I2a-Din came to the Balkans and Dinaric Alps with the Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians

[LeBrok]

Obviously you're not reading the data that actually matters or your thought process is really flawed. A Germanic tribe spreading a ydna that's found far and wide among Slavs, follows their movements from Belarus to Greece, that arose only 2300 years, and doesn't exist among Germans to boot, makes sense to you? Sounds like wishful thinking to me.

I2a CTS10228 is what's being questioned here.

Wrong, you are the low-IQ poster here, not Leka. Your "theory" is not based on any fact, but pure fantasy and you keep changing it which makes you among the least credible posters.

I am 100% sure this fantasy has to do with your dubious ethnic background. Stop coping and off with you.

Stay civil.

 

[Fatherland]

Stay civil.

Read Nik's post above me. I didn't jump to the IQ discussion beforehand.

 

[LABERIA]

Tani.......

 

[Leka]

Judging by the speed that you jump into conclusions and insult people, your IQ must be way below average. You (and some others here) sound just like those poor souls that burned innocent beautiful women because "the data that actually mattered" proved them guilty of witchcraft.

Perhaps you and your fellow keyboard swingers can take a chill pill and understand first what it means to be a Slav. Slavs absorbed millions of Germanics, Balts, Scythians, Sarmatians, Dacians, Thracians, Illyrians, Romans, etc, so the CTS10228 guy could have belonged to any of such ethnic groups, got assimilated and marched throughout Eastern Europe joining the Slavic cause.

So until we get A LOT of data from ancient DNA and confirmation that such skeletons belonged specifically to early Slavs judging by their culture, traditions, ornaments found in the area, then we can talk about thought process. Until then everyone can freely exercise the right to freedom of thought.

Back to your IQ, didn't you read that I listed Dacians, Bastarnae, Carpi, Anartes, Taurisci, Osi, Cotini, and Britogalli? All of them besides Bastarnae escaped you? And you talk about wishful thinking.

I have no time for your nonsense. Topic is regarding CTS10228 and its distribution. If you want to discuss IQ's, mythology and fairy tales, open a topic and invite me.

 

[Nik]

I have no time for your nonsense. Topic is regarding CTS10228 and its distribution. If you want to discuss IQ's, mythology and fairy tales, open a topic and invite me.

So where's your contribution to the origin of CTS10228 and its distribution? The fact that you use its lack from the 3 Croatian samples?

I'm not disregarding the option that it's a Slavic marker, but rather saying that there's not enough evidence to prove it or disprove that it belonged to another ethnicity around the Carpathians. The reason behind it is that no ancient documents noticed the Slavs while they always spoke of Dacians, Bastarnae, Scytho-Sarmatians in the area, and all of them either got Slavicized or Romanized later on.

If you're claiming that CTS10228 is a Slavic marker, I agree with you as it is one of the modern Slavic markers.

But little details such as its presence among Romanians, Moldovans, and Vlachs, and the physical appearance of Herzegovinians, do make me think twice before accepting the obvious theory of it being Slavic. Call me old fashioned (regarding the anthropological part) but I can't see how a half NE European half Balkanite is darker than a full Balkanite. Similarly, seems strange that the Slavic invaders turned nomadic and got Romanized in a period when the opposite was happening, then Slavs settling in South Albania and instead of getting Albanized they became Vlachs, or again I2a originally Slavic tribes became Vlachs in ex-Yugoslavia while being from the "ruling class" and at the peak of their power and expansion.

Therefore, I'd go back a few years when Maciamo suggested that it was brought by the Dacians in the Balkans initially, then Slavs brought even more and spread it around.

 

[LABERIA]

So where's your contribution to the origin of CTS10228 and its distribution? The fact that you use its lack from the 3 Croatian samples?

I'm not disregarding the option that it's a Slavic marker, but rather saying that there's not enough evidence to prove it or disprove that it belonged to another ethnicity around the Carpathians. The reason behind it is that no ancient documents noticed the Slavs while they always spoke of Dacians, Bastarnae, Scytho-Sarmatians in the area, and all of them either got Slavicized or Romanized later on.

If you're claiming that CTS10228 is a Slavic marker, I agree with you as it is one of the modern Slavic markers.

But little details such as its presence among Romanians, Moldovans, and Vlachs, and the physical appearance of Herzegovinians, do make me think twice before accepting the obvious theory of it being Slavic. Call me old fashioned (regarding the anthropological part) but I can't see how a half NE European half Balkanite is darker than a full Balkanite. Similarly, seems strange that the Slavic invaders turned nomadic and got Romanized in a period when the opposite was happening, then Slavs settling in South Albania and instead of getting Albanized they became Vlachs, or again I2a originally Slavic tribes became Vlachs in ex-Yugoslavia while being from the "ruling class" and at the peak of their power and expansion.

Therefore, I'd go back a few years when Maciamo suggested that it was brought by the Dacians in the Balkans initially, then Slavs brought even more and spread it around.

There are two theories about the Vlachs in South Balkans.
First, they arrived from today Romania.
Second, they are latinised natives of Epir.
What we know for sure, if we accept the second option, is that before latinisation this people were not greeks.
It's true that Vlachs are more darker than the average southern Albanian. About Vlachs, you can add other elements regarding their ethnogenesis, from roman mercenaries or colons settled by romans, etc. They are really a great enigma.
I don't know much about genetics, but my opinion from what i read here is that this haplogroup was brought by slavs. I have serious doubts about the percentage of slavs in South Albania. I don't see serious studies about this. Maybe other studies in the future can prove even a high percentage, i don't know. But this actual data don't convince me.

 

[Nik]

There are two theories about the Vlachs in South Balkans.
First, they arrived from today Romania.
Second, they are latinised natives of Epir.
What we know for sure, if we accept the second option, is that before latinisation this people were not greeks.
It's true that Vlachs are more darker than the average southern Albanian. About Vlachs, you can add other elements regarding their ethnogenesis, from roman mercenaries or colons settled by romans, etc. They are really a great enigma.
I don't know much about genetics, but my opinion from what i read here is that this haplogroup was brought by slavs. I have serious doubts about the percentage of slavs in South Albania. I don't see serious studies about this. Maybe other studies in the future can prove even a high percentage, i don't know. But this actual data don't convince me.

Well I for instance think that both theories can be true. Vlachs are too diverse from each other, therefore I see them as Romanized, Illyrians, Epirotes, Thracians, Greeks, Macedonians, Dacians, Germanics, Celts, etc.

But considering the specific haplogroups of some Vlachs in South Albania and Macedonia for example, they do show an Eastern Balkan influence, having more J2a, R1a, and I2a. Obviously many here will say that J2a is Greek, while R1a and I2a are Slavic, but we know that's not true (yet). Thracians definitely had tons of J2a together with Macedonians, as well as R1a. It's only I2a that needs to be proven although the age CTS10228 is too young to have been widespread among South Thracians, so I'd rather considering a Northern origin in the area possibly inhabited by Dacians, Scythians, Bastarnae, Slavs, etc.

Perhaps that could explain why Vlachs are on average more Mediterranean/Pontid than Albanians, just like modern Bulgarians and Romanians.

 

[LABERIA]

Well I for instance think that both theories can be true. Vlachs are too diverse from each other, therefore I see them as Romanized, Illyrians, Epirotes, Thracians, Greeks, Macedonians, Dacians, Germanics, Celts, etc.

But considering the specific haplogroups of some Vlachs in South Albania and Macedonia for example, they do show an Eastern Balkan influence, having more J2a, R1a, and I2a. Obviously many here will say that J2a is Greek, while R1a and I2a are Slavic, but we know that's not true (yet). Thracians definitely had tons of J2a together with Macedonians, as well as R1a. It's only I2a that needs to be proven although the age CTS10228 is too young to have been widespread among South Thracians, so I'd rather considering a Northern origin in the area possibly inhabited by Dacians, Scythians, Bastarnae, Slavs, etc.

Perhaps that could explain why Vlachs are on average more Mediterranean/Pontid than Albanians, just like modern Bulgarians and Romanians.

Every option is open regarding Vlachs, but this was really interesting:

Call me old fashioned (regarding the anthropological part) but I can't see how a half NE European half Balkanite is darker than a full Balkanite.

If we follow this, than Vlachs of Epir are latinised natives.

 

[DuPidh]

Well I for instance think that both theories can be true. Vlachs are too diverse from each other, therefore I see them as Romanized, Illyrians, Epirotes, Thracians, Greeks, Macedonians, Dacians, Germanics, Celts, etc.

But considering the specific haplogroups of some Vlachs in South Albania and Macedonia for example, they do show an Eastern Balkan influence, having more J2a, R1a, and I2a. Obviously many here will say that J2a is Greek, while R1a and I2a are Slavic, but we know that's not true (yet). Thracians definitely had tons of J2a together with Macedonians, as well as R1a. It's only I2a that needs to be proven although the age CTS10228 is too young to have been widespread among South Thracians, so I'd rather considering a Northern origin in the area possibly inhabited by Dacians, Scythians, Bastarnae, Slavs, etc.

Perhaps that could explain why Vlachs are on average more Mediterranean/Pontid than Albanians, just like modern Bulgarians and Romanians.

J2a is i huge haplogroup. Not all of that is Helen. Greek is a wider term. One can be Greek but have nothing to do with Hellens. A Greek could be an Albanian emigre, a Vlah, a Slav, a Thracian, and so on, who lives in Greece. But Hellens left it written that they were sharing the same space with Pellazgoi. Pellasgoi being the earliest inhabitants of Ballkans were not as mixed as today Greeks. Their best haplogroup candidate is I, G, E. So the other major Haplogroup of today's Greeks is J2a, a certain subclade of J2a, Which is the Hellenic marker. Hellens adoppted the Phoenician alphabet and language they spoke is close to Armenian, so for this to happen they must have lived in Anatolia. So, yes, J2a is a Hellenic marker. As you live Greece and go north this marker almost disappears.
As for Vlahs being Illyrians or Thracian: If they were Illyrians why do they call Albanians Arbanas?

 

[Nik]

J2a is i huge haplogroup. Not all of that is Helen. Greek is a wider term. One can be Greek but have nothing to do with Hellens. A Greek could be an Albanian emigre, a Vlah, a Slav, a Thracian, and so on, who lives in Greece. But Hellens left it written that they were sharing the same space with Pellazgoi. Pellasgoi being the earliest inhabitants of Ballkans were not as mixed as today Greeks. Their best haplogroup candidate is I, G, E. So the other major Haplogroup of today's Greeks is J2a, a certain subclade of J2a, Which is the Hellenic marker. Hellens adoppted the Phoenician alphabet and language they spoke is close to Armenian, so for this to happen they must have lived in Anatolia. So, yes, J2a is a Hellenic marker. As you live Greece and go north this marker almost disappears.

Wow, thank you for the lecture. You opened my eyes.

As for Vlahs being Illyrians or Thracian: If they were Illyrians why do they call Albanians Arbanas?

Huh? I don't get where you're going with this. How are they supposed to call Albanians if they were Illyrians or Thracians?

 

[Trojet]

LOL. It seems like every post on this thread is being down-rated. I'm guessing someone will down-rate this post too.

EDIT: I was right. Evidence that some will down-rate pretty much anything...

 

[Trojet]

Obviously many here will say that J2a is Greek, while R1a and I2a are Slavic, but we know that's not true (yet).

First of all, you're not specifying which "R1a" and "I2a" clades you're talking about. Second of all how do you know that's not true. Evidence says *certain* I2a and R1a clades are Slavic.

Thracians definitely had tons of J2a together with Macedonians, as well as R1a. It's only I2a that needs to be proven although the age CTS10228 is too young to have been widespread among South Thracians

Since you claim Thracians definitely had "tons" of J2a and R1a, you must know something we don't, as I'm not aware of any study that tested many Thracian remains. So we'd like to see the evidence. Furthermore, I see you seem to be convinced that I-CTS10228 (I2a-Din) was present among Thracians, and you're just waiting for this to be proven. I wonder who Slavicized these populations in Thrace then, since going by what you're saying, Thracians must've not been very different from present day populations.

Perhaps that could explain why Vlachs are on average more Mediterranean/Pontid than Albanians, just like modern Bulgarians and Romanians.

And this is another area you appear to be struggling with. You seem to confuse genetics, specifically Y-DNA, with appearance/phenotype. They don't have to go in a parallel pattern.

 

[Dinarid]

Bla bla bla...

I even made sure to say that Northern Slavs have mostly blue eyes and some of the highest percentages of blonde hair, and you still didn't get it. Oh well, a lesson for me not to waste time.


"Many Ukrainians are dark-haired, dark-eyed too". Wow, what a great point mate. I feel so stupid right now.

How about concentrating really hard on my post and read why its exactly in the place with almost 80-90% Slavic yDna haplogroups that the eyes are the darkest, and compare it to the surrounding areas. Unless you believe Albanians have lighter features than Slavs.

Then again, another issue rises. Did the Early South Slavs who belonged to I2a to guard the mountains while the R1a will take care of the lowlands? Seems like Early Slavs knew about genetics 15 centuries before us, or its simply an extreme coincidence that most of the I2a settled in Herzegovina?

Seems to me like they were being surrounded by incoming R1a.

But anyway, why I am wasting my time with the Albanian version of Kingslav.


The problem is that its not the small differences that create the complex of inferiority, it's the awareness of how others perceive them combined with a weak/childish personality which results in such people succumbing to the temptation of proving their worth to the people who despise them and don't even care about their arguments.

Such a waste of time and nerves if u ask me.

Many people hate us, so what?

They hate us for being mostly Muslim, so what? Our ancestors lived in a tough period where the Ottomans butchered us for 300 years, imposed high taxes, and sweetened the deal by allowing them to carry weapons and use horses if they convert. Case closed.

They hate us for spreading criminality in Europe or USA as if we are the only ones. Yeah we were screwed by the Western Powers having our lands given as gifts to our neighbours, then not supported by them in WW2 but rather given like trash to the Russians to do as they please, then following 45 years of harsh communist regime. What do you expect out of that, painters and ballerinas?

Long story short, this is who we r, a hot blooded nation with tendencies to violence trying to make our way to the top on our own at all costs and using all the methods we can.

Boasting in forums that we are Illyrians and E-V13, J2b2, R1b, etc. and that Serbs are newcomers won't change anything.

Good luck getting anywhere with that attitude. The same racist argument can be made about any group of people whose nation has endured hardship, and is often used about third-world inhabitants in the rhetoric of those with a rather unsavory agenda. You are accepting what Stormfront is telling you that you are. How sad. I'm just glad most Albanians don't think like that.

 

[Leka]

So where's your contribution to the origin of CTS10228 and its distribution? The fact that you use its lack from the 3 Croatian samples?

I'm not disregarding the option that it's a Slavic marker, but rather saying that there's not enough evidence to prove it or disprove that it belonged to another ethnicity around the Carpathians. The reason behind it is that no ancient documents noticed the Slavs while they always spoke of Dacians, Bastarnae, Scytho-Sarmatians in the area, and all of them either got Slavicized or Romanized later on.

If you're claiming that CTS10228 is a Slavic marker, I agree with you as it is one of the modern Slavic markers.

But little details such as its presence among Romanians, Moldovans, and Vlachs, and the physical appearance of Herzegovinians, do make me think twice before accepting the obvious theory of it being Slavic. Call me old fashioned (regarding the anthropological part) but I can't see how a half NE European half Balkanite is darker than a full Balkanite. Similarly, seems strange that the Slavic invaders turned nomadic and got Romanized in a period when the opposite was happening, then Slavs settling in South Albania and instead of getting Albanized they became Vlachs, or again I2a originally Slavic tribes became Vlachs in ex-Yugoslavia while being from the "ruling class" and at the peak of their power and expansion.

Therefore, I'd go back a few years when Maciamo suggested that it was brought by the Dacians in the Balkans initially, then Slavs brought even more and spread it around.

Brother, I don't need to contribute, scientists are doing just that along with CTS10228 folks who are testing. Even if I wanted to, I couldn't contribute to that extent. All one needs to do is follow the data, and if you haven't followed this specific halpogroup closely, look at the yfull tree to get a general idea: https://yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/. As you can see all sub-branches downstream are to be found from Russia to Greece: PH908 (formed 1850ybp) found from Greece to Finland; S17250 (formed 2300ybp, TMRCA 1850ybp) found from Russian, Poland to Greece; same thing with Z17855 from Lithuania to Greece; same thing with Y4460 etc. To dig deeper, check the TMRCA dates, most branches seem to have really started to pickup steam right around 250-300 AD, which makes perfect sense when one combines this data along with the historical sources that speak of the Slavic expansion - which other population fits the bill better? Please don't mention obscure tribes that we know nothing about, when we actually have the evidence staring right at us genetically, linguistically and historically.

Thracians, Illyrians etc. where disintegrating around this time. Their golden days and when they were in full swing that were a force to recon with this specific SNP/clade was miniscule (2300ybp)....

Phenotype doesn't correlate with ydna, y chromosome makes merely one percentile of your genetic profile. Autosomal DNA is what influence phenotype and other features.

 

[Milan.M]

Here some people want to convince us in something they themselves contradict.
They claim the oldest I-CTS10228-* is from Podkarpackie (Subcarpathian) region in Poland,that is southern Poland,ok fine.The TMRCA is 2300 years and that this haplogroup is Slavic,Slavs presumably living in what is now Poland.
But we had DNA from Iron Age Poland just couple days ago AND this is who lived there;

So out of 16:

8 I1 (I-M253)
- 3 I1a3a1a1a (I-L1237)
- 1 I1a2a (I-Z59)
- 4 just I-M253

4 G2a (G-P15)

1 I2a2 (I-m436)
1 R1a M420
1 R1b1 (R-L278)
1 E1b1 (E-P2)

The TMRCA of I-CTS10228-* is in this timespan,see the results above.There was no Slavs in Poland in that time.

But more interesting is to who lived in Southern Poland,this is what member Trojet have to say;

Furthermore, I see you seem to be convinced that I-CTS10228 (I2a-Din) was present among Thracians, and you're just waiting for this to be proven. I wonder who Slavicized these populations in Thrace then, since going by what you're saying, Thracians must've not been very different from present day populations.

Right but Thracians were not living only in the Roman province of Thrace.To ancient Greeks like Herodotus they were most numerous people in Europe,to Roman like Pliny the most powerful but whatever,The ancient Greeks employed the term "Thrace" to refer to all of the territory which lay north of Thessaly inhabited by the Thracians, a region which "had no definite boundaries" and to which other regions (like Macedonia and even Scythia) were added.
Thracians inhabited parts of the ancient provinces of Thrace, Moesia, Macedonia, Dacia, Scythia Minor, Sarmatia, Bithynia, Mysia, Pannonia, and other regions of the Balkans and Anatolia. This area extended over most of the Balkans region, and the Getae north of the Danube as far as beyond the Bug and including Panonia in the west.There were about 200 Thracian tribes.
For example the Tyragetae were living along the river Dniester in Ukraine,one of the name of Dniester is Tyras,that's from where they got their name.
So if in Poland according to DNA there was no Slavs 2300 years ago,who lived in southern Poland Podkarpackie? Well we have that in written history.

Conclusion;If one want to say that in southern Poland lived Slavs 2300 years ago one should say that Thracians are Slavs.

Or unless one want to claim "Celts" now or Germanics?

 

[Garrick]

Here some people want to convince us in something they themselves contradict.
They claim the oldest I-CTS10228-* is from Podkarpackie (Subcarpathian) region in Poland,that is southern Poland,ok fine.The TMRCA is 2300 years and that this haplogroup is Slavic,Slavs presumably living in what is now Poland.
But we had DNA from Iron Age Poland just couple days ago AND this is who lived there;

So out of 16:

8 I1 (I-M253)
- 3 I1a3a1a1a (I-L1237)
- 1 I1a2a (I-Z59)
- 4 just I-M253

4 G2a (G-P15)

1 I2a2 (I-m436)
1 R1a M420
1 R1b1 (R-L278)
1 E1b1 (E-P2)

The TMRCA of I-CTS10228-* is in this timespan,see the results above.There was no Slavs in Poland in that time.

But more interesting is to who lived in Southern Poland,this is what member Trojet have to say;


Right but Thracians were not living only in the Roman province of Thrace.To ancient Greeks like Herodotus they were most numerous people in Europe,to Roman like Pliny the most powerful but whatever,The ancient Greeks employed the term "Thrace" to refer to all of the territory which lay north of Thessaly inhabited by the Thracians, a region which "had no definite boundaries" and to which other regions (like Macedonia and even Scythia) were added.
Thracians inhabited parts of the ancient provinces of Thrace, Moesia, Macedonia, Dacia, Scythia Minor, Sarmatia, Bithynia, Mysia, Pannonia, and other regions of the Balkans and Anatolia. This area extended over most of the Balkans region, and the Getae north of the Danube as far as beyond the Bug and including Panonia in the west.There were about 200 Thracian tribes.
For example the Tyragetae were living along the river Dniester in Ukraine,one of the name of Dniester is Tyras,that's from where they got their name.
So if in Poland according to DNA there was no Slavs 2300 years ago,who lived in southern Poland Podkarpackie? Well we have that in written history.

Conclusion;If one want to say that in southern Poland lived Slavs 2300 years ago one should say that Thracians are Slavs.

Or unless one want to claim "Celts" now or Germanics?

I-CTS10228 emerged after bottleneck 300 BC along river Vistula how Nordtvedt determined.

According territory and time it is best placed Bastarnae, next is neighbouring tribe Scirii.

No Thracian and Slavic tribes there in that time.

Thracians have important role when Bastarnae migrated on the south east.

Bastarnae mixed with Thracians and it is not controversial.

But if someone searches Thracians along river Vistula he or she can search and search.

Time is for new thread.

 

[Nik]

First of all, you're not specifying which "R1a" and "I2a" clades you're talking about.

I was talking about the old R1a that possibly came to the Balkans with the IE tribes and is present among Albanians and Greeks. I might be wrong, but this is what I read here in Eupedia. So please correct if I'm wrong about the R1a among Vlachs.

Second of all how do you know that's not true. Evidence says *certain* I2a and R1a clades are Slavic.

I used the word yet, didnt I? I'm the one saying we dont know yet and you're the one claiming that CTS10228 is definitely Slavic.

Since you claim Thracians definitely had "tons" of J2a and R1a, you must know something we don't, as I'm not aware of any study that tested many Thracian remains. So we'd like to see the evidence.

Again, I'm not trying to mislead anyone or pull a Garrick-like move with fake information, but AFAIK there has been found J2a and R1a among Thracian skeletons. You're more than welcome to correct me and I'll automatically change my views on it. Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "tons" since the topic is know to be full of grammar Nazis waiting for any opportunity to roast you, but it was just a logical assumptions. In any case, I take that back. Kindly read my sentence by ignoring the word "tons".

Furthermore, I see you seem to be convinced that I-CTS10228 (I2a-Din) was present among Thracians, and you're just waiting for this to be proven. I wonder who Slavicized these populations in Thrace then, since going by what you're saying, Thracians must've not been very different from present day populations.

You seem to be convinced that I'm convinced. In reality I keep mentioning in every post Dacians, Bastarnae, Scythians, Slavs, Celts.
Isn't the Slavic R1a enough evidence of ruling elite imposing their language to the rest? I believe their numbers were more than enough to gradually Slavicize tribes of shepherds over 1000 years.

And this is another area you appear to be struggling with. You seem to confuse genetics, specifically Y-DNA, with appearance/phenotype. They don't have to go in a parallel pattern.

Don't play dumb with me by feeding me kindergarten logic of not confusing genetics with appearance, unless you believe that Early Slavs were darker than Balkanites. Since I personally believe that they were indeed fairer (just like ancient Greeks perceived Scythians) and these I2a + R1a tribes moved to Herzegovina where they make up 90% of the yDna (and I'm counting the Slavic mtdna as 0% to make a point), then for what reasons do they end up looking the way they do? Is there any other admixture among Herzegovinians that we dont know of? Were the indigenous Herzegovinian women way darker than those in the surrounding areas?

Good luck getting anywhere with that attitude.

You'd be surprised but that attitude gets you wherever you want in life. I'm actually not doing bad at all.

The same racist argument can be made about any group of people whose nation has endured hardship, and is often used about third-world inhabitants in the rhetoric of those with a rather unsavory agenda. You are accepting what Stormfront is telling you that you are. How sad. I'm just glad most Albanians don't think like that.

Accepting? Rather not giving a F of what a bunch of losers think about you. And most Albanians dont give a F either and are too damn proud in case you haven't noticed.

Brother, I don't need to contribute, scientists are doing just that along with CTS10228 folks who are testing. Even if I wanted to, I couldn't contribute to that extent. All one needs to do is follow the data, and if you haven't followed this specific halpogroup closely, look at the yfull tree to get a general idea: https://yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/. As you can see all sub-branches downstream are to be found from Russia to Greece: PH908 (formed 1850ybp) found from Greece to Finland; S17250 (formed 2300ybp, TMRCA 1850ybp) found from Russian, Poland to Greece; same thing with Z17855 from Lithuania to Greece; same thing with Y4460 etc. To dig deeper, check the TMRCA dates, most branches seem to have really started to pickup steam right around 250-300 AD, which makes perfect sense when one combines this data along with the historical sources that speak of the Slavic expansion - which other population fits the bill better? Please don't mention obscure tribes that we know nothing about, when we actually have the evidence staring right at us genetically, linguistically and historically.

Thracians, Illyrians etc. where disintegrating around this time. Their golden days and when they were in full swing that were a force to recon with this specific SNP/clade was miniscule (2300ybp)....

Phenotype doesn't correlate with ydna, y chromosome makes merely one percentile of your genetic profile. Autosomal DNA is what influence phenotype and other features.

Fair enough. I hope you understand that I have no personal interest in making I2a Dacian or non-Slavic like some Albanians claim here. I'm just entitled to an opinion and I'm holding off until the evidence is conclusive.

With regards to phenotype, the only reason I can find is that the I2a + R1a tribes mixed a lot with Romanian-like Mediterranean natives in Eastern Balkans before moving to Illyricum. But then again, didn't the White Croats and Serbs from somewhere near Poland?

 

[Leka]

Evidence is very conclusive that CTS10228 was part of the Slavic realm when they started expanding, that much is evident, because there is no other explanation that can make sense of how a Czech, Belarusian, Russian, Pole, Greek, Serbian, Bosnian, Croat, Bulgarian and an Albanian, on most of the sub-branches, can share a common ancestor that lived anywhere from 500 years ago to max 2300 years ago. Where Slavs got it is another matter which shouldn't concern us much to my opinion, and we might never know.

Slavs were not all blond blue/green eyed, and neither were all the Balkan folk charcoal brown - you can't simplify things to that extent. Serbs and other Balkan Slavs have other influence that they have absorbed, not just Vlahs and Albanians, but also Avars, Huns, Bulgars etc. All depends on the region, same thing with Albanians; rural isolated areas tend to be more homogeneous phenotype wise.

 

[Garrick]

Again, I'm not trying to mislead anyone or pull a Garrick-like move with fake information, but AFAIK there has been found J2a and R1a among Thracian skeletons. You're more than welcome to correct me and I'll automatically change my views on it. Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "tons" since the topic is know to be full of grammar Nazis waiting for any opportunity to roast you, but it was just a logical assumptions. In any case, I take that back. Kindly read my sentence by ignoring the word "tons".

About someone who spread fake information is not talked. There is fable about shepherd who twice spread false information that the wolf attacked sheeps. Third time no one paid any attention to him. And the wolf really showed up.

Back to thread. You really gave some good observations. And in the thread we can see that some people don't see woods from the trees. Therefore delusion in which they fall is deep. You noticed in private life people who know some details but they are weak analysts and misjudge the whole picture. Here in the thread is (inter alia) one very important thing that people overlook but you (intuitively) not. And it is big quality (although without insight what is in question). Congratulations.

Somewhere in the thread you wrote people in South Slavic countries have less confidence. No. Confidence is high and very high that it is not good. So high confidence can means big ego. And someone's big ego means selfishness and thinking for himself without taking other people into account, too much selfishness probably is not good for society.

Objectively has no standing on this or that side. It is for persons who are emotively on the one side. Here are given four theories and you can notice how some members, dice per dice, contribute increasing knowledge about subject. For me emotively all the same if I-CTS10228 is German, Thracian, Slavic or Illyrian marker. But intellectual curiosity. When enter in matter we need to ask questions and seek answers.

(English is not something I can boast of, but hope it is understood.)

 

[Leka]

You're a typical Serb Garric, throw as much mud on the wall and see what sticks is the usual route Serbs take in these sort of discussions (like they tend to do at poreklo, where you got your bastarnea theory).