# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  Germanic settlement in the southern Balkans ? ?

## Maciamo

Something has been bothering me for some time because of the lack of detailed Y-DNA data in the Balkans. There is an unusually high percentage of typically Germanic haplogroups (I1, I2b, R1b and R1a) in Macedonia, Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, and to a lower extent Bosnia-Herzegovina. The combined studies I used to create the table of Y-DNA frequencies totalled an amazing 10% of I1 in Macedonia and 4% of I2b in Serbia. The Pericic et al. study of the Balkans found 5% of I1 among Herzegovinians, Serbs, Kosovar Albanians and Macedonians.

If only I could get a detailed analysis of R1b subclades and R1a STR markers in that region, I would be able to confirm whether the four haplogroups came together as part of a major Germanic migration. The only one I can think of are the Visigoths in the late 4th century. They started their invasion of the Roman Empire from what is now Moldova, another known hotspot of haplogroup I1 outside the traditional Germanic homeland.

Some people have hypothesised that I1 originated in South-East Europe, or that it once covered most of eastern and northern Europe, before the Neolithic and Indo-European migrations. But STR markers tell a different story. I1 is a young haplogroup whose members descend from a common ancestor who lived barely 4500 years ago, in the early Bronze Age, not during the Paleolithic. So I1 cannot be indigenous to the Balkans and Moldova. It came fairly recently, after the Bronze Age. Considering its point of origin in northern Germany and southern Scandinavia, I cannot think of any other possible source as a Germanic one. As there has been no massive Germanic migrations to the Balkans in Medieval times or later, the most likely period is late Roman Empire. 

The Balkans have the most diverse array of R1a lineages in the world. Some have seen it as a sign that R1a originated there during the Paleolithic, then moved to the Indian subcontinent and Central Asia via the Eurasian steppe. I think that part of the genetic diversity within R1a in the Balkans is simply due to the fact that the region lies at the receiving end of the countless migrations from the steppes (see 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe). 

There is certainly too much R1a in the Balkans for it to be all Germanic. In fact, I think that the Visigoths (or any other Germanic tribe that settled there) were most likely to carry 20 to 35% of R1a and perhaps 20 to 30% of I1, 3 to 8% of I2b and 35 to 60% of R1b. If the average I1 for the southern Balkans is 5%, then we can expect only about 4 or 5% of R1a to be Germanic.

Not all R1b should be Germanic either. Macedonia and Albania combined have about 15% of R1b, out of which only about 5 or 6% are probably Germanic. The rest would have come during the early Indo-European invasion of Europe via the Balkans and the Danube basin. Later migrations (from the Scythians onwards) would have brought mostly R1a though.

----------


## iapodos

I would remind on recent study on Serbia and Montenegro which states:
7,82% of I1 and 2,23% of I2b for Serbia
6,2% of I1 and 1,73% of I2b for Montenegro
That makes all together 10% of Germanic I haplogroups for Serbia (excluding R1b and R1a) which is unusual and high percent for Southeastern Europe.
The most possible candidates considering historical facts could be Goths, but their kingdom was much more western in position.

Other candidate could be Transylvanian Saxon which came on Balkan in medieval times as miners and were quite numerous around mining points. A lot of places in Serbia, Bosnia have names Sasi, Sasina, Sase which remind on them. It is well known fact that they were later incorporated in local Slavic nations.
This is part from encyclopedia
"Balkans 
In the Middle Ages, groups of Saxon ore miners (called саси, sasi in the South Slavic languages) settled in ore-rich regions of Southeastern Europe. In the 13th and 14th centuries, Saxons from the Upper Harz and Westphalia settled in and around Chiprovtsi in modern northwestern Bulgaria (then in the Second Bulgarian Empire) to extract ore in the western Balkan Mountains, receiving royal privileges from Bulgarian tsar Ivan Shishman. It is thought that these miners established Roman Catholicism in this part of the Balkans before being completely assimilated and merging with the local population. Along with spreading Roman Catholicism, the Saxons also enriched the local vocabulary with Germanic words and introduced new mining techniques and metal-working instruments to Bulgaria. Ethnic subgroups that are thought to be partially descended from these Saxons are the Banat Bulgarians and the Krashovani. 
Saxons also mined ore in the Osogovo and Belasica mountains (between Bulgaria and the Republic of Macedonia), as well as around Samokov in Rila and in various parts of the Rhodopes and around Etropole (all in Bulgaria), but were assimilated without establishing Roman Catholicism there . 
The Saxons miners in Serbia, Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina—active in Brskovo, Rudnik, Olovo, Novo Brdo and other places—also left a significant trace in the mining and metal-working history of the South Slavs. 
In the Srebrenica region for example the mine of Sase translates directly to Saxon in the South Slavic languages of the region. Many of the regions Bosniaks are the direct descendents of these very same miners who settled into the region between the 12th and 15th century."
Third candidate could be Normans from south Italy which were active on the Balkans too, especially in the coastal Adriatic region of Albania and Montenegro. A lot of merceniaries in medieval states of Balkan were of Germanic origin. Just to mention Serbian Allemanic Guard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palman
but I don't believe they could contribute to nowadays gene pool in significant percent.

----------


## Haganus

R1b also is a real Germanic haplogroup. This haplogroup is very frequent
in Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Never Celtic tribes entered these areas,
they are purely germanic.

About the origin of haplogroup I: has it originated in
Scandinavia? What is the relation with the others haplogroups, for example Ia etc?

----------


## Yorkie

> R1b also is a real Germanic haplogroup. This haplogroup is very frequent
> in Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Never Celtic tribes entered these areas,
> they are purely germanic.
> 
> About the origin of haplogroup I: has it originated in
> Scandinavia? What is the relation with the others haplogroups, for example Ia etc?


R1b is associated with the spread of Celtic languages. Arguably, the bulk of R1b is associated with Celtic peoples. Celts did reach Scandinavia, i.e, the Cimbri of Denmark.

The R1b which is Germanic-leaning [though not intrinsically Germanic] appears to be some of U106/S21, some of the rarer U198/S29 and the recently discovered 'Norse' form of R1b, found in the Scottish Clan MacLeod, and tested for as SNP S182. The rest, or bulk, seems Celtic.

It is specifically I1 haplogroup, not haplogroup I per se, that is seen as having a Scandinavian origin [around Denmark, post-LGM] by Ken Nordtvedt and by Peter Underhill.

----------


## Shetop

I believe that West Germanic tribes indeed had significant percentages of R1b (maybe even majority).
But when it comes to East Germanic tribes the story was probably different, meaning frequency of R1b was low (or very low).

There are records about both Visigoths and Ostrogoths temporarily settling in Macedonia. Some of them could’ve remained there.
Btw 10% of I1 is for Greek Macedonia not FYROM (FYROM has 5-6% I1 by Pericic). Also Myres et al have found very low frequencies for “Germanic” R1b subclades in Macedonia and neighboring countries.

Regarding I2b1, I also used to think it came together with I1, but pattern of I2b1 distribution in Southeast Europe seems to be different from I1, so it is possible when I1 came, part of I2b1 was there already.

----------


## Shetop

> I would remind on recent study on Serbia and Montenegro which states:
> 7,82% of I1 and 2,23% of I2b for Serbia


I have calculated 1.68% for I2b1 in Serbia.

----------


## how yes no 2

> I would remind on recent study on Serbia and Montenegro which states:
> 7,82% of I1 and 2,23% of I2b for Serbia
> 6,2% of I1 and 1,73% of I2b for Montenegro
> That makes all together 10% of Germanic I haplogroups for Serbia (excluding R1b and R1a) which is unusual and high percent for Southeastern Europe.
> The most possible candidates considering historical facts could be Goths, but their kingdom was much more western in position.
> 
> Other candidate could be Transylvanian Saxon which came on Balkan in medieval times as miners and were quite numerous around mining points. A lot of places in Serbia, Bosnia have names Sasi, Sasina, Sase which remind on them. It is well known fact that they were later incorporated in local Slavic nations.


Right, 10% of people were imported miners and Serbia was mining superpower of the world...... :)

I think it comes from several sources but mostly from Goths...
not from the Ostrogothic kingdom that iapodos talks about, but from earlier settlements of Goths seeking refuge in Serbia during invasion of Huns...


interestingly, there is also medieval historical source "Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja" that claims that south Slavs are in fact Goths and gives overview of kings and situation in country following arrival of Goths ... the source claims that Goths have divided their land on two parts - calling mountains near the sea Croatia (also Montenegro as red or south Croatia) and giving name Serbia to both Bosnia and Raska(part of today Serbia)... 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic...iest_of_Duklja

because of this document, I was wondering even if I2a2 could have in fact arrived with Goths... as it does have large variance in areas of Gothic settlements around Black sea, and is in general spread in their zone of influence...... however, I discarded that because of language issue... as I discarded Illyrian origin of I2a2 with same reason... areas that are extremelly homogenous in origin, as one of Bosnian Croats is extremelly dominantly I2a2, cannot change language without any traces of old language... that is just not realistic... only alternative explanation was that it has arrived with Slavic people, or their precursors speaking same language (Pannonians)....

Back to I1, besides Goths, Gepids could be another source of I1 as they lived for a while in Voivodina and were raiding towards south.... 

also, according to some proposals Serbs are supposed to have (before settling in Balkans) settled first Bohemia and areas of east Germany where Sorbs live today, so they could have assimilated some local I1 tribe that came with them...

I would also add that Scordisci as previous settlers of Serbia do fit tribal name pattern for I haplogroup...
they were Celtic, but R1b is exceptionally low in serbia, while area didnot go through major depopulation events (I claim this because E-V13 is close to 20% which is about 2 times more than in Bosnia and 3-4 times more than in Croatia )...so Celtic Scordisci might have dominantly been not R1b but haplogroup I carriers...


In addition, split of I2 and I1 was likely not clear cut...so some I1 is likely to have always accompanied I2a2....

----------


## iapodos

> I have calculated 1.68% for I2b1 in Serbia.


True. Mistake.

----------


## Shetop

> Regarding I2b1, I also used to think it came together with I1, but pattern of I2b1 distribution in Southeast Europe seems to be different from I1, so it is possible when I1 came, part of I2b1 was there already.


There is one more possibility for I2b1, very hypothetical - Visigoths could have had higher I2b1 frequency than Ostrogoths.

----------


## how yes no 2

> There is one more possibility for I2b1, very hypothetical - Visigoths could have had higher I2b1 frequency than Ostrogoths.


hm, matches their position next to Black sea....
but why is than (according to your map) almost none I2b1 in Iberia, which is their last settlement......

I think Goths were I1, while I2b1 might even have been carried by some other folk... 



lol, Huns...
http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...tity_1020.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...tity_1020.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...tity_1020.html
no people who origin from Huns survived in Pannonia...


back to I1
from what I just read on maps, Visigoths were also known as Getae and Tervingi...

Huns pushed them from Black sea area in Romania towards south in Serbia, Macedonia, Greece, Albania... 

and according to this map, in 400 AD Serbia, Macedonia, Greece, Albania are named 
"*Tervingorum* Praefectura Praetorio per Illyricum (Illyricum) , Praefectura Praetorio per Illyricum Regis Alarici, *Visigothorum* Praefectura Praetorio per Illyricum."

http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...ntity_719.html

with such a name for province, Visigoths must have been very populous in the area...

----------


## Shetop

> hm, matches their position next to Black sea....
> but why is than (according to your map) almost none I2b1 in Iberia, which is their last settlement......


That is a good observation.

----------


## how yes no 2

spread of I2b1 west of Black sea might be from earlier period (prior to Roman empire) as it does not show any respect for borders of Byzantium...
but again Getae or Visigoths pop up... though Carpi might fit as well ...

Btw. I just read that in Chinese sources Alans are one of the Hun tribes... strange...

Bulgarians are another possibility
Volga Bulgarians match spread further north of area between Black sea and Caspian sea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_Bulgaria 
and also spread near Black sea in Romania..
http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...entity_55.html

but traces of it in Asia minor and Levant tell me that haplogroup I2b1 was in Balkans perhaps already in time of sea peoples movement...

----------


## LeBrok

Obviously we are talking about 2 different clads of I2b1, one in east Europe, one in west. East looks like Bulgar signature, for a lack of a better much in my mind now.
East looks like Germanic. We don't know any Bulgar invasion into Germany area, so it had to exist there for many years before, like couple of thousand years.
North looks like spread by Saxons, and stronger Portugal area could have been marked by Suebi invasion.
The East is completely separate though. There could have been pre Roman movement from Saxon/Suebi area to the east, settled in the area where Bugars later came from. 
East doesn't look like Hunik invasion. We would have had more I2b1 in Hungary.
Heck, a very interesting map Shetop.

----------


## LeBrok

When I look longer at this map I can see a strong Slavic thrust west into Germany. There is a strong border that starts at Baltic sea and goes down through east Germany, Czechs, Austria to Slovenia/Italia border. Call it a front. :)
Also I can see spread of I2b1 with Franks (Germans) into France, till they met with strong Iberian/Celtic resistance. Or whatever kingdom was there at the time. 

They even got to Mediterranean sea and we have a stronger signature of I2b1 there at one point.
On the other hand Goths/Visigoths didn't have anything to do with I2b1. Whenever they went they didn't spread the I2b1 with them. Considering that they started going west from Black sea, they didn't pick up and spread I2b1 with them. It means there was no I2b1 at Black Sea at the time Goths lived there, for few hundreds of years. It confirms my believe that it showed up there later with Bulgars from Volga. Looks like they settled in Romania by the sea for a while before some of them went south. It looks like they made few cousins in Albania too.
I just wonder if Bulgarian language was derivative of Scythians, therefore related to Slavic and it was easy for Bulgars to get slavonized with similar Slavic language?

Interesting is that Baltic nations have stronger I2b1 signature. Was there a thrust of Germanic tribes closer to the sea? Did some come with Vikings? Teutonic knits?
I'm leaning with the last. The Prussians were conquered by Teutonic knits, and majority of them came from Germany.

----------


## LeBrok

I'm still looking at the map....lol
Looks like Bulgars moved from Volga to the north part of Back sea first.


Then they went like this:

Just watch out, Magyars are right behind. :)

----------


## LeBrok

If this map is correct, Bulgars conquered Greece, Macedonia, Albania and part of Turkey.

We also see the heightened amount of I2b1 in this area. It farther confirms Bulgar origin of this clad. Saying lightly they were very promiscuous these Bulgars, lol.
The only white spot there is in Macedonia. Did Serbs reconquered Macedonia from Bulgars? (not familiar with this part of history) Looks like Bulgars were wiped out from Macedonia before they managed to spread their seed.
If yes then most of R1a in Macedonia is Serb/Slavic, and not Bulgars or Bulgarian/Slavic.

----------


## iapodos

> If this map is correct, Bulgars conquered Greece, Macedonia, Albania and part of Turkey.
> 
> We also see the heightened amount of I2b1 in this area. It farther confirms Bulgar origin of this clad. Saying lightly they were very promiscuous these Bulgars, lol.
> The only white spot there is in Macedonia. Did Serbs reconquered Macedonia from Bulgars? (not familiar with this part of history) Looks like Bulgars were wiped out from Macedonia before they managed to spread their seed.
> If yes then most of R1a in Macedonia is Serb/Slavic, and not Bulgars or Bulgarian/Slavic.


Bulgarians never conquered Greece and Turkey, and what you are watching on this map is actually Byzantine Empire. If you look carefully it is written in the corner, Bulgaria is marked with other colour on the north.
Macedonia during early medieval period was mostly Byzantine and Bulgarian teritory. Serbs conquered Macedonia in 13th century and kept it for about hundred years till Turkish invasion.

----------


## iapodos

The hotspot of I2b in Russia is in Nizniy Novgorod, Ryazan region and in Republic of Mordovia. The Mordvin people inhabitate all of this regions. They showed about 20 % of haplogroup I, I don't of what subcalade, probably I2b. 
Mordvins are mentioned in early Getica of Jordanes as subjects of Gothic king Ermanaric, whose state was north of the black sea, around Moldavian hotspot of I2b.

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

It is connection worth of exploring. I don't believe that Bulgars, Huns are candidates for I2b in easterm Europe. Volga Bulgar region correspond with today Russian Tatarstan, and among Tatars there are significant percent of haplogroup I, but I1 and not I2b.

----------


## Maciamo

> There is one more possibility for I2b1, very hypothetical - Visigoths could have had higher I2b1 frequency than Ostrogoths.





> spread of I2b1 west of Black sea might be from earlier period (prior to Roman empire) as it does not show any respect for borders of Byzantium...


Actually, based on the above map, I2b1 does seem to fit nicely within the Byzantine borders, which ended around the modern border of Romania and Moldova.

If the I2b1 along the west Black Sea coast is indeed the result of Gothic settlements, it doesn't really matter whether all of it lies inside of outside the boundaries of the Roman/Byzantine Empire. After the Empire crumbled, people were free to move across the former border. What I mean is that the I2b1 distribution we see today does not represent a fixed moment in history, but everything that happened until today. 

Here is what could have happened :

Some of the Goths stayed outside the Roman borders, accounting for the I2b in Moldova and Ukraine.

The Goths defeated the Romans at the Battle of Adrianople, and many decided to settled in Adrianople itself, while others continued their journey west to Italy, Gaul and Iberia. Based on the above map, Thrace (where Adrianople/Edime is located) seems to be a hotspot for I2b1. Cinnioglu et al.'s study of Anatolia confirms the presence of I1 in Thrace, a further indication that the Goths did indeed settle there.

From Adrianople, Gothic lineages would have expanded progressively within the boundaries of the Byzantine then Ottoman Empire. Haplogroup tend to spread simply by the natural flow of people who move or marry in the next village, expanding little by little over the course of many centuries. As people tend to marry within their linguistic group, an expansion of these I2b1 lineages within the Romanian/Moldovan-speaking area is to be expected. Eventually the lineages from Adrianople would have reached those who stayed outside the Roman boundaries and met around Moldova.

----------


## how yes no 2

> The hotspot of I2b in Russia is in Nizniy Novgorod, Ryazan region and in Republic of Mordovia. The Mordvin people inhabitate all of this regions. They showed about 20 % of haplogroup I, I don't of what subcalade, probably I2b. 
> Mordvins are mentioned in early Getica of Jordanes as subjects of Gothic king Ermanaric, whose state was north of the black sea, around Moldavian hotspot of I2b.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ermanaric
> It is connection worth of exploring. I don't believe that Bulgars, Huns are candidates for I2b in easterm Europe. Volga Bulgar region correspond with today Russian Tatarstan, and among Tatars there are significant percent of haplogroup I, but I1 and not I2b.




Mordovia is number 11 on map, Tatarstan is number 13...
it is more or less same location, as both republics are pretty small and nearby... it's hard to tell which one fits better to hotspot...when I look at landmarks and borders on the north it seems to be 13, when I look the ones on the south it looks as 11... actually, I think 11...so, Mordvins and Goths

though, besides trajectory of Goths it does also follow nicely trajectory of Bulgars... from Volga Bulgaria to Crimea, than to south Romania, and today Bulgaria... also spread in Albania can be related as Albania was part of Bulgarian empire for significant time
http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...entity_55.html

better argument against Bulgar origin would be lack of it in Macedonia which was for long under influence of Bulgars... 

anyway, really good argument about Mordovin people and their relation to Goths... I2b1 might be Gothic indeed


still, I see as major problem for exclusively Gothic or Bulgarian origin of I2b1 fact that it is present in Asia minor...

I can agree that Goths did pass the borders and also inhabited lands of Byzantium, but I do not believe they went all the way to the Asia minor...


there might have been two or more sources for east Europe... (I do not look at west Europe as there I think it is obviously Germanic in origin as it correlates with spread of I1)





> Actually, based on the above map, I2b1 does seem to fit nicely within the Byzantine borders, which ended around the modern border of Romania and Moldova.


not really, as it stretches along east side of Black sea from Istanbul to Crimea, while I think Byzantine borders included always Istanbul, but never Crimea.....




> If the I2b1 along the west Black Sea coast is indeed the result of Gothic settlements, it doesn't really matter whether all of it lies inside of outside the boundaries of the Roman/Byzantine Empire. After the Empire crumbled, people were free to move across the former border. .


true...we know that Visigoths lived inside Byzantium teritory e.g. 400 AD following of their displacement by Huns... but likely much before as well...as their tribal name is likely the same as Getae who lived in area during ancient Greece......

but it is a bit hard to believe they actually settled as far as Asia minor in any recent history...




> What I mean is that the I2b1 distribution we see today does not represent a fixed moment in history, but everything that happened until today. 
> Here is what could have happened :
> Some of the Goths stayed outside the Roman borders, accounting for the I2b in Moldova and Ukraine.
> The Goths defeated the Romans at the Battle of Adrianople, and many decided to settled in Adrianople itself, while others continued their journey west to Italy, Gaul and Iberia. Based on the above map, Thrace (where Adrianople/Edime is located) seems to be a hotspot for I2b1. Cinnioglu et al.'s study of Anatolia confirms the presence of I1 in Thrace, a further indication that the Goths did indeed settle there.


that makes sense... correlation with I1 especially, as I1 is likely to have spread on Balkans east with Goths




> From Adrianople, Gothic lineages would have expanded progressively within the boundaries of the Byzantine then Ottoman Empire. Haplogroup tend to spread simply by the natural flow of people who move or marry in the next village, expanding little by little over the course of many centuries. As people tend to marry within their linguistic group, an expansion of these I2b1 lineages within the Romanian/Moldovan-speaking area is to be expected. Eventually the lineages from Adrianople would have reached those who stayed outside the Roman boundaries and met around Moldova.


that's ok...
but I miss proper explanation for presence in certain areas of Asia minor...

reasonable one would be that Getae were same as Goths (Visigoths in fact) and as they inhabited Thrace in times of ancient Greeks, than they likely did in some time in ancient history also live in certain parts of Asia minor...

----------


## how yes no 2

Visigoths actually correlate with lack of I2b1 in Iberia





so, I think some other germanic people are related to spread of I2b1...
LeBrok rightly pointed to Franks...





Franks have legend of origin relating them to Troy, which may explain I2b1 in 
Asia minor...




> Like many Germanic peoples, the Franks developed an origin story to connect themselves with peoples of antiquity. In the case of the Franks, these peoples were the *Sicambri* and the *Trojans*. An anonymous work of 727 called Liber Historiae Francorum states that following the fall of Troy, 12,000 Trojans led by chiefs Priam and Antenor moved to the Tanais (Don) river, settled in Pannonia near the Sea of Azov and founded a city called "Sicambria". In just two generations (Priam and his son Marcomer) from the fall of Troy (by modern scholars dated in the late Bronze Age) they arrive in the late fourth century at the Rhine. An earlier variation of this story can be read in Fredegar. In Fredegar's version an early king named Francio serves as namegiver for the Franks, just as Romulus has lent his name to Rome.


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

Sicambri from whom Franks origin, might be related to Cimbri and Cimmerians...


Cimbri are also interesting as they cover Provence in south France and much of I2b1 area in west Europe...



Thraco-Cimmerians 700-800 BC

----------


## LeBrok

It's hard to pinpoint exact origin of Suebi/Suevi. One map shows here in south/west Germania:

One map shows in east of germania:

So lets say they are from central germania, and this is the strongest I2b1 signature. The migrated to Galicia in Iberia, and this is where we have the strongest signature of I2b1 in Iberia.


On other hand Goths started migration from Scandinavia where I2b1 is not that much. They didn't make much of the mark in rest of Iberia. Knowing that they lived few hundred years by Black sea where I2b1 is reach, that means that they left Black sea area to Iberia, before I2b1 showed there. Otherwise why they didn't leave mark on Iberia the way Suebi did?

The heighten I2b1 around Israel and Lebanon could be a mark of crusaders. Most of them came from Germany, France, Italy and England.

----------


## Dalmat

its interesting,as we ere usually say "Švabe" as nickname for all "Njemce"(Germans),and Švabe means Suebi(i think) in our way of saying,since it was our general or collective knowledge that Germans descended from Swabians(Suebi?)

----------


## Shetop

There is one good argument in favor of Visigoth origin of I2b1.

I believe that Visigoths had to have significant frequencies of I1 also. But similarly I1 is not found in Iberian regions conquered by them.

This needs explanation and it could be like following one. Goths were forced to Pannonia and Balkans by Huns, and this migration was real and massive because it was the way for them to save their lives. Unlike that, conquests of Iberia and Italy would actually be result of ambition of Gothic elite followed by a minor part of the tribe loyal to them. Most of the ordinary Goths abandoned the elite in turbulent circumstances.
It should also be noted that between 418 AD and 508 AD, political center of Visigothic kingdom was Southern France (not Iberia) and this kingdom included larger part of Iberia. It was like that until Franks took control of the most of France.

In this scenario I2b1 was brought to Southeast Europe by Visigoths (but they brought I1 also), and Ostrogoths would’ve been predominantly I1. After downfall of the Hunnic Empire part of Ostrogoths moved to Balkans from Pannonia (approximately 80 years after Visigoths).

Here is one map of I1 distribution, it looks good to me:

----------


## how yes no 2

hm, there is no match between spread of I1 and I2b1 in Balkans... (there is a match in area far north of Caucasus, but as far as we know Goths didnot live there but more to the west and south)

Visigoths must have left bigger impact in genetics of Spain than in the one of Serbia, but spread of I1 contradicts this... let's forget for a moment Goths as key donor of I1 to Balkans... after all they might have been dominantly some other haplogroup... 

what do you think about Scordisci as a key source of I1 in Balkan? they fit well into haplogroup I tribal name pattern....




> The Scordisci (Greek,"Σκορδίσκοι") were an ancient Celtic tribe centered in what would become the Roman Provinces of lower Pannonia, Moesia and present-day Serbia at the confluence of the Savus[1] (Sava), Dravus[2] (Drava) and Danube rivers. They were historically notable from the beginning of the third century B.C. until the turn of the common era. At their zenith, their influence stretched over regions comprising parts of the present-day Austria, Croatia, Hungary, Serbia, Slovenia, Slovakia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Their tribal name may be connected to the name of the Scordus[3] mountain (Šar mountain) which was located between the regions of Illyria and Paionia.


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

Šar mountain extends over areas of southern Kosovo and the northwest of the Republic of Macedonia to northeastern Albania, which coincides with south most part of I1 hotspot in Balkans according to the map provided by Shetop...

and mention of tribal name does stretch all the way to Austria and Slovakia same as Balkan I1 hotspot does...







btw. spread for Serbia of I1 in map has to be just approximation as I am not aware of any separate sampling done per different regions...

----------


## LeBrok

> its interesting,as we ere usually say "Švabe" as nickname for all "Njemce"(Germans),and Švabe means Suebi(i think) in our way of saying,since it was our general or collective knowledge that Germans descended from Swabians(Suebi?)


Great observation, and it means that Suebi were the biggest-most eastern germanic tribe Slavs incounter expending west. Or the one that gave them most resistance. 
In Poland word Shvab is more of a derogatory flavour, niemiec is neutral. Not sure how it is in other Slavic countries, or if negative meaning showed up recently and was neutral in the past?

----------


## LeBrok

> There is one good argument in favor of Visigoth origin of I2b1.
> 
> I believe that Visigoths had to have significant frequencies of I1 also. But similarly I1 is not found in Iberian regions conquered by them.
> 
> This needs explanation and it could be like following one. Goths were forced to Pannonia and Balkans by Huns, and this migration was real and massive because it was the way for them to save their lives. Unlike that, conquests of Iberia and Italy would actually be result of ambition of Gothic elite followed by a minor part of the tribe loyal to them. Most of the ordinary Goths abandoned the elite in turbulent circumstances.
> 
> Here is one map of I1 distribution, it looks good to me:



I'm confused looking at this map. I don't sea even slightest elevation of I1 on North side of Black Sea. We know that Goths lived there for few hundred years as a ruling/dominant tribe, and they should have left their I1 there, the same way we see elevated I2b1 level there.
Did they isolate themselves from locals and never mingled?
Was I1 any dominant in Goths?
But if they had lots of I1 and they didn't leave a mark around Black Sea, it means that they couldn't possibly leave any I2b1 either, right? Can you leave one and not leave the other?
Maybe the map is low resolution?

----------


## how yes no 2

> Great observation, and it means that Suebi were the biggest-most eastern germanic tribe Slavs incounter expending west. Or the one that gave them most resistance. 
> In Poland word Shvab is more of a derogatory flavour, niemiec is neutral. Not sure how it is in other Slavic countries, or if negative meaning showed up recently and was neutral in the past?


 in Serbia Nemci is also neutral and official, while Svabe can be somewhat derogative but I think is more jargon or casual speaking than offending...

good point, that for Slavs tribal name Suebs (Svabe) is identical to Germans(Nemci), and not part of Germans....meaning that Suebi were the core germanic tribe at least in area of contact with pre-Slavic people... they were dominantly I1 carriers, we can see that from their genetic imprint in Iberia







> I'm confused looking at this map. I don't sea even slightest elevation of I1 on North side of Black Sea. We know that Goths lived there for few hundred years as a ruling/dominant tribe, and they should have left their I1 there, the same way we see elevated I2b1 level there.
> Did they isolate themselves from locals and never mingled?
> Was I1 any dominant in Goths?
> But if they had lots of I1 and they didn't leave a mark around Black Sea, it means that they couldn't possibly leave any I2b1 either, right? Can you leave one and not leave the other?
> Maybe the map is low resolution?


map is incorrect in sense that in Iberian peninsula there should be, as on other haplogroup I maps, lot of I1 in area of northwest Spain and north Portugal - that hotspot matches Suebi settlements... 

if you go to familytreee dna I1 project, all except 1 of I1 samples for Spain are from that area...
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...x?section=ymap
also in area north of Black sea where Goths lived for long time are no I1 samples

I think that Goths were not I1 carriers... maybe marginally but not as main haplogroup...

----------


## Shetop

> I'm confused looking at this map. I don't sea even slightest elevation of I1 on North side of Black Sea. We know that Goths lived there for few hundred years as a ruling/dominant tribe, and they should have left their I1 there, the same way we see elevated I2b1 level there.
> Did they isolate themselves from locals and never mingled?
> Was I1 any dominant in Goths?
> But if they had lots of I1 and they didn't leave a mark around Black Sea, it means that they couldn't possibly leave any I2b1 either, right? Can you leave one and not leave the other?
> Maybe the map is low resolution?


There are couple of issues about maps. One is that I1 map shows higher scale of frequencies than I2b1 map. And one more thing as a reminder, maps are not perfect tools and we can use them to get some ideas, but we should not blindly stick to them.

It is hard to answer your questions. It is not much known how many Goths remained on Black Sea shores after Huns came. I think that object of the interest here should be “when and with what people did I1 come to Balkans?”, simply because there are much more data about this region. If we answer that we may get answers about what happened further on the East.

I1 in Southeast Europe has its maximum values in Pannonia and Greek Macedonia. I think there is no way I1 could preserve these maximums during early middle ages. Migration waves were very strong and these two regions (Pannonia and Macedonia) were most interesting to newcomers, because of the land but also because of the wealth of close by Byzantine Empire. These same regions would later be settled by the Slavs also, and I think this is not a coincidence.

Mainly because of the reasons I’ve just wrote, my opinion is that I1 came to Balkans during Early middle ages, after Huns and before Slavs. Huns “cleaned” some regions for I1, but when Avars and Slavs came they pushed I1 and I2b1 to their present location. Only tribes which fit into this story are Germanic tribes, mostly Goths (both Visigoths and Ostrogoths), but also Gepids in Pannonia and some Heruli. I had (have) some doubts about I2b1, but I’m pretty sure about I1 is brought by these people.

----------


## Shetop

> Visigoths must have left bigger impact in genetics of Spain than in the one of Serbia, but spread of I1 contradicts this... let's forget for a moment Goths as key donor of I1 to Balkans... after all they might have been dominantly some other haplogroup...


It is good that you are trying to find some other source of I1, but saying that "Visigoths must have left bigger impact in genetics of Spain than in the one of Serbia" should be explained. For example my opinion is opposite.





> what do you think about Scordisci as a key source of I1 in Balkan? they fit well into haplogroup I tribal name pattern.....


There is no way Scordisci would remain in the same region during Early middle ages. Changes in population of Southeast Europe were large, and in that region especially.

I think it is not that compliacted:
- There were indigenous people of SE Europe
- Than Germanic tribes came (4th-5th century pushed by Huns)
- Than Slavs came (6th-7th century partly pushed by Avars)

----------


## Shetop

> meaning that Suebi were the core germanic tribe at least in area of contact with pre-Slavic people... they were dominantly I1 carriers, we can see that from their genetic imprint in Iberia


This same region settled by Suebi (with maximum I1 in Iberia) also has maximum for R1b-U106 in Iberia. R1b-U106 is clearly Germanic subclade. This brings into question that Suebi were predominantly I1.

----------


## how yes no 2

> It is good that you are trying to find some other source of I1, but saying that "Visigoths must have left bigger impact in genetics of Spain than in the one of Serbia" should be explained. For example my opinion is opposite.


Last settlement of Visigoths was Iberia. They were not there in small numbers. They were initially settled in southwest Gaul as Roman federati. It was big settlement, not just brief military conquest, From there, they have slowly extended their influence to Spain. Later they were pushed out from southwest France by Franks. If they were I1 or I2b1 their genetic impact must be visible in all those areas... 

there are two options:
1) they were not dominantly one or both of those clades
2) your maps are incorrect, as they shows that Visigoth settlement in southwest France and Iberia in fact correlates with complete lack of those haplogroups...

In Iberia Visigoths are last settlers and thus their genetical impact must be very clear...
In Serbia, after questionable settlement of Goths, there were equally questionable settlements of Gepids (mostly in Vojvodina), Avars, and later various Slavic people and in particular Serbs....





> There is no way Scordisci would remain in the same region during Early middle ages. Changes in population of Southeast Europe were large, and in that region especially.


Scordisci were romanized... people stay living where they lived unless there is mass genocide and exodus... but this didnot happen in Serbia as obvious from preserved high E-V13 values... thus, elevated I1 levels can as well be due to previous inhabitants, in this case Scordisci, who by the way fit perfectly into haplogroup I tribal names pattern (Swedes, Suebi, Serbs, Sarbans, Sardinians)

Also spread of I1 matches exactly spread of Scordisci (from Sar mountains on south to and including Vojvodina on north and than towards west along south shores of Pannonian plain - Slavonia area)... 

Goths I1 would show in Hungary, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, more or less equally strong as in Serbia...





> I think it is not that compliacted:
> - There were indigenous people of SE Europe
> - Than Germanic tribes came (4th-5th century pushed by Huns)
> - Than Slavs came (6th-7th century partly pushed by Avars)


Sure, that was my first way of thinking...
but now I think it might be oversimplified way of looking at it...
thing is we do not know genetics of indigenous people, we do not know whether Goths were Germanic only by culture or also by haplogroup I, 
we do not know whether pre- south Slavs could have carried I1... if they carried abundance of I2a2 why would they not carry some I1 as well?

----------


## how yes no 2

> This same region settled by Suebi (with maximum I1 in Iberia) also has maximum for R1b-U106 in Iberia. R1b-U106 is clearly Germanic subclade. This brings into question that Suebi were predominantly I1.


that's not the point... point is that their I1 imprint is very clearly visible exactly in places of their settlement...... which seems not to be the case for areas settled by Visigoths...

----------


## Dalmat

> Great observation, and it means that Suebi were the biggest-most eastern germanic tribe Slavs incounter expending west. Or the one that gave them most resistance. 
> In Poland word Shvab is more of a derogatory flavour, niemiec is neutral. Not sure how it is in other Slavic countries, or if negative meaning showed up recently and was neutral in the past?


Well its not derogatory per-se,but more a word that generalizezes German man strerotype,like you would say Yankee for US citizen.

Njemac is neutral and our word for German,country Germany/Deutchland we call Njemačka.



Now i wonder from who word "German" came from,German tribes didn't call them selfs like that as i can recall,was it from Romans perhaps?

----------


## how yes no 2

> Now i wonder from who word "German" came from,German tribes didn't call them selfs like that as i can recall,was it from Romans perhaps?


it's interesting that in ancient east Europe, linguistically closest match to Deutch and Dutch are Dacians..

name German comes from Germania... word Germania we find in Persia inside Iran of today, in the name of province Kerman/Germania/Zermanya... name there is ancient old and it meant meant "bravery/combat", likely related is the name Cimmerians or Gimmri which meant hero....Cimmerians in hostory appear in areas around Black sea and Caucasus area, 
700-800 BC we find Thraco-Cimmerians in east Europe

however, Cimmerians were satem-speakers... they might have been second wave of haplogroup I settlers of Europe... likely I2a2 haplogroup...
I propose that Sarmatians is the name that came from them...

during Roman empire, areas north of Roman empire are divided in two parts:
1) area where people live in households - Germania
2) area where people live in nomadic way - Sarmatia...

btw. old but likely better maps of I1 and I2b1 than the posted ones by Shetop



I1 in Iberia matches Suebi, but not Visigoths
in Balkans its hotspot is more in Bulgaria than in Serbia...

 

I2b1 (former I1c) matches settlements of Goths match better...

it is very likely that both Goths and Suebi also had some strong R1b branches...

----------


## LeBrok

@Dalmat. It's possible that in Poland shvab became more impolite term after last war.

@Shetop



> There are couple of issues about maps. One is that I1 map shows higher scale of frequencies than I2b1 map. And one more thing as a reminder, maps are not perfect tools and we can use them to get some ideas, but we should not blindly stick to them.


Yes, the current maps are with many mistakes and not great resolution. I'm not looking at scale of haplogroup, but more for contrasts between regions, in this case. For now we work with what we have, keeping in mind that the maps could be misleading.

@how yes no



> thing is we do not know genetics of indigenous people, we do not know whether Goths were Germanic only by culture


I was considering this too. It's possible that after 500 year (from moment they left Scandinavia to leaving Black Sea) they lost their original y haplogroups and acquired local once. From polish archeology we know that Goths coexisted with local population. We surely know that they were not killing and scorching on big scale. If they were more friendly, or open tolerant culture, it's possible that they mixed quite a bit with indigenous population.
Let's say that it's true. Therefore they mostly enquired I2a and R1a from locals around the Black Sea. Let's see if there is an elevated level of these groups in Iberia in center of their settlements. 

In Spain the capital of Visigoths was Toledo and this map shows lots of I2a there:

It's hard to say now if this I2a matches the Black Sea type. Is there a way to check it out? If in France there was a hot spot too, where they settled, the case would be sealed.
I can't find a decent R1a map for Iberia.

----------


## Maciamo

> In Spain the capital of Visigoths was Toledo and this map shows lots of I2a there:
> 
> It's hard to say now if this I2a matches the Black Sea type. Is there a way to check it out? If in France there was a hot spot too, where they settled, the case would be sealed.
> I can't find a decent R1a map for Iberia.


Watch out that this is a map of all I2a. The variety found in Spain, Sardinia and most of western Europe is I2a1, while in eastern Europe almost 100% is I2a2. There is therefore no connection between them.

----------


## Shetop

> there are two options:
> 1) they were not dominantly one or both of those clades
> 2) your maps are incorrect, as they shows that Visigoth settlement in southwest France and Iberia in fact correlates with complete lack of those haplogroups...


You forced me to serach for Visigoths.  :Smile: 

This study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181996/ showed 3.1% I1 in Catalonia and this one http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...d&searchtype=a showed 8.96% of I1+I2b1 in Midi-Pyrenees (France). Much of it could be from Visigoths.

Btw I was inprecise when talking about Visigoths in Serbia. I had I1 as a whole in mind when I wrote that.

My opinion is that I1 in Serbia is more from Ostrogoths than Visigoths.

----------


## Shetop

> in Balkans its hotspot is more in Bulgaria than in Serbia...


There are two results for I1 Serbia, and they show 5-8%.
Do you have some data for Bulgaria? Again, maps are not that reliable.

----------


## Shetop

> I2b1 (former I1c) matches settlements of Goths match better...
> it is very likely that both Goths and Suebi also had some strong R1b branches...


Have you ever heard of Moesian Goths?
Were Ostrogoths mentioned in any other regions during their inhabitance of Moesia?

----------


## how yes no 2

> Watch out that this is a map of all I2a. The variety found in Spain, Sardinia and most of western Europe is I2a1, while in eastern Europe almost 100% is I2a2. There is therefore no connection between them.


this spread of I2a1 actually resembles the most what I would expect to see from Visigoth's imprint...
I am complete amateur here, but I can imagine that it is theoretically possible that I2a1 was carried to Iberia by Goths and Vandals.
In those times, if your tribe is moving away, you as individual do not want to stay behind... which explains why there is no I2a1 in previous settlements of Goths and Vandals in east Europe...




> There are two results for I1 Serbia, and they show 5-8%.
> Do you have some data for Bulgaria? Again, maps are not that reliable.


what I meant is that hotspot of I1 looked more as Bulgaria on that map...
I tend to write and post without reading, and than to read posted and edit (because in preview mode spaces between lines are lost and I need to keep adding them) ...thing is I had last night weird issue (perhaps due to different ip address) that I could not edit my post and it was invisible until approved by admin...

btw. looking at Bulgarian familytree dna project, I see only 1 I1 out of 75 samples... and one more that is just haplogroup I. to compare, there are 11 I2a2 samples (1 of them in Macedonia and 1 in Greece Macedonia)
(22 markers are E-V13, 3 G2a & 3 G, 9 are R1a (2 of them from Macedonia), 5 are R1b - M269, there is some J as well)

to conclude, you are right, hotspot of I1 is in Serbia not in Bulgaria

btw. looking at spread of I1 in Balkans



we can see that it seems to come from Germany rather than from areas around Black sea and it also shows no spread in directions of Goths movements (though the fast movements can never be seen on haplogroup maps, only the ones where settlements spread slowly) 

I can imagine that it origins mostly from Gepids in Serbia and Langobards in Austria/Slovenia/west Pannonia... in fact, we know from history that in 630 Ad in Pannonia Byzantian troops found no traces of Avars, only Gepids...we also know that part of Gepids did move towards Italy... so the hotspot near north Italy may as well be Gepids too...






> Then in 375 they had to submit to the Huns along with their Ostrogoth overlords, becoming the favored Hun vassals. Under their king, Ardaric, Gepid warriors joined Attila the Hun's forces in the Battle of Chalons (the "Catalaunian fields") in Gaul (451). On the eve of the main encounter between allied hordes, the Gepids and Franks met each other, the latter fighting for the Romans and the former for the Huns, and seem to have fought one another to a standstill, with 15,000 dead reported by Jordanes, the main source for the events.
> Such loyalties were personal bonds among kings, and a*fter Attila's death in 453, the Gepids and other people allied to defeat Attila's horde* of would-be successors, who were dividing up the subjugated peoples like cattle, and led by Ardaric, they broke the Hunnic power in the Battle at the River Nedao in 454:
> ...a most remarkable spectacle, where one might see the Goths fighting with pikes, the Gepidae raging with the sword, the Rugii breaking off the spears in their own wounds, the Suevi fighting on foot, the Huns with bows, the Alani drawing up a battle-line of heavy-armed and the Heruli of light-armed warriors. (Jordanes, l.259)
> After the victory they finally won a place to settle in the Carpathian Mountains.
> The Gepidae by their own might won for themselves the territory of the Huns and ruled as victors over the extent of all Dacia, demanding of the Roman Empire nothing more than peace and an annual gift as a pledge of their friendly alliance. This the Emperor freely granted at the time, and to this day that race receives its customary gifts from the Roman Emperor. (Jordanes, l.262)
> Not long after the battle at the Nedao the old rivalry between the Gepids and the Ostrogoths spurred up again and they *were driven out of their homeland in 504 by Theodoric the Great.*
> They *reached the zenith of their power after 537, settling in the rich area around Belgrade.* For a short time, the *city of Sirmium was the center of the Gepid State* and the king Cunimund minted golden coins in it.[4] In *546 the Byzantine Empire allied themselves with the Lombards to expel the Gepids* from this region. In 552 the Gepids suffered a disastrous defeat from Alboin in the Battle of Asfeld and were finally conquered by the Lombards in 567.
> Alboin had a drinking-cup made from the skull of Cunimund, which occasioned his death later in Italy, at the hands of an assassin sent by Rosamund, Cunimond's daughter.[5]
> *Many Gepids followed Alboin to Italy (see Paulus Diaconus), but many remained.* In *630*, Theophylact Simocatta reported that the *Byzantine Army entered the territory of the Avars and attacked a Gepid feast, capturing 30,000 Gepids (they met no Avars).* Recent excavation by the Tisza River at Szolnok brought up a Gepid nobleman from an Avar period grave who was also wearing Turkic-Avar pieces next to the traditional Germanic clothes in which he was buried.


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




> Have you ever heard of Moesian Goths?
> Were Ostrogoths mentioned in any other regions during their inhabitance of Moesia?


according to wikipedia, Moesogoths who origin from Ostrogths have migrated from Thrace all the way to Jutland... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moesogoths




> You forced me to serach for Visigoths. 
> This study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181996/ showed 3.1% I1 in Catalonia and this one http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...d&searchtype=a showed 8.96% of I1+I2b1 in Midi-Pyrenees (France). Much of it could be from Visigoths.


ok, that is somewhat better, but I would still expect much larger impact in Iberia... so I do think that I1 might have not really been dominant in Goths...




> Btw I was inprecise when talking about Visigoths in Serbia. I had I1 as a whole in mind when I wrote that.
> My opinion is that I1 in Serbia is more from Ostrogoths than Visigoths.


under assumption that I1 came with Goths, it is hard to say who contributed more Visigoths or Ostrogoths... Moesigoths were Ostrogths, but they moved away to Jutland and during Hunish conquest Visigoths settled area... on other hand Ostrogoths are said to have settled in Prevalitania (Montenegro) and we do know that not so small number of people in Serbia origin from Montenegro and east Hercegovina....

----------


## Shetop

You are right about Gepid origin for I1 in Pannonia. You should have in mind that destiny of Gepids and Ostrogoths was very similar. Actually Gepids also inhabited Black Sea region and during that period they were vassals of Greuthungi. Later both of these tribes became vassals of Huns. With most of Greuthungi emerging as Ostrogoths after the downfall of Huns.

But nor Gepids nor Langobards have ever entered Balkans, with all Langobards moving to North Italy (Lombardia got its name from them).

Route of the Ostrogoths was more or less this one:
North Poland –> Black Sea –> Pannonia –> Macedonia –> Bulgarian Moesia –> Italy with Western Balkans.

Wikipedia article explaining that Goths went to Jutland is silly.




> An agreement was reached between Zeno and Theodoric, stipulating that Theodoric, if victorious, was to rule in Italy as the emperor's representative.[5] Theodoric with his people set out from Moesia in the autumn of 488, passed through Dalmatia and crossed the Julian Alps into Italy in late August 489.


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

I also agree that it is hard to distinguish if Macedonian and Serbian I1 is of Visigoth or Ostrogoth origin. And another good point from you is about big number of people settling Serbia from the region of Medieval Serbia. This is exactly the reason I said that Serbian I1 is mostly from Ostrogoths. But for Macedonia it could indeed be Visigoths.

----------


## Shetop

> ok, that is somewhat better, but I would still expect much larger impact in Iberia... so I do think that I1 might have not really been dominant in Goths...


I think you are yet to provide better explanation for I1 origin in Macedonia (and Balkans).

You had one assumption about I1 coming with Slavs, but that would mean much higher I1 in Ukraine. And we don't have it.

----------


## how yes no 2

you are right, Gepids for sure didnot go as far south as Macedonia...
alternative explanation can be that I1 comes from Goths, or that it came with Serbs or perhaps from earlier Scordisci who did extend all the way to Sar mountain on south...




> I think you are yet to provide better explanation for I1 origin in Macedonia (and Balkans).
> You had one assumption about I1 coming with Slavs, but that would mean much higher I1 in Ukraine. And we don't have it.


actually this holds for Goths as they did come from Ukraine and according to those maps I1 shows fairly homogeneous spread across east Europe without expected hotspots on places where Goths lived...... confusing is that even Crimea where we know some Goths lived long after movement of others doesnot show elevated I1... and for I2b1 it does..


though we can see stream of elevated I1 going from Poland towards Black sea, which may be about early movement of Goths.. 

On other hand, Slavs comming to Balkan from Ukraine is an assumption...
According to Byzantium sources, Serbs came from land of white(west) Serbia or Boika... I would say that name Boika suggest land named after Celtic Boii and thus previously settled by Boii, which is nowadays Bohemia in west part of Czech republic.. in fact, there you find hotspot of I2a2, ans also set of toponyms clearly related to Serbs 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srby_(P...outh_District))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srby_(D...lice_District))) 




> Roman authors refer to the area they invaded as *Boihaemum*, the earliest mention[4] being in Tacitus' Germania 28[5] (written at the end of the 1st century AD). The name appears to include the tribal name *Boi*- plus the Germanic element **xaim- "home"* (whence *Gothic haims, German Heim, English home*). This Boihaemum included parts of southern Bohemia as well as parts of Bavaria (whose name also seems to derive from the tribal name Boii) and Austria.


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


If Serbs did arrive to Balkan from area of Bohemia than it is quite possible that they carried some I1 with them to Balkan... 

in fact in Bohemia you will find hole in spread of I1 and hotspot in spread of I2a2...
if area had same I1 as surrounding and much higher I2a2 than surrounding, than movement of much of its inhabitants to Balkan would leave hole in I1, but still enough I2a2 to create hotspot...

Bohemia was previously settled by Suebi and Boii... I1 in Bohemia likely did origin from Suebi...Serbs probably settled area from I2a2 hotspots in Ukraine, hence this area was called white (=west) Serbia ..since they settled area that was out of I2a2 spread they made hotspot of I2a2 there...as they settled inside I1 area, some previous I1 inhabitants were likely assimilated in Serbs... than dominantly I2a2 Serbs moved to Balkans together with assimilated I1 people...

----------


## Yorkie

> this spread of I2a1 actually resembles the most what I would expect to see from Visigoth's imprint...
> I am complete amateur here, but I can imagine that it is theoretically possible that I2a1 was carried to Iberia by Goths and Vandals.
> In those times, if your tribe is moving away, you as individual do not want to stay behind... which explains why there is no I2a1 in previous settlements of Goths and Vandals in east Europe...
> 
> 
> 
> what I meant is that hotspot of I1 looked more as Bulgaria on that map...
> I tend to write and post without reading, and than to read posted and edit (because in preview mode spaces between lines are lost and I need to keep adding them) ...thing is I had last night weird issue (perhaps due to different ip address) that I could not edit my post and it was invisible until approved by admin...
> 
> ...


 
I definately do not see M26 I2a1 as having been brought to Iberia by Visigoths and Vandals. The evidence from Ken Nordtvedt's calculations at least is that I2a1 was founded in Iberia many centuries prior to the Germanic incursions of the Vandals and Visigoths.

I2a1 is _ancient_ and its presence in Britain and Ireland, for example, has been dated to the earliest, post-LGM period. Indeed, it is a candidate for the earliest clade to hit British shores.

The Vandals and Visigoths would be more likely carriers of I1, I2b1, some R1b, maybe a little R1a1 and perhaps just a dash of the German-founded I2a2b. M26 I2a1 had been in Iberia for a long, long time when the Germanic tribes came.

----------


## how yes no 2

> I definately do not see M26 I2a1 as having been brought to Iberia by Visigoths and Vandals. The evidence from Ken Nordtvedt's calculations at least is that I2a1 was founded in Iberia many centuries prior to the Germanic incursions of the Vandals and Visigoths.
> I2a1 is _ancient_ and its presence in Britain and Ireland, for example, has been dated to the earliest, post-LGM period. Indeed, it is a candidate for the earliest clade to hit British shores.
> The Vandals and Visigoths would be more likely carriers of I1, I2b1, some R1b, maybe a little R1a1 and perhaps just a dash of the German-founded I2a2b. M26 I2a1 had been in Iberia for a long, long time when the Germanic tribes came.


yes, but confusing part is that I1 is not really significant in those areas of Iberia that were settled by Vandals and Visigoths while I2a1 is. I2a1 fits very nice with expected spread of Visigoths in Spain, and also with spread of Vandals in Andalusia, north Africa and Sardinia... so, I wondered how sure can we be that I2a1 is indeed (only) ancient in Iberia...

----------


## Shetop

> Bohemia was previously settled by Suebi and Boii... I1 in Bohemia likely did origin from Suebi...Serbs probably settled area from I2a2 hotspots in Ukraine, hence this area was called white (=west) Serbia ..since they settled area that was out of I2a2 spread they made hotspot of I2a2 there...as they settled inside I1 area, some previous I1 inhabitants were likely assimilated in Serbs... than dominantly I2a2 Serbs moved to Balkans together with assimilated I1 people...


What about I1 in Macedonia?
If that is the region from which I1 came, than R1b-U106 would have to be found in Macedonia. And there isn't any.

----------


## Yorkie

> yes, but confusing part is that I1 is not really significant in those areas of Iberia that were settled by Vandals and Visigoths while I2a1 is. I2a1 fits very nice with expected spread of Visigoths in Spain, and also with spread of Vandals in Andalusia, north Africa and Sardinia... so, I wondered how sure can we be that I2a1 is indeed (only) ancient in Iberia...


I am just basing my judgement on Nordvedt's dating. I have to agree with you that there is not much I1 in Iberia per se, never mind those parts supposedly settled by Vandals etc. I can also see how this M26 I2a1 'fits' neatly with Visigothic and Vandal incursions, but _dare I say it.._my view is that this is a coincidence. There is some supporting evidence from Oppenheimer that I2a1 is ancient too. I think it _was_ founded in Iberia thousands of years before any Vandal went to Spain. Besides, I cannot think of how it got to Germanic lands from Iberia. There is no evidence that I personally know of that suggests that M26 I2a1 was founded anywhere else but Iberia.

As you know, I am open to persuasion. This world of genetics seems to shift like the sands...

----------


## how yes no 2

> What about I1 in Macedonia?
> If that is the region from which I1 came, than R1b-U106 would have to be found in Macedonia. And there isn't any.


btw. looking at its spread I think R1b - U106 is not particularly strong in Bohemia and around it... I do wonder how much of R1b in Serbia is U106..



Macedonia was not initially settled by Serbs who came from west Serbia (Bohemia)... those were other Slavic (and non-Slavic) tribes..



Keramisians were tribal group that came from Pannonia and had lot of Germanic people...




> *Khan Kuber* (or Kouver) was a Bulgar leader, brother of Khan Asparukh and member of the Dulo clan, who according to the Miracles of St Demetrius, in the 670s was the leader of a *mixed Christian population of Bulgars, ‘Romans’, Slavs and Germanic people*[1] that had been transferred to the Srem region in Pannonia by the Avars 60 years earlier[2][3]. The Miracles of St Demetrius states that, circa 680 AD, Kuber had a falling out with the Avar khagan, and *after repelling an Avar attack, led his followers of around 70,000 people*,[4] from Srem and to Macedonia (modern Republic of Macedonia). The *Byzantines* initially *called his people* Sermisianoi (after their former settlement - Sirmium), and later the *Keramisians (after their new place: the Keramissian plain in Greater Macedonia*).


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

btw. on figure showing south Slavic tribes you can see that there are Serb tribes in area of Raska and Hercegovina and Moravians in most of Serbia proper... this also points out that white Serbia was Bohemia as Bohemia is just west of Moravia, same as Serb tribes on Balkan are just west of Moravians...



Bohemia is hilly part, Moravia is around river Morava,,,
Raska and Hercegovina is hilly part, Moravians are around river Morava...

----------


## Shetop

> btw. looking at its spread I think R1b - U106 is not particularly strong in Bohemia and around it... I do wonder how much of R1b in Serbia is U106..
> 
> Macedonia was not initially settled by Serbs who came from west Serbia (Bohemia)... those were other Slavic (and non-Slavic) tribes..
> 
> Keramisians were tribal group that came from Pannonia and had lot of Germanic people...


According to Myres at al R1b has 10% frequency in Serbia.
R1b-U106 particularly is 2%.

If Keramisian Germanic people came from Pannonia, where from did they come to Pannonia?

----------


## how yes no 2

> According to Myres at al R1b has 10% frequency in Serbia.
> R1b-U106 particularly is 2%.
> 
> If Keramisian Germanic people came from Pannonia, where from did they come to Pannonia?


They came from Srem area led by kan Kuber...
among them were Romans (romanized previous inhabitants likely originating from Scordisci), Bulgars, Slavs, and Germanic people (likely Gepids)

they were not tribe but mix of people from various origin fleeing from revenge of Avars,,, Germanic part were likely Gepids...


according to http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...21235/suppinfo
there is 4.5% of R1b in Serbia

the wikipedia data and research you mention that gives 10% R1b are based on 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/pp...es/PMC2799514/

which is based on data from work of Croatian lady Marijana Pericic

http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/22/10/1964.long

difference is that in http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...21235/suppinfo data is obtained from significantly larger number of samples (179 instead of 113), and also without scientists from Croatia leading the sampling (so there was for example no invention of mystic K* haplogroup for Serbs)...
so I am inclined to trust more those results...

results of sampling depends widely on sample size and randomness of sample taken...
so, we can expect R1b percentage to be between 5% and 10% likely closer to 5% (as much larger sample size gave 4.5%)

----------


## Shetop

> They came from Srem area led by kan Kuber...


Looks like you misunderstood me. I meant where were they before they came to Pannonia?

And this is the data I was talking about**: Myres et al 2010

----------


## how yes no 2

> Looks like you misunderstood me. I meant where were they before they came to Pannonia?
> 
> And this is the data I was talking about**: Myres et al 2010


he didnot do the sampling, he used data from work of Pericic... you can see that by checking number given in column called references... and verifying that number is 8, and that bellow the table under number 8 is reference to work of Pericic


what do you mean where were they before?
Gepids and romanized people were in Panonia before Avars
Bulgars came during the times of Avars
and Slavs probably were there both in Pannonia of Gepids and Pannonia of Avars...
do not forget that I link Pannonians from pre-Hunic times to proto-Slavic folk...

this is where Gepids first appear in history
http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...ity_15159.html

it is quite far from R1b-U106 spread

and the teritory was previously part of Dacia ( http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...ity_15233.html ), which in fact gives some credibility to idea that there might be more than linguistic relation between self-identity tribal name of Germans - Deutsch and identity of more eastern Dacian tribes..

----------


## Shetop

> do not forget that I link Pannonians from pre-Hunic times to proto-Slavic folk...


Than we have a major disagreement which could prolong to a much bigger discussion.  :Smile: 

I think I'll retire here. We have both made enough arguments for the others to make their own judgements.

Pozdrav do sledece diskusije!

----------


## LeBrok

I can't find a map that shows only I2a2 in Europe, and especially Iberia. I have to put my theory to the rest, lol. Help anyone, please. :)

----------


## Shetop

> I can't find a map that shows only I2a2 in Europe, and especially Iberia. I have to put my theory to the rest, lol. Help anyone, please. :)


This one is fine for me:

----------


## how yes no 2

> this is where Gepids first appear in history
> http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...ity_15159.html
> and the teritory was previously part of Dacia ( http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...ity_15233.html ), which in fact gives some credibility to idea that there might be more than linguistic relation between self-identity tribal name of Germans - Deutsch and identity of more eastern Dacian tribes..


in fact, as east of Deutsch people are Goths
east of Dacians are Getae
http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...ity_15233.html
http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...tity_8877.html

Shetop, can this be coincidence?

----------


## Shetop

> in fact, as east of Deutsch people are Goths
> east of Dacians are Getae
> http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...ity_15233.html
> http://www.euratlas.net/history/euro...tity_8877.html
> Shetop, can this be coincidence?


I think I ones told you what I think about those "word games".

This way you could try proving that Serbs are from Siberia.

----------


## Shetop

Here are the Visigoths!

Iberian Y-DNA

14.3% of I1+I2b1 for Castile!

But also around 10% of I1+I2b1 for some other Spanish cities. I don't understand why haven't anyone taken this into account so far???

----------


## how yes no 2

> Here are the Visigoths!
> Iberian Y-DNA
> 14.3% of I1+I2b1 for Castile!
> But also around 10% of I1+I2b1 for some other Spanish cities. I don't understand why haven't anyone taken this into account so far???


yes, good work!
this looks more like it...





numbe__area___I*(xI2a1)__I2a1___R1a__G______German ic tribe
1___Seville_______9.7_____2.6____0.6___4.0____Vand ali Hasdingi, Visigoths, Vikings? (no, too little R1a)
2___Huelva_______9.2_____— _____--___--_____Vandali Hasdingi, Visigoths
3___Cadiz________3.6_____10.7____--___--_____Vandali Hasdingi, Visigoths
4___Cordoba______11.0____3.7____--____--_____Vandali Hasdingi, Visigoths
5___Malaga	_______—______—_____7.7___3.8____Vikings? (no, as there is no I)
6 __N. Portugal___3.7 _____1.8____ --____7.3____Suebi 
7___Leon________1.7______1.7____6.7___6.7____Vanda li Silingi, Vikings? (maybe, but R1a is much bigger than I) 
8___Galicia________—______ —____--____--____Vandali Silingi
9___Cantabria ____4.3______1.4___4.3____8.6___Vikings
10__Valencia_____9.7_______3.2___3.2____--____Visigoths, Vikings
11__Castile______14.3______19.0___--____--____Visigoths	
12__Basques a____4.4______4.4____--
13__Catalans b____6.2______—_____--____--____Visigoths



Btw. now I believe that I2a1 doesnot come from Vandals and Goths

----------


## Shetop

Maybe you have already realized but just in any case:

I2a2 in the study is old nomenclature for M26 - I2a1.

Also don't forget that the most of Vandals left Iberia when Visigoths came.

----------


## how yes no 2

> Maybe you have already realized but just in any case:
> I2a2 in the study is old nomenclature for M26 - I2a1.
> Also don't forget that the most of Vandals left Iberia when Visigoths came.


yes, it was lapse... I did correct it...
btw. I will edit post to extend reasoning with the influence of Vikings... I will add them where R1a is found and where maps show they were present... they carried R1a but also I*(xI2a1)

----------


## how yes no 2

Vandali Silingi seems to not have had I haplogroup...

However, R1a we find in areas of Leon (7) on north and Malaga (5) on south...
this might be signature of Silingi and Hasdingi Vandals...

Interestingly G we find in areas 1 & 5 (most south), 6 & 7 (Suebic kingdom) and 9, but not in areas that were under control of Alans
However, south Portugal and west Spain are not sampled here...

if we imagine Visigoths pushing Alans and Vandals to south, we could match G in areas 1 and 5 with Alans retreat...than 3 is to expect to show traces of Vandals retreat...

----------


## LeBrok

This could be interesting:



> Alans and Slavs
> Third-century inscriptions from the Greek colony of Tanais at the mouth of the Don River mention a nearby Alan tribe called the Choroatos or Chorouatos[_citation needed_]. The historian Ptolemy identifies the Serboi as a tribe who lived north of the Caucasus, and other sources identify the Serboi as an Alan tribe in the Volga-Don steppe in the 3rd century[_citation needed_].
> Some historians argue that the arrival of the Huns on the European steppe forced a portion of Alans previously living there to move northwest into the land of Venedes, possibly merging with Western Balts there to become the precursors of historic Slav nations.[22])
> It's believed that some Alans resettled to the North (Barsils), merging with Volga Bulgars and Burtas, eventually transforming to Volga Tatars[23]


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

----------


## LeBrok

> Here are the Visigoths!
> 
> Iberian Y-DNA
> 
> 14.3% of I1+I2b1 for Castile!
> 
> But also around 10% of I1+I2b1 for some other Spanish cities. I don't understand why haven't anyone taken this into account so far???


Great job, you found them! I started to believe that they vanished in a thin air, lol.

----------


## Eldritch

I'm interested to know the reason of I2b Hotspot between Greece,Albania and Macedonia?

----------


## Eldritch

> If this map is correct, Bulgars conquered Greece, Macedonia, Albania and part of Turkey.
> 
> We also see the heightened amount of I2b1 in this area. It farther confirms Bulgar origin of this clad. Saying lightly they were very promiscuous these Bulgars, lol.
> The only white spot there is in Macedonia. Did Serbs reconquered Macedonia from Bulgars? (not familiar with this part of history) Looks like Bulgars were wiped out from Macedonia before they managed to spread their seed.
> If yes then most of R1a in Macedonia is Serb/Slavic, and not Bulgars or Bulgarian/Slavic.


So you're basically saying that Bulgarians incorporated I2b1 in their background from Germanic tribes and then spread them elsewhere?
Doubtful but could be, where does I2b1 reach the highest percentages in Balkans?

----------


## kamani

> I'm interested to know the reason of I2b Hotspot between Greece,Albania and Macedonia?


Only someone who knows genetics, bulgarian, greek, albanian and old-norse can answer this question. Lately I have compared albanian and old-norse and it was like a big piece of the puzzle revealed. The number of cognates is quite high but they are not as clear-cut as albanian-latin cognates, showing an older influence, before the romans came to the balkans. I am not sure it can be called germanic because it's so old, but it is something that came from Denmark area in the Iron age.

----------


## al-kochol

I2 belongs to the Slavic soup of genes, not Germanic.

----------


## Balder

> I2 belongs to the Slavic soup of genes, not Germanic.


What I2 you mean? 

I2b peaks in central and northern Germany (10-20%), the Benelux (Low Countries) (15%) as well as in northern eastern Sweden. It is also found in 3 to 10% of the inhabitants of Denmark, East England, and Northern France. And it has nothing to do with Slavs or recent immigrants.
https://www.google.com.br/url?sa=t&r...JtgAjSc7FHsmxQ

----------


## al-kochol

> What I2 you mean?


Look at the density peaks of I2 in general across Europe. I2a2 could belong to Ostrogoths and I2a1 to Vandals. Contrary to German propaganda, these were non-Germanic tribes.

----------


## Balder

> Look at the density peaks of I2 in general across Europe. I2a2 could belong to Ostrogoths and I2a1 to Vandals. Contrary to German propaganda, these were non-Germanic tribes.


We don't know for sure which haplogroups were dominant among Ostrogoths and Vandals. Probably, the haplotypes 'dominant' in modern day Germanic language countries. 

Well the idea of Vandals being Slavics is pretty much of a bad taste Slavic piss off propaganda. I created a thread here asking the origin of this pathetic antho-forum phenomenon. http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...-who-were-they

----------


## al-kochol

> Well the idea of Vandals being Slavics is pretty much of a bad taste Slavic piss off propaganda.


Your hatred of the so called Slavs kills your logic. Slavic languages are older than German. Slavic tribes came out of Scythia and Scythia was very well known to Herodotus in the 5th century BC.

----------


## zanipolo

> Look at the density peaks of I2 in general across Europe. I2a2 could belong to Ostrogoths and I2a1 to Vandals. Contrary to German propaganda, these were non-Germanic tribes.


from russian genetic people



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

----------


## al-kochol

I do not understand your map, zanipolo. Mixing I1 with I2 is a common error.

----------


## zanipolo

> I do not understand your map, zanipolo. Mixing I1 with I2 is a common error.


its from russian genetics, 

All I ydna was once one group, like all R ydna was once one group , now its R1a , R1b and R2

the map is the oldest dates and where they are found by age

----------


## how yes no 3

let me try to direct this thread back to its topic "germanic settlements in Balkan"
according to genetic search of Serbia 
http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2012/02/...romosomes.html

most of I1 found there is I1d1

now if you look at yfamilytreedna database for I1
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...x?section=ymap

you can notice that I1d1 is relatively rare and seems to be Viking related... as it is present in Denmark, along sea coasts of Scandinavia, and along sea coasts of UK, Ireland, north France and north Italy.....there is also one sample in Bavaria and two more in central Germany.....one sample in Romania....and one sample on Baltic coast of Estonia...

In Serbia I1d1 is 4.9% of population and other I1 is 2.9%...


now, its hard to explain how did I1d1 come to Serb settled areas from Scandinavia...
this is not influence of historic Germanic tribes... as it is practically lacking in continental Europe where historic Germanic tribes dwellt.... nor we can relate it to late Vikings...

I1d1 is relatively rare haplogroup and being as large as 5% in Serbs and not existing in surrounding areas suggests it travelled with Serbs... 

so it looks as a Viking admixture to proto-Serbs prior to their arrival to Balkan....
I suspect its admixture from the times when Scirii resided in Baltic area....in northwest Poland...
we can imagine Viking settlement on south shores of Baltic sea or even on shores of Black sea being absorbed by Scirii

another option is trade routes... Serians are in my opinion people who have early in history established trade routes to silk they have produced in Seres area north of Tibet and to spices from India and Arab countries.... Vikings could have used these trade routes and part of them was merged into Serian population....

----------


## Eldritch

> let me try to direct this thread back to its topic "germanic settlements in Balkan"
> according to genetic search of Serbia 
> http://dienekes.blogspot.nl/2012/02/...romosomes.html
> 
> most of I1 found there is I1d1
> 
> now if you look at yfamilytreedna database for I1
> http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...x?section=ymap
> 
> ...


I have a simpler and more reasonable explanation, Saxon Miners during middle ages.

----------


## gyms

> let me try to direct this thread back to its topic "germanic settlements in Balkan"
> according to genetic search of Serbia 
> 
> 
> most of I1 found there is I1d1
> 
> now if you look at yfamilytreedna database for I1
> 
> 
> ...


Maybe I1d1,I1d3a is Finnish and com to Balkan with Bulgars and Hungarians like I2a-Din.

----------


## how yes no 3

> Maybe I1d1,I1d3a is Finnish and com to Balkan with Bulgars and Hungarians like I2a-Din.


you are joking, right?

i1d1 map shows no samples in hungary and Bulgaria and only one on coasts of Finland...
and i2a-din has nothing to do with Hungarians and original Bulgars...

i2a-din south is in fact typical for Serb settled areas and shows few islands in rest of Europe that are probably linked to prior locations of Serbs (as we can be sure is the case for the hotspot in Bohemia due to historic data and Srb related place names in that area)

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...x?section=ymap

----------


## how yes no 3

> I have a simpler and more reasonable explanation, Saxon Miners during middle ages.


i don't buy it...
we speak of 5% of population that has I1d1
and no I1d1 sample exists in Saxony in yfamilytreedna database...

----------


## Balder

> Maybe *I1d1*,I1d3a is Finnish and com to Balkan with Bulgars and Hungarians like I2a-Din.


I'm I1d1 (L22+ P109+) tested by FTDNA. No, it is not Finnish.

----------


## gyms

[QUOTE=how yes no 3;405977]you are joking, right?

i1d1 map shows no samples in hungary and Bulgaria and only one on coasts of Finland...
and i2a-din has nothing to do with Hungarians and original Bulgars...

i2a-din south is in fact typical for Serb settled areas and shows few islands in rest of Europe that are probably linked to prior locations of Serbs (as we can be sure is the case for the hotspot in Bohemia due to historic data and Srb related place names in that area)
Map?Look at the Finland,Hungarian,Hungarian-Bukovina,Gagauz FTDNA Project and you will see plenty of I1d and I2a.I Think I2a is of Khazar origin.

----------


## gyms

> I'm I1d1 (L22+ P109+) tested by FTDNA. No, it is not Finnish.


Hur vet du det?(How do you know that?)

----------


## kamani

what if most of these "germanic" traces are Illyrian or Thracian? They spoke an IE language coming from somewhere north. That would explain why it is all over the balkans. Here is some linguistic backup, (I was too lazy to go further than the letter D); the format is "albanian - english - old norse":

pjek - bake - baka
kullote (bald field) - bald - kollottr
laj - bath - laug
beteje - battle - bardagi
ndyr - beast - dyr
blete - bee - by
filli - first - fyrsta
ja - beside - hja
ikje - betray - svikja
midis - between - midli
matan - beyond - utan
madh, mall - big - mikill
buce - bi*ch- bikkja
erret- black blar - svartr
prisht - break - bresta
fund - end - enda
ngre - build - gorr
bren - burn - brenna
ble, kap - buy - kaupa
kotele - cat - kottr
i mir (good) - chief - hilmir
roba - clothes - ript
hajte - come to - hitta
urdha - command - bjoda
shok - company - sjot
fshehen - hide - verstecken
fitoj - conquer - vinna
agon - dawn - daga, dagan
dita - dawn - dagr
dekur - dead - daudr
vdekur - dead - feigr
dashur - dear - dyrr
fte - declare - kveda
vone - delay - dvol
jo - deny - synja
prite (stop it) - deny - preta
rrena (lie) - deprive of - rena
dreka(lunch) - drink - drekka

----------


## Balder

> Hur vet du det?(How do you know that?)


No, it is 'Scandinavian' and with less extent 'Northern-Western European'. 

My haplotype (I-M253, P-109 mutation), has a high peak in Norway. But it is found in good numbers in throughout Scandinavia. Obviously, it can be found in Finland as well, but I doubt that it has relevance in numbers like the others I1 mutations existing there.


WzLy9Uo.jpg

----------


## gyms

Tack Balder.Haplogroup frequency and diversity says litle or nothing about the origins.The most relevante is the variance.There is a possibility that Sami spread I1d to Norway.

----------


## Balder

> Tack Balder.Haplogroup frequency and diversity says litle or nothing about the origins.The most relevante is the variance.There is a possibility that Sami spread I1d to Norway.


No, it is not Sami. It is derived of I1d (L22+) which mutation originated in Denmark. 
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...ection=results






In relation to the I1d1 (L22+ P109) mutation. It is found in good numbers in Denmark as well. It represents 20% of all I1 present in Denmark. Obviously, Sweden and Norway have more of it.
http://danishdemes.org/YDNA-results-HgI1.html
http://dgmweb.net/DNA/General/SNPmatrix-HgI1.html

----------


## gyms

[QUOTE=Balder;405986]No, it is not Sami it is derived of I1d1 L22+ which mutation originated in Denmark. I1d1 (L22 + P109 +) is also found in good numbers in Denmark as well.
"...wich mutation originated in Danmark."
Is there any aDNA evidence for that?

----------


## gyms

"Taking the L22+ sector tree as a whole, I think a geographical division is forming as well. Z74+ DYS522 = 12 portion of the tree tends to be richer in northern Scandinavian origins, while Z74- DYS522 portion of the tree has a bigger frequency in the British Isles and in region of continental Europe south of the Baltic and North Seas."(Kenneth Nordtvedt,25 Mar.2013)

----------


## Balder

> "...wich mutation originated in Danmark."
> Is there any aDNA evidence for that?


Well, ask it to the professor Ken Nordtvedt. It was he who through calculations came to conclusion of the origin and date of each clade of I1.

Index of origin: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/
His method: http://www.jogg.info/42/files/nordtvedt.pdf

And his facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ken-No...39695579381679  :Grin: 





> "Taking the L22+ sector tree as a whole, I think a geographical division is forming as well. Z74+ DYS522 = 12 portion of the tree tends to be richer in northern Scandinavian origins, while Z74- DYS522 portion of the tree has a bigger frequency in the British Isles and in region of continental Europe south of the Baltic and North Seas."(Kenneth Nordtvedt,25 Mar.2013)


No, no and no! You are confusing everything here. 

Nordtvedt is simply referring the Z74 mutation of L22+. It's a Northern Scandinavian and Finnish branch of I-M253 L22+ aka ( I1d3* L22+ Z74). Look at the last chart by Lapinski I have posted:

----------


## gyms

[QUOTE=Balder;405999]Well, ask it to the professor Ken Nordtvedt. It was he who through calculations came to conclusion of the origin and date of each clade of I1.

UPDATE15: Latest Haplogroup I1 SNP Phylo Tree including Geno 2.0 Data Here is the latest tree with some of the SNPs that have been found within Haplogroup I1. The SNPs shown in red are the new tentative ones that have recently been found in some Geno 2.0 samples: 

At this stage the CTS2208 could also include CTS2208, CTS5476. Similarly, Z133 could also include Z133, Z134. And Z74 could also include Z74, Z75. And CTS1679 could include CTS1679, CTS743. And CTS9352 could include CTS9352, CTS9477. And CTS9875 could include CTS9875, F2711. And Z138 includes Z138,Z139. And Z140 includes Z140,Z141. Etc. Other novel, but apparently phyloequivalent Geno 2.0 SNP's are not shown. 

Terry, January 2013, and March 2013

----------


## Balder

At the Danish Demes Project there is 2 tested Danish with my haplotype clade. http://danishdemes.org/YDNA-results-HgI1d.html

In Sweden 6 from (Anders Berg database), 4 from Almundsryd and 2 from Älmhult, Vastra Götaland.http://dna.scangen.se/index.php?sokt...sv&show=search

----------


## Balder

> Hur vet du det?(How do you know that?)


Also, it needs to be added here. At the new classification of 2013 according to ISOGG and FTDNA. The old I1d1 (L-22 P109+) clade is now the  (ISOGG: I1a2a) P109, (following the current ISOGG proposal characterised by polymorphisms L22 and P109). 

Since these definitions of (I1* and derived) nomenclatures are changing too often. I prefer the generic term I-M253-L22/P109 to be quite honest. 


http://ytree.ftdna.com/index.php?nam...arent=39157351
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I-M253
http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpI.html

----------


## nordicwarrior

> ...Other candidate could be Transylvanian Saxon which came on Balkan in medieval times as miners and were quite numerous around mining points. A lot of places in Serbia, Bosnia have names Sasi, Sasina, Sase which remind on them. It is well known fact that they were later incorporated in local Slavic nations....In the Srebrenica region for example the mine of Sase translates directly to Saxon in the South Slavic languages of the region. Many of the regions Bosniaks are the direct descendents of these very same miners who settled into the region between the 12th and 15th century."...


Iapodos, this makes the most sense to me... excellent find. I predict the autosomal findings will match this idea.

And on a side note, the FTDNA and International codes slightly differ and seem to be in a constant state of flux... can I make a request that we use SNP numbering on further thread comments? The alphabet soup is getting difficult to follow.

----------


## gyms

> Iapodos, this makes the most sense to me... excellent find. I predict the autosomal findings will match this idea.
> 
> And on a side note, the FTDNA and International codes slightly differ and seem to be in a constant state of flux... can I make a request that we use SNP numbering on further thread comments? The alphabet soup is getting difficult to follow.


Wich subclade/subclades of I1 are present on Balkan peninsula?

----------


## Yetos

> what if most of these "germanic" traces are Illyrian or Thracian? They spoke an IE language coming from somewhere north. That would explain why it is all over the balkans. Here is some linguistic backup, (I was too lazy to go further than the letter D); the format is "albanian - english - old norse":
> 
> pjek - bake - baka
> kullote (bald field) - bald - kollottr
> laj - bath - laug
> beteje - battle - bardagi
> ndyr - beast - dyr
> blete - bee - by
> filli - first - fyrsta
> ...


If i understand well, after Albanian being mother of Greek, Basquez,Latin Celtic, now they are also mother language of Norge, right?

----------


## kamani

> If i understand well, after Albanian being mother of Greek, Basquez,Latin Celtic, now they are also mother language of Norge, right?


not really, all I said is that there is an old nordic substratum in albanian.

----------


## Balder

> not really, but there is no point giving further explanations to you.


Interesting comparison.

Well when the Indo-European spread northward, the first speakers of it were the former Baltic tribes of what is now Lithuania, Latvia and part of Northern Poland. They were the older speakers of Indo Europeans in northern Europe. The Proto-Germanic 'people'/and first Germanic speakers possibly took and learned it from them. But also, there are other theories coming from Proto-Celts from the South.

Also, as we all know, the Germanic languages are a sub-branch of the Indo-European language family spoken by Germanic peoples. However, many elements of the common Germanic vocabulary and syntactical forms, close to 30% of it, have not an Indo-European origin. Just ancient, a part of their substrate from past cultures of the region.

Just take a a look at the Germanic substrate hypothesis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germani...ate_hypothesis


You should compare it (the Albanian) with the Litas. Lithuanian is the most archaic and "pure" among all the Indo-European languages spoken today.
http://www.lituanus.org/1969/69_3_02.htm

----------


## MOESAN

my friend Kamani
you put in this thread a lot of old norse and albaina words:
they contain a mixt of_ possibly_ (rare) common words not pan-PIE, some common PIE cognates (don't prove anything at this level of theory) and a lot of words that are not common, at any stage of IE... be carefull and don't be victim of superficial and incomplete similarities, phonetical or by spelling - 

Balder, I think that a version of an archaïc I-E languages was old enough yet in N-Germany, before becoming germanic by some processus or being overwhelmed by already well formed and foreign germanic language - proto baltic (satem) could very have been older there than this (I suppose centum) language but i'm not sure that the germanic language is the direct descendant of this proto-baltic, whatever the complexity of the germanic "gestation" _ some interactions yes, common origin, no - concerning Celts, I think they have been an influence upon this germanic, but I'm not so sure celtic had never been the material which become the germanic, the basic material could better have been the ancient NW I-E (archaïc) - this doesn't exclude the possibility of a very ancient community at the famous archaïc stage, before we could speak about baltic or celtic or germanic or ... before stameziation too: but this community I think was broken down in central-eastern Europe, I suppose -

----------


## Balder

MOESAN. Possibly, I agree with your line of thinking. Somehow the Balts looks have caught this before us, namely, they developed their own Indo-European derived language before the first Indo-European Germanics.

----------


## gyms

Snp F1583 is apparently derived in one of many P109+ Geno2 results. It is in the FTDNA catalog for P109+ customers.

Unfortunately F2711 and CTS9875 are not in the catalog; they have potential for dividing P109+ as well.


- - - - 
Kenneth Nordtvedt

----------


## kamani

I am starting more and more to believe that this has nothing to do with the goths. After some research on public data on the areas around south-east albania/north-west greece I came up with some approximate percentages:

I1 9%
I2b 4%
I2a2b 15% (extremely high for this rare hg)

which totals for some 30% of "celtic/nordic" dna. Out of 20% r1b of the area, around 4% is celtic, which shoots the percentage up even higher. This is an Illyrian tribe, indicating a back-migration wave from north/west europe into the balkans. They have created a founding circle, pushing the more pelasgian E v-13 north into the mountains of albania and south into the peloponesus.

----------


## zanipolo

> I am starting more and more to believe that this has nothing to do with the goths. After some research on public data on the areas around south-east albania/north-west greece I came up with some approximate percentages:
> 
> I1 9%
> I2b 4%
> I2a2b 15% (extremely high for this rare hg)
> 
> which totals for some 30% of "celtic/nordic" dna. Out of 20% r1b of the area, around 4% is celtic, which shoots the percentage up even higher. This is an Illyrian tribe, indicating a back-migration wave from north/west europe into the balkans. They have created a founding circle, pushing the more pelasgian E v-13 north into the mountains of albania and south into the peloponesus.


Finally, reason to say that the illyrians where initially central european and not balkan people, like it stated in the macedonian-illyrian wars

----------


## kamani

> Finally, reason to say that the illyrians where initially central european and not balkan people, like it stated in the macedonian-illyrian wars


well, that also needs specification. The 20-30% seed/elite that gave them their IE language was central european. The 70% Illyrian bulk was still local "indigenous" balkan population with E v-13, J2b, old R1b, and G2a. That's how you get an IE language with central european substrata that is so different from anything else that it sits on its own branch.

----------


## zanipolo

> well, that also needs specification. The 20-30% seed/elite that gave them their IE language was central european. The 70% Illyrian bulk was still local "indigenous" balkan population with E v-13, J2b, old R1b, and G2a. That's how you get an IE language with central european substrata that is so different from anything else that it sits on its own branch.


but G2a4 (a or b, unsure) in the alps is completly different from G2a4 ( a or b ) in Etruscans and balkan peoples. oetzi was of the G2a found in the alps. His marker is from the caucasus, terek river valley areas ( maybe even south ossetian ) and not the south caucasus of the armenian, south georgian areas .

There is hardly any E-v13 in the north, IIRC less than 4 % lowering to 2%

----------


## Yaan

> Something has been bothering me for some time because of the lack of detailed Y-DNA data in the Balkans. There is an unusually high percentage of typically Germanic haplogroups (I1, I2b, R1b and R1a) in Macedonia, Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, and to a lower extent Bosnia-Herzegovina. The combined studies I used to create the table of Y-DNA frequencies totalled an amazing 10% of I1 in Macedonia and 4% of I2b in Serbia. The Pericic et al. study of the Balkans found 5% of I1 among Herzegovinians, Serbs, Kosovar Albanians and Macedonians.
> 
> If only I could get a detailed analysis of R1b subclades and R1a STR markers in that region, I would be able to confirm whether the four haplogroups came together as part of a major Germanic migration. The only one I can think of are the Visigoths in the late 4th century. They started their invasion of the Roman Empire from what is now Moldova, another known hotspot of haplogroup I1 outside the traditional Germanic homeland.
> 
> Some people have hypothesised that I1 originated in South-East Europe, or that it once covered most of eastern and northern Europe, before the Neolithic and Indo-European migrations. But STR markers tell a different story. I1 is a young haplogroup whose members descend from a common ancestor who lived barely 4500 years ago, in the early Bronze Age, not during the Paleolithic. So I1 cannot be indigenous to the Balkans and Moldova. It came fairly recently, after the Bronze Age. Considering its point of origin in northern Germany and southern Scandinavia, I cannot think of any other possible source as a Germanic one. As there has been no massive Germanic migrations to the Balkans in Medieval times or later, the most likely period is late Roman Empire. 
> 
> The Balkans have the most diverse array of R1a lineages in the world. Some have seen it as a sign that R1a originated there during the Paleolithic, then moved to the Indian subcontinent and Central Asia via the Eurasian steppe. I think that part of the genetic diversity within R1a in the Balkans is simply due to the fact that the region lies at the receiving end of the countless migrations from the steppes (see 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe). 
> 
> There is certainly too much R1a in the Balkans for it to be all Germanic. In fact, I think that the Visigoths (or any other Germanic tribe that settled there) were most likely to carry 20 to 35% of R1a and perhaps 20 to 30% of I1, 3 to 8% of I2b and 35 to 60% of R1b. If the average I1 for the southern Balkans is 5%, then we can expect only about 4 or 5% of R1a to be Germanic.
> ...


R1a is not Germanic, not even by a long shot. R1a is the Indo European group, typical for Slavs and in Pakistan and India 
R1b is also not Germanic, just some branches. R1b in the Balkan is either old local R1b from the Thrachains, also observed in Armenia,Greece,Albania,Anadola,Central Asia that has nothing to do with Germanics or R1b typcial for Romans that also have nothing to do with Germanics 
I1 in the Balkan is either really old, or maybe came with Bulgars and other horse warriors 
I2b is really small.
So no Germanics in the Balkan, also Bulgaria and Macedonia and big part of Romania and small part of Turkey is East Balkan, Albania and former Yugoslavia is West Balkan, South Balkan is only Greece. 
The R1b in the Balkan is not Germanic, R1a is not Germanic at all nowhere in the world. I do not believe Albania and Macedonia/Bulgaria have 5-6 % germanic 1-2% maybe who knows.

----------


## Tomenable

Kenneth Nordtvedt and Vadim Verenich are most certainly right that I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by Slavs, as I explained here:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post451367

----------

