# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  Large-scale new study of Croatian Y-DNA

## Maciamo

Yaan pointed me to this 2012 paper by Mrsic et al. They tested the Y chromosomes of 1100 Croatian men, 220 for each of the five regions. This allowed me to recalculate the haplogroup frequencies more accurately. So far, the small studies by Pericic et al. (2005) and Battaglia et al. (2008) only totalled a bit over 200 samples. The new frequencies are based on 1325 samples for the three studies combined.

The frequencies did change considerably. They decreased for haplogroups T (-1%), I1 (-2.5%), I2a (-5%) and R1a (-5%), but increased for E1b1b (+4%), J2, (+2.5%), G2a (+1.5%), J1 (+1%), Q (+1%), N (+0.5%) and R1b (+0.5%).

----------


## Anthro-inclined

Good job Yaan, very large study. Maciamo are you going to post the frequencies up per region like with France.

----------


## brendo

It would be very interesting to see the regional differences and results in Croatia. So far Croatians are one of the most represented and studied groups in Europe.

----------


## martinmkp

> It would be very interesting to see the regional differences and results in Croatia.


See table three of the above mentioned study - it´s there.

Table 3

Haplogroup composition in single Croatian regional dataset

----------


## kamani

The regional study is quite interesting. As previously mentioned in this forum, I2a and E-v13 seem to exclude each-other. I2a has highest concentration in south-croatia; on the other hand E-v13 seems evenly spread all over, except in south-croatia. So far we're consistent with history, I2a representing the slavic expansion over an existing E-v13 population. Things get more complicated when considering R1a which has highest concentration in north-croatia and is not inversely proportional with E-v13. This leads to believe that not all R1a in croatia came with the slavic expansion, and some of it was previously there co-existing with the indigenous E-v13. 
It gets more complicated when considering I1, which is evenly spread all over. It has been previously mentioned in this forum that it coresponds with the germanic tribe migrations in the late roman era. However, the slavic expansion came after the germanic expansion, so the even spread does not make any sense (we would expect I2a and I1 to be inversely proportional). One explanation is that the slavs also came with 5-6% I1.

----------


## zanipolo

> The regional study is quite interesting. As previously mentioned in this forum, I2a and E-v13 seem to exclude each-other. I2a has highest concentration in south-croatia; on the other hand E-v13 seems evenly spread all over, except in south-croatia. So far we're consistent with history, I2a representing the slavic expansion over an existing E-v13 population. Things get more complicated when considering R1a which has highest concentration in north-croatia and is not inversely proportional with E-v13. This leads to believe that not all R1a in croatia came with the slavic expansion, and some of it was previously there co-existing with the indigenous E-v13. 
> It gets more complicated when considering I1, which is evenly spread all over. It has been previously mentioned in this forum that it coresponds with the germanic tribe migrations in the late roman era. However, the slavic expansion came after the germanic expansion, so the even spread does not make any sense (we would expect I2a and I1 to be inversely proportional). One explanation is that the slavs also came with 5-6% I1.


The Goths stayed 200 years in Italy and Croatia, Slovenia .....what did they bring along with their R1a ?

----------


## kamani

> The Goths stayed 200 years in Italy and Croatia, Slovenia .....what did they bring along with their R1a ?


The goths would explain ~6% I1, which was probably there before the slavs. However the slavs probably also came with some 5% I1. That would explain why I1 is evenly spread and I2a isn't. (or the data is just random and inconclusive)

----------


## nordicwarrior

We need to start including SNP results at this point. Really an I1 in Croatia could have moved in 5,000 years ago or 500 years ago (or even 5 years ago). Going further down the y-branches and adding autosomal results should clarify things, or at least give us fodder for decades more of debate.

----------


## MOESAN

I 'm game to bet that Y-I1 as a whole is not that old (as 5000 years) in Croatia - the explanation of Kamani is not stupid at all: few reminds of Goths, maybe scattered all over the land after loosing their elite position (?) leaving 6/7% of Y-I1 and Slavic sending some similar %s (see: Poland, Baltic lands, N-Slavs) Czechs and Slovenes have even more (but here we can expect some germanic LATE influence?)

----------


## MOESAN

> We need to start including SNP results at this point. Really an I1 in Croatia could have moved in 5,000 years ago or 500 years ago (or even 5 years ago). Going further down the y-branches and adding autosomal results should clarify things, or at least give us fodder for decades more of debate.


I don't see why autosomals could help us concerning Y-I1 for 2 reasons: possible drift for Y-DNA and the melting pot formed by 'NW and NE european'

----------


## MOESAN

> I 'm game to bet that Y-I1 as a whole is not that old (as 5000 years) in Croatia - the explanation of Kamani is not stupid at all: few reminds of Goths, maybe scattered all over the land after loosing their elite position (?) leaving 6/7% of Y-I1 and Slavic sending some similar %s (see: Poland, Baltic lands, N-Slavs) Czechs and Slovenes have even more (but here we can expect some germanic LATE influence?)


I add that the peak of Y-I2a1b in S-Croatia (Dalmatia, I suppose) where 'dinaroid' types are the most frequent, not corresponding to Y-R1a distributions could prove that if Slavs send an appreciable proportion of this haplogroup, they found in S-Croatia (and S-osnia, almost sure) preceding Y-I2a1b bearers, maybe not "autochtonous" but arrived there before (bronze Age?), maybe from central Europe (even if not conclusive, for autosomals and Y-HG are very vaguely tied) COON seemed thinking the 'dinaric' types was descended there from North - the alleged high variance of Y-I2a1b in Yougoslavia seems support this relatively old presence there: so I2a1b + I2a1b !!! history can mock us

----------


## Yetos

[QUOTE=zanipolo;405175]The Goths stayed 200 years in Italy and Croatia, Slovenia .....what did they bring along with their R1a ?[/QUΟΤΕ]


are you expecting a well based answer?

----------


## zanipolo

[QUOTE=Yetos;405199]


> The Goths stayed 200 years in Italy and Croatia, Slovenia .....what did they bring along with their R1a ?[/QUΟΤΕ]
> 
> 
> are you expecting a well based answer?


Upon further reading, the goths where only in Croatian lands for about 70 years, the byzantine took over , then the Hungarians.

I believe the I1 was not gothic but came with the goths.

Is the I1 in Croatia a confirmed Scandinavian type?

----------


## kamani

Fig.2 was a bit of a surprise for me. It shows south-italians being closer to jugoslavs and albanians than to north-italians. I have heard before of albanians being close to south-italians, but I have not heard of jugoslavs being as well almost the same distance from south-italians. I wonder how did that happen? 
Slovenians also seem to be far from the rest of the jugoslavs, clustering with slovakians and czechs.

----------


## ElHorsto

> I add that the peak of Y-I2a1b in S-Croatia (Dalmatia, I suppose) where 'dinaroid' types are the most frequent, not corresponding to Y-R1a distributions could prove that if Slavs send an appreciable proportion of this haplogroup, they found in S-Croatia (and S-osnia, almost sure) preceding Y-I2a1b bearers, maybe not "autochtonous" but arrived there before (bronze Age?), maybe from central Europe (even if not conclusive, for autosomals and Y-HG are very vaguely tied) COON seemed thinking the 'dinaric' types was descended there from North - the alleged high variance of Y-I2a1b in Yougoslavia seems support this relatively old presence there: so I2a1b + I2a1b !!! history can mock us


Let's keep in mind there was a people called Antes who were considered very early east-slavs, but recently this has become more controversial. Prokopius and Jordanes describe them as very similar to slavic. They came from Ukraine and were possibly influenced by an iranian elite. It is very interesting that the Antes fought the actual slavs and later became allies of Byzantinum. It could be that I2 came originally from Antes. The mythical iranian elite hypothesis of Serb and Croat origin in White-lands could be possibly related to Antes?!
In this scenario the Dinarics could have come first from east by antes to Moravia or even south-east germany, and later continued (together with some I1) to the Balkans, such that Coon still could be right? Just some musing.

----------


## nordicwarrior

> I don't see why autosomals could help us concerning Y-I1 for 2 reasons: possible drift for Y-DNA and the melting pot formed by 'NW and NE european'


I'm sorry-- I should have clarified that I meant including downstream SNP results would help locate all y-groups in space/time, not just I1. 

P.S. I'm developing an off the wall theory that both paternal and maternal haplogroup membership somewhat influences autosomal patterns. Will try to explain more as I work it through.

----------


## Eldritch

Dinarics are an Alpino-Med blend according to Coon.

----------


## james stock

Let's be clear here that this data is not representative of Croatians, but of Croatia. It omits the Croatians with the highest percentage of I2a which are Croatians from Hercegovina and Bosna. So i'm unsure why you changed the data. Is the data weighted reflect Croatians that live in Hercegovina and Bosnia?

Dalmatians: 55% I2a

----------


## james stock

It's also well known that a significant portion of north Croatian population came from the diaspora of Dalmatians/Hercegovci. So I would assume that a large majority of the I2a found in what the study describes as North/East/West Croatia came from South Croatia/Hercegovina/Bosna. If anyone knows the history of Croatian people they will know that many went north in search of work and higher paying jobs.

I would expect to find significant gene flow from South/Herceg-Bosna to North croatia.

----------


## ElHorsto

> Dinarics are an Alpino-Med blend according to Coon.


Correct, but imo Coon was was wrong in this case.

----------


## nordicwarrior

I have to explain my thinking on autosomal as it relates to y-DNA and this Croatian thread is a good fit because of the confusing y-DNA makeup in this region.

1. As we build a more complete model of Croatian autosomal results, we will be able to paint the full mosiac of genetic flow into and out of the region-- not limited to just y-haplogroup data. Over time, as this model becomes more and more clear-- we can then overlay the y-DNA (and mtDNA) maps for a even fuller picture. That's the simple way of how autosomal will help tell us of our historical movements through time.

2. Now here's where it gets weird-- right now we view y-DNA completely seperate from autosomal. However, nature doesn't work like that. In nature everything is interconnected, nothing occurs in a vacuum. What if over time (as all of our models and maps become more and more defined) we are able to draw correlations between y-DNA and autosomal results? In other words, autosomal will dictate skin and eye color, but what if y-DNA impacts skin thickness or say distance between eyes? 

In order to pick up these correlations, we would need some extra powerful computing and a dozen or so experts in statistics. But with a strong mainframe from M.I.T., a dedicated team of qualified scientists, and a few cases of intense Asperger's syndrome-- somebody is going to crack the code and discover how y and mtdna haplogroup impact autosomal characteristics. This will have incredible applications not only in the field of history, but also biology and just about an other ology you can think come up with.

I apologize in advance to Moesan, I know how much he enjoys my digressions...

----------


## Eldritch

> Correct, but imo Coon was was wrong in this case.


Care to explain!

----------


## Nobody1

*at ElHorsto* 

According to _Beals & Hoijer (1953)_, the *Dinarics* are an intermixture of *Nordics* & *Armenoids*.
But *Coon* is more precise (better ref.) about *Dinarics* being an *Alpine* (Brachycephalic) and *Mediterranid* (Dark Complexion: _Hair, Eyes_; Narrow Nose; Narrow Face; Pontid type); with *Noric* (noricum) simply being the more *Nordic* (light complexioned) *Dinaric* sub-type.

*Stefan Vatev*: _"ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF LOVECH REGION, NORTH BULGARIA"_ 
_"The Noric race (German: Norische Rasse) was a racial category proposed by the anthropologist Victor Lebzelter. The Noric race was supposed to be a lighter sub-type of the Dinaric race."_
_"Norics were characterized by tall stature, brachycephaly, nasal convexity, long face and broad forehead. Their complexion was said to be light, and blondness combined with light eyes to be their anthropologic characteristic. Norics were supposed to populate parts of Austria, Slovenia, Hungary, Northern Croatia, Northern Serbia and South-Eastern Germany."_

[*Note:* all races mentioned in this post are sub-races of the Caucasoid race]

----------


## zanipolo

> Fig.2 was a bit of a surprise for me. It shows south-italians being closer to jugoslavs and albanians than to north-italians. I have heard before of albanians being close to south-italians, but I have not heard of jugoslavs being as well almost the same distance from south-italians. I wonder how did that happen? 
> Slovenians also seem to be far from the rest of the jugoslavs, clustering with slovakians and czechs.


If they are ancient, then they are epirote as Pyrrhus the Great , king of Epirus was asked by epirotes in southern Italy to help them defeat the Romans.

If the markers are more modern, then its another story

----------


## zanipolo

> Let's be clear here that this data is not representative of Croatians, but of Croatia. It omits the Croatians with the highest percentage of I2a which are Croatians from Hercegovina and Bosna. So i'm unsure why you changed the data. Is the data weighted reflect Croatians that live in Hercegovina and Bosnia?
> 
> Dalmatians: 55% I2a


 Dalmatians where the last of the people in croatia to become slavic, they did not migrate from anywhere but where one of the original illyrian confederation of tribes, even their language only expired in the 18th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalmatian_language

Dalmatian was influenced particularly heavily by Venetian and Croatian (despite the latter, the Latin roots of Dalmatian remained prominent).

So, I do not know why you think I2a was entirely slavic

----------


## zanipolo

> *at ElHorsto* 
> 
> According to _Beals & Hoijer (1953)_, the *Dinarics* are an intermixture of *Nordics* & *Armenoids*.
> But *Coon* is more precise (better ref.) about *Dinarics* being an *Alpine* (Brachycephalic) and *Mediterranid* (Dark Complexion: _Hair, Eyes_; Narrow Nose; Narrow Face; Pontid type); with *Noric* (noricum) simply being the more *Nordic* (light complexioned) *Dinaric* sub-type.
> 
> *Stefan Vatev*: _"ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF LOVECH REGION, NORTH BULGARIA"_ 
> _"The Noric race (German: Norische Rasse) was a racial category proposed by the anthropologist Victor Lebzelter. The Noric race was supposed to be a lighter sub-type of the Dinaric race."_
> _"Norics were characterized by tall stature, brachycephaly, nasal convexity, long face and broad forehead. Their complexion was said to be light, and blondness combined with light eyes to be their anthropologic characteristic. Norics were supposed to populate parts of Austria, Slovenia, Hungary, Northern Croatia, Northern Serbia and South-Eastern Germany."_
> 
> [*Note:* all races mentioned in this post are sub-races of the Caucasoid race]


Noric is the term used for the eastern alps , originally an ancient illyrian tribe called Nori it became rename, to norici when the celts merged with illyrian in eastern Austria. Thats how the name came about.

----------


## Yetos

> Fig.2 was a bit of a surprise for me. It shows south-italians being closer to jugoslavs and albanians than to north-italians. I have heard before of albanians being close to south-italians, but I have not heard of jugoslavs being as well almost the same distance from south-italians. I wonder how did that happen? 
> Slovenians also seem to be far from the rest of the jugoslavs, clustering with slovakians and czechs.



why you are surprised?

never heard of an imaginary line (Cizarec) that is mentioned in this forum many times?

----------


## Yetos

> Let's keep in mind there was a people called Antes who were considered very early east-slavs, but recently this has become more controversial. Prokopius and Jordanes describe them as very similar to slavic. They came from Ukraine and were possibly influenced by an iranian elite. It is very interesting that the Antes fought the actual slavs and later became allies of Byzantinum. It could be that I2 came originally from Antes. The mythical iranian elite hypothesis of Serb and Croat origin in White-lands could be possibly related to Antes?!
> In this scenario the Dinarics could have come first from east by antes to Moravia or even south-east germany, and later continued (together with some I1) to the Balkans, such that Coon still could be right? Just some musing.


according Byzantine chronicles, yes you are right,
Serbs from moravia, Croars from around Ruthinia, Severi from Ucraine.

----------


## kamani

> If they are ancient, then they are epirote as Pyrrhus the Great , king of Epirus was asked by epirotes in southern Italy to help them defeat the Romans.
> 
> If the markers are more modern, then its another story


sounds like jugoslav I2a is very watered down from its original environment, because south-italians have almost none of it, but still the populations are close.

----------


## kokki

> I have to explain my thinking on autosomal as it relates to y-DNA and this Croatian thread is a good fit because of the confusing y-DNA makeup in this region.
> 
> 1. As we build a more complete model of Croatian autosomal results, we will be able to paint the full mosiac of genetic flow into and out of the region-- not limited to just y-haplogroup data. Over time, as this model becomes more and more clear-- we can then overlay the y-DNA (and mtDNA) maps for a even fuller picture. That's the simple way of how autosomal will help tell us of our historical movements through time.
> 
> 2. Now here's where it gets weird-- right now we view y-DNA completely seperate from autosomal. However, nature doesn't work like that. In nature everything is interconnected, nothing occurs in a vacuum. What if over time (as all of our models and maps become more and more defined) we are able to draw correlations between y-DNA and autosomal results? In other words, autosomal will dictate skin and eye color, but what if y-DNA impacts skin thickness or say distance between eyes? 
> 
> In order to pick up these correlations, we would need some extra powerful computing and a dozen or so experts in statistics. But with a strong mainframe from M.I.T., a dedicated team of qualified scientists, and a few cases of intense Asperger's syndrome-- somebody is going to crack the code and discover how y and mtdna haplogroup impact autosomal characteristics. This will have incredible applications not only in the field of history, but also biology and just about an other ology you can think come up with.
> 
> I apologize in advance to Moesan, I know how much he enjoys my digressions...


That would be great. Need more precision in the age of the mutations, and many ancient DNA research. Will be born and the new sciences. . I can think of 1. SPEKULATSIOLOGIA.

----------


## nordicwarrior

> That would be great. Need more precision in the age of the mutations, and many ancient DNA research. Will be born and the new sciences. . I can think of 1. SPEKULATSIOLOGIA.


That actually made me laugh out loud, no joke!

Please do try to remember my oddball theory though. In five years or so, the focus of DNA will shift to it's interrelatedness. There is no such thing as "junk DNA"-- it all has a function and purpose. 

Plus when you consider the fact that mtdna effects the main power plant in every cell in the body... of course a mutation in this area will have far reaching impact throughout the entire organism.

----------


## nordicwarrior

Back to the thread though, Yetos tell us more about these Severi from Ucraine. Byzantine sources would have validity because of their age... much closer in time to the actual population shifts.

----------


## james stock

> Dalmatians where the last of the people in croatia to become slavic, they did not migrate from anywhere but where one of the original illyrian confederation of tribes, even their language only expired in the 18th century.
> 
> Dalmatian was influenced particulary Venetian and Croatian despite the latter, the Latin roots of Dalmatian remained prominent).
> 
> So, I do not know why you think I2a was entirely slavic


I never said that I2a was slavic. I said that there was significant gene flow of I2a from South Croatia (Dalmatia/Hercegovina) and Bosnia to North/East/West Croatia. Without this gene flow we would be looking at much lower I2a frequencies in the north. Of course I believe I2a is old in the Balkans, preceding Illyrians.

1) I2a was found in a high percent of pre-roman venetians.
2) I don't believe any variance models based on frequency topography because they exclude geographic barriers to gene flow making the whole premise erroneous.
3) The parts of Croatia with the highest I2a are geographically isolated from gene flow making the slavic invasion hypothesis extremely unlikely. 
4) Ken N's claim of Y dating based on a model, and all models are prone to errors of input and of the model itself.

----------


## zanipolo

> I never said that I2a was slavic. I said that there was significant gene flow of I2a from South Croatia (Dalmatia/Hercegovina) and Bosnia to North/East/West Croatia. Without this gene flow we would be looking at much lower I2a frequencies in the north. Of course I believe I2a is old in the Balkans, preceding Illyrians.
> 
> 1) I2a was found in a high percent of pre-roman venetians.
> 2) I don't believe any variance models based on frequency topography because they exclude geographic barriers to gene flow making the whole premise erroneous.
> 3) The parts of Croatia with the highest I2a are geographically isolated from gene flow making the slavic invasion hypothesis extremely unlikely. 
> 4) Ken N's claim of Y dating based on a model, and all models are prone to errors of input and of the model itself.


there is another who rivals Ken N , Terry Robb. His data is below, from full migrational routes , including barbarian invasions, to I1 and I2 as well as all the geno 2.0 results

http://www.goggo.com/terry/Haplogrou...Migrations.pdf

http://www.goggo.com/terry/Haplogrou...R_Branches.pdf

http://www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/

there is even a spot where you can enter your ftdna kit number ( only if your are from the I family ) to reveal new data

----------


## Templar

> Dinarics are an Alpino-Med blend according to Coon.


No, Dinarics are a mix of Paleolithic Europeans (Cro-Magnons) and Near-Eastern migrants (probably Armenoids). Indo-Europeans had Alpine-like characteristics such as having a wide but short face. 

There are still many un-mixed relatively "pure" Cro-Magnons in Herzegovina. My father's side of the family are all over 6'2 for males and over 5'7 for women. And they aren't frail like the stereotypical Dinaric, they have extremely wide/thick bones (especially the legs) and pack on muscle as if they are on steroids.

----------


## Eldritch

> No, Dinarics are a mix of Paleolithic Europeans (Cro-Magnons) and Near-Eastern migrants (probably Armenoids). Indo-Europeans had Alpine-like characteristics such as having a wide but short face. 
> 
> There are still many un-mixed relatively "pure" Cro-Magnons in Herzegovina. My father's side of the family are all over 6'2 for males and over 5'7 for women. And they aren't frail like the stereotypical Dinaric, they have extremely wide/thick bones (especially the legs) and pack on muscle as if they are on steroids.


Do you have a source to back up your claims?

----------


## Templar

> Do you have a source to back up your claims?


Several anthropologists have suggested it. Plus there is a lot of evidence for it. Western Balkans have the highest rates of haplogroup I (the Cro-Magnon Y haplogroup), the people are the tallest in Europe, have features which fit with how paleolithic Europeans are thought to have looked, etc. There are many similarities between "Nordics" and Dinarics. And most agree that "Nordics" have a considerable amount of Paleolithic ancestry. The only big difference between them is coloring, but that can be attributed to Indo-European admixture in the case of Nordics and near-eastern admixture in the case of Dinarics.

----------


## Eldritch

> Several anthropologists have suggested it. Plus there is a lot of evidence for it. Western Balkans have the highest rates of haplogroup I (the Cro-Magnon Y haplogroup), the people are the tallest in Europe, have features which fit with how paleolithic Europeans are thought to have looked, etc. There are many similarities between "Nordics" and Dinarics. And most agree that "Nordics" have a considerable amount of Paleolithic ancestry. The only big difference between them is coloring, but that can be attributed to Indo-European admixture in the case of Nordics and near-eastern admixture in the case of Dinarics.


Link me those Anthropologists and your theories don't count.

----------


## Templar

> Link me those Anthropologists and your theories don't count.


RALPH L. _BEALS_ and HARRY _HOIJER_

----------


## kamani

> Several anthropologists have suggested it. Plus there is a lot of evidence for it. Western Balkans have the highest rates of haplogroup I (the Cro-Magnon Y haplogroup), the people are the tallest in Europe, have features which fit with how paleolithic Europeans are thought to have looked, etc. There are many similarities between "Nordics" and Dinarics. And most agree that "Nordics" have a considerable amount of Paleolithic ancestry. The only big difference between them is coloring, but that can be attributed to Indo-European admixture in the case of Nordics and near-eastern admixture in the case of Dinarics.


On previous threads you have claimed jugoslav I2a to be illyrian; following your logic with what you're saying now, illyrians are paleolithic in the balkans.

----------


## Malsori

> On previous threads you have claimed jugoslav I2a to be illyrian; following your logic with what you're saying now, illyrians are paleolithic in the balkans.


There is no single evidence that I2a is Paleolithic or Mesolithic in origin. We have to wait for aDNA to conclude that. Everything else said is just bollocks. Besides that, how many times we have discussed that I2a among Yugoslavians is exclusively I2a1b1 which is only 2500-2000 years old. It has absolutely nothing to do with Illyrians.

----------


## Templar

> On previous threads you have claimed jugoslav I2a to be illyrian; following your logic with what you're saying now, illyrians are paleolithic in the balkans.


Not really, I claimed that I2a was a major element of the Illyrian population (the others being E, J1, J2, and other haplogroups that came during the neolithic, and small amounts of r1b and r1a).

----------


## Templar

> There is no single evidence that I2a is Paleolithic or Mesolithic in origin. We have to wait for aDNA to conclude that. Everything else said is just bollocks. Besides that, how many times we have discussed that I2a among Yugoslavians is exclusively I2a1b1 which is only 2500-2000 years old. It has absolutely nothing to do with Illyrians.


The 2500-2000 date is derived from Ken's data and estimation, now many people think that his way of calculating haplogroup age is very flawed, plus as someone already mention, pre-Roman Venetians might have had I2a.

----------


## james stock

> The 2500-2000 date is derived from Ken's data and estimation, now many people think that his way of calculating haplogroup age is very flawed, plus as someone already mention, pre-Roman Venetians might have had I2a.




Do not even argue with Albanians. They will hijack any thread to talk about their made up Illyrian history. This pathetic behavior seems more commom in Albanian youth, as i've met some very nice Albanian elderly who do not exhibit the stupidity that their youth do.

The Albanians use 2500yo haplogroup dating based on Ken N's model.

Ken N's model was also used to date E-V13 in the Balkans. Albanians tested as the most recent migrants at 250AD-500AD. Thus if the Albanians here want to claim that Balkan I2a is recent using Ken N's model, they must also be ready to accept that their own population dates to 500AD using the same exact model.

dienekes.blogspot.com/2008/07/expansion-of-e-v13-explained.html

----------


## kamani

> Ken N's model was also used to date E-V13 in the Balkans. Albanians tested as the most recent migrants at 250AD-500AD. Thus if the Albanians here want to claim that Balkan I2a is recent using Ken N's model, they must also be ready to accept that their own population dates to 500AD using the same exact model.
> 
> dienekes.blogspot.com/2008/07/expansion-of-e-v13-explained.html


That's not Ken N's model being used, that's dienekes, the greek owner of the blog giving his amateur 2 cents on the matter (and pretty bias 2 cents). The slav migration in the balkans that formed the jugoslav genesis, happened in the middle ages and has been documented, any serious historian outside of ex-jugoslavia is not going to dispute that. 
Not even the greeks support you guys on jugoslav I2a being that old, because that would mean the Macedonian slavs were the first inhabitants of greece (they don't even want Macedonia to even be called Macedonia anymore, because it's inhabited by slavs).

----------


## gyms

> That's not Ken N's model being used, that's dienekes, the greek owner of the blog giving his amateur 2 cents on the matter (and pretty bias 2 cents). The slav migration in the balkans that formed the jugoslav genesis, happened in the middle ages and has been documented, any serious historian outside of ex-jugoslavia is not going to dispute that. 
> Not even the greeks support you guys on jugoslav I2a being that old, because that would mean the Macedonian slavs were the first inhabitants of greece (they don't even want Macedonia to even be called Macedonia anymore, because it's inhabited by slavs).


Sorry kamani,but there is no jugoslav people and jugoslav genesis.

----------


## Eldritch

Nordvedt is probably the best person on earth to have studied Y-DNA I branches so it would make him pretty reliable.

E-V13 has never been studied by Nordvedt, according to last Bulgarian paper E-V13 could even be Mesolithic into Balkans so i don't know where are all your theories coming.

----------


## james stock

> That's not Ken N's model being used, that's dienekes, the greek owner of the blog giving his amateur 2 cents on the matter (and pretty bias 2 cents). The slav migration in the balkans that formed the jugoslav genesis, happened in the middle ages and has been documented, any serious historian outside of ex-jugoslavia is not going to dispute that. 
> Not even the greeks support you guys on jugoslav I2a being that old, because that would mean the Macedonian slavs were the first inhabitants of greece (they don't even want Macedonia to even be called Macedonia anymore, because it's inhabited by slavs).


Yes, it is Ken N's model being used. Do you even know what a model is? You input data, and it gives you an output of information based on premises. It's not Ken N's data, it is Ken N's model. Are you arguing that the data used by Dienekes is an inaccurate representation of Balkan E-V13? If so, please provide evidence to support your assertions. 

I see that the Albanians will use Ken N's model to support their hypothesis, but reject Ken N's model when it says that Albanian E-V13 originated from 500AD. I have no doubt that E-V13 Albanians, and especially E-V13 Albanians in Kosovo are a product of a founder effect that is rather recent and the date of 500AD seems very likely for the founder. Anyone with any knowledge of evolutionary genetics would infer from the E-V13 frequency contours of Kosovo and surrounding areas that that population is a product of a recent founder effect.

----------


## Yetos

> That's not Ken N's model being used, that's dienekes, the greek owner of the blog giving his amateur 2 cents on the matter (and pretty bias 2 cents). The slav migration in the balkans that formed the jugoslav genesis, happened in the middle ages and has been documented, any serious historian outside of ex-jugoslavia is not going to dispute that. 
> Not even the greeks support you guys on jugoslav I2a being that old, because that would mean the Macedonian slavs were the first inhabitants of greece (they don't even want Macedonia to even be called Macedonia anymore, because it's inhabited by slavs).


@Kamani

Leave Greeks alone, 
don't mix them with your 'theories' which are just propaganda pappers.
and especially Dienekes who is searching autosomal admixtures,
Dienekes is searching, you are just want to make propaganda.
I am proud of Dienekes being Greek, cause his blog has a good scientific lvl, which you do not have, and true or false he is using scientific methods,

----------


## kamani

> Yes, it is Ken N's model being used. Do you even know what a model is? You input data, and it gives you an output of information based on premises. It's not Ken N's data, it is Ken N's model. Are you arguing that the data used by Dienekes is an inaccurate representation of Balkan E-V13? If so, please provide evidence to support your assertions.


Look up threads in this forum about E-v13, they're full of links that put in the Neolithic. So it is neolithic everywhere in the balkans, excepts in tiny kosovo, where it is supposed to be 250 AD, nevermind that the highest density is in kosovo and the distribution maps show its epicenter over there! That dienekes link is just some anonimous dude in 2008, in his spare time playing with the Ken Nordtvedt's Generations2 program, choosing his own input. That's not a serious published study.

----------


## kamani

> @Kamani
> 
> Leave Greeks alone, 
> don't mix them with your 'theories' which are just propaganda pappers.
> and especially Dienekes who is searching autosomal admixtures,
> 
> Dienekes is searching, you are just want to make propaganda.


then let me ask you a question. Why don't greeks want Macedonia to be called Macedonia?

----------


## Yetos

> Look up threads in this forum about E-v13, they're full of links that put in the Neolithic. So it is neolithic everywhere in the balkans, excepts in tiny kosovo, where it is supposed to be 250 AD, nevermind that the highest density is in kosovo and the distribution maps show its epicenter over there. That dienekes link is just some anonimous dude in 2008, in his spare time playing with the Ken Nordtvedt's Generations2 program, choosing his own input. That's not a serious published study.



better look again threads in the forum,
half posts say that is not neolithic but about 2000 BC and many other others say earlier,
If I remember correct Battaglia also claims that in bronze maritime entrance
why you want to create impressions?
it is not only Nortvedt, but also many others, who say that is maritime, not neolithic, copper or bronze age, 

you still claim that gennetic laws are just like liquid fluid laws, 
that from high density spreads around, 
but genetical laws say that from high diversity we know the age and starting point, which until today surely is not Kossovo but Greece at 1rst and Bosnia at 2nd

besides no matter the scientific claims, archaiology in balkans say no ancient E-V13, but in minor asia around 2000 BC,
now if you claim Iberian Neolithic E, then why you don't claim Ethiopean which is closer and older, Paleolithic.

how would like if I say that E-V13 is paleolithic since it is older in Cyprus which is more closer than Iberia?

maybe Cypriots with heavy E-V13 are from kossovo high peak?
or they are Arbanites as you claim in another post about the high peaks of E-v13 in Greece? making Arbanites 2 millions in Greece, while by their own clubs stats are only 150 000.

you think according propaganda, not according science.

----------


## james stock

I'm glad you agreed with me that the model used to produce a 2500yo estimate for I2a also produced a 1500yo estimate (500AD) for Albanian E-V13. You seem to accept the accuracy of this model, based on your reliance on it for dating I2a. 

I don't make statements of fact and I pointed out earlier, in this thread, that I do not trust Ken N's model. The issue here is that you make a statement of fact that I2a is 2500yo, based on Ken N's model, and reject that Albanian E-V13 is 1500yo (500AD), based on the same model. If you accept the model, you must first prove that the input data is either acceptable or unacceptable. You have not proven that Ken N's model is accurate. You have not proven the data used to date I2a is accurate. You have not proven the data used to date E-V13 is inaccurate. Therefore we are left in a situation where it seems that you reject Dieneke's data solely because it does not comply with, as Yetos pointed out, Albanian propaganda.

I'm not sure what your intentions are but if you cannot use a model when it suits you, and dismiss it when it doesn't, without people questioning your intentions. It's not the end of the world if Albanian E-V13 is from 500AD and E-V13 Albanians had nothing to do with Illyria. Propaganda only makes you, and the people you represent, look foolish.

----------


## kamani

@yetos
we've argued all that before, I disagree and if you want to know my take on it, look at the threads about E v-13 (I'm not going to destroy this thread with large posts about something non-related). Why don't you answer the question about Macedonia? Or at least if you don't want to answer that, answer how old is Macedonian I2a in the balkans?

----------


## kamani

> I'm glad you agreed with me that the model used to produce a 2500yo estimate for I2a ...


I did not agree with anything, read carefully, I said dienekes is an anonymous person that claimed in 2008 to have used ken N's software to come up with some results about E-v13. For all we know, he has not run anything and made the whole thing up. Until it is a published paper with somebody's reputation on the line, it is all speculation. Even the actual paper that started this thread says that jugoslav I2a is slavic. have you read the paper?

----------


## Malsori

> The 2500-2000 date is derived from Ken's data and estimation, now many people think that his way of calculating haplogroup age is very flawed, plus as someone already mention, pre-Roman Venetians might have had I2a.


It's flawed by the sense it doesn't give precise date. It doesn't change the fact highest diversity is in Ukraine and North Romania. Ken Nordvedt is the best possible source for anything related to Y-DNA i subclades. The guy has dedicated a portion of his life studying these subclades. And between there was no testing of Venetians, the dude who said so is a joke which except a t r o l l paper from a Croatian teen cannot bring any serious paper.






> Do not even argue with Albanians. They will hijack any thread to talk about their made up Illyrian history. This pathetic behavior seems more commom in Albanian youth, as i've met some very nice Albanian elderly who do not exhibit the stupidity that their youth do.
> 
> The Albanians use 2500yo haplogroup dating based on Ken N's model.
> 
> Ken N's model was also used to date E-V13 in the Balkans. Albanians tested as the most recent migrants at 250AD-500AD. Thus if the Albanians here want to claim that Balkan I2a is recent using Ken N's model, they must also be ready to accept that their own population dates to 500AD using the same exact model.
> 
> dienekes.blogspot.com/2008/07/expansion-of-e-v13-explained.html


Nice ad hominem, trying to project your own complexes toward others. Your previous claims that pre roman Venetians had I2a1b1 was a big lulz. There is tested Venetians and they resulted to carry I2a1b1 only on your own narrow mind, not in the real world.

Btw, no one said EV-13 is Albanian marker. It's on contrary. It's a native Balkan-Mediterranean marker and these people were Albanized in ancient times. High percentage among Albanians is because founder effect. But, that doesn't change the fact that Y-DNA I2a1b1 was recognized as Slavic marker even by your own scientists in this study. The pattern of it's distribution among South Slavs and it's diversity peak is uncanny. So deal with reality.

Here is a dose of reality, from the paper itself




> They showed that the most frequent Y-chromosomalhaplogroups in the overall Croatian population are I1b-P37 (41.7%) and R1a-SRY1532 (25%) indicating the Slavic gene pool component.


http://www.draganprimorac.com/wp-con...ports-2012.pdf

I have already mentioned in this forum that ex-Yugoslavians from net suffer from extreme Illyrianism. And, their biggest nightmare and problem is any sort of Albanian claim to Illyrians. Your megalomania is pathetic and funny at the same time especially when it comes to your self hate about having Slavic ancestry lol.

----------


## nordicwarrior

Why did I introduce my incredibly innovative theory on y/mtd/autosomal linkage on a Croatia/Albania/Greece thread? What was I thinking? 

Please stop lobbing the same old stones at one another and pay attention to this ground breaking advancement in genetic thinking.

We might learn something new, of course this knowledge will be used in future Albian and Greek online territorial skirmishes--

Lather, rinse, repeat.

P.S. I guess modesty isn't always my strong suit.

----------


## Yetos

> @yetos
> we've argued all that before, I disagree and if you want to know my take on it, look at the threads about E v-13 (I'm not going to destroy this thread with large posts about something non-related). Why don't you answer the question about Macedonia? Or at least if you don't want to answer that, answer how old is Macedonian I2a in the balkans?


I have answer that in other threads many times,
no need to repeat and chew again the same gum,
just find the Simmilarity of DYS to have clear view of the few I2a that exists in Balkans,

for example why I2a with a certain DYS among 16-19 is Slavic, while the same I2a with the same DYS above 19-23 is North sea?
a good question to enter both of us to more deep water of gennetics,

----------


## Yetos

> It's flawed by the sense it doesn't give precise date. It doesn't change the fact highest diversity is in Ukraine and North Romania. Ken Nordvedt is the best possible source for anything related to Y-DNA i subclades. The guy has dedicated a portion of his life studying these subclades. And between there was no testing of Venetians, the dude who said so is a joke which except a t r o l l paper from a Croatian teen cannot bring any serious paper.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice ad hominem, trying to project your own complexes toward others. Your previous claims that pre roman Venetians had I2a1b1 was a big lulz. There is tested Venetians and they resulted to carry I2a1b1 only on your own narrow mind, not in the real world.
> 
> Btw, no one said EV-13 is Albanian marker. It's on contrary. It's a native Balkan-Mediterranean marker and these people were Albanized in ancient times. High percentage among Albanians is because founder effect. But, that doesn't change the fact that Y-DNA I2a1b1 was recognized as Slavic marker even by your own scientists in this study. The pattern of it's distribution among South Slavs and it's diversity peak is uncanny. So deal with reality.
> ...



we agree that E-V13 in Hemos peninsula is a founder effect result,
but where that founder effect happened?
Balkans, Iberia, minor Asia, Levant Egypt?
Can you give me an answer to that?

----------


## zanipolo

> we agree that E-V13 in Hemos peninsula is a founder effect result,
> but where that founder effect happened?
> Balkans, Iberia, minor Asia, Levant Egypt?
> Can you give me an answer to that?


http://haplozone.net/e3b/project
E project above with notes

http://www.jogg.info/32/bird.pdf


here is a list of reading materials from 2001 to 2013

http://community.haplozone.net/index...sg3436#msg3436

The oldest E-v13 in Europe was found in Iberia

----------


## albanopolis

> @Kamani
> 
> Leave Greeks alone, 
> don't mix them with your 'theories' which are just propaganda pappers.
> and especially Dienekes who is searching autosomal admixtures,
> Dienekes is searching, you are just want to make propaganda.
> I am proud of Dienekes being Greek, cause his blog has a good scientific lvl, which you do not have, and true or false he is using scientific methods,


Read one of Dienekes blogs. He was arguing with an albanian poster about origin of Arvanites. Dienekes explanations was that they are geneticaly Greeks and have nothing to do with Albanians. And you still use him as a scientific sourse? Is this retards forum?

----------


## Yetos

@ Albanopolis, 

no need to answer you,
read his posts,
check his methods, 
and then throw mud at him,

who knows, maybe he is right.

and may I ask you a question?
Arberesh what are they?
Italians Greeks or Albanians?

----------

