# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  Bosnia - haplogroups in three main ethnic groups

## Kotroman

Can you please write down those numbers of percentage on *"Distribution of European Y-chromosome DNA (Y-DNA) haplogroups by country in percentage": 

*Bosniaks (Bosnian muslims): 
E3b1: 13%
E3b*: 0% 
G: 3,5% 
I1: 4,5% 
I2a: 43,5% 
I* 0% 
I2b: 0% 
J1: 2,5% 
J2: 9,5% 
R1a1: 15,5% 
R1b: 3,5% 
T: 1% 


Bosnian Serbs: 
E3b1: 20% 
E3b*: 2,5% 
G: 1% 
I1: 2,5% 
I2a: 31% 
I2b: 1% 
I*: 1% 
J1: 0% 
J2: 8,5% 
R1a1: 13,5% 
R1b: 6% 
T: 7,5% 


Bosnian Croats: 
E3b1: 9% 
E3b*: 0%
G: 1% 
I1: 0%
I2a: 71% 
I*: 2% 
I2b: 0% 
J1: 0% 
J2: 1% 
R1a1: 12% 
R1b: 2% 
T: 0%

From: _"The peopling of Bosnia-Herzegovina: Y-chromosome haplogroups in the three main ethnic groups, 2005"_ by Marjan Damjanović.

I am sorry, I am new here, but for some reason, I am not yet allowed to post links on this forum. 

Thank you.

----------


## Kotroman

It would be great if the person who is responsible (probably the moderator) for writing down the percentages of haplogroups in _"Distribution of European Y-chromosome DNA (Y-DNA) haplogroups by country in percentage"_, could write down those numbers of percentages under _Bosnia and Herzegovina_, with _Bosniaks_, _Bosnian Serbs_ and _Bosnian Croats_, like you did with Germany, France, Greece and Spain.

----------


## Yaan

> It would be great if the person who is responsible (probably the moderator) for writing down the percentages of haplogroups in _"Distribution of European Y-chromosome DNA (Y-DNA) haplogroups by country in percentage"_, could write down those numbers of percentages under _Bosnia and Herzegovina_, with _Bosniaks_, _Bosnian Serbs_ and _Bosnian Croats_, like you did with Germany, France, Greece and Spain.


I suggest to either write % only for Muslim Boshniaks or but as the poster above suggested, but it need to be fixed.  :Smile:

----------


## Marko94

I don't understand why called bosniaks.......just because you are muslim don't need to change name of ethnic group.

----------


## Kotroman

> I suggest to either write % only for Muslim Boshniaks or but as the poster above suggested, but it need to be fixed.


Absolutely. :) But we will see what Maciamo will do in due time.

----------


## Kotroman

> I don't understand why called bosniaks.......just because you are muslim don't need to change name of ethnic group.


Changed name of ethnic group? What? When?

----------


## Garrick

> Can you please write down those numbers of percentage on *"Distribution of European Y-chromosome DNA (Y-DNA) haplogroups by country in percentage": 
> 
> *Bosniaks (Bosnian muslims): 
> E3b1: 13%
> E3b*: 0% 
> G: 3,5% 
> I1: 4,5% 
> I2a: 43,5% 
> I* 0% 
> ...


It is a coincidence that T1 among Bosnian Serbs is too much. You can see findings in Serbia. According Pericic et al. in Serbia was 7,8% K*. However newer researches not confirmed it (not mentoin it). And I have a little skepticism about researches performed at that time. Again, the example of Serbia, later two researches conducted of American scientists (2010 and 2012) gave real situation Serbian haplogroups. I think it is right time that in Bosnia and Hezegovina (both Republic of Serbian and BH federation) be performed serious research and to be led by American or European researchers, not the local or Balkans.




> Changed name of ethnic group? What? When?


You are right. Bosniacs may themselves to call how wish. They are mostly muslim, but, you agree, that probably there are Bosniacs who are atheists. But people who are not from the Balkans can interfere terms Bosniacs and Bosnians. Both Serbs and Bosniacs and Croats can be Bosnians, Bosnians are inhabitants of Bosnia and Herzegovina, while Bosniacs are one of nations who live in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is fair to say. And I think, although I'm not sure, that it is more appropriate to write in English Bosniacs rather than Bosniaks.

----------


## Luan

> It is a coincidence that T1 among Bosnian Serbs is too much. You can see findings in Serbia. According Pericic et al. in Serbia was 7,8% K*. However newer researches not confirmed it (not mentoin it). And I have a little skepticism about researches performed at that time. Again, the example of Serbia, later two researches conducted of American scientists (2010 and 2012) gave real situation Serbian haplogroups. I think it is right time that in Bosnia and Hezegovina (both Republic of Serbian and BH federation) be performed serious research and to be led by American or European researchers, not the local or Balkans.
> 
> 
> 
> You are right. Bosniacs may themselves to call how wish. They are mostly muslim, but, you agree, that probably there are Bosniacs who are atheists. But people who are not from the Balkans can interfere terms Bosniacs and Bosnians. Both Serbs and Bosniacs and Croats can be Bosnians, Bosnians are inhabitants of Bosnia and Herzegovina, while Bosniacs are one of nations who live in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is fair to say. And I think, although I'm not sure, that it is more appropriate to write in English Bosniacs rather than Bosniaks.


I'm surprised Bosian serbs have such high E3b1 at 20% don't you think so? On a y-dna chart they are closest with Gheg Albanians and Greeks then rest of Serbia.

----------


## Garrick

> I'm surprised Bosian serbs have such high E3b1 at 20% don't you think so?


I don't think so. One part of Thracians are Serbs, and you can see in this forum, assumption is that Thracians were carriers of E1b1b. It is same with Bosniacs, they have about 14% E1b1b. Bulgarians have more than Serbs and Bosniacs, again Thracian roots.

It is possible that some Serbian tribes from Montenegro probably were carriers of E1b1b. And Serbs and Greeks have long common history and interference. And Serbs and Romanians too. Etc.

And you can notice we are talking about movements carriers of haplogroups, all today's nations are a product of modern time.

----------


## Luan

> I don't think so. One part of Thracians are Serbs, and you can see in this forum, assumption is that Thracians were carriers of E1b1b. It is same with Bosniacs, they have about 14% E1b1b. Bulgarians have more than Serbs and Bosniacs, again Thracian roots.
> 
> It is possible that some Serbian tribes from Montenegro probably were carriers of E1b1b. And Serbs and Greeks have long common history and interference. And Serbs and Romanians too. Etc.
> 
> And you can notice we are talking about movements carriers of haplogroups, all today's nations are a product of modern time.


Its only assumption that E1b1b were carriers by thracians,but does not change the fact that bosnian serb cluster more with Gheg Albanians, greeks then do with the majority serbs who have I2a. I dont know if that bothers you.

----------


## Ike

It depends where the samples were gathered. If they were gathered in eastern BiH, the percentage of E3b1 would be higher that that for western Bosnia, and I don't think that has anything to do with their ethnicity.

Thracians and Illyrians are assumed to be R1a, I2 at this moment.

----------


## Garrick

> Its only assumption that E1b1 were carriers by thracians,but does not change the fact that bosnian serb cluster more with Gheg Albanians, greeks then do with the majority serbs who have I2a. I dont know if that bothers you.


Why bother me? I don't understand. The aim is to find out what were the movements bearers of different haplogroups in the past, when there was no nations in today's terms, nor state borders. And yes, the assumptions are that Thracians were carriers of E1b1b, you can see that Maciamo write that Thracians and Illyrians were carriers of I2a1b (I2a2 older nomenclature) and R1a.

----------


## Garrick

> It depends where the samples were gathered. If they were gathered in eastern BiH, the percentage of E3b1 would be higher that that for western Bosnia, and I don't think that has anything to do with their ethnicity.
> 
> Thracians and Illyrians are assumed to be R1a, I2 at this moment.


Yes, eastern BiH have more E1b1b (more relatively to other parts not absolutely) and northern BiH have more R1a and Herzegovina have more I2a2. And carriers of haplogroups in past had nothing to do with today's ethnicity.

It is interesting, earlier opinion was that the Trachians were more E1b1b, today a lot of people think that Thracians were mix I2a2 and R1a. Maybe, Thracians were mix all of three haplogroups, and it is possible that some Thracian regions were more E1b1b and other more I2a2 and R1a. Thracians were big group of tribes and probably they had different haplogroups.

----------


## adamo

The thracians where I2a tribesmen; as where the Dacians

----------


## Garrick

> The thracians where I2a tribesmen; as where the Dacians


There are different opinions. Bird (2007) writes in Journal of Genetic Genealogy that the highest frequency E1b1b (E-V13) worldwide were at Thracians and Dacians.

----------


## Luan

> The thracians where I2a tribesmen; as where the Dacians


I don't think majority wise.

----------


## Sile

> The thracians where I2a tribesmen; as where the Dacians


yes for what you say about Dacians, but thracians are I2c , as per southern thracia and anatolian thracians( bithynia), its also found in kurds and armenians.
Its even in britain brought by thracian roman legionaires
Armenian/kurd I2 individuals are mostly I2c (P215+ L596+ L597+ P37.2- P217- L416-)

----------


## Sile

> Yes, eastern BiH have more E1b1b (more relatively to other parts not absolutely) and northern BiH have more R1a and Herzegovina have more I2a2. And carriers of haplogroups in past had nothing to do with today's ethnicity.
> 
> It is interesting, earlier opinion was that the Trachians were more E1b1b, today a lot of people think that Thracians were mix I2a2 and R1a. Maybe, Thracians were mix all of three haplogroups, and it is possible that some Thracian regions were more E1b1b and other more I2a2 and R1a. Thracians were big group of tribes and probably they had different haplogroups.


IIRC E1b1b1 is from North-west africa ( berber)

----------


## Sile

the only "illyrian" I marker that I know about is from pannonia area and its
Haplo I2a1b3 (M423+ L621+), found basically from masovia to pannonia and the eastern alps, and is also in the british isles. 
I would like to know if its found in some southern "illyrian" tribes

*The name of Illyrians as applied by the ancient Greeks to their northern neighbours may have referred to a broad, ill-defined group of peoples, and it is today unclear to what extent they were linguistically and culturally homogeneous. The Illyrian tribes never collectively regarded themselves as 'Illyrians', and it is unlikely that they utilized any collective nomenclature for themselves.[7] The term Illyrioi may originally have designated only a single people who came to be widely known to the Greeks due to proximity.[18]*

due to modern terms for illyrians as per above, the southern illyrian I am referring to are the dalmatians

----------


## Garrick

> IIRC E1b1b1 is from North-west africa ( berber)


Yes you're right, I should write E1b1b1a1b but it is long, and illegible. E1b1b is not mistaken, because it is origin (M-215), and a lot of people write so. Of course it is more accurate to write long or E-V13, you can see that I sometimes write E-V13 parenthetical.

----------


## Kotroman

Thank you Maciamo for writing down the numbers of percentage of Bosnian ethnic groups, but why isn't Bosniaks seperately written? Also, Herzegovinian is an geographic and not ethnic term (just like Siberians, etc), all ethnic groups, such as Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks, Roma, etc. are Herzegovinians. I think that you should write the haplogroup percentage of the Bosniak population seperately from Herzegovinians, just such as you did With Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats.

----------


## Maciamo

> Thank you Maciamo for writing down the numbers of percentage of Bosnian ethnic groups, but why isn't Bosniaks seperately written? Also, Herzegovinian is an geographic and not ethnic term (just like Siberians, etc), all ethnic groups, such as Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks, Roma, etc. are Herzegovinians. I think that you should write the haplogroup percentage of the Bosniak population seperately from Herzegovinians, just such as you did With Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats.


Pericic et al. 2005 had separate data for Bosniaks and Herzegovinians, but since they didn't mention what ethnic group was included in Herzegovinians I put it together with the data for Bosniaks.

----------


## Marko94

> Changed name of ethnic group? What? When?


I wanted to say "why bosnian musliman are called bosniak and not bosnian? Why change name?".

----------


## Ike

Because the definition of nationality gives them that right. As a group of people that speak the same language, that's been together through some sort of political and cultural development, and that is aware of their own distinctions in contrast to neighbouring nationalities, they have the right to declare a different national identity.

Bosniak national identity was formed in last century or so, and is mainly based on their cultural differences that rely on their religious beliefs. Before 1922. Turkish population was a ruling caste in Bosnia and it populated only cities, so when the fallout occurred they quickly migrated to modern Turkey. The peasants, highlanders and poor people in the cities, all muslim and mainly uneducated (as all in Bosnia at that time) were left in the new country (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) confused. They had problems integrating in new, industrial society and European culture, and in lack of better term were refered as Turks for a long time, although they probably knew they are not real Turks.

During the last Balkan war (1991.) they rightfully fulfilled that void and chosen the Bosniak national identity. It's pretty much logical, but somewhat confusing, especially when we have country called Bosnia and Bosnian people.

As for their ethnicity, they don't say what they are, but DNA analysis will reveal that eventually.

----------


## Templar

> Bosniak national identity was formed in last century or so, and is mainly based on their cultural differences that rely on their religious beliefs.


That is false, it dates back to the medieval Kingdom of Bosnia. Read the book "Bosnia: a Short History" by Noel Malcolm, and read the writings of friar * Antun Knežević.

*


> As for their ethnicity, they don't say what they are, but DNA analysis will reveal that eventually.


*


*It is already known what we are, we are more European than both Serbs and Croats. Serbs have more neolithic Near-Eastern ancestry, Croats have more Bronze Age Indo-European ancestry from Central Asia.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/europe...logroups.shtml

----------


## Ike

1. There were no national states nor national identity in medieval Europe.
2. I stopped reading the book when he connected Serbs and Croats with Iran. Those theories belong to the 20th century :)

3. You have statistics for administrative zones of Serbia, BiH, Croatia and Montenego. You can't get conclusions from there. You can't claim Bosnikas highest with I2 just because BiH has high I2. Bosnikas are not majority in BiH.

----------


## LeBrok

> I wanted to say "why bosnian musliman are called bosniak and not bosnian? Why change name?".


I thought they both mean the same. One is in slavic the other in english, right?

----------


## LeBrok

> 1. There were no national states nor national identity in medieval Europe.


There were but different. Take a medieval map and you will see the states/kingdoms/principalities. Most of them correlated well with language and distinct culture and religion. 
Some of course did not, but so are exclusions in today's world like Russia (it is federation), Yugoslavia, China, etc.
The biggest disparities between countries and nationalities were during imperial era before WWI. That's why new, after the war, national state europe was so contrasting to europe before the war. Situation was similar in dark ages or medieval period, when europe was filled with many new national identities/countries, after collapse of Roman Empire.

----------


## Templar

> 1. There were no national states nor national identity in medieval Europe.


That is true to a degree but not fully. There were vague notions of identity, although they weren't nearly as strong as nowadays. 




> 2. I stopped reading the book when he connected Serbs and Croats with Iran. Those theories belong to the 20th century :)


Don't give up on it! I think he might have been mentioning a popular 19th century theory, and not endorsing the theory himself. 




> 3. You have statistics for administrative zones of Serbia, BiH, Croatia and Montenego. You can't get conclusions from there. You can't claim Bosnikas highest with I2 just because BiH has high I2. Bosnikas are not majority in BiH.


Bosniaks were almost a majority during the last census, and by now we are almost certainly a majority. Just compare the population growth rate in Federation with RS's.

But anyways, we shouldn't be hostile. Judging by your "country pic" you are pro socialism and Yugoslavia, yes? I am fine with Yugoslavia, and if one solid ethnic identity had been formed by blending together all of the different groups within it, it would have formed an extremely strong and united country. But that did not happen and instead, certain groups went fascist and genocidal on the other groups. The only proper response is to strengthen your own national identity, until the danger is over.

----------


## Marko94

> But anyways, we shouldn't be hostile. Judging by your "country pic" you are pro socialism and Yugoslavia, yes? I am fine with Yugoslavia, and if one solid ethnic identity had been formed by blending together all of the different groups within it, it would have formed an extremely strong and united country. But that did not happen and instead, certain groups went fascist and genocidal on the other groups. The only proper response is to strengthen your own national identity, until the danger is over.


U can't make again Yugoslavia.
Why you are at odds with each of you.
Just because you are of the same ethnicity (Slavic) does not mean that you have to be in one state.
If it were so then Ireland, Scotland, France, north Italy should unite and form a new state called "celtic".

----------


## Templar

> U can't make again Yugoslavia.
> Why you are at odds with each of you.
> Just because you are of the same ethnicity (Slavic) does not mean that you have to be in one state.
> If it were so then Ireland, Scotland, France, north Italy should unite and form a new state called "celtic".


I never said that. I was just describing a hypothetical scenario where all the former Yugoslav people mixed and assimilated each other into one big group. I have no idea how you got out of what I wrote that I wanted Yugoslavia to return. What Yugoslavia was and what the hypothetical new country would be, are completely different.

----------


## Garrick

> I wanted to say "why bosnian musliman are called bosniak and not bosnian? Why change name?".





> I thought they both mean the same. One is in slavic the other in english, right?


No, I explained but maybe should detailed.

Terms Bosnians and Bosniacs (I think it is more correct than Bosniaks) are different.

Bosnians are inhabitants of Bosnia and Herzegovina, therefore Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats who live in Bosnia and Herzegovina all are Bosnians. It is similar as Belgians are inhabitants of Belgium.

Bosnia and Herzegovina consists of the Republic of Serbian and the BH federation (plus district of Brchko). Republic of Serbian and BH federation are two political entitiets. It iis similar as Belgium which consists of the Flemish region (Flanders), the Walloon region (Walloonia) and the city of Brussels.

In Republic of Serbian live mostly Serbs, in BH federation live mostly Bosniacs and Croats. It is similar as in Flemish region live mostly Flemish people, in Walloon region live mostly Walloon people and Germans.

The term Bosniacs refers to the Bosniac ethnicity, and Bosniacs live not only in Bosnia and Herzegovina but also in Croatia, Slovenia, Serbia, Montenegro, etc. Terms Bosnian Muslims or Muslims (with capital letter M) are not adequate because Bosniacs don't want to use this term. Muslims are believers, islam is one of the world's religions. Bosniacs are an ethnic group, they are Muslims by faith but there are Bosniacs who are atheists.

----------


## Yaan

> That is false, it dates back to the medieval Kingdom of Bosnia. Read the book "Bosnia: a Short History" by Noel Malcolm, and read the writings of friar * Antun Knežević.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *It is already known what we are, we are more European than both Serbs and Croats. Serbs have more neolithic Near-Eastern ancestry, Croats have more Bronze Age Indo-European ancestry from Central Asia.
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/europe/europe...logroups.shtml


No u are not more European then Serbs and Croats, not even close. All three are European. As for what u call neolithic is is older then what u falsely believe to be " more European" . If we follow ur " Internet nationalists" logic the most European are the Croats, because of the higher I2a, but it does not work like this. 
First in the Balkan u have I2a, then come E-V13,J2b2,some T and R1b-HT35 in the end come R1a and other R1b. The fact that u r I2a means nothing maybe all man in tjhe family of ur Mom and all other man in the family of ur Dad are E-V13 and J1 and N1c, u can not trace all ur lines, not even close. I am astonished of Albanians and Yugoslavs that try wrongly to claim history and genes and more European. The difference between u and Croats and Serbs is that ur ancestors changed their religion. They did it for different reasons:
1. They were a sect called Bogomil and they were being tortured by Catholics and Orthodox people because in the Middle Ages, sect was seen as worse then not believing or being Muslim, so they though instead of being also tortured by Muslim we can become one and have dominant position 
2. They change their religion for economical reasons and so their children and not being stolen for sex slaves in harems and enichars 
3. They did it because the Muslims said either u become Muslim or u be tortured and killed 
All of the above things happened in the Balkan in the case of Bosnian the 1 is the biggest reason. Before u become Muslims u were almost identical to Orthodox Serbs and Catholic Croats. 
I find it annoying and disturbing and propaganda to say Bosnians are more European then Croats and Serbs. 
In cultural sense u are less European, because u r Muslims and connected with Turks and Arabs 
Qua look u are more or less the same dark haired Dinaric people with tanned European white skin, often blue eyes really tall. 
Qua genes u r more or less the same, differences are negligible. 
Also there is no good sample on Bosnians or Serbs, only on Croats. 
And for the last time E-V13 is older then all genes in the Balkan except I2a. Regarding R1b-HT-35 and J2b2 and most of G2a maybe it is more or less the same age. 
It is nice that u r interested in genetics but u should understand it and make good tests. What test have u made? 23andme is the best, regarding being I2a, let me give u an possible example a I2a Austrians(it exist in them) in 1601 married a Chinese woman and their child marries an English women and the child a Japanese woman and the child an Arab girl and the child a Bulgarian girl and the child a Swedish girl and the child a Mexican girl etc.etc, the direct male line is I2a, but for the rest the picture is totally different. 
I hope we can talk genetics and not propaganda of nationalists from the West Balkans

----------


## Marko94

> No, I explained but maybe should detailed.
> 
> Terms Bosnians and Bosniacs (I think it is more correct than Bosniaks) are different.
> 
> Bosnians are inhabitants of Bosnia and Herzegovina, therefore Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats who live in Bosnia and Herzegovina all are Bosnians. It is similar as Belgians are inhabitants of Belgium.
> 
> Bosnia and Herzegovina consists of the Republic of Serbian and the BH federation (plus district of Brchko). Republic of Serbian and BH federation are two political entitiets. It iis similar as Belgium which consists of the Flemish region (Flanders), the Walloon region (Walloonia) and the city of Brussels.
> 
> In Republic of Serbian live mostly Serbs, in BH federation live mostly Bosniacs and Croats. It is similar as in Flemish region live mostly Flemish people, in Walloon region live mostly Walloon people and Germans.
> ...


Ok but why called bosniaks and not bosnian??
I have friends serb and he explained to me: "bosnian are bosnian christians and Bosniaks are bosnian musliman".
I know this about bosnian.
I think is no sense "invented" the term for united all ethnic group.
Because french are inhabitants of france, we italian are inhabitants of italy and in bosnia and herzegovina who are the rlly inhabitants?? Bosniaks?Croats?Serbs?

----------


## Templar

> If we follow ur " Internet nationalists" logic the most European are the Croats, because of the higher I2a


Croatians overall have lower I2a. Croatians in Bosnia are Bosnians who changed their national identity during the 19th century. Read what the Catholic friar *Antun Knežević* said about the process of Croatization and Serbianization in Bosnia due to nationalist movements in surrounding countries. Btw what I wrote about us being more European was a bit crude I admit, but it was warranted due to the things that the person I was responding to had suggested. He wrote: "As for their ethnicity, they don't say what they are, but DNA analysis will reveal that eventually." That implies lots of false and offensive things.




> What test have u made? 23andme is the best, regarding being I2a, let me give u an possible example a I2a Austrians(it exist in them) in 1601 married a Chinese woman and their child marries an English women and the child a Japanese woman and the child an Arab girl and the child a Bulgarian girl and the child a Swedish girl and the child a Mexican girl etc.etc, the direct male line is I2a, but for the rest the picture is totally different. 
> I hope we can talk genetics and not propaganda of nationalists from the West Balkans


Patrilineal descent is everything in patriarchal societies. The only true heirs to a throne are the male sons, likewise the only true descendants of an ancient people are those descendant from them from their male side.




> Before u become Muslims u were almost identical to Orthodox Serbs and Catholic


We NEVER considered ourselves Serb or Croat, that is the propaganda my friend. All the old Bosnjanin/Bosnian/Bosniak documents refer to us as the "dobri Bosnjani" or the good Bosnians.

----------


## Templar

> Ok but why called bosniaks and not bosnian??
> I have friends serb and he explained to me: "bosnian are bosnian christians and Bosniaks are bosnian musliman".
> I know this about bosnian.


Well, in modern-day Bosnia: Bosnian refers to citizenship, Bosniak refers to ethnicity. Pretty simple.

----------


## Ike

> There were but different. Take a medieval map and you will see the states/kingdoms/principalities. Most of them correlated well with language and distinct culture and religion.


 I agree with that. I just like to regard it as ethnic identity. You can read my BiH theory just below.





> That is true to a degree but not fully. There were vague notions of identity, although they weren't nearly as strong as nowadays.


It's obvous that most of contemporary Croatian or Serbian national identity is derived from medieval Kingdoms. Even more, crucial cultural aspects of that identity are even older, probably from tribal times. Disregarding religion, all of the three nationalities share that very similar cultural background. Problem occurred in the way they were "depaganized". Christianization was almost process of amalgamation, through which Serbs, Croats and Bosnians kept their ethnic identity very well. On the other hand, Islamization was enforced by the invaders and was a cultural shock that resulted in discontinuity between Bosnian and Bosniak cultural identity. 

Yes, I guess there was a strong ethnic awareness in medieval Bosnia that could have resulted in a real Bosnian national identity, only if Ottomans didn't invade us. But, from this position even Bosnian Serbs or Croats seem to me more related with it, than Bosniaks are.

I suppose there will be with different regional cultural theory, from you or other members of Eupedia.




> Don't give up on it! I think he might have been mentioning a popular 19th century theory, and not endorsing the theory himself.


I'll give it a try then.




> Bosniaks were almost a majority during the last census, and by now we are almost certainly a majority. Just compare the population growth rate in Federation with RS's.


 Ok, I'll believe you without checking, because I know that Muslims generally have higher birth rate at present. 

Anyway, what I was trying to say: For example, Dalmatia is an ancient territory, has been with Venice for centuries, has been a separate province in Austro-Hungarian empire, and a kingdom. If history was regarded in 1945. there could have easily been formed a republic of Dalmatia in Yugoslavia, and now it would have been a separate state. If we did DNA analysis in that country of Dalmatia they would show more I2b than anywhere else in Balkans. Than they would be able to say: "OK, you Bosnians are half-Dalmatians, but Serbs and Croats are just mongrels". And that all could have happened very easily. They had very strong historical and cultural arguments to defend that position.

So, it's of no point to discuss who is majority, but to find traces of original Bosnian ethnic identity, because without it they just fall under Serb or Croats. But watch for details:

DNA analysis confirm that modern Serbian or Croatian national identity is vague at best, and history suggests that it's been mostly defined with religious orientation. Where have you seen a Catholic Serb? Or Orthodox Bosniak? Even Serbian Muslims north of Kosovo started declaring themselves as Bosniaks. Would I be wrong to guess that they are not I2/R1 in majority, and that they would destroy your Y-DNA statistics once when they get included. Should I remind you that E-V13 have even higher birth rate habits than Bosnikas, and that in 50 years there may be more Bosniaks near Kosovo, than in todays Bosnia? So, everything suggests that Bosniak national identity is religion based as same.

Croatians and Serbs claim their national identities are based on Croats' and Serbs' ethnicity but we know it isn't so. In the end, it's of no difference if Bosniaks really succeed Bosnian identity because even if it was true, it would still be wrong(in it's merit), as it is wrong for other two nationalities.




> But anyways, we shouldn't be hostile. Judging by your "country pic" you are pro socialism and Yugoslavia, yes? I am fine with Yugoslavia, and if one solid ethnic identity had been formed by blending together all of the different groups within it, it would have formed an extremely strong and united country. But that did not happen and instead, certain groups went fascist and genocidal on the other groups. The only proper response is to strengthen your own national identity, until the danger is over.


That picture showed up automatically, I didn't put it there. Anyway, Yugoslavia is for sure my second choice, and I wouldn't have anything against living in country like that. It was just like EU is today, and there was no reason to for it to be destroyed.DNA analysis show Yugoslavians are strongly related. It's even ironic how that, so called, artificial country in the end showed up more logical that some had hoped for. If we hadn't accepted Middle Eastern Religions that divided us, we would have been a very strong pagan Yugoslavia by now.




> Well, in modern-day Bosnia: Bosnian refers to citizenship, Bosniak refers to ethnicity. Pretty simple.


You mean nationality. There is still no evidence of Bosnian/Bosniak ethnicity. Nowhere are they mentioned as a tribe.

----------


## Garrick

> That is false, it dates back to the medieval Kingdom of Bosnia. Read the book "Bosnia: a Short History" by Noel Malcolm, and read the writings of friar * Antun Knežević.
> 
> *It is already known what we are, we are more European than both Serbs and Croats. Serbs have more neolithic Near-Eastern ancestry, Croats have more Bronze Age Indo-European ancestry from Central Asia.
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/europe/europe...logroups.shtml


Let’s talk about the facts. Serbs are typical Balkan population. You can see MDS scaling in many scientific papers.

You can see difference between Bosniacs and Serbs in Serbia (for Bosnian Serbs is small sample).

I1 is twice higher in Serbia (Serbs 8,5, Bosniacs 4)
I2a is for 2/3 higher in Bosniacs (Serbs 33, Bosniacs 56)
R1a is same (Serbs 16%, Bosniacs 16%)
R1b is much higher in Serbs (Serbs 8%, Bosniacs 3%)
J2 is twice higher in Serbs (Serbs 8%, Bosniacs 3,5%)
E1b1b1a2 is higher in Serbs (Serbs 18%, Bosniacs 10%).

We can compare with any east European nation, for example Belarus, who is closer to them Bosniacs or Serbs.

Bosniacs have much more I2a and Belarus have much more R1a. But we can see the sum I2a+R1a, scientists often relate these two haplogroups.

Bosniacs have 72%, and Belarus have 68,5%.

But Serbs have less than 50%, accurate 49%. You can see for other Balkan nations, Romanians have 45,5%, Macedonians* (Noveski et al.) 41,7%, Montenegrins 37%, Bulgarians 37%, Tosk Albanians about 29%, Greeks 25%.

*Macedonians from former Yugoslav republic, not Aegean Macedonians in Greece

You can see for J2. Bosniacs have 3,5% and Belarus have 2,5%.

Serbs have 8%, Montenegrins 9%, Macedonians 10% (Noveski et al.), Bulgarians 11%, Romanians 13,5%, Tosk Albanians 23%, Greeks 23%.

You can see for R1b, E1b1b1a2 etc. Bosniacs and Belarus are much different compared to Serbs, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Tosk Albanians or Greeks.

And who are closer to east Europeans and who are closer to other Balkan peoples?

Conclusion is that Serbs are similar to other Balkan peoples and Bosnicas are closer to east European peoples.

But Bosniacs are closer to other Balkan peoples compared to Croats in mainland (Croatia). Also Bosniacs are closer other Balkan peoples compared to Geg Albanians.

Bosniacs are very specific for Balkans, they are untypical, due to the very high I2a and much lower R1b, E1b1b1a2, J2 etc. compared with other Balkan peoples.

----------


## Marko94

> I never said that. I was just describing a hypothetical scenario where all the former Yugoslav people mixed and assimilated each other into one big group. I have no idea how you got out of what I wrote that I wanted Yugoslavia to return. What Yugoslavia was and what the hypothetical new country would be, are completely different.


Just see your country as unstable.
In your country there are 3 different presidents.
If they would do so for all country of the world then there would be 10 presidents in Italy.
If Bosnia and Erzegovins is of the Bosniaks the Bosniaks amministrate Bosnia and Erzegovina and for reffer to people of Bosnia and Erzegovina we use the term "bosniaks".
Croats and Serb are just emigrants.

----------


## Ike

@Garrick

Yes, but that is not a Bosnian, Serbian, Croatian nor Albanian trait. It is much older than any national, ethnic or tribal identity, so it's a waste of time to make connections at this moment. What is more important, the percentage of Hg indicates just survival rate in certain area, and it's diversity is more indicative of it's origin.

@Marko94 :facepalm:

----------


## Garrick

> Ok but why called bosniaks and not bosnian??
> I have friends serb and he explained to me: "bosnian are bosnian christians and Bosniaks are bosnian musliman".
> I know this about bosnian.
> I think is no sense "invented" the term for united all ethnic group.
> Because french are inhabitants of france, we italian are inhabitants of italy and in bosnia and herzegovina who are the rlly inhabitants?? Bosniaks?Croats?Serbs?


I explained. Inhabitants of Bosnia and Herzegovina are Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats as Flemish people and Walloon people are inhabitants of Belgium. Serbs live mostly in Republic of Serbian, and Bosniacs and Croats live mostly in BH federation. Republic of Serbian and BH federation are two entities of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

In Bosnia Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats are Bosnians. I think that Bosnia is mostly Christian land because there are more Serbs and Croats than Bosniacs. If census shows that Serbs and Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina (both Republic of Serbian and BH federation) in sum are more than Bosniacs, this would mean that Bosnians are more Christians than Muslims. But we will see new census, for Bosnia and Herzegovina is problem that census of population has not been a long.

I think this is clear enough for someone to understand difference in terms Bosniacs and Bosnians.




> Just see your country as unstable.
> If Bosnia and Erzegovins is of the Bosniaks the Bosniaks amministrate Bosnia and Erzegovina and for reffer to people of Bosnia and Erzegovina we use the term "bosniaks".
> Croats and Serb are just emigrants.


Bosnia and Herzegovina is complex country as Belgium. Who can say that Flemish people are emigrants and whole Belgium is Walloon, or Walloon people are emigrants and whole Belgium is Flemish. In Bosnia Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats are Bosnians as in Belgium Flemish people and Walloon people are Belgians.

I do not see what there is not clear. In the world there are countries that are complex and consist of multiple entities and peoples.

----------


## Marko94

> I explained. Inhabitants of Bosnia and Herzegovina are Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats as Flemish people and Walloon people are inhabitants of Belgium. Serbs live mostly in Republic of Serbian, and Bosniacs and Croats live mostly in BH federation. Republic of Serbian and BH federation are two entities of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
> 
> In Bosnia Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats are Bosnians. I think that Bosnia is mostly Christian land because there are more Serbs and Croats than Bosniacs. If census shows that Serbs and Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina (both Republic of Serbian and BH federation) in sum are more than Bosniacs, this would mean that Bosnians are more Christians than Muslims. But we will new census, for Bosnia and Herzegovina is problem that census of population has not been a long.
> 
> I think this is clear enough for someone to understand difference in terms Bosniacs and Bosnians.


I have understand, but is no senso (for me) that in a country other ethnicities rule while. 
Then it is better that the Croats are joined to Croatia, Serbia to the Serbs, and Bosniaks that they form their own state.
For the religion, all European lands are christian.
Serbs in the north of Albania there are Catholics.
I wonder how can they are Catholic.

And then i would like to ask a question.
But the Albanians of the north albania are slavs??

----------


## Templar

> Conclusion is that Serbs are similar to other Balkan peoples and Bosnicas are closer to east European peoples.


The primary haplogroup in Eastern European is OVERWHELMINGLY R1a. You cannot ignore that by lumping I2 with r1a as part of the "East European" package. The ratio of I2a to R1a is completely different in Bosnia than it is in, for example Poland. Poland only has 5.5% I2 and 57.5% r1a, compared to Bosnia's 50% I2 and 13.5% R1a, the difference is astoundingly huge. The ratio is almost the reverse.

----------


## Templar

> You mean nationality. There is still no evidence of Bosnian/Bosniak ethnicity. Nowhere are they mentioned as a tribe.


You don't necessarily have to be mentioned as a tribe in order to be an ethnicity. There are many mentions of medieval Bosnians in various old texts. They were often referred to as "dobri Bosnjani".

----------


## Garrick

> I have understand, but is no senso (for me) that in a country other ethnicities rule while. 
> Then it is better that the Croats are joined to Croatia, Serbia to the Serbs, and Bosniaks that they form their own state.
> For the religion, all European lands are christian.
> Serbs in the north of Albania there are Catholics.
> I wonder how can they are Catholic.
> 
> And then i would like to ask a question.
> But the Albanians of the north albanian are slavs??


Why not. There are Serbs who are Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, Muslims, etc. Previously there were many Catholic Serbs. Today most Serbs are Orthodox, followed by Protestants. Tens of thousands of Serbs are Muslim (I think mainly in the capital). In Serbia there are a lot of atheists mostly the older generations. Most of them are Communists who remained in their belief. No Communists among the young.

I know that in Albania lived Serbs but today most of them were assimilated, especially in times of Enver Hoxha. But it is interesting some people from Albania who say that are Serbs of all faiths Orthodox, Catholic, Muslim, want to come to live in Serbia. I don't know whether they are of Serbian origin, or no, maybe you're right.

----------


## Ike

> You don't necessarily have to be mentioned as a tribe in order to be an ethnicity. There are many mentions of medieval Bosnians in various old texts. They were often referred to as "dobri Bosnjani".


I know, but we have to be certain that ethnicity was mentioned before geographical allocation.
There are mentions of Illyrian river Bosona, after which region may have been called Bosnia, and inhabitants Bosnians.

The only other case that I know in Slavic population, where major river name corresponds with the name of the tribe, are Moravians in Czech/Poland. But there are no river Serbia or Croatia or Slovakia, etc...


One explanation could indeed be that Bosnians did not come to Balkans in most recent migration of 6th century, a theory which some Bosniak historians support. If that was the case, there may have been a small tribe around river Bosnia for centuries before, and since it was bound to a very small region by the river, tribe identified itself with it, just as local Serbian inhabtants of Pomoravlje around Morava river, are called Moravci. 

But that's still a long shot, and historians here are used far more for political purposes than for truth. Further DNA analysis can point us if that's the right direction to search.

----------


## Garrick

> The primary haplogroup in Eastern European is OVERWHELMINGLY R1a. You cannot ignore that by lumping I2 with r1a as part of the "East European" package. The ratio of I2a to R1a is completely different in Bosnia than it is in, for example Poland. Poland only has 5.5% I2 and 57.5% r1a, compared to Bosnia's 50% I2 and 13.5% R1a, the difference is astoundingly huge. The ratio is almost the reverse.


Ok, but due to the high I2a and small R1b, E1b1b1a2, J2 etc., Bosniacs are very specific and atypical Balkan peoples compared to Serbs, Romanians, Macedonians, Montenegrins, Bulgarians, Tosk Albanians and Greeks, who share more common Balkan haplogroups.

You wrote that Serbs have more near eastern ancestry but it is not true. Serbs are typical Balkan people and Bosniacs are atypical, if you really looked in detail Bosniacs are closer east Europeans than Serbs. I can still think about Bosniacs as Balkan peoples (but again atypical) because Bosniacs are closer to other Balkan people than Croats in Croatia and Geg Albanians.

----------


## Garrick

> No u are not more European then Serbs and Croats, not even close. All three are European. As for what u call neolithic is is older then what u falsely believe to be " more European" . If we follow ur " Internet nationalists" logic the most European are the Croats, because of the higher I2a, but it does not work like this. 
> First in the Balkan u have I2a, then come E-V13,J2b2,some T and R1b-HT35 in the end come R1a and other R1b. The fact that u r I2a means nothing maybe all man in tjhe family of ur Mom and all other man in the family of ur Dad are E-V13 and J1 and N1c, u can not trace all ur lines, not even close. I am astonished of Albanians and Yugoslavs that try wrongly to claim history and genes and more European. The difference between u and Croats and Serbs is that ur ancestors changed their religion. They did it for different reasons:
> 1. They were a sect called Bogomil and they were being tortured by Catholics and Orthodox people because in the Middle Ages, sect was seen as worse then not believing or being Muslim, so they though instead of being also tortured by Muslim we can become one and have dominant position 
> 2. They change their religion for economical reasons and so their children and not being stolen for sex slaves in harems and enichars 
> 3. They did it because the Muslims said either u become Muslim or u be tortured and killed 
> All of the above things happened in the Balkan in the case of Bosnian the 1 is the biggest reason. Before u become Muslims u were almost identical to Orthodox Serbs and Catholic Croats. 
> I find it annoying and disturbing and propaganda to say Bosnians are more European then Croats and Serbs. 
> In cultural sense u are less European, because u r Muslims and connected with Turks and Arabs 
> Qua look u are more or less the same dark haired Dinaric people with tanned European white skin, often blue eyes really tall. 
> ...


Yes, and I think that science and scientific papers about Y-DNA, mtDNA etc. neutralized propaganda. For example in the Balkans, it turned out that Balkan nations are much closer than the nationalists thought. And it is nice knowing because people need to cooperate with each other and not to dispute.

----------


## Ike

> . 
> And for the last time E-V13 is older then all genes in the Balkan except I2a.


 :Confused: 

1. We still don't know when E-V13 entered Balkans. There are suggestions that is 8000 years old, and that it may have origin in Levant, Anatolia or Balkans. Nothing more so far.

2. We still don't know when I2 entered Balkans. Maciamo just said:

"_I used to think that I2a1b in the Dinaric Alps were the remnants of the original hunter-gatherers and that only the I2a1b outside the Dinaric Alps and Balkans were integrated to the Corded Ware culture and became Proto-Slavs, then Slavs. However there is so little difference between the Dinaric and other Eastern European I2a1b, all belonging to the same deep subclade (L621>CTS4002>...>L147.2) that they must all descend from a fairly recent ancestor and have expanded no earlier than 3000 to 1500 BCE_."

So no conclusive answer there.

3. We still don't know when R1a entered Balkans. There are works that push it up all the way back to 8000 BC. No certainty.

----------


## Templar

> You wrote that Serbs have more near eastern ancestry but it is not true. Serbs are typical Balkan people and Bosniacs are atypical, if you really looked in detail Bosniacs are closer east Europeans than Serbs..


Typical Balkan people have high Near Eastern ancestry. Like the Greeks and Bulgarians. Southern Europe is largely inhabited by people who migrated there from Anatolia and brought with them farming technology. You just have to look at haplogroup data for Balkan countries (and Southern Europe in general) to see what I mean. I am not saying that is a bad thing though.

----------


## Templar

> I know, but we have to be certain that ethnicity was mentioned before geographical allocation.
> There are mentions of Illyrian river Bosona, after which region may have been called Bosnia, and inhabitants Bosnians.
> 
> The only other case that I know in Slavic population, where major river name corresponds with the name of the tribe, are Moravians in Czech/Poland. But there are no river Serbia or Croatia or Slovakia, etc...
> 
> 
> One explanation could indeed be that Bosnians did not come to Balkans in most recent migration of 6th century, a theory which some Bosniak historians support. If that was the case, there may have been a small tribe around river Bosnia for centuries before, and since it was bound to a very small region by the river, tribe identified itself with it, just as local Serbian inhabtants of Pomoravlje around Morava river, are called Moravci. 
> .


Keep in mind that Croats and Serbs weren't the only Slavic tribes to inhabit the Western Balkans. Before their arrival, there were several smaller tribes who arrived alongside the Avars. A local Slav-Illyrian culture could have developed deep in the mountainous parts of Bosnia. Now you might then ask how come Serbo-Croatian was spoken in Bosnia then, well it could be due to cultural diffusion due to close proximity.

----------


## Ike

> Typical Balkan people have high Near Eastern ancestry. Like the Greeks and Bulgarians. Southern Europe is largely inhabited by people who migrated there from Anatolia and brought with them farming technology. You just have to look at haplogroup data for Balkan countries (and Southern Europe in general) to see what I mean. I am not saying that is a bad thing though.


You two have to define what moment in time are you talking about. Percentages change with every war. What do you consider typical? Is present time typical?





> Keep in mind that Croats and Serbs weren't the only Slavic tribes to inhabit the Western Balkans. Before their arrival, there were several smaller tribes who arrived alongside the Avars. A local Slav-Illyrian culture could have developed deep in the mountainous parts of Bosnia. Now you might then ask how come Serbo-Croatian was spoken in Bosnia then, well it could be due to cultural diffusion due to close proximity.


I'm aware of that. For there are at least three major Slavic waves into Balkans identified. And there may have been more smaller ones. And those may have been backwaves, which would only complicate situation :)

It's doesn't matter what is the name of the language, but what confuses me is, if they spoke Old Slavic, how had it evolved into almost the same language (BHS) today on three different locations/kingdoms/religions/nations over 1000 years period? It seems to me almost impossible. Does that indicate that some sort of language evolution had already happened in Balkan Slavs, before last wave of Croats and Serbs came to Balkan in 520 AD, so that they have quickly adopted? There is low possibility that Balkans are the source point, and that language evolved towards North-East.

----------


## Garrick

> Typical Balkan people have high Near Eastern ancestry. Like the Greeks and Bulgarians. Southern Europe is largely inhabited by people who migrated there from Anatolia and brought with them farming technology. You just have to look at haplogroup data for Balkan countries (and Southern Europe in general) to see what I mean. I am not saying that is a bad thing though.


We speak about local nuances. Balkan peoples are more similar than nationalists think. And Bosniacs. They have I2a more than others, and other haplogroups less than others, probably because Bosnia is a little more isolated from other areas, but Bosniacs are clearly Balkan population. Croats and Slovenes have more R1a and it is logical. But between Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats differences are not big. Serbs and Romanians are very similar, and it is logical. We are all connected. It is logical that the Serbs close to everyone as Serbia is in the center of the Balkans. And former Yugoslav peoples are very close. According to haplogroups Serbs and Bosniacs (and not only they) are brothers. Differences between Yugoslav peoples are not Y-DNA, all share similar chromosomes, not even geographical, differences are cultural, and we are all little guilty in former country because we did not know how to manage the cultural diversity. 

But what was surprise for me when I studied results haplogroups? Geg Albanians are most different from the rest of the Balkan population. Maybe that population was the most isolated. Or some another, or third reason. You can see, Geg Albanians almost do not even have I2a. By this Geg Albanians are diametrically opposed Bosniacs. Geg Albanians have R1a, I1 and another haplogroups similarly to others, they have the peak of E1b1b1a2 (40-50%) and this makes them quite different from the Balkan nations, but absence I2a is mistery. I have no explanation.

----------


## Marko94

> Why not. There are Serbs who are Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, Muslims, etc. Previously there were many Catholic Serbs. Today most Serbs are Orthodox, followed by Protestants. Tens of thousands of Serbs are Muslim (I think mainly in the capital). In Serbia there are a lot of atheists mostly the older generations. Most of them are Communists who remained in their belief. No Communists among the young.
> 
> I know that in Albania lived Serbs but today most of them were assimilated, especially in times of Enver Hoxha. But it is interesting some people from Albania who say that are Serbs of all faiths Orthodox, Catholic, Muslim, want to come to live in Serbia. I don't know whether they are of Serbian origin, or no, maybe you're right.


Don't is problem why not, but why in albania are catholic?
I think who are really albanian don't like go in Serbia or another country slavs, and if albanian wanted to find work, he go in germany, greece or italy.
More albanian don't like slavs (and all know that).

----------


## FBS

> Don't is problem why not, but why in albania are catholic?
> I think who are really albanian don't like go in Serbia or another country slavs, and if albanian wanted to find work, he go in germany, greece or italy.
> More albanian don't like slavs (and all know that).


Your English is very broken. 

Regarding Albanians and their (our) identity: In contrast to other ethnicities in the Balkans, Albanian ethnicity is not dependent on the religious pertinence. The majority of Albanians nowadays are Muslim, but there are Christian Orthodox and Catholics (traditionally) and we have many different Christian sects planting their "seeds" lately. My family was Christian Orthodox but we did not become something else when we converted, we were Albanians who decided to change the religion (even though have heavy Crypto-Christian behavior apart from the atheists).

So to sum it up, one can be Albanian no matter the religious adherence as long as you speak Albanian, feel Albanian and adhere to the Albanian customs and cuisine  :Satisfied:  but you need to prove that you are Albanian by descent  :Thinking:  not legally of course; a bit like Scottish, you should know which clan (principality) you were part of. 

Because of this Albanians are very prone to assimilation since there is no strong religious tie among them (us) as in other ethnicities around.

----------


## Garrick

> Don't is problem why not, but why in albania are catholic?
> I think who are really albanian don't like go in Serbia or another country slavs, and if albanian wanted to find work, he go in germany, greece or italy.
> More albanian don't like slavs (and all know that).


I said that earlier were much more Serbian Catholics, especially in Adriatic region, for example:

Serbs Catholics in Dubrovnik between two world wars

http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/Article.a...2-57320824109N

But someone in this forum said that national division in Balkans is by religion. Practically today almost all Balkans south Slavic Catholics are Croats, south Slavic Muslims are Bosniacs and there are several south Slavic nations who are mostly Orthodox .

There are Serbian Catholics and today but less than Serbian Protestants. Most Serbs are Orthodox.

I don't know why in Albania there are Serbs Catholics. Throughout history in Balkans have been a lot of Serbs Catholics and maybe some of them live in Albania.

And for work in other countries, I don't see why Albanians do not go to Slavic countries. There are Albanians who work and live in Croatia and Slovenia. If these two and other Slavic countries have favorable labor conditions I see no reason why Albanians to avoid them. And Slavic people are people, there are good (and unfortunately bad) peoples in each population.

----------


## Marko94

> Your English is very broken. 
> 
> Regarding Albanians and their (our) identity: In contrast to other ethnicities in the Balkans, Albanian ethnicity is not dependent on the religious pertinence. The majority of Albanians nowadays are Muslim, but there are Christian Orthodox and Catholics (traditionally) and we have many different Christian sects planting their "seeds" lately. My family was Christian Orthodox but we did not become something else when we converted, we were Albanians who decided to change the religion (even though have heavy Crypto-Christian behavior apart from the atheists).
> 
> So to sum it up, one can be Albanian no matter the religious adherence as long as you speak Albanian, feel Albanian and adhere to the Albanian customs and cuisine  but you need to prove that you are Albanian by descent  not legally of course; a bit like Scottish, you should know which clan (principality) you were part of. 
> 
> Because of this Albanians are very prone to assimilation since there is no strong religious tie among them (us) as in other ethnicities around.


According to analysts and World Organizations of the true majority is Catholic.In Italy there are nearly 500.000 Albanians, and of these 96% are Catholic (according to the census 2012).
You have answer to my post because u think i speak for "catholic albanian", but i speak for "catholic serbs".

For english say thx to "governament italian". 



> I said that earlier were much more Serbian Catholics, especially in Adriatic region, for example:
> 
> Serbs Catholics in Dubrovnik between two world wars
> 
> http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/Article.a...2-57320824109N
> 
> But someone in this forum said that national division in Balkans is by religion. Practically today almost all Balkans south Slavic Catholics are Croats, south Slavic Muslims are Bosniacs and there are several south Slavic nations who are mostly Orthodox .
> 
> There are Serbian Catholics and today but less than Serbian Protestants. Most Serbs are Orthodox.
> ...


I don't say "But someone in this forum said that national division in Balkans is by religion.".
The religion is a "key point" in the Balkans.However, let's stop here.
We'll talk about in another post on the religions in the Balkans.

----------


## Sile

> According to analysts and World Organizations of the true majority is Catholic.In Italy there are nearly 500.000 Albanians, and of these 96% are Catholic (according to the census 2012).
> You have answer to my post because u think i speak for "catholic albanian", but i speak for "catholic serbs".
> 
> For english say thx to "governament italian". 
> 
> 
> I don't say "But someone in this forum said that national division in Balkans is by religion.".
> The religion is a "key point" in the Balkans.However, let's stop here.
> We'll talk about in another post on the religions in the Balkans.


The bulk of these 500,000 where Tosks and they initially declared themselves as Greeks due to the fact that at the time of immigration there was no agreement between albanians and Italians. Many albanians where sent back if caught crossing the adriatic

----------


## Garrick

> I don't say "But someone in this forum said that national division in Balkans is by religion.". The religion is a "key point" in the Balkans.However, let's stop here.
> We'll talk about in another post on the religions in the Balkans.


I didn't say that you said. But the someone who is claimed was right. And you're right. In the Balkans religion is key point of division. Otherwise you can see that the Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats in the Y-DNA haplogroups are similar, much closer than people from different regions of Italy. There are families who changed religion more times over the last several hundred years. And some family members are Orthodox, some are Muslims and some are Catholics. Today they are Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats, three nations but same origin and Y-DNA.

I agree with you about religion we can talk more on another topic, but and in this topic it can not be avoided. And thanks about Serbs Catholics in Albania, I supposed that they lived in this region but I thought that they are assimilated.

----------


## Garrick

> The primary haplogroup in Eastern European is OVERWHELMINGLY R1a. You cannot ignore that by lumping I2 with r1a as part of the "East European" package.


For I2a (M423) a lot of sources as region of origin notice Ukraine, not Balkans. For example:

http://ecbiz126.inmotionhosting.com/...haplogroupm423



According this author (Jack Danel), inhabitants of Lepen Whirl in Serbia (begining 9000 ago, peak about 7000 ago) were cariers of I2a.

Regueiro et al. (2012) claim that I2a in Serbs is about 9000 years ago. But Sparkley and I had debate about this estimate of authors. They based their claim on Zhivotovsky method, so it could be conflated by factor 3. If Sparkley is right today's I2a in Balkans (Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia etc.) is maximum about 3000 years old.

----------


## Marko94

> The bulk of these 500,000 where Tosks and they initially declared themselves as Greeks due to the fact that at the time of immigration there was no agreement between albanians and Italians. Many albanians where sent back if caught crossing the adriatic


No, who are greek domanded "asylum politic".
Albanian can't.
In the census explains only the number and religion.
The exact number is "482.627" of 2011 (i'm srry, i have wrong, don't is 2012).
About this they are 96% catholic.
In the censun don't have say if this are from north,center or south albania.





> I didn't say that you said. But the someone who is claimed was right. And you're right. In the Balkans religion is key point of division. Otherwise you can see that the Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats in the Y-DNA haplogroups are similar, much closer than people from different regions of Italy. There are families who changed religion more times over the last several hundred years. And some family members are Orthodox, some are Muslims and some are Catholics. Today they are Serbs, Bosniacs and Croats, three nations but same origin and Y-DNA.
> 
> I agree with you about religion we can talk more on another topic, but and in this topic it can not be avoided. And thanks about Serbs Catholics in Albania, I supposed that they lived in this region but I thought that they are assimilated.


That video can answer to you (i think u have see).


In internet u can find so many video like this subbed in italian.

----------


## Marko94

> By this Geg Albanians are diametrically opposed Bosniacs. Geg Albanians have R1a, I1 and another haplogroups similarly to others, they have the peak of E1b1b1a2 (40-50%) and this makes them quite different from the Balkan nations, but absence I2a is mistery. I have no explanation.


And for this i think because they in past are isolated.
In fact Arbaresh for study language albania go in Albania and Kosovo.
In Kosovo because language has less loans from other languages.

----------


## Jovan

Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats are actually the same people just separated culturally (different religion). They speak the same language, just have 3 different standard versions. The only difference is that the south Serbs are more similar to Macedonians and the dialects spoken there are similar to the Macedonian language and north Croats are similar to the Slovenes. It's sad how those people hate each other because of stupid things.

----------

