ) but genes are yet very simillar

----------


## Ike

> Yes, good observation, but you need to try more into translation. 
> Troy is an Albanian word. Dardanian in north West Anatolia, dardanian in modern kosova. Maybe it is a coincidence. But troy in the Albanian language means land bank or is used to describe the lands and the territory which you owns.


Troy is not Albanian word. That root probably has meaning on almost every language of the world. And the correct term was not Troy but Troia.
And people of what we call Troia did not use any of them, as far as we know today. Just like Illyrians...

----------


## Sile

> Troy is not Albanian word. That root probably has meaning on almost every language of the world. And the correct term was not Troy but Troia.
> And people of what we call Troia did not use any of them, as far as we know today. Just like Illyrians...



Troia as per the trojans was the province name where the capital was called Ilios.


In venetian
Troj(i) is a dirt track

Troj(i)a is to sow 

Troia is also used as a slang word to describe a cheap prostitute .............a woman who peddles her profession along dirt tracks........sow ones seeds

----------


## Yetos

> Yes, good observation, but you need to try more into translation. 
> Troy is an Albanian word. Dardanian in north West Anatolia, dardanian in modern kosova. Maybe it is a coincidence. But troy in the Albanian language means land bank or is used to describe the lands and the territory which you owns.


yes Dardanian and dardanelian passage,
Maybe linguist Duridanov is Alb anian also?
remember Persian king was also Darius
he could be Albanian if he was Daridus?
and in Greece there an area that is named Darnako-choria the people are Darnakes, 
are they Troyans, Illyrians? or Thracians?

----------


## Yetos

> Yes, good observation, but you need to try more into translation. 
> Troy is an Albanian word. Dardanian in north West Anatolia, dardanian in modern kosova. Maybe it is a coincidence. But troy in the Albanian language means land bank or is used to describe the lands and the territory which you owns.


ok my Albanian neighbour and pure divine race!!!

*Will you decide what you are?
*are you* Autochthonous?
*are you* Illyrians from Noricum?
*are you* Getaae from Dacia?
*are you* ancient Greeks, Dorians?
*Are you* Troyans
*are you* Pelasgians
*are you* Etruscans?
*are you* Aromani?
*are you* Slavs?

it is time to decide

*except if you are a nation of gathering litlle bit of all the above,
a mixed modern nation

----------


## Милан М.

Croats were called "Krobatoi" in Greek sources most similar names from ancient tribes i could find are;Krobyzoi (Greek: "Κρόβυζοι") is a Thracian,Getae or Dacian tribe.The Kuretes or Kouretes (Κουρῆτες) although this name is connected with some people in Greek mythology that fought against Aetolians,Strabo connect them with Cretans,Aetolians etc..

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Troy is not Albanian word. That root probably has meaning on almost every language of the world. And the correct term was not Troy but Troia.
> And people of what we call Troia did not use any of them, as far as we know today. Just like Illyrians...


Troia or troy both are Albanian words. The people of the region were was located the ancient city of troy were called dardanians. You probably know this. 
Illyrians were a tribe located near scodra lake. From this tribe the hellenes and later the Romans called either the other tribes who were ethnically akin with the illyrians of scodra lake. This is generally accepted by the scholars. Hyllirian is a name and a word probably not Hellenic . Please stop saying stuff before not verifying it.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Troia as per the trojans was the province name where the capital was called Ilios.
> 
> 
> In venetian
> Troj(i) is a dirt track
> 
> Troj(i)a is to sow 
> 
> Troia is also used as a slang word to describe a cheap prostitute .............a woman who peddles her profession along dirt tracks........sow ones seeds


You are completely wrong here. Has nothing to do with the venetians nor with the Italian language. Troy was the city. Dardanian were the inhabitants of the region North West Anatolia around troy. Troy is an Albanian word. It is too clear. Old Albanians who lived on mountains used that, describing their own lands. : I am on troy. This is my troy, or this is my Troia. Dardan is an Albanian word either. Ok, all these stuffs could be a coincidence.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> yes Dardanian and dardanelian passage,
> Maybe linguist Duridanov is Alb anian also?
> remember Persian king was also Darius
> he could be Albanian if he was Daridus?
> and in Greece there an area that is named Darnako-choria the people are Darnakes, 
> are they Troyans, Illyrians? or Thracians?


I never said that Persians were Albanians. Illyrians were not Albanians. It is impossible. They were proto Albanians.
I am trying to make a normal and helpful conversation

----------


## Piro Ilir

> ok my Albanian neighbour and pure divine race!!!
> 
> *Will you decide what you are?
> *are you* Autochthonous?
> *are you* Illyrians from Noricum?
> *are you* Getaae from Dacia?
> *are you* ancient Greeks, Dorians?
> *Are you* Troyans
> *are you* Pelasgians
> ...


Firstly: surely the Albanians are not a divine and superior race, as you just said . They are just normal people as the rest of the world. 
I can't answer you simply because we can't be 100% sure about stuff and events which happened many many times ago through the course of history.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Croats were called "Krobatoi" in Greek sources most similar names from ancient tribes i could find are;Krobyzoi (Greek: "Κρόβυζοι") is a Thracian,Getae or Dacian tribe.The Kuretes or Kouretes (Κουρῆτες) although this name is connected with some people in Greek mythology that fought against Aetolians,Strabo connect them with Cretans,Aetolians etc..


When begin the split between the Croatian and the Serbian language? As I know the split started after the year 1000 ad.

----------


## Yetos

> Firstly: surely the Albanians are not a divine and superior race, as you just said . They are just normal people as the rest of the world. 
> I can't answer you simply because we can't be 100% sure about stuff and events which happened many many times ago through the course of history.


WHAT ?
now we can not be sure?
but until now we claim that : 

Thracians were Albanians
 Getae were Albanians?
Ilyrians were Albanians
Makedonians were Albanians
Greeks/Dorians were Albanians
Epirotans were Albanians
Etruscans were Albanians
Troyans were Albanians
Pelasgians were Albanians
Aromani were Albanians 
Slavs were Albanians?

Everybody is Albanian

what is next?
Italians are they Albanians to?


*NO I have founded it* 

*ADAM and EVE*





Yes Bible made a mistake  :Angry: 

*their Names were Alban and AlbanEVE 
and they were Autochthonus in Albania
were the world created, and IE language sprunk 

*


Every body is Albanian Autochthon since homo erectus and homo Sapiens were created in Albania, Yeahh yeahhh  :Cool V: 
Yes and the bad snake was a Greek snake, correct?  :Laughing:  :Laughing:   :Laughing:   :Laughing: 

Time to change the bible too except History and science


aren't you tired?
to spread whatever?

----------


## Ike

> Troia or troy both *are Albanian words*. The people of the region were was located the ancient city of troy were called dardanians. You probably know this. 
> 
> Illyrians were a tribe located near scodra lake. From this tribe the hellenes and later the Romans called either the other tribes who were ethnically akin with the illyrians of scodra lake.* This is generally accepted* by the scholars. Hyllirian is a name and a word probably not Hellenic . Please stop saying stuff before not verifying it.


1. You may have the world which sound like Troia, just like every other language in the world, but what's that got to do with Wilusa? 
2. No it is not generally accepted. Stop lying.

----------


## Gorgonzola

LOL. I don't know why the origin of Albanians becomes a discussion in every topic here. But sometimes it can create funny situations. 

For example. Recently, in the 6th grade history books in Serbia, they have accepted that the albanians are autochtonus people of the balkans and the serbs have migrated here and have taken the lands and traditions from them. This thing created a wide debate in the country. The tension was created between the historians, ministry of education and the orthodox church. Patriarch of the church had criticized this move by saying that "we shouldn't raise our children with this dangerous ideas". 

But various historians reacted to this by saying that: "Without taking in consideration our relations with Albanians, they are a special nation and have their own tradition and history. And this should not be included in someone's own political agenda." - said Nebojsa Jovanovic. 
Link http://www.telegrafi.com/lajme/tekst...e-2-68464.html

----------


## Ike

> LOL. I don't know why the origin of Albanians becomes a discussion in every topic here.


Because Albanian romantic-nationalists poison every thread on the internet that mentions Thracians, Illyrians, Makedonians, Dorians, Epiroteans, Troyans, Pelasgians, etc ...

----------


## MOESAN

> Troia as per the trojans was the province name where the capital was called Ilios.
> 
> 
> In venetian
> Troj(i) is a dirt track
> 
> Troj(i)a is to sow 
> 
> Troia is also used as a slang word to describe a cheap prostitute .............a woman who peddles her profession along dirt tracks........sow ones seeds


_we are far from the very topic, but concerning 'troia' as slang term for prostitute we can make the link with the meaning "sow" and here I put a french etymology for the word "truie" = "sow": latin 'troia' from 'porcus troianus', "stuffed pork meat", a joke with the famous Troy horse of the Greeks -
same words transfert of meaning as in french as "jersey" = "wool jumper", from "Jersey wool"
_

----------


## mihaitzateo

Albanians are not older in Balkans than South Slavs and Romanians.
The genetic testing says clear that South Slavs and Romanians have more old blood,than Albanian,because I2-din came in Balkans before E-v13 did.
As for Croatians,I think they are not mostly Slavic,but they are more Slavic than Serbians,cause they have higher R1A.
The rulers and ruling class was Slavic ,at both Croatians and Serbians and this is how the mass of the people started to speak Slavic.
But I do not think that ruling class is making a whole people.

----------


## DuPidh

> Albanians are not older in Balkans than South Slavs and Romanians.
> The genetic testing says clear that South Slavs and Romanians have more old blood,than Albanian,because I2-din came in Balkans before E-v13 did.
> As for Croatians,I think they are not mostly Slavic,but they are more Slavic than Serbians,cause they have higher R1A.
> The rulers and ruling class was Slavic ,at both Croatians and Serbians and this is how the mass of the people started to speak Slavic.
> But I do not think that ruling class is making a whole people.


Really professor! What about the Albanian language that has 50% of its vocabulary from pre-christ vocabulary of Latin!
How did the Albanian get those words if they were not in Illyria that was the only place conquered by Romans at that time?
How about Serb and Croatian language that is similar with south Polish? How did that happen if they were in Ballkans and not in south Poland? Why SLAVS of the Ballkans dont have Latin vocabulary if they were there at the time of Roman conquest?
What is the percentage of Sardinian I in Serbs and Croatian? That is the regional I not the Slavic I?
Use the top of of your body to think, not the bottom!

----------


## RobertColumbia

> ...Patriarch of the church had criticized this move by saying that "we shouldn't raise our children with this dangerous ideas". 
> 
> But various historians reacted to this by saying that: "Without taking in consideration our relations with Albanians, they are a special nation and have their own tradition and history. And this should not be included in someone's own political agenda." - said Nebojsa Jovanovic. 
> Link http://www.telegrafi.com/lajme/tekst...e-2-68464.html


Great points. The history of the world shows very large amounts of admixture, settlement, and plain land-grabbing. Even so-called "native" groups are not always the "true" natives, but are the people who were living there just before the most recent invasion. For example, Celts are frequently seen as the "natives" of the British Isles who were displaced by Anglo-Saxons and Vikings, but there are clear indications of pre-Celtic settlement.

If I accuse someone of taking my ancestors' land, they can point right back and say that my ancestors took that land from someone else. We can go around and around and play the accuse everyone else game, or we can find a way to move ahead and get along.

----------


## Ike

> I never said that Persians were Albanians. *Illyrians were not Albanians. It is impossible. They were proto Albanians.*
> I am trying to make a normal and helpful conversation


Since we know that Illyrians came from north and that Albanian language has strange correlation with Lithuanian, you probably think there is a chance that Illyrians and Albanians occupied some North-Eastern European area, before they both came down to Balkan. There is a reasonable doubt, but no evidence so far.

----------


## Yetos

> Really professor! What about the Albanian language that has 50% of its vocabulary from pre-christ vocabulary of Latin!
> How did the Albanian get those words if they were not in Illyria that was the only place conquered by Romans at that time?
> How about Serb and Croatian language that is similar with south Polish? How did that happen if they were in Ballkans and not in south Poland? Why SLAVS of the Ballkans dont have Latin vocabulary if they were there at the time of Roman conquest?
> What is the percentage of Sardinian I in Serbs and Croatian? That is the regional I not the Slavic I?
> Use the top of of your body to think, not the bottom!


Romanians are heavily with Slav genes, but speak more ancient Latin,
Bulgarian language although Slavic has enough Latin also,

ok mr PHD?

----------


## Piro Ilir

> WHAT ?
> now we can not be sure?
> but until now we claim that : 
> 
> Thracians were Albanians
>  Getae were Albanians?
> Ilyrians were Albanians
> Makedonians were Albanians
> Greeks/Dorians were Albanians
> ...


You are the only one who is assuming these claims, not, me. I am just trying to elaborate the history. 
Try to keep calm and enjoy the forum.  .

----------


## Piro Ilir

> 1. You may have the world which sound like Troia, just like every other language in the world, but what's that got to do with Wilusa? 
> 2. No it is not generally accepted. Stop lying.


I don't have any reason to lie. The yllirian tribe was located near scodra. The scholars argue that from this tribe the hellenes and later the Romans started to call all the rest of the tribes who were akin to them, likewise yllirians. 
Troia is an Albanian word connected with the meaning of the city which is your own, on your own possession. It is not just a word akin with another whatsoever Albanian word. - I am back again in my homeland- alb- un u ktheva perseri ne "trojen" time. Go back to homeland- alb- kthehu mbrapsht ne "troje" . I repeat, this might be a coincidence. Although a strange coincidence.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Because Albanian romantic-nationalists poison every thread on the internet that mentions Thracians, Illyrians, Makedonians, Dorians, Epiroteans, Troyans, Pelasgians, etc ...


I could say the same. Because some Slavs romantic nationalistic poison every thread denying everything of Albanian stuff or of Albanian origin.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> LOL. I don't know why the origin of Albanians becomes a discussion in every topic here. But sometimes it can create funny situations. 
> 
> For example. Recently, in the 6th grade history books in Serbia, they have accepted that the albanians are autochtonus people of the balkans and the serbs have migrated here and have taken the lands and traditions from them. This thing created a wide debate in the country. The tension was created between the historians, ministry of education and the orthodox church. Patriarch of the church had criticized this move by saying that "we shouldn't raise our children with this dangerous ideas". 
> 
> But various historians reacted to this by saying that: "Without taking in consideration our relations with Albanians, they are a special nation and have their own tradition and history. And this should not be included in someone's own political agenda." - said Nebojsa Jovanovic. 
> Link http://www.telegrafi.com/lajme/tekst...e-2-68464.html


If the Serbs claim that their ancestors took and inherited the old Albanian traditions, indeed they could claim some illirian heritage. Which means, partly autochtonous.
Although the term "historical right" doesn't exist

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Albanians are not older in Balkans than South Slavs and Romanians.
> The genetic testing says clear that South Slavs and Romanians have more old blood,than Albanian,because I2-din came in Balkans before E-v13 did.
> As for Croatians,I think they are not mostly Slavic,but they are more Slavic than Serbians,cause they have higher R1A.
> The rulers and ruling class was Slavic ,at both Croatians and Serbians and this is how the mass of the people started to speak Slavic.
> But I do not think that ruling class is making a whole people.


The larger part of I2,which is on Slavic population came in Balkans during the big Slavic migration.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Great points. The history of the world shows very large amounts of admixture, settlement, and plain land-grabbing. Even so-called "native" groups are not always the "true" natives, but are the people who were living there just before the most recent invasion. For example, Celts are frequently seen as the "natives" of the British Isles who were displaced by Anglo-Saxons and Vikings, but there are clear indications of pre-Celtic settlement.
> 
> If I accuse someone of taking my ancestors' land, they can point right back and say that my ancestors took that land from someone else. We can go around and around and play the accuse everyone else game, or we can find a way to move ahead and get along.


What about the mysterious Picts people. They disappear around the year 1000 . What were them ? I like the Celtics, and their history. 

Modern south Slavs have the same rights over the Balkans as the Albanians and the Greeks. History is just history. They belong to the Balkans

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Since we know that Illyrians came from north and that Albanian language has strange correlation with Lithuanian, you probably think there is a chance that Illyrians and Albanians occupied some North-Eastern European area, before they both came down to Balkan. There is a reasonable doubt, but no evidence so far.


So, Albanians were conquered on Baltic sea by the Romans and their shores were colonized by the hellenes.!!! . Come on. You are pulling down the conversation.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Romanians are heavily with Slav genes, but speak more ancient Latin,
> Bulgarian language although Slavic has enough Latin also,
> 
> ok mr PHD?


You know that your assertion is partly false. Is coming to be an attitude for you. Albanian language has words with origin by archaic Latin and archaic north West Greek dialect. Romanian has not. Which means the Romanian language was formed later. It was formed by latinized tracians and yllirians. Probably Greeks either. The church Albanian vocabulary also shows a very earlier Christian adherence, prior Byzantine empire.

----------


## Ike

> So, Albanians were conquered on Baltic sea by the Romans and their shores were colonized by the hellenes.!!! . Come on. You are pulling down the conversation.


You find it more plausible that Lithuanians conquered Mediterranean?

----------


## Милан М.

> You know that your assertion is partly false. Is coming to be an attitude for you. Albanian language has words with origin by archaic Latin and archaic north West Greek dialect. Romanian has not. Which means the Romanian language was formed later. It was formed by latinized tracians and yllirians. Probably Greeks either. The church Albanian vocabulary also shows a very earlier Christian adherence, prior Byzantine empire.


Maybe i post to you this prior,will post it again and after you tell me what is your prove to support your "Illyrian" heritage.

*Austrian Scholars Leave Albania Lost for Words*

Viennese researchers upset traditionally minded Albanians by pouring cold water on the theory that the Albanian language has its roots in Ancient Illyria.

Besar Likmeta
[COLOR=#666666 !important]Tirana and Vienna[/COLOR]

Joachim Matzinger and Stefan Schumacher |_ Photo by : Besar Likmeta_


Deep in the bowels of Vienna University, two Austrian academics are poring over the ancient texts of a far-away people in the Balkans. 

Like a couple of detectives searching for clues, Stefan Schumacher and Joachim Matzinger are out to reconstruct the origins of Albanian - a language whose history and development has received remarkably little attention outside the world of Albanian scholars.

“The way that languages change can be traced,” Schumacher declares, with certainty. 

Although the two men are simply studying 17th and 18th-century Albanian texts in order to compile a lexicon of verbs, their innocent-sounding work has stirred hot debate among Albanian linguists. 

The root of the controversy is their hypothesis that Albanian does not originate from the language of the Ancient Illyrians, the people or peoples who inhabited the Balkans in the Greek and Roman era. 

According to Classical writers, the Illyrians were a collection of tribes who lived in much of today’s Western Balkans, roughly corresponding to part of former Yugoslavia and modern Albania. 

Although Albanian and Illyrian have little or nothing in common, judging from the handful of Illyrian words that archeologists have retrieved, the Albanian link has long been cherished by Albanian nationalists. 

The theory is still taught to all Albanians, from primary school through to university. 

It is popular because it suggests that Albanians descend from an ancient people who populated the Balkans long before the Slavs and whose territory was unfairly stolen by these later incomers.

“You’ll find the doctrine about the Illyrian origin of Albanians everywhere,” Matzinger muses, “from popular to scientific literature and schoolbooks. “There is no discussion about this, it’s a fact. They say, ‘We are Illyrians’ and that’s that,” he adds.

*What’s in a name?* 

The names of many Albanians bear witness to the historic drive to prove the Illyrian link.
 

 Pandeli Pani | Photo by : Idem Institute


Not Pandeli Pani. When he was born in Tirana in 1966, midway through the long dictatorship of Enver Hoxha, his father told the local registry office that he wished to name him after his grandfather. 

Pani recalls his father’s hard-fought battle not to have to give his son an Illyrian name. 

Staff at the civil registry office apparently said that naming the future linguistics professor after his grandfather was not a good idea, as he was dead. They suggested an approved Illyrian name instead. 

“But the Illyrians aren’t alive either,” Pani recalls his father as quipping.

Many members of Pani’s generation born in the Sixties did not have such stubborn fathers. Their parents subscribed to the government policy of naming children after names drawn from ancient tombs. 

In the eyes of the world, they aimed to cement the linkage between modern Albania and its supposedly ancient past. 

“While I was named after my grandfather, keeping up a family tradition, other parents gave their children Illyrian names that I doubt they knew the meaning of,” says Pani, who today teaches at Jena university in Germany. 

“But I doubt many parents today would want to name their children ‘Bledar’ or ‘Agron,’ when the first means ‘dead’ and the second ‘arcadian,” he adds. 

Pani says that despite the Hoxha regime’s efforts to burn the doctrine of the Albanians’ Illyrian origins into the nation’s consciousness, the theory has become increasingly anachronistic.

“The political pressure in which Albania’s scientific community worked after the communist took over, made it difficult to deal with flaws with the doctrine of the Illyrian origin,” he said. 

But while the Illyrian theory no longer commands universal support, it hasn’t lost all its supporters in Albanian academia. 

Take Mimoza Kore, linguistics professor at the University of Tirana. 




Mimoza Kore | Photo by : Photo by : Albaneological Institute


Speaking during a conference in November organised by the Hanns Seidel Foundation, where Pani presented Schumacher’s and Matzinger’s findings, she defended the linkage of Albanian and Illyrian, saying it was not based only on linguistic theory.

“Scholars base this hypothesis also on archeology,” Kore said. Renowned scholars who did not “subscribe blindly to the ideology of the [Hoxha] regime” still supported the idea, she insisted.

One of the key problems in working out the linguistic descendants of the Illyrians is a chronic shortage of sources. 

The Illyrians appears to have been unlettered, so information on their language and culture is highly fragmentary and mostly derived from external sources, Greek or Roman.

Matzinger points put that when the few surviving fragments of Illyrian and Albanian are compared, they have almost nothing in common. 

“The two are opposites and cannot fit together,” he says. “Albanian is not as the same as Illyrian from a linguistic point of view.”

Schumacher and Matzinger believe Albanian came into existence separately from Illyrian, orginating from the Indo-European family tree during the second millennium BC, somewhere in the northern Balkans. 

The language’s broad shape resembles Greek. It appears to have developed lineally until the 15th century, when the first extant text comes to light. 

“One thing we know for sure is that a language which, with some justification, we can call Albanian has been around for at least 3,000 years,” Schumacher says. “Even though it was not written down for millennia, Albanian existed as a separate entity,” he added. 

*Bastard tongues:*

Linguists say different languages spoken in the same geographical area often reveal similarities, despite a lack of evidence of a common origin. 

This phenomenon of linguistic “areas” is also evident in the Balkans, where such different languages as Albanian, Greek, Bulgarian and Romanian all share words and structures.
*First written words in Albanian*

The first written record of Albanian is a baptismal formula written in 1462 by the Archbishop of Durres, Pal Engjelli. The first book in Albanian, a missal, was written in 1554 by Gjon Buzuku, a Catholic priest from the Shkodra region.
Pjeter Budi, Archbishop of Sape, also translated and adapted several Italian texts to Albanian in the same period.
Schumacher and Matzinger are concentrating their scholarship mostly on the work of Pjeter Bogdani, Archbishop of Prizren, who wrote half-a-century later. He is considered the most interesting Albanian early writer and the “father” of Albanian prose.
Bogdani’s most famous work, The Story of Adam and Eve, his account of the first part of the Bible, is written in both Albanian and Italian. Matzinger says that when Bogdani published the book he was under some pressure from the Inquisition. As the Inquisition did not know Albanian, and were not sure what he wrote, they forced him to make an Italian translation, which is published in the left column of the book.
“That is most useful because it means that no sentence in the book [in Albanian] is incomprehensible,” Matzinger says.
Although numerous texts by Bogdani, Budi and some others survive, the variety of authors, mainly Catholic clerics, is small. “It would be interesting if we had a bigger variety of authors, though we’re grateful enough for what we do have,” Schumacher says.


According to Schumacher, from the Middle Ages onwards, languages throughout the Balkans tended to become more similar to one another, suggesting a high level of linguistic “exchange” between populations in the region. 

“A lot of people used a number of languages every day, and this is one way in which languages influence each other,” Schumacher says. “The difficult thing is that this runs counter to nationalist theories,” he adds. 

Drawing on genetic terminology, linguists term this process of language exchange language “bastardization”. 

Following the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, the phenomenon of language bastardization has taken a new twist, moving in the opposite direction, as each newly formed state acts to shore up its own unique linguistic identity. 

Before the common state collapsed, four of the six constituent republics, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Montenegro, shared a common language known as Serbo-Croat.

But since declaring independence in 1991, Croatia has consciously highlighted the distinct character of its language, now called “Croatian”. 

Bosnian Muslims have made similar efforts in Bosnia and Herzegovina, promoting official use of a codified “Bosniak” language.

Montenegro, which remained in a loose state union with Serbia until 2006, then appeared content not to have its own separate language. But after independence, a new constitution adopted on October 2007 named the official language as Montenegrin. 

Similar calls to foster a separate national language have been heard in Kosovo, drawing on the northern Albanian “Gegh” dialect, though none of these initiatives has received official encouragement. 

*Out of language, an identity:* 

The study of Balkan languages came of age in the later 19th century as the Ottoman Empire began disintegrating and as intellectuals tasked with creating new nations out of its rubble turned to language to help forge national identities.


Cover of Adam and Eve, from Pjeter Bogdani | Photo by : Stefan Schumacher


According Schumacher, each country in the Balkans forged its own national myth, just as Germany or the US had done earlier, with a view to creating foundations for a shared identity. 

“In the late 19th century, language was the only element that everyone could identify with,” says Schumacher. 

He described the use of linguistics in national mythology as understandable, considering the context and the time when these countries gained independence.

“It’s not easy to create an identity for Albanians if you just say that they descend from mountains tribes about whom the historians of antiquity wrote nothing,” he notes. 

The friction between ideological myth and reality, when it comes to forging national identity, and laying claim to territory, is not unique to Albania. 

Schumacher points out that Romanian history books teach that Romanians descend from the Roman legionnaires who guarded the Roman province of Dacia – a questionable theory to which few non-Romanians lend much credence, but which shores up Romania’s claim to Transylvania, a land to which Hungarians historically also lay claim. 

“The Romanian language developed somewhere south of the Danube, but Romanians don’t want to admit that because the Hungarians can claim that they have been there before,” notes Schumacher.

“None of them is older or younger,” says Schumacher. “Languages are like a bacterium that splits up in two and than splits up in two again and when you have 32 bacteria in the end, they are all the same,” he added. 

The two Austrian linguists say that within European academia, Albanian is one of the most neglected languages, which provides an opportunity to conduct pioneering work. 

Although the extant texts have been known for a long time, “they hardly ever been looked at properly”, Schumacher says. “They were mostly read by scholars of Albanian in order to find, whatever they wanted to find,” he adds.

----------


## Милан М.

> You find it more plausible that Lithuanians conquered Mediterranean?


I think that contrary to all they hailed from South Italy and or Sicily,this can explain their "ancient" Latin loanwords us they say and the old Greek,since Greeks had colonies there,plus Albanian has matching with Messapian which was exactly from there,they match in genetics more there,then with the Balkan people.

Italian theory
Laonikos Chalkokondyles (c. 1423–1490), the Byzantine historian, thought that the Albanians hailed from Italy. The theory has its origin in the first mention of the Albanians, disputed whether it refers to Albanians in an ethnic sense,made by Attaliates (11th century): "... For when subsequent commanders made base and shameful plans and decisions, not only was the island lost to Byzantium, but also the greater part of the army. Unfortunately, the people who had once been our allies and who possessed the same rights as citizens and the same religion, i.e. the Albanians and the Latins, who live in the Italian regions of our Empire beyond Western Rome, quite suddenly became enemies when Michael Dokenianos insanely directed his command against their leaders..

The time they are mentioned first there was very much religious wars troughout the Balkans and competition among Byzantines,Latins and various other Slavic polities,how they ended i don't know.

----------


## DuPidh

> Romanians are heavily with Slav genes, but speak more ancient Latin,
> Bulgarian language although Slavic has enough Latin also,
> 
> ok mr PHD?



Romanians speak a latin language with a post Christ origin. Pre Christ origin of Latin words in Albanian are older than post Christ Romanians. Yes Romanians are heavy Slavic in their genes, but so are the Greeks of Thesalia and Southern Albanians. Northern Greeks are real slavs which were attached to Greek state with the help of European powers at the beginning of this century. The only original population of the region are Geg Albanians.
But the discussion was that Slavs in the Ballkans are original inhabitants of the area. And that is stupid. We know that there are to many ****** in this forums, but just because they are ****** it doesn't mean their stupidities should go unanswered.
When one says a stupid thing of course will get a stupid rebuttal.

----------


## Ike

> I think that contrary to all they hailed from South Italy and or Sicily,this can explain their "ancient" Latin loanwords us they say and the old Greek,since Greeks had colonies there,plus Albanian has matching with Messapian which was exactly from there,they match in genetics more there,then with the Balkan people.


There is also a possibility that Albanian is a Hybrid language formed when two groups - one from Sicily and another from Carpates merged together with Dorian leftovers in the Epirus.







> The only original population of the region are Geg Albanians.


Really? How did you get to this conclusion?

----------


## DuPidh

> There is also a possibility that Albanian is a Hybrid language formed when two groups - one from Sicily and another from Carpates merged together with Dorian leftovers in the Epirus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? How did you get to this conclusion?


Geg Albanians lack the slavic R1a and I2a haplogroups which are south Poland originated. Ev13+j2b are the early farmers. What else you want? A picture of Albanians of antiquity?

----------


## Ike

> Geg Albanians lack the slavic R1a and I2a haplogroups which are south Poland originated. Ev13+j2b are the early farmers. What else you want? A picture of Albanians of antiquity?


That means everyone who have E-V13 and J2b are the original population of Balkan? Including tens of millions of Russians, Bulgarians, Europeans, Greeks and a small number of Ghegs in the end?

----------


## Trojet

> Geg Albanians lack the slavic R1a and I2a haplogroups which are south Poland originated. Ev13+j2b are the early farmers. What else you want? A picture of Albanians of antiquity?


Don't bother with this guy IKE. He is a joke just like his avatar.

----------


## Angela

> That means everyone who have E-V13 and J2b are the original population of Balkan? Including tens of millions of Russians, Bulgarians, Europeans, Greeks and a small number of Ghegs in the end?



What it means is that Europeans who carry those lineages, no matter where they might now be living, or what their autosomal signature, ultimately descend in the direct paternal line from farmers who arrived in Europe, probably south east Europe, thousands of years ago from the Near East via Anatolia. (That's if we don't find out that E-V13 or perhaps the precursor of E-V13 already existed in Greece or the Greek islands in the Mesolithic.) That doesn't change the fact, of course, that it seems that E-V13 probably got lucky and experienced its expansion in the Bronze Age.

What it also means is that given that we have E-V13 related lineages in the Balkans in the mid-late Neolithic very near where we now find the epicenter of E-V13 in Europe, any proposal that somehow the current bearers of it in the Balkans are _not_ descended from these Neolithic people but were instead somehow transported or moved there in more recent times is the opposite of Occam's Razor, and is, in fact, illogical, most particularly when we have no _attested_ movement (as shown in archaeology)into the Balkans within the last 1500 years except for the Slavs. That doesn't necessarily mean, of course, that the ancestors of the people in that epicenter region always sat on those specific square miles of territory.They might have moved from further east. However, I think a case could be made that the Slavs moved south primarily, although not totally, through the center of the Balkans.

Many groups of people in Europe have been fed an awful lot of "tripe" about their own "ethnic" origins and those of their neighbors. Modern genetics research is putting the lie to many of these ideas. I don't see the point in continuing to argue theories which have been disproved by the evidence. It's not persuading anyone; it's just an exercise in futility.

----------


## Ike

@Angela

You're going too broad on this one.

The guy clearly stated that *The only original population of the region are Geg Albanians.* and that it is because *Geg Albanians lack the slavic R1a and I2a haplogroups which are south Poland originated*.


I was wondering why doesn't then all the people of Balkan, who don't have Slavic R1a and I2a, count in as the original population of Balkan?

----------


## Angela

> @Angela
> 
> You're going too broad on this one.
> 
> The guy clearly stated that *The only original population of the region are Geg Albanians.* and that it is because *Geg Albanians lack the slavic R1a and I2a haplogroups which are south Poland originated*.
> 
> 
> I was wondering why doesn't then all the people of Balkan, who don't have Slavic R1a and I2a, count in as the original population of Balkan?


I responded only to _your_ comment. I never said that the Gheg Albanians are the only representatives of the "original" inhabitants of the Balkans. 

I think it's clear that men who carry Slavic R1a and I2a are also descended from "original" inhabitants of the Balkans. For one thing, those men may have and probably do have some male ancestors who carried E-V13 and J2b and G2a etc. (and whatever I2a lines were absorbed into Neolithic communities, lines which might have been from a different I2a branch than the ones from further north and east that moved south as Slavs). The y line a man carries represents only one of his many male ancestors. 

Second of all, there are all the maternal ancestors, many of which seem to have arrived in the Neolithic

It is _all_ those ancestors who make up one's autosomal signature and inheritance.

Now, some "ethnic" groups in the Balkans might have proportionally more ancestry from the Neolithic (and Mesolithic) and less from the Yamnaya period or the "Slavs", and the proportions might be reversed in other groups. That's another issue. However, we're talking about migrations that are all in the distant past. Yamnaya incursions date to at least _5,000 years ago_. Even the Slavs date to about_ 1200 years ago_. Everybody is now mixed to one degree or another. 

Frankly, it's my opinion that on top of the barbarism that they encourage, these bitter "tribal" disputes are totally counter-productive and that you'd all be much better off if you spent your time thinking about developing your countries economically and educationally and socially rather than in some ****ing contest about which group of your ancestors arrived when...

That's about all I have to say on this particular topic.

----------


## Милан М.

> I responded only to _your_ comment. I never said that the Gheg Albanians are the only representatives of the "original" inhabitants of the Balkans. 
> 
> I think it's clear that men who carry Slavic R1a and I2a are also descended from "original" inhabitants of the Balkans. For one thing, those men may have and probably do have some male ancestors who carried E-V13 and J2b and G2a etc. (and whatever I2a lines were absorbed into Neolithic communities, lines which might have been from a different I2a branch than the ones from further north and east that moved south as Slavs). The y line a man carries represents only one of his many male ancestors. 
> 
> Second of all, there are all the maternal ancestors, many of which seem to have arrived in the Neolithic
> 
> It is _all_ those ancestors who make up one's autosomal signature and inheritance.
> 
> Now, some "ethnic" groups in the Balkans might have proportionally more ancestry from the Neolithic (and Mesolithic) and less from the Yamnaya period or the "Slavs", and the proportions might be reversed in other groups. That's another issue. However, we're talking about migrations that are all in the distant past. Yamnaya incursions date to at least _5,000 years ago_. Even the Slavs date to about_ 1200 years ago_. Everybody is now mixed to one degree or another. 
> ...


I agree with you with most of your comment,only regarding ethnogenesis of the Slavs their supposed migration was never proven archeologicaly as you point out in your comment prior,good to notice there is yet researches on Slavic ethnogenesis,Slavic language and entire IE language family,so it will be good from your side not to take theories or inceptions from 19th century as axioms,otherwise i think that as always particularly toward Balkan Slavs to labeled no connection to that land or the "autochotonous" population or underlying their role in the same ethnogenesis,regardless peoples memories their oral and written sources wrote very much different history,not to mention entire Balkan peninsula is pretty much similar in genetics.

----------


## gyms

> Geg Albanians lack the slavic R1a and I2a haplogroups which are south Poland originated. Ev13+j2b are the early farmers. What else you want? A picture of Albanians of antiquity?


DearSDuPidh,two questions:can you prove,that I2a is slavic?Can you prov that R1a and I2a "are South Poland originated"?Thanks!

----------


## gyms

> The larger part of I2,which is on Slavic population came in Balkans during the big Slavic migration.


There's really not enough evidence for that assumption.It's pure speculation.

----------


## Ike

> DearSDuPidh,two questions:can you prove,that I2a is slavic?Can you prov that R1a and I2a "are South Poland originated"?Thanks!


We could prove by testing some old skeletons. If they don't find any I2a-Din in ~Christ-time corpses it would then be safe to assume that it got there with Slavs. Still not an evidence, but much more plausible.

----------


## gyms

> We could prove by testing some old skeletons. If they don't find any I2a-Din in ~Christ-time corpses it would then be safe to assume that it got there with Slavs. Still not an evidence, but much more plausible.


It's exactly what I meant.There are no tested skeletons just speculations.

----------


## Angela

> I agree with you with most of your comment,only regarding ethnogenesis of the Slavs their supposed migration was never proven archeologicaly as you point out in your comment prior,good to notice there is yet researches on Slavic ethnogenesis,Slavic language and entire IE language family,so it will be good from your side not to take theories or inceptions from 19th century as axioms,otherwise i think that as always particularly toward Balkan Slavs to labeled no connection to that land or the "autochotonous" population or underlying their role in the same ethnogenesis,regardless peoples memories their oral and written sources wrote very much different history,not to mention entire Balkan peninsula is pretty much similar in genetics.


I neither said nor implied that there was any lack of proof for a migration of Slavic speaking peoples into the Balkans in the early Middle Ages. I would never do such a thing because it would be contrary to all archaeological, linguistic, historical, and now genetic evidence. To argue that it never happened is another exercise in futility. (Of course, these migrating Slavic speakers were not the same genetically as the modern people who identify as Balkan Slavs.)

Specifically _how much_ of a genetic change this caused autosomally is another issue. There are also some differences by group, although most Balkanites are pretty darn similar genetically.

As to I2a Din, other than lots of ancient dna showing it didn't exist in the Balkans before the Roman era, another clue would lie in improved resolution of the phylogeny for I2a. Does I2a Din derive from the I2a branches that were present in the Balkans in the Neolithic, or does it derive from branches from far northern areas or from the steppe lands? As to R1a, the current evidence does seem to indicate that most of the R1a in the Balkans dates to the period of the Slavic migrations, although if some of it is from older, more ancestral clades, those could have come with the steppe related migrations. Absolute precision may be impossible in this specific instance, because older clades may have survived in the Slavic speakers and been swept along during the migrations.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> You find it more plausible that Lithuanians conquered Mediterranean?


No, I just was concluding your theory, which was scientifically completely impossible . Lithuanians are a different branch of IE languages. They are from the Baltic branch. Albanian is different. There is a possibility that illyrians and proto Baltics were neighbors before 4000-4500 years ago. There are some affinities between the Albanian language and the Baltic languages. But that's it. Nothing more. It is just a hypothesis from the scholars.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> I think that contrary to all they hailed from South Italy and or Sicily,this can explain their "ancient" Latin loanwords us they say and the old Greek,since Greeks had colonies there,plus Albanian has matching with Messapian which was exactly from there,they match in genetics more there,then with the Balkan people.
> 
> Italian theory
> Laonikos Chalkokondyles (c. 1423–1490), the Byzantine historian, thought that the Albanians hailed from Italy. The theory has its origin in the first mention of the Albanians, disputed whether it refers to Albanians in an ethnic sense,made by Attaliates (11th century): "... For when subsequent commanders made base and shameful plans and decisions, not only was the island lost to Byzantium, but also the greater part of the army. Unfortunately, the people who had once been our allies and who possessed the same rights as citizens and the same religion, i.e. the Albanians and the Latins, who live in the Italian regions of our Empire beyond Western Rome, quite suddenly became enemies when Michael Dokenianos insanely directed his command against their leaders..
> 
> The time they are mentioned first there was very much religious wars troughout the Balkans and competition among Byzantines,Latins and various other Slavic polities,how they ended i don't know.


Mesapians were not illyrians. They had spoken a centum not a satem branch. It's impossible linguistically that they were proto Albanians. Modern scholars agreed that they were not illyrians. Albanian language has words by north west Hellenic dialect and doric dialect. So has nothing to do with the Sicily and south Italy. I read your previous post. I don't see what is the conclusion of your long long post. I have read before all the stuff there.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> I think that contrary to all they hailed from South Italy and or Sicily,this can explain their "ancient" Latin loanwords us they say and the old Greek,since Greeks had colonies there,plus Albanian has matching with Messapian which was exactly from there,they match in genetics more there,then with the Balkan people.
> 
> Italian theory
> Laonikos Chalkokondyles (c. 1423–1490), the Byzantine historian, thought that the Albanians hailed from Italy. The theory has its origin in the first mention of the Albanians, disputed whether it refers to Albanians in an ethnic sense,made by Attaliates (11th century): "... For when subsequent commanders made base and shameful plans and decisions, not only was the island lost to Byzantium, but also the greater part of the army. Unfortunately, the people who had once been our allies and who possessed the same rights as citizens and the same religion, i.e. the Albanians and the Latins, who live in the Italian regions of our Empire beyond Western Rome, quite suddenly became enemies when Michael Dokenianos insanely directed his command against their leaders..
> 
> The time they are mentioned first there was very much religious wars troughout the Balkans and competition among Byzantines,Latins and various other Slavic polities,how they ended i don't know.


I don't see anything for dispute here. You think that Albanians were living around ancient Rome. Come on. I think he is clear on this source, but modern people are playing with his words

----------


## Piro Ilir

> There is also a possibility that Albanian is a Hybrid language formed when two groups - one from Sicily and another from Carpates merged together with Dorian leftovers in the Epirus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? How did you get to this conclusion?


Linguistically is impossible. This term doesn't exist. First time hearing this. The language evolves , it didn't get hybrid. The core of the language is one. Romanian language could have some paleontologists balkanic substrate, but it is a Latin language too. The core is Latin, it's not paleo balkanic.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> It's exactly what I meant.There are no tested skeletons just speculations.


Generally I don't know much about genetics. This was what I had read.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> I neither said nor implied that there was any lack of proof for a migration of Slavic speaking peoples into the Balkans in the early Middle Ages. I would never do such a thing because it would be contrary to all archaeological, linguistic, historical, and now genetic evidence. To argue that it never happened is another exercise in futility. (Of course, these migrating Slavic speakers were not the same genetically as the modern people who identify as Balkan Slavs.)
> 
> Specifically _how much_ of a genetic change this caused autosomally is another issue. There are also some differences by group, although most Balkanites are pretty darn similar genetically.
> 
> As to I2a Din, other than lots of ancient dna showing it didn't exist in the Balkans before the Roman era, another clue would lie in improved resolution of the phylogeny for I2a. Does I2a Din derive from the I2a branches that were present in the Balkans in the Neolithic, or does it derive from branches from far northern areas or from the steppe lands? As to R1a, the current evidence does seem to indicate that most of the R1a in the Balkans dates to the period of the Slavic migrations, although if some of it is from older, more ancestral clades, those could have come with the steppe related migrations. Absolute precision may be impossible in this specific instance, because older clades may have survived in the Slavic speakers and been swept along during the migrations.


The I2 found in Thrace was connected with the sardinian I2 ? Am I right?

----------


## Ike

> As to I2a Din, other than lots of ancient dna showing it didn't exist in the Balkans before the Roman era...


No, we need samples from Roman or Illyrian era. There is not much use in knowing that it wasn't on Balkan 5 or 7 Kya.

----------


## Милан М.

> I neither said nor implied that there was any lack of proof for a migration of Slavic speaking peoples into the Balkans in the early Middle Ages. I would never do such a thing because it would be contrary to all archaeological, linguistic, historical, and now genetic evidence. To argue that it never happened is another exercise in futility. (Of course, these migrating Slavic speakers were not the same genetically as the modern people who identify as Balkan Slavs.)
> 
> Specifically _how much_ of a genetic change this caused autosomally is another issue. There are also some differences by group, although most Balkanites are pretty darn similar genetically.
> 
> As to I2a Din, other than lots of ancient dna showing it didn't exist in the Balkans before the Roman era, another clue would lie in improved resolution of the phylogeny for I2a. Does I2a Din derive from the I2a branches that were present in the Balkans in the Neolithic, or does it derive from branches from far northern areas or from the steppe lands? As to R1a, the current evidence does seem to indicate that most of the R1a in the Balkans dates to the period of the Slavic migrations, although if some of it is from older, more ancestral clades, those could have come with the steppe related migrations. Absolute precision may be impossible in this specific instance, because older clades may have survived in the Slavic speakers and been swept along during the migrations.


There is neither of those "proofs" you listed,therefore we have researches,depends what kind of hypothesis you favor,that's assumption about I2a din,that haplogroup can very well spread from the Balkans instead of southern Poland it's most frequent there anyway,about R1a you are wrong majority is not the same as in the northern Slavic countries.
Two genetically distant groups of Slavic populations were revealed: One encompassing all Western-Slavic, Eastern-Slavic, and few Southern-Slavic populations (north-western Croats and Slovenes), and one encompassing all remaining Southern Slavs. According to the authors most Slavic populations have similar Y chromosome pools — R1a. They speculate that this similarity can be traced to an origin in the middle Dnieper basin of Ukraine during the Late Glacial Maximum 15 kya.*However, Southern-Slavic populations including the Bosnians, Croats (excluding north-western Croatia), Serbs, Bulgarians and Macedonians are clearly separated from the tight DNA cluster of the rest of the Slavic populations.*

----------


## Angela

> There is neither of those "proofs" you listed,therefore we have researches,depends what kind of hypothesis you favor,that's assumption about I2a din,that haplogroup can very well spread from the Balkans instead southern Poland,about R1a you are wrong majority is not the same as in the northern Slavic countries.
> Two genetically distant groups of Slavic populations were revealed: One encompassing all Western-Slavic, Eastern-Slavic, and few Southern-Slavic populations (north-western Croats and Slovenes), and one encompassing all remaining Southern Slavs. According to the authors most Slavic populations have similar Y chromosome pools — R1a. They speculate that this similarity can be traced to an origin in the middle Dnieper basin of Ukraine during the Late Glacial Maximum 15 kya


That's a-scientific nonsense, almost on a par with believing that the earth is flat. I have no more time to waste on this, but by all means continue talking in your echo chamber and thinking that the sound you hear is that of agreement.

----------


## Милан М.

> That's a-scientific nonsense, almost on a par with believing that the earth is flat. I have no more time to waste on this, but by all means continue talking in your echo chamber and thinking that the sound you hear is that of agreement.


WOW,they don't know anything tell them,agreement thanks but who need it.

----------


## DuPidh

> DearSDuPidh,two questions:can you prove,that I2a is slavic?Can you prov that R1a and I2a "are South Poland originated"?Thanks!


Can't you see that any south Slavic country in the Balkans has over 33% of its male haplogroups I2a din and another 16 to 18% R1a. Then in non Slavic countries of the Balkan's this male linage is not as significant. Can you check the presence of this haplogroups in western Ukraine and south Poland. Are they not approximately the same? is this a coincidence? Have you noticed that the Slavic language you speak has its origins in South Poland western Ukraine? how could that be? Have noticed that Roman documents do not mention the presence of Slavs as their subordinates? Have they forgotten to mention that? Have you red the Bizantine documents of 7 century that document mass Slavic migrations to the Balkans. What I said is that I2a din in The Balkans is Slavic for the above reasons. 
Had I been Balkan shouldn't Kosovo Albanians been higher than 2% in this haplogroup? So there are so many hints about I2a connection with south Slavs. Slavs are an ethnicity no a race so they have other haplogroup linages but the predominant linage is the pair I2a+R1a+Siberian

----------


## gyms

> Can't you see that any south Slavic country in the Balkans has over 33% of its male haplogroups I2a din and another 16 to 18% R1a. Then in non Slavic countries of the Balkan's this male linage is not as significant. Can you check the presence of this haplogroups in western Ukraine and south Poland. Are they not approximately the same? is this a coincidence? Have you noticed that the Slavic language you speak has its origins in South Poland western Ukraine? how could that be? Have noticed that Roman documents do not mention the presence of Slavs as their subordinates? Have they forgotten to mention that? Have you red the Bizantine documents of 7 century that document mass Slavic migrations to the Balkans. What I said is that I2a din in The Balkans is Slavic for the above reasons. 
> Had I been Balkan shouldn't Kosovo Albanians been higher than 2% in this haplogroup? So there are so many hints about I2a connection with south Slavs. Slavs are an ethnicity no a race so they have other haplogroup linages but the predominant linage is the pair I2a+R1a+Siberian


Modern haplogroup frequecies per se doesn't prove anything.As Jean Manco says:Arguments from modern DNA have been shown to be wrong by ancient DNA over and over and over again.
Do you have some slavic I2a aDNA in your "arsenal"?

----------


## gyms

> The I2 found in Thrace was connected with the sardinian I2 ? Am I right?


Yes,it was connected with the sardinian I2.

----------


## hrvat22

> DearSDuPidh,two questions:can you prove,that I2a is slavic?Can you prov that R1a and I2a "are South Poland originated"?Thanks!


 So far, most or all of those who are negative for S17250 have patrilineage
originating near the Carpathians, particularly southeastern Poland and
extreme western Ukraine. That pattern may change with more sampling, of
course Date: Tue, 20 May 2014

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.co...-05/1400615460

*I2a1b2a1**CTS5966, CTS10228, L147.2
• • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a S17250/YP204
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a1 Z16971
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a2 Y4882
• • • • • • • • • I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983*

http://isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpI.html

negative for I2a1b2a1a S17250 is *I2a1b2a1**CTS5966, CTS10228, L147.2 or father of White Croatian* I2a1b2a1a S17250 in southe Poland and grandfather of Croatian I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983 in Croatia..


administrator of I2a haplogrup..

Even though there are not so many results for the new SNPs for people from Croatia and Serbia, many of these people belong to the "Dinaric-South" group as defined by STRs and I think most of "Dinaric-South" will belong to what our project calls the I-Z16983/A356 group..


I2a movement throughout history ... Poland - Croatia...

https://web.archive.org/web/20110722...r%20Hg%20I.pdf


Croatian R1a Z280 ...has great concentration in southern Poland but whether there originates is still unknown..

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...5UvaRd3c&hl=en

----------


## hrvat22

> Can't you see that any south Slavic country in the Balkans has over 33% of its male haplogroups I2a din and another 16 to 18% R1a. Then in non Slavic countries of the Balkan's this male linage is not as significant. Can you check the presence of this haplogroups in western Ukraine and south Poland. Are they not approximately the same? is this a coincidence? Have you noticed that the Slavic language you speak has its origins in South Poland western Ukraine? how could that be? Have noticed that Roman documents do not mention the presence of Slavs as their subordinates? Have they forgotten to mention that? Have you red the Bizantine documents of 7 century that document mass Slavic migrations to the Balkans. What I said is that I2a din in The Balkans is Slavic for the above reasons. 
> Had I been Balkan shouldn't Kosovo Albanians been higher than 2% in this haplogroup? So there are so many hints about I2a connection with south Slavs. Slavs are an ethnicity no a race so they have other haplogroup linages but the predominant linage is the pair I2a+R1a+Siberian


I2a originally was not Indo-European or Slavic haplotype...but its later mutations that reside in Poland or Ukraine with R1a, and over there become Slavs...probably someone with these haplotypes came in contact with Slavs and then became Slavs...they mixed in Poland and Ukraine....

*I2a1b2**L621/S392
• • • • • • I2a1b2a CTS10936
• • • • • • • I2a1b2a1 CTS5966, CTS10228, L147.2*

----------


## hrvat22

> There is neither of those "proofs" you listed,therefore we have researches,depends what kind of hypothesis you favor,that's assumption about I2a din,that haplogroup can very well spread from the Balkans instead of southern Poland it's most frequent there anyway,about R1a you are wrong majority is not the same as in the northern Slavic countries.
> Two genetically distant groups of Slavic populations were revealed: One encompassing all Western-Slavic, Eastern-Slavic, and few Southern-Slavic populations (north-western Croats and Slovenes), and one encompassing all remaining Southern Slavs. According to the authors most Slavic populations have similar Y chromosome pools — R1a. They speculate that this similarity can be traced to an origin in the middle Dnieper basin of Ukraine during the Late Glacial Maximum 15 kya.*However, Southern-Slavic populations including the Bosnians, Croats (excluding north-western Croatia), Serbs, Bulgarians and Macedonians are clearly separated from the tight DNA cluster of the rest of the Slavic populations.*


In northwestern Croatia I2a is in second place and R1a on the first..what is different from the rest of Croatia ?
Fact that have a higher R1a ?

Serbs have a second haplotype in population Albanian E1b V13 that has nothing to do with Slavs, while Croats in Bosnia have minimum haplotype E1b and they are similar to the east of Balkans....how ?

But what this have to do with the arrival of Croats from White Croatia...?

Croatian, Bosnian, Montenegrin and Serbian carriers of I2a1b2a1a3 A356 coming to Balkans as Croats .... this is logic ....and later become Bosnians, Montenegrins etc...

----------


## Милан М.

> In northwestern Croatia I2a is in second place and R1a on the first..what is different from the rest of Croatia ?
> Fact that have a higher R1a ?
> 
> Serbs have a second haplotype in population Albanian E1b V13 that has nothing to do with Slavs, while Croats in Bosnia have minimum haplotype E1b and they are similar to the east of Balkans....how ?
> 
> But what this have to do with the arrival of Croats from White Croatia...?
> 
> Croatian, Bosnian, Montenegrin and Serbian carriers of I2a1b2a1a3 A356 coming to Balkans as Croats .... this is logic ....and later become Bosnians, Montenegrins etc...


What make you think or label,haplogroups with modern day ethnicity,the day when they arose there is no names such is Croat,Albanian etc,which in fact the origin of the very names are disputed and are from Middle Ages,Dalmatians if you read their chronicles most of them never used name such is Croat in self designation instead they did Dalmatian,illyrian,Slovinac-Slav,don't imagine communities such is white Croatia,because it will be what all Slavic speakers descend from white Croats wow, i wrote there is yet research on entire ethnogenesis,language etc..couple researchers on the Slavs even denied the migration recently or at least it was nowhere near as it was prior imagined,let alone they brought all the haplotypes with them,what was Balkans,waste land?

----------


## hrvat22

> What make you think or label,haplogroups with modern day ethnicity,the day when they arose there is no names such is Croat,Albanian etc,which in fact the origin of the very names are disputed and are from Middle Ages,Dalmatians if you read their chronicles most of them never used name such is Croat instead they did Dalmatian,illyrian,Slovinac-Slav,don't imagine communities such is white Croatia,although maybe is popular among nationalists where they everywhere took part,because it will be what all Slavic speakers in Balkans descent from them?white Croats wow, i wrote there is yet research on entire ethnogenesis,language etc..couple researchers on the Slavs even denied the migration recently or at least it was nowhere near as it was prior imagined,let alone they brought all the haplotypes with them,what was Balkans,waste land?



Prove that I am wrong if you can, rather than talk fairy tales...

I do not say that entire Serbian people are Croatian origin, only those with I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983 and with mutation I-Y3548 or about 25 percent of today Serbs...

When they explore all E1b mutation in Serbia and Albania, then we will know how many Serbs is Albanian origin...

----------


## Ike

> Serbs have a second haplotype in population Albanian E1b V13 that has nothing to do with Slavs, while Croats in Bosnia have minimum haplotype E1b and they are similar to the east of Balkans....how ?


Not Serbs but Serbians. You know exactly what is the difference, and there is no need to try to convince yourself into something over the public forum.





> Prove that I am wrong if you can, rather than talk fairy tales...


However plausible that sounds, you're the one who has to prove it. That's how science works.





> I do not say that entire Serbian people are Croatian origin, only those with I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983 and with mutation I-Y3548 or about 25 percent of today Serbs...


You still have to mitigate the fact that there was no recorded Croat migration into the western parts of Yugoslavia, and that since the incursion of Turks people only moved toward NW. So if Croats didn't come to Montenegro, Kosovo, Serbia and Macedonia at the very beginning, chances that they moved there later are even less plausible. What facts do we have about Croatian presence in these parts of Balkan from 8-13th century?

----------


## Милан М.

> Prove that I am wrong if you can, rather than talk fairy tales...
> 
> I do not say that entire Serbian people are Croatian origin, only those with I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983 and with mutation I-Y3548 or about 25 percent of today Serbs...
> 
> When they explore all E1b mutation in Serbia and Albania, then we will know how many Serbs is Albanian origin...


Can you first tell me the origin of Croatian name,then we can talk about haplogroups,I can recomend you Danijel Dzino,he is Croat only living in Australia,he study identity transformation in post Roman Illiricum.

----------


## Trojet

> Prove that I am wrong if you can, rather than talk fairy tales...
> 
> I do not say that entire Serbian people are Croatian origin, only those with I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983 and with mutation I-Y3548 or about 25 percent of today Serbs...
> 
> When they explore all E1b mutation in Serbia and Albania, then we will know how many Serbs is Albanian origin...


 :Good Job:   :Good Job:  They keep cherrypicking ridiculous unproven theories, and yet they choose to ignore scientific genetic facts as you have pointed them.

----------


## hrvat22

> They keep cherrypicking ridiculous unproven theories, and yet they choose to ignore scientific genetic facts as you have pointed them.



I am realistic.. part of Croats are and Albanian origin .. part of E1b in Croatia came with Vlach while part may be an Illyrian origin...but both are today's Albanians..

There is also Croatian haplotypes in Albanians..especially around Montenegro where they mixed....

I do not know much about Albanian E1b haplotypes but I am convinced that in our region majority E1b V13 are Albanian origin...

----------


## hrvat22

> Can you first tell me the origin of Croatian name,then we can talk about haplogroups,I can recomend you Danijel Dzino,he is Croat only living in Australia,he study identity transformation in post Roman Illiricum.


I know the origin of Serbian name, but I was too embarrassed to say ...

----------


## Trojet

> I am realistic.. part of Croats are and Albanian origin .. part of E1b in Croatia came with Vlach while part may be an Illyrian origin...but both are today's Albanians..
> 
> There is also Croatian haplotypes in Albanians..especially around Montenegro where they mixed....
> 
> I do not know much about Albanian E1b haplotypes but I am convinced that in our region majority E1b V13 are Albanian origin...


Yes. I agree. So far Y-DNA is pointing to this direction. I think in the near future we will know much more conclusively with more people being tested and also with ancient DNA samples.

----------


## hrvat22

> Not Serbs but Serbians. You know exactly what is the difference, and there is no need to try to convince yourself into something over the public forum.
> 
> 
> 
> However plausible that sounds, you're the one who has to prove it. That's how science works.
> 
> 
> 
> You still have to mitigate the fact that there was no recorded Croat migration into the western parts of Yugoslavia, and that since the incursion of Turks people only moved toward NW. So if Croats didn't come to Montenegro, Kosovo, Serbia and Macedonia at the very beginning, chances that they moved there later are even less plausible. What facts do we have about Croatian presence in these parts of Balkan from 8-13th century?


http://www.srpsko-nasledje.rs/sr-l/1...article-1.html

google translate ..
When you examine the origin Šumadia(central Serbia) population, we see that among them there are very few natives people. In Sumadija areas: Kačer, Georgia, Lepenica, Kragujevac Jasenica Smederevo Danube region and Jasenica Kosmaju in villages near Belgrade examined the origin of the genus 8894 with 52,475 houses. Of this number, only 464 species with 3603 home natives, so almost has a population of unknown origin (470 genera with 2464 houses), and the rest of Sumadija population is migrant and immigrant families of a 7960 with 46,408 houses. Sumadiju settled immigrants from almost all parts of our kingdom today, but it has most of the local currency area, the Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, of Sjenica and Novi Pazar, in Kolasin, from Pester and Bihor, from Dalmatia, Lika and other parts of the Dinaric. In a small number of them have to do with Kosovo, Metohija and other parts of South Slavic.

_Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea_ 1298-1300

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

Describing Red Croatia, Dukljanin says, that there found these cities: Kotor, Budva, Bar, Ulcinj, Shkodra, Trebinje, Pilot, etc., And also in this area: Hum, Trebinje, Podgorje and Zeta

*Shkodër (definiteAlbanian form: Shkodra, for other names see theetymology section), also called Skadar is a city and municipality in northwestern Albania

**Trebinje (Serbian Cyrillic:Требиње) is the southernmost municipality and city in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Located inEast Herzegovina, it is part of the Republika Srpska

**Ulcinj (Serbian Cyrillic: Улцињ,pronounced [ǔlt͡siɲ]) orUlqin (In Albanian,pronounced [ult͡ɕin])) is the southernmost town in Montenegro. 

*The *Principality of Zeta was a medieval state ruled by the families of Balšić, Lazarević,Branković and Crnojević in succession from the second half of the 14th century until the Ottoman vassalage in 1514. The Serbian crown land of Zeta had become virtually independent during the fall of the Serbian Empire

**Budva (Montenegrin: Будва, Budva,pronounced [bûːdv̞a] or[bûdv̞a], Italian andAlbanian: Budua) is aMontenegrin town on the Adriatic Sea. 

* list of the Bosnian army before the battle of Mohács

http://www.scribd.com/doc/132776360/...Du-1526-godine

Half of the Bosnian army are Croats whic exist in the Drina valley along the Serbian border, in Sandzak in southern Serbia and in Montenegro ... Serbs on this list do not exist ..

Evliya Çelebi (Çelebi), the famous Turkish traveler XVII. Paragraphs,( 1660 and 1661)

Near the town Foča on the Drina River (along the Serbian border), in the old town Prača, it (Çelebi)
"They gave him 50 Croatian young men under arms for companions". 
On Gatačko polje (field in eastern Herzegovina along the Serbian border) "gets 300 Croatian gazija (heroes)". Attribute gazija (hero) could be given only to Muslims ...

*Foča (Serbian Cyrillic:Фоча) is a town and a municipality in Bosnia and Herzegovina on the Drinariver, in the Republika Srpska entity. Previously it was called Srbinje


*Ottoman Turkish historian Aali (1542nd-1599th), a native of Gallipoli

As for the tribe of Croats, who is attributed to the Bosna River, their importance is reflected in the happy disposition; They are known in Bosnia and at the current river be called.

Niketas choniates (Gr. Νικήτας ὁ Χωνιάτης, around 1155-1217), also known as Nikita Akominat
..- speaking of Stefan Nemanja(ruler of Raska) and his activities between 1160 and 1173. Whatever., says of him: "Not knowing the right measure, began to conquer Croatia and himself seizing control of Kotor"

*Kotor (Serbian Cyrillic:Котор, pronounced [kɔ̌tɔr];Italian: Cattaro) is a coastal town inMontenegro. 

etc..etc..etc..*

----------


## hrvat22

> Yes. I agree. So far Y-DNA is pointing to this direction. I think in the near future we will know much more conclusively with more people being tested and also with ancient DNA samples.



I think that both J2 and R1b in our area are Albanian origin or Vlach, Arbanas...at least most of them...

For Croats it is about 24% of the population with E1b, for the Serbs is about 35% of the population..

Needs to see all these haplotypes and their movements ... in Croats is possible that they brought part of R1b from the West, so in the future we will know more...

----------


## Ike

@Hrvat22

What do you want to say? That Croats started migrating in large numbers into Serbia, Kosovo and Macedonia in 19th century? Why would they do that?

----------


## Милан М.

> http://www.srpsko-nasledje.rs/sr-l/1...article-1.html
> 
> google translate ..
> When you examine the origin Šumadia(central Serbia) population, we see that among them there are very few natives people. In Sumadija areas: Kačer, Georgia, Lepenica, Kragujevac Jasenica Smederevo Danube region and Jasenica Kosmaju in villages near Belgrade examined the origin of the genus 8894 with 52,475 houses. Of this number, only 464 species with 3603 home natives, so almost has a population of unknown origin (470 genera with 2464 houses), and the rest of Sumadija population is migrant and immigrant families of a 7960 with 46,408 houses. Sumadiju settled immigrants from almost all parts of our kingdom today, but it has most of the local currency area, the Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, of Sjenica and Novi Pazar, in Kolasin, from Pester and Bihor, from Dalmatia, Lika and other parts of the Dinaric. In a small number of them have to do with Kosovo, Metohija and other parts of South Slavic.
> 
> _Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea_ 1298-1300
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Croatia
> 
> ...


How can you mix chronicle of priest of Dioclea and Andministrando de imperio when the first never mention any Slavic migration and consider them natives,while others does tell us migration of Serbs and Croats,but none mentioned Albanians nearby,your idea betrayed you,i think you find someone with who you can share opinion,legacy of whom Pavelic?  :Laughing:  enjoy your talk.

----------


## hrvat22

> How can you mix chronicle of priest of Dioclea and Andministrando de imperio when the first never mention any Slavic migration and consider them natives,while others does tell us migration of Serbs and Croats,i think you find someone with who you can share opinion,legacy of whom Pavelic?  enjoy your talk.


Porphyrogenitus says that Serbs come from Bojka to a small village in Greece and from there they settling a half Balkans. That is not physically possible..

The genes of today's inhabitants our area do not confirm Porphyrogenitus story of Serbs and their arrival in the Balkans because there is no haplotype wich is coming from Lusatian Serbia or eastern Germany to Greek and from Greek into eastern Dalmatia ..For that reason, or the original Serbs extinct or were created from Croats and other..This is logic..

----------


## hrvat22

> @Hrvat22
> 
> What do you want to say? That Croats started migrating in large numbers into Serbia, Kosovo and Macedonia in 19th century? Why would they do that?


 Large number of Croats and Vlahs in the Turkish time converted to Islam and Orthodoxy and later became Serbs and Bosnians but *haplotypes* remain same or White Croatian and Albanian origin..

Part of Croats became Serbs after coming to this area when they fell under Byzantine influence and later Serbian influence...but most of them became Serbs after departure of Turks from Balkans when Orthodox Croats and Vlahs become Serbs...

And then as Serbs (or rather as Orthodox because many did not know the term Serbia) they move to Serbia and Vojvodina, but they still have White Croatian or Croatian haplotype origin and Albanian or Vlach..

----------


## Ike

> Large number of Croats and Vlahs in the Turkish time converted to Islam and Orthodoxy and later became Serbs and Bosnians but *haplotypes* remain same or White Croatian and Albanian origin..


Are you claiming that Orthodox church, which was crumbling down under Ottomans ( even on the territories which were Serbian before the Muslim the invasion), had the power to convert Catholics in Bosnia and Croatia? If they couldn't do it while Serbia was free and powerful European empire in 14th century, how was that possible under Ottoman terror?!




> Part of Croats became Serbs after coming to this area when they fell under Byzantine influence and later Serbian influence...but most of them became Serbs after departure of Turks from Balkans when Orthodox Croats and Vlahs become Serbs...


Vlachs maybe, but how did Croats become Orthodox? Turks let Orthodox priests run around and convert people into Orthodoxity? Did they build orthodox churches while doing it? Give us some examples of Orthodox Croats before they "became Serbs". 




> And then as Serbs (or rather as Orthodox because many did not know the term Serbia) they move to Serbia and Vojvodina, but they still have White Croatian or Croatian haplotype origin and Albanian or Vlach..


As I told you, the migrations went other way. Serbs and other Christians fled to Bosnia and Dinaric mountains, while Croatians run towards Zagorje, Austro-Hungary, Venice ...

----------


## Sile

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

----------


## hrvat22

> Are you claiming that Orthodox church, which was crumbling down under Ottomans ( even on the territories which were Serbian before the Muslim the invasion), had the power to convert Catholics in Bosnia and Croatia? If they couldn't do it while Serbia was free and powerful European empire in 14th century, how was that possible under Ottoman terror?!
> 
> 
> Vlachs maybe, but how did Croats become Orthodox? Turks let Orthodox priests run around and convert people into Orthodoxity? Did they build orthodox churches while doing it? Give us some examples of Orthodox Croats before they "became Serbs". 
> 
> 
> 
> As I told you, the migrations went other way. Serbs and other Christians fled to Bosnia and Dinaric mountains, while Croatians run towards Zagorje, Austro-Hungary, Venice ...


Serbs fought for Turks and it is logical that Orthodox Church has retained a part of their privileges...

Turkey main enemies are Catholicis and Western Europe with which they are in conflict, not with allies Serbs...That is why Croats converted to Islam and Orthodox Christianity or fleeing

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





> Vlachs maybe, but how did Croats become Orthodox?


How Serbs remained Orthodox?




> Turks let Orthodox priests run around and convert people into Orthodoxity? Did they build orthodox churches while doing it?


*Pećka patrijaršija*
During the Ottoman rule had enormous significance for the preservation of religious autonomy and Orthodox identity.

https://sh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pe%C4%...rijar%C5%A1ija

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchate_of_Pe%C4%87




> Give us some examples of Orthodox Croats before they "became Serbs"


Village in Croatia and Dalmatia .... same customs, same songs, same language, same dance, the same instrument, half village are Catholic Croats half are Orthodox Serbs ... and such examples there are hundreds of villages .

Departure people hundred years ago to America ... the vast majority of people from Croatia and Bosnia with Serbian Orthodox names stated that they Croats under race..

Croatian reporter from eastern Herzegovina populated by Serbs...

He says this....

Popovo polje( filed ) eastern Herzegovina, when Orthodox Church arrived in the 14th century offered peasants the land if they switch to Orthodoxy, all seselj family refusedand and leave for Croatia , except one....These Seselj family who accepted Orthodoxy and remains in eastern Herzegovina have descendant today in Serbia and he is called Vojislav Seselj, an ultra nationalist and proponent of Greater Serbia...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrapH2_IdXI

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vojislav_%C5%A0e%C5%A1elj

----------


## Ike

> Serbs fought for Turks and it is logical that Orthodox Church has retained a part of their privileges...
> 
> Turkey main enemies are Catholicis and Western Europe with which they are in conflict, not with allies Serbs...That is why Croats converted to Islam and Orthodox Christianity or fleeing
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Nicopolis


Do you even listen to yourself? You're saying that Croats converted into Orthodox faith in fear of Muslims? How does that help?

Battle of Nicopoli and has nothing to do with conversion. Serbian prince was not an ally, but a Turkish vassal and had to support him in that battle. Long after that Serbia fell under Ottoman rule, then Bosnia, then Croatia. That was 100-200 years after battle of Nicopolis. If there was any conversion, it happened in those times. And in those times, Serbs, Bosnians and Croatians were the same in the eyes of Ottomans. None of them was their ally.





> How Serbs remained Orthodox?


Did you hear that Ottomans let people stay Christian if they pay extra tribute called _harac_?





> *Pećka patrijaršija*
> During the Ottoman rule had enormous significance for the preservation of religious autonomy and Orthodox identity.
> 
> https://sh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pe%C4%...rijar%C5%A1ija
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchate_of_Pe%C4%87


Read your own links:

_"... 1577. godine Mehmed-paša Sokolović, veliki vezir (premijer) Osmanlijskog carstva poreklom iz pravoslavne hercegovačke porodice, je ponovo ustanovio Pećku patrijaršiju..."_

_".. In 1577, Mehmed Pasha Sokolovic, the Grand Vizier (Prime Minister) of the Ottoman Empire originally from Orthodox Herzegovina families, reestablished the Pec Patriarchate ..."_





> Village in Croatia and Dalmatia .... same customs, same songs, same language, same dance, the same instrument, half village are Catholic Croats half are Orthodox Serbs ... and such examples there are hundreds of villages .
> 
> Departure people hundred years ago to America ... the vast majority of people from Croatia and Bosnia with Serbian Orthodox names stated that they Croats under race..
> 
> Croatian reporter from eastern Herzegovina populated by Serbs...
> 
> He says this....
> 
> Popovo polje( filed ) eastern Herzegovina, when Orthodox Church *arrived* in the 14th century *offered peasants the land* if they switch to Orthodoxy, all seselj family refusedand and leave for Croatia , except one....These Seselj family who accepted Orthodoxy and remains in eastern Herzegovina have descendant today in Serbia and he is called Vojislav Seselj, an ultra nationalist and proponent of Greater Serbia...
> ...


Really? They arrived with the land and offered it from their trucks? 

Maybe plausible for the borderland and Popovo Polje, but how is there then so many Orthodox people in the western parts of Yugoslavia? Serbian Orthodox church had no influence in those parts of Ottoman empire. It was way out of their realm even in the time Slavs were free.

http://i.imgur.com/NQ80o5u.jpg

----------


## hrvat22

> Do you even listen to yourself? You're saying that Croats converted into Orthodox faith in fear of Muslims? How does that help?
> 
> Battle of Nicopoli and has nothing to do with conversion. Serbian prince was not an ally, but a Turkish vassal and had to support him in that battle. Long after that Serbia fell under Ottoman rule, then Bosnia, then Croatia. That was 100-200 years after battle of Nicopolis. If there was any conversion, it happened in those times. And in those times, Serbs, Bosnians and Croatians were the same in the eyes of Ottomans. None of them was their ally.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you hear that Ottomans let people stay Christian if they pay extra tribute called _harac_?
> 
> 
> ...






> You're saying that Croats converted into Orthodox faith in fear of Muslims? How does that help?


All or most of Vlachs in the territory of Bosnia and Croatia are Orthodox and someone had to take care of them and Serbs too, that is Serbian Orthodox Church.. Parts of Croats converted to Orthodox Christianity but most to Islam..





> _ In 1577, Mehmed Pasha Sokolovic, the Grand Vizier (Prime Minister) of the Ottoman Empire originally from Orthodox Herzegovina families, reestablished the Pec Patriarchate ..."_


It is proof that Serbian Orthodox Church functioned in Turkish empire, especially in Bosnia and Serbia and neighboring countries, and had support from Turks..




> Serbian Orthodox church had no influence in those parts of Ottoman empire. It was way out of their realm even in the time Slavs were free.


16th and 17th centuries

Patriarchate_of_Peć_in_the_16th_and_17th_century.png

Half of the Bosnian army are Croats whic exist in the Drina valley along the Serbian border, in Sandzak in southern Serbia and in Montenegro ... Serbs on this list do not exist ..

http://www.scribd.com/doc/132776360/...Du-1526-godine

Evliya Çelebi (Çelebi), the famous Turkish traveler XVII. Paragraphs,( 1660 and 1661)

Near the town Foča on the Drina River (along the Serbian border), in the old town Prača, it (Çelebi)
"They gave him 50 Croatian young men under arms for companions". 
On Gatačko polje (field in eastern Herzegovina along the Serbian border) "gets 300 Croatian gazija (heroes)". Attribute gazija (hero) could be given only to Muslims ...

etc, etc...

----------


## Ike

> All or most of Vlachs in the territory of Bosnia and Croatia are Orthodox and someone had to take care of them and Serbs too, that is Serbian Orthodox Church.. Parts of Croats converted to Orthodox Christianity but most to Islam..


Not good enough explanation. There was 44% of Serb Orthodox people, in the period when Ottomans went out of Bosnia. If those were all Croatians to start with, why would they convert into Orthodox and not Muslim faith? You think that not a part, but half of people of Bosnia converted from Catholic into Orthodox during 15-19th century? But for what reason to convert from one Christian into another Christian? They would gain nothing from converting from Catholic into Orthodox faith, and it would be a futile move. Do you believe that Catholic under ISIS would come through better if they convert into Orthodox faith?




> It is proof that Serbian Orthodox Church functioned in Turkish empire, especially in Bosnia and Serbia and neighboring countries, and had support from Turks..


But before it was closed for like 150 years.




> 16th and 17th centuries
> 
> Patriarchate_of_Peć_in_the_16th_and_17th_century.png


The fact that the church was given a simple right to exist, didn't mean they had any actual influence. What facts do we have about the impact of Pecka Patrijarsija west of Drina valley during those couple of centuries? How many triburaties they had? What was their income? How many churches have they built?

Do you really believe that Serbian Christians who have already been burdened with extra taxes for just being Christians, had the money to support the conversion policy (even if it existed) of the Orthodox church outside of Serbia? Do you realize that they were not in the situation to even help themselves. People had no money to feed themselves or to build the church for themselves, and you're proposing Serbians had a Religious Ministry of Foreign Affairs with a budget.





> Half of the Bosnian army are Croats whic exist in the Drina valley along the Serbian border, in Sandzak in southern Serbia and in Montenegro ... Serbs on this list do not exist ..
> 
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/132776360/...Du-1526-godine
> 
> Evliya Çelebi (Çelebi), the famous Turkish traveler XVII. Paragraphs,( 1660 and 1661)
> 
> Near the town Foča on the Drina River (along the Serbian border), in the old town Prača, it (Çelebi)
> "They gave him 50 Croatian young men under arms for companions". 
> On Gatačko polje (field in eastern Herzegovina along the Serbian border) "gets 300 Croatian gazija (heroes)". Attribute gazija (hero) could be given only to Muslims ...
> ...


There are no Serbs on this list, which is logical. Serbs usually weren't involved in the Ottoman army.

----------


## hrvat22

> Not good enough explanation. There was 44% of Serb Orthodox people, in the period when Ottomans went out of Bosnia. If those were all Croatians to start with, why would they convert into Orthodox and not Muslim faith? You think that not a part, but half of people of Bosnia converted from Catholic into Orthodox during 15-19th century? But for what reason to convert from one Christian into another Christian? They would gain nothing from converting from Catholic into Orthodox faith, and it would be a futile move. Do you believe that Catholic under ISIS would come through better if they convert into Orthodox faith?
> 
> 
> 
> But before it was closed for like 150 years.
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that the church was given a simple right to exist, didn't mean they had any actual influence. What facts do we have about the impact of Pecka Patrijarsija west of Drina valley during those couple of centuries? How many triburaties they had? What was their income? How many churches have they built?
> ...






> If those were all Croatians to start with, why would they convert into Orthodox and not Muslim faith?


I'm not saying that all Croats converted to Orthodoxy but part, large part Orthodox Christians in Bosnia are Vlach....Haplotypes of Serbs from Bosnia say that not me...




> of the Orthodox church outside of Serbia?


The *Patriarchate of Peć* had jurisdiction to Zagreb and not to Drina river..

According to the Turkish official figures in 1528/30. in today's Bosnia and Herzegovina there were about 220,000 Muslims, or about 34%, about 360,000 Catholics, or about 57%, and Orthodox Christians, mostly non-Slavic Vlachs, about 55,000, or 9%. In 1624, in Bosnia there were 450,000 Muslims, or 67%, Catholics 150,000, or 22%, and the Orthodox, mostly Vlachs, 75,000 or 11%

Except the Turkish violence, Catholics in Bosnia were exposed to pressures of Orthodox religious leaders, and as such are a few examples. "Suspicion of allegiance of Catholics prompted the Port on new measures, and Peć patriarch gave a firman, which in Bosnia undergoing its jurisdiction Zimije. These name (zimije) was officially designated all Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire, whether Roman or Greek ceremony..

In 1779, Metropolitan of Herzegovina tries to subdue Catholic of Trebinje, Blagaj, Mostar, Ljubuski ad Duvno; but in court he denied as well as the Bishop of Mostar, who in 1781 invited the friars of Mostar to court for the same things. "Except these examples there were previous attempts Orthodox priests to put under its control the Franciscans, Catholics ad non-believers.

Court decision in the first half of September 1567, rejecting the request of the Serbian Patriarch, royalty and Orthodox representatives from Gabela to the Franciscans ad Catholic people are paying the wedding ad the other giving.

Drinopolje, June 9, 1675. Ferman of Mehmed IV., Who at the request of Dubrovnik deputies Marina Kaboge protected Catholics of Bosnia and Herzegovina against the prosecution of the Peć patriarchy and its followers of Eastern ceremony..

Catholics in Sarajevo asking Pope Innocent XII., That over the French envoy in Constantinople obtain a firman, which would be protected against the Orthodox, who wanted to force them to submit to the authorities of Peć patriarch. "" Dubrovnik, 29 January 1693. Francis Ricciardi, a member of St. Congregation de Propaganda in Dubrovnik, recommended St. Congregation Catholics of Sarajevo in their fight with the patriarchs of Pec.

Ahmed II. orders, to Catholics in Herzegovina that have to pay Metropolitan Peć Simeon wedding and other fees.

From these few examples, it is seen which pressures were exposed Catholics in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Ottoman rule. Some converted to Islam, some have adopted Orthodoxy because of the lack of Catholic priests, then constant pressure, blackmail ad harassment from across Drina Orthodox leaders.

The defeat of the Bosnian beglerbeg Hasan Pasha Predojevića near Sisak (Croatia). 1593, where was killed a flower Muslims of Bosnia and Herzegovina, resulting shift in the Turkish conquest of Croatian and Western Christian 
countries.
Bosnia is the year 1606, had to sign a peace on the Žitva torogo in Hungary, where for the first time Croatia returned her some conquered areas.
These local people(Bosnian Muslim) knew,that Croatian Catholics are happy for the victory of Christians and their brothers free Croats, so after returning from military g. 1606 began to do great violence against local Catholics ad their pastors Franciscans..

When in 1635 Fr. Jerome Lucic-Bogoslavić ordained to the bishop, his opponents reported to Rome that his brothers Hehrem, Alija, and Pervan with their families converted to Islam and that will mix miter and turbans if Jerome to be ordained as bishop. Fr. Jerome was born in Vares central Bosnia..
Therefore his brothers converted to Islam at the earliest g. 1590, when the future Fr. Jerome had gone to school, and probably early 17 century., When other Catholics in Vares converted to Islam.

Others case was recorded in the year 1631, when he was elected leader of the Bosnian Franciscans (Minister provincialis) Fr. Martin Brguljanin from Vares. Then it was reported to the Congregation de Propaganda in Rome, that his almost all relatives converted to Islam..

That a large number of Catholic Croats in central Bosnia converted to Islam in the first two decades of the 17-century, it can be seen from the reports of the Bosnian bishop Franjo Baličević. 1600, from the report of Bishop Marijan Maravić. 1655, and bishop Nicholas Ogramić from. 1672, as well as from reports from Fr Paul Papic. 1623..

June 1, 1635 Sarajevo merchant Ante Matijevic reported to Rome, "that Turks began a violent act [the Catholics], we'll be extinct, if the Lord does not help us





> There are no Serbs on this list, which is logical. Serbs usually weren't involved in the Ottoman army.


Voynuks: also recruited from the local Christian population (the very term is of Slovenian origin). There are two types - those in Bulgaria, which do not concern us, and "our" Serbian. They performed military service. Cerības (of Christians), Serasker, voynuks begs and sandžakbeg (of Muslims). Since 1530 their position becomes less favorable, because they were reduced to pay taxes (harač). Gradually they crossed the civilian status, and when the 1530 abolished voynuks status in sandžak Smederevo, Krusevac and Zvornik the number of dervendžija is growing.

Voynuk' is derived from 'voynik' which in South Slavic languages means soldier
Such troops are to be found under this name throughout the Balkans — in Albania, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Herzegovina, Macedonia, Serbia and Thessaly ...

----------


## Ike

> I'm not saying that all Croats converted to Orthodoxy but part, large part Orthodox Christians in Bosnia are Vlach....Haplotypes of Serbs from Bosnia say that not me...


OK then, lets review this hypothesis. 

1. Which would be the Vlach haplotype? 
2. What was the percentage of Vlachs and Croats in Bosnia when Ottomans entered 1459. and what was when the Austrians annexed Bosnia in 1878? 
3. How many of them (Croats and Vlachs) were Orthodox before Ottomans, and how many after the Ottomans?





> The Patriarchate of Peć had jurisdiction to Zagreb and not to Drina river..


Patriarchate of Pec had jurisdiction beyond Bratislava. If Turks conquered Vienna, we would probably have Austria under Patriarchate of Pec. 
But what baffles me is that you think Patriarch of Pec had real influence in all those areas. With what did he influence people of Western Balkans? Whom did he send there? Did he have gold, money, land, goods? What did he offer? Do you think that Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople today has any impact in Japan, Andalusia, Bratislava or even Macedonia which is next to his yard?




> In 1779, Metropolitan of Herzegovina tries to subdue Catholic of Trebinje, Blagaj, Mostar, Ljubuski ad Duvno; but in court he denied as well as the Bishop of Mostar, who in 1781 invited the friars of Mostar to court for the same things. "Except these examples there were previous attempts Orthodox priests to put under its control the Franciscans, Catholics ad non-believers.


Exactly. In 1779, which was 15 years before the first Uprise in Serbia, when it was obvious that Ottoman's lost strength and when battle for taxpayers started among Christian churches. And right 20 km to Serbian borders. And he obviously failed. So why do you think it was possible 300 km away, in the times of Ottomans. Who converted people of Western Bosnia into Orthodox and when?




> From these few examples, it is seen which pressures were exposed Catholics in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Ottoman rule. Some converted to Islam, some have adopted Orthodoxy because of the lack of Catholic priests, then constant pressure, blackmail ad harassment from across Drina Orthodox leaders.


They were under pressure for sure, but all your examples show that the pressure failed, because Pope's influence in Dalmatia was much more stronger than the Patriarch of Pec, which was BTW normal to expect.

----------


## hrvat22

> OK then, lets review this hypothesis. 
> 
> 1. Which would be the Vlach haplotype? 
> 2. 
> 
> 
> 
> What was the percentage of Vlachs and Croats in Bosnia when Ottomans entered 1459. and what was when the Austrians annexed Bosnia in 1878?
> 
> ...


Vlach haplotype in Bosnia and Croatia would be E1b V13, possible that some are Illyrian assimilated earlier....We will know when in detail are explore mentioned haplotype and all its mutations, then we will specify the haplotypes..

Possible and types of R1b and J2, we will see in the future..




> What was the percentage of Vlachs and Croats in Bosnia when Ottomans entered 1459. and what was when the Austrians annexed Bosnia in 1878?


I do not know, I assume that later was much more Vlach or Serbs which is logical..




> How many of them (Croats and Vlachs) were Orthodox before Ottomans, and how many after the Ottomans?


Part of Vlach was and Catholics, they are Croats today..but a lot more of them is in today's Serbs..




> Exactly. In 1779, which was 15 years before the first Uprise in Serbia, when it was obvious that Ottoman's lost strength and when battle for taxpayers started among Christian churches. And right 20 km to Serbian borders.


Serbs and Orthodox majority is not at war with Turks, the main enemies of Turks are western countries and Catholicism, among them are Croatia not Serbia..

After departure of Turks half Balkans remained Orthodox..





> When the Peć Patriarchate from Constantinople in 1557, received privileges it confers and its territory ... along old areas which once have *Patriarchate of Peć* before the Turkish invasion, the new Patriarchate of Peć received a new areas in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia with Srem and in Hungary, all the way to Budim. Therefore Pec Patriarchate after 1557, expanded its jurisdiction over Orthodox in all countries, where the Serbian people settled in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Such extended Pec Patriarchate far exceeded the boundaries of the Patriarchate under the Turks than they were in Nemanjic time..






> After creation Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was proclaimed the unification of all Orthodox Churches districts in a Serbian Orthodox Church 1920, which was declared as successor Pec Patriarchate.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> In northwestern Croatia I2a is in second place and R1a on the first..what is different from the rest of Croatia ?
> Fact that have a higher R1a ?
> 
> Serbs have a second haplotype in population Albanian E1b V13 that has nothing to do with Slavs, while Croats in Bosnia have minimum haplotype E1b and they are similar to the east of Balkans....how ?
> 
> But what this have to do with the arrival of Croats from White Croatia...?
> 
> Croatian, Bosnian, Montenegrin and Serbian carriers of I2a1b2a1a3 A356 coming to Balkans as Croats .... this is logic ....and later become Bosnians, Montenegrins etc...


So, you mean that the original Slavs of the west Balkans settled firstly in Croatia? Afterward they settled further south?

----------


## Piro Ilir

> What make you think or label,haplogroups with modern day ethnicity,the day when they arose there is no names such is Croat,Albanian etc,which in fact the origin of the very names are disputed and are from Middle Ages,Dalmatians if you read their chronicles most of them never used name such is Croat in self designation instead they did Dalmatian,illyrian,Slovinac-Slav,don't imagine communities such is white Croatia,because it will be what all Slavic speakers descend from white Croats wow, i wrote there is yet research on entire ethnogenesis,language etc..couple researchers on the Slavs even denied the migration recently or at least it was nowhere near as it was prior imagined,let alone they brought all the haplotypes with them,what was Balkans,waste land?


The population during the last time of Roman empire on west Balkans was too rare. This is what I had read, but of course nothing is 100% sure. The population generally always was too rare throughout Balkans, except some areas of the south on the shores.

----------


## Piro Ilir

> Do you even listen to yourself? You're saying that Croats converted into Orthodox faith in fear of Muslims? How does that help?
> 
> Battle of Nicopoli and has nothing to do with conversion. Serbian prince was not an ally, but a Turkish vassal and had to support him in that battle. Long after that Serbia fell under Ottoman rule, then Bosnia, then Croatia. That was 100-200 years after battle of Nicopolis. If there was any conversion, it happened in those times. And in those times, Serbs, Bosnians and Croatians were the same in the eyes of Ottomans. None of them was their ally.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you hear that Ottomans let people stay Christian if they pay extra tribute called _harac_?
> 
> 
> ...


Scanderbeg destroyed the Serb army because they stopped him to join the Huniad for the battle against the ottomans. Serbs during the reign of scanderbeg were allies of ottomans. The wife of the sultan was the sister of the Serb lord. All this is something well-known, you like or not

----------


## Ike

> Scanderbeg destroyed the Serb army because they stopped him to join the Huniad for the battle against the ottomans. Serbs during the reign of scanderbeg were allies of ottomans. The wife of the sultan was the sister of the Serb lord. All this is something well-known, you like or not


Already discussed in #355 and has nothing to do with the subject.

----------


## Ike

> Vlach haplotype in Bosnia and Croatia would be E1b V13, possible that some are Illyrian assimilated earlier....We will know when in detail are explore mentioned haplotype and all its mutations, then we will specify the haplotypes..
> 
> Possible and types of R1b and J2, we will see in the future..


It currently seems that E-V13 is too old to be Vlach. It couldn't have come from central Europe where Illyrians have descended from. What hg would be Illyrians then?





> I do not know, I assume that later was much more Vlach or Serbs which is logical..
> Part of Vlach was and Catholics, they are Croats today..but a lot more of them is in today's Serbs..


We have whole parts of Western Bosnia and Croatia filled with Orthodox people today, and we know that there was non before Ottomans, and have no evidence of actual impact of Orthodox church in those areas. That would suggest that they settled there in the meantime... which is in accordance with some historical sources.






> Serbs and Orthodox majority is not at war with Turks, the main enemies of Turks are western countries and Catholicism, among them are Croatia not Serbia..
> After departure of Turks half Balkans remained Orthodox..


Well some would argue about that, but that's a whole different subject.

----------


## hrvat22

> So, you mean that the original Slavs of the west Balkans settled firstly in Croatia? Afterward they settled further south?


 According to Porphyrogenetus Croats come to Dalmatia and spread to Illyria and Pannonia. 

Haplotypes with White Croatian mutation I-Y3548 has in Slovenia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro, Belarus, Ukraine, probably Albania, Slovakia and Czech Republic ...

Obviously migration of White Croats went in several directions.

It is interesting that behind our Croatian haplotype I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983 there are mutations in the Czech Republic old about two hundred years...that are Croats escaped from the Turks and today, those people probably feeling Czechs but apparently Croatian origin..

Experimental I2a tree..

Croats belong to branch I-S17250 and majority are I-Z16983 I2a1b2a1a3 A356/Z16983.


http://yfull.com/tree/I2/

----------


## hrvat22

> *Ike*





> It currently seems that E-V13 is too old to be Vlach. It couldn't have come from central Europe where Illyrians have descended from. What hg would be Illyrians then?


I do not have specific Albanian haplotype but reading Serbian forums they are mostly identical types so when they get specific haplotypes I will contact you and I will answer...

----------


## Ike

> I do not have specific Albanian haplotype but reading Serbian forums they are mostly identical types so when they get specific haplotypes I will contact you and I will answer...


FFS. When did Albanians become Illyrians.

----------


## hrvat22

> FFS. When did Albanians become Illyrians.


Far as I know E1b V13 is candidate for Illyrians because it is in Balkans at time of the Illyrians, when Illyrians became Albanians is question for historians.

----------


## Sile

> Far as I know E1b V13 is candidate for Illyrians because it is in Balkans at time of the Illyrians, when Illyrians became Albanians is question for historians.


E-V13 is a very minor part of illyrians ...less than 10%...................how can you claim anything with less than 10% ?

Vudecol culture is know as proto-illyrian culture and it is in modern Bosnia and since I2a is the bulk of Bosnian people we can assume I2a has *far greater chance to be Illyrian* than E-v13, don't you agree?

----------


## Ike

> Far as I know E1b V13 is candidate for Illyrians because it is in Balkans at time of the Illyrians, when Illyrians became Albanians is question for historians.


But as far as we know Illyrians were probably not in Balkan in times of E-V13. Why do you think that Illyrians who came down to Balkan were also E-V13?
If they were E-V13 and not related to Greeks (as we know from Greek writings), how come we have so much E-V13 in southern Balkan? What happened so that whole Illyrian tribes moved from Dinaric mountains towards Bulgaria, Greece and Crete?

We still don't know who Illyrians were for sure, so guessing about their connection with any of today's nationalities or ethnicities seems futile. Maybe Albanians were here before the Illyrians, maybe they were Illyrians, maybe they came here after Illyrians perished, etc. No point in involving Albanians in this discussion.

----------


## Yetos

> Far as I know E1b V13 is candidate for Illyrians because it is in Balkans at time of the Illyrians, when Illyrians became Albanians is question for historians.


E-V13 is still a strange story in Balkans,

if we connect with the research of Italians searches, 
then is palaiolithic/neolithic >7ky and its primary spot is modern central-west Bulgaria, (combination of E-v13 +PC1)

if we connect it with migrations from levant and minor Asia then is surely shorter than <4ky in Balkans and expand from Greece

*we can not connect V-13 with IE,*
meaning that true GREEKS THRACIANS ILLYRIANS had no V-13,
but either lived together, either they accept it later,

WE CAN NOT CONNECT ANY IE POPULATIONS WITH E-V13
meaning that E-V13 existed in Balkans before IE arrival,
or E-V13 came at late bronze age, (could be combined with tin bronze)
so E-V13 has nothing to do with proto-Thracians, proto-Greeks, Proto-Illyrians etc
but is a mark of Balkans and around generally,

E-v13 is not a mark of Albanians, neither a mark of Greeks, neither a mark of Bulgarians, neither a mark of Serbs,
all these found V-13 when they came, or accept it when it came,

----------


## hrvat22

> E-V13 is a very minor part of illyrians ...less than 10%...................how can you claim anything with less than 10% ?
> 
> Vudecol culture is know as proto-illyrian culture and it is in modern Bosnia and since I2a is the bulk of Bosnian people we can assume I2a has *far greater chance to be Illyrian* than E-v13, don't you agree?



Where is that I2a Illyrian today in the Balkans?

Illyrians are mixed tribes and probably mixed haplotypes ...

Each haplotype, which is autochthon in territory of Albania, Bosnia, Croatia etc...in the former territory of the Illyrian tribes...may be a candidate..

J2, E1b, R1b...possible R1a and I2a...when it is confirmed, we will be smarter..

----------


## hrvat22

> But as far as we know Illyrians were probably not in Balkan in times of E-V13. Why do you think that Illyrians who came down to Balkan were also E-V13?
> If they were E-V13 and not related to Greeks (as we know from Greek writings), how come we have so much E-V13 in southern Balkan? What happened so that whole Illyrian tribes moved from Dinaric mountains towards Bulgaria, Greece and Crete?
> 
> We still don't know who Illyrians were for sure, so guessing about their connection with any of today's nationalities or ethnicities seems futile. Maybe Albanians were here before the Illyrians, maybe they were Illyrians, maybe they came here after Illyrians perished, etc. No point in involving Albanians in this discussion.


Perhaps they were chased by Slavs

----------


## hrvat22

> E-V13 is still a strange story in Balkans,
> 
> if we connect with the research of Italians searches, 
> then is palaiolithic/neolithic >7ky and its primary spot is modern central-west Bulgaria, (combination of E-v13 +PC1)
> 
> if we connect it with migrations from levant and minor Asia then is surely shorter than <4ky in Balkans and expand from Greece
> 
> *we can not connect V-13 with IE,*
> meaning that true GREEKS THRACIANS ILLYRIANS had no V-13,
> ...







> Finally, conclusion of their administrator (Bulgarian dna) is that J2b1 has nothing to do with Greeks. Today's Greeks, according to him, is very questionable category. A good part of Northern Greece is Slovenian (Slavs) and Albanian origin. Upon the arrival of Turks "real Greeks" emigrating to Italy and other countrys. Their place "filled" are mostly people of Albanian origin, then the Greeks from Western Anatolia (later), etc ..
> 
> Similar reasoning have admin of our Serbian DNA project (this seems to be a universal opinion of the administrator)



This is comment from Serbian genetic forum, I do not know all types of haplotypes but Bulgarian and Serbian administrator know, if they come to the same conclusion it may be true what they saying.. ..

I cant confirm whether is this true or not but that's what they think..

----------


## Милан М.

> This is comment from Serbian genetic forum, I do not know all types of haplotypes but Bulgarian and Serbian administrator know, if they come to the same conclusion it may be true what they saying.. ..
> 
> I cant confirm whether is this true or not but that's what they think..


Serbian genetic forum "poreklo" they does that in order to test and attract people to collect money,people are more interested in things like those,you are "Illyrian" oh no you are "Serb" Slav,A Croat,no you are Thracian,maybe Vlach? something like Igenea did,in my opinion you can't connect haplogroups to any present day ethnicities,as i said the day they arose none of modern ethnicities existed,we can only say which haplogroups were the most frequent let's say in Slavic ethnogenesis..

----------


## Sile

> Where is that I2a Illyrian today in the Balkans?
> 
> Illyrians are mixed tribes and probably mixed haplotypes ...
> 
> Each haplotype, which is autochthon in territory of Albania, Bosnia, Croatia etc...in the former territory of the Illyrian tribes...may be a candidate..
> 
> J2, E1b, R1b...possible R1a and I2a...when it is confirmed, we will be smarter..


since at this present time ( today ) Harvard univ. is genotyping the R1b found of the Vudecol culture, which is proto-illyrian culture , we can safely say that whatever branch this R1b is , it will be known as an illyrian marker.

----------


## LeBrok

Off topic posts were moved here:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...reements/page8

----------


## Piro Ilir

In the end, what is the decision onto the Croats. What were them? Were them Slavic or not? Who are more Slavic, Serbs Croats, montenegrins, bosniaks or slovenes?

----------


## hjalmar

> Who converted people of Western Bosnia into Orthodox and when?


Do you know the history of the Bosnian bogomils?

Since the late 12th century, Bosnia was a stronghold of bogomils. These were dualist Christians who held a faith similar to the French cathars, they believed all material things were created by the devil, who also created the world, and trapped human souls which belong to God into bodies of his creation. Their belief was similar to the earlier gnostic christians, the Armenian paulicians (who settled in Thrace and spread the religion from there all over Europe) and the manicheans. Even the Church of Bosnia, originally catholic, became a bogomil (also known as patarene) institution. They believed themselves to be the original christians and called themselved krstjani. They refuted the cross, baptism, marriage, the eucharist and church hierarchy. They only knew credentes, believers, who were free to live as they wanted as long as they did not harm others, and perfecti, who lead a very ascetic life as to invite the Holy Spirit in them. Most believers only became perfects on their death-bed.

Until the Ottomans came, the heretic Bosnians were ruthlessly persecuted by the Roman Catholic Church. In fact, the RCC found the Inquisition to root out this type of heresy, in which they succeeded in France with the cathars. Catholic Hungary had been attacking Bosnia for the last couple of centuries, and as a result, being catholic did not make you very popular in Bosnia. The bogomils had invited the Turks to protect them from this persecution.

The Bosnian muslims are for the most part direct descendants of these bogomil heretics, who converted to islam over a period of 200 years. The Ottomans brought previously unseen prosperity to Bosnia, cities were founded and the economy was flourishing. They initially forced the Bosnian noblemen, all bogomils, to convert to islam if they wanted to keep their possessions, and their sons were taken to Turkey and returned as jannissaries, but the other classes were left at peace. 

Also, from the Ottoman administration we see that the heretic christians were treated favorably by the Ottomans, who called them kristians (while Orthodox and Catholic christians were called kuffar). In the early 17th century the term kristian disappears, and Bosnia is predominantly muslim (around that time another heresy appears, islamic in name this time, but similar to bogomilism, but is destroyed by the Ottomans very fast).

We can assume that not every christian heretic was very happy with the advent of islam (even if sufism was the most popular, again a heterodox branch of religion), and it is known that a minor part of the bogomils converted to Orthodox christianity.

----------


## Croat91

> Do you know the history of the Bosnian bogomils?
> 
> Since the late 12th century, Bosnia was a stronghold of bogomils. These were dualist Christians who held a faith similar to the French cathars, they believed all material things were created by the devil, who also created the world, and trapped human souls which belong to God into bodies of his creation. Their belief was similar to the earlier gnostic christians, the Armenian paulicians (who settled in Thrace and spread the religion from there all over Europe) and the manicheans. Even the Church of Bosnia, originally catholic, became a bogomil (also known as patarene) institution. They believed themselves to be the original christians and called themselved krstjani. They refuted the cross, baptism, marriage, the eucharist and church hierarchy. They only knew credentes, believers, who were free to live as they wanted as long as they did not harm others, and perfecti, who lead a very ascetic life as to invite the Holy Spirit in them. Most believers only became perfects on their death-bed.
> 
> Until the Ottomans came, the heretic Bosnians were ruthlessly persecuted by the Roman Catholic Church. In fact, the RCC found the Inquisition to root out this type of heresy, in which they succeeded in France with the cathars. Catholic Hungary had been attacking Bosnia for the last couple of centuries, and as a result, being catholic did not make you very popular in Bosnia. The bogomils had invited the Turks to protect them from this persecution.
> 
> The Bosnian muslims are for the most part direct descendants of these bogomil heretics, who converted to islam over a period of 200 years. The Ottomans brought previously unseen prosperity to Bosnia, cities were founded and the economy was flourishing. They initially forced the Bosnian noblemen, all bogomils, to convert to islam if they wanted to keep their possessions, and their sons were taken to Turkey and returned as jannissaries, but the other classes were left at peace. 
> 
> Also, from the Ottoman administration we see that the heretic christians were treated favorably by the Ottomans, who called them kristians (while Orthodox and Catholic christians were called kuffar). In the early 17th century the term kristian disappears, and Bosnia is predominantly muslim (around that time another heresy appears, islamic in name this time, but similar to bogomilism, but is destroyed by the Ottomans very fast).
> ...


The issue of the Bosnian Bogomil theory is that it is heavily disputed by historians such as Noel Malcom (Bosnia: A Short History) and John V.A Fine, due to the fact that no evidence can be found in the original documents of the Bosnian Christians. Importantly the Bosnian Church split form the Catholic Church due to opposing Hungary and not submitting to their demands. It’s reasonable to suggest that mostly Catholics converted to the Bosnian Church as Bosnia was ruled by the Catholic Church and was predominately Catholic at the time. Critically are you also suggesting that the Bogomils are predominately of I2a Din origin?

----------


## Croat91

Croatians had to pay tax to the Orthodox and Muslim churches, so the Orthodox Church expanded at the expense of the Catholic Church in Bosnia. This was due to double taxation and lack of rights in society, for example court action against people of the Muslim or Orthodox faiths were mostly unsuccessful. As a result some Croatians converted to the Orthodox faith due to taxation and social rights reasons, but at the same time they could still be Christian and be able to attend a familiar Christian church. Additionally this is further supported by changes in the ethnic demographic makeup of Bosnia over the centuries where the Muslim and Orthodox populations expanded at the expense of the Catholic population.

Sources: The Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina: Their Historical Development from the Middle Ages to the Dissolution of Yugoslavia by Mark Pinson.
Eastern Europe: An Introduction to the People, Lands, and Culture, Volume 1 edited by Richard C. Frucht.

----------


## Daemon2017

Croats as people - of course yes. Croats as a name of people - of course no  :Grin:

----------

