Were I2a Slavs part of the same tribe?

catosicarius

Junior Member
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Y-DNA haplogroup
I2
So I mean, most West/East Slavs are different to South Slavs. Wondering why that is?

I have read that there was a tribe called the Sclavenians which conquered and ravaged the whole of the Balkans peninsula. Could they just have been dominant I2a? Why is there this big genetic difference between north/south? I mean I'm aware Slavs aren't a "race" rather a culture/language. But who were the I2a Slavs before Slavs existed? Were they Dacians? The Balkan Slavs have many similar haplogroups to Romanians, moreso than to Russians and Poles.

I've also heard crazy theories about I2 coming from Celts/Gauls, this sounds wild to me, any credence to it?

Or, if im understanding things about the haplogroup correctly, were the I2a Slavs just a minor tribe that had a population explosion and went south?
 

So I mean, most West/East Slavs are different to South Slavs. Wondering why that is?

How concretely they are different?

I have read that there was a tribe called the Sclavenians which conquered and ravaged the whole of the Balkans peninsula.

Sclavenians are mentioned in historical records but there were more tribes among them, same as Illyrians whose name covered all tribes in the Illyrian area.

Could they just have been dominant I2a?

If we take Croats as example, Slavic genetics of Croatians are R1a and I2a branches, possible others haplotypes as well, but this is the main one.

Croats speak Slavic Indo-European language but I2a peoples originally are not Indo-Europeans, for this reason I2a people had to learn Slavic language in the area where they were mixed with Slavs and Indo-Europeans. For now and based on living genetics I2a peoples are mixed with R1a peoples somewhere in the area of southern Poland and south-western Ukraine ie. that part of Carpathians.

For now, according to history records in that area White Croats are mentioned, possibly some other tribes but one of the earliest ones are White Croats.

Why is there this big genetic difference between north/south?

A lot of time has passed since migration period and normally some other genetics is mixed in the area of Carpatians, but in the Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians little less in Poles etc.. there are still plenty peoples with I2a branches.

I mean I'm aware Slavs aren't a "race" rather a culture/language. But who were the I2a Slavs before Slavs existed?

They were not Slavs. If we follow this map original R1a Slavs has source somewhere in central Ukraina and from there they migrate to Poland and I2a peoples.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Proto-Slavic#/media/File:Balto-Slavic_lng.png


The same or similar talk and live genetics.

https://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/R1a_migration_map.jpg



Were they Dacians? The Balkan Slavs have many similar haplogroups to Romanians, moreso than to Russians and Poles.

Romanians has I2a branches with mutation I-Y3120 and I-S17250 which means that ancestors of I2a Croats and Romanians are same or have source in same area. Whether these(Romanian I2a) are some older or younger migration we'll know more in the future and then we will be able to say a little more.

I've also heard crazy theories about I2 coming from Celts/Gauls, this sounds wild to me, any credence to it?

As far as I know older I2a branches coming from direction of Luxembourg, northeastern France to Poland.

Or, if im understanding things about the haplogroup correctly, were the I2a Slavs just a minor tribe that had a population explosion and went south?

It could be because a good part of migration to the Balkan begins from a small area where I2a has its epicenter and it would be White Croatia, besides these Croats and others Slavs coming with their genetics and with regard to some other older I2a branches that exist in the Greece they probably go to the Balkans before Croats and via eastern Carpathians, through Romania, Bulgaria to the Greece. There are also Slavs from other areas that have some other R1a branches which says that they do not come from White Croatia but from Ukraine, northeastern Poland, Russia etc.
 
There's no credible hypothesis. The ruler of the invading Magyars descended from the same I2a group, so it is likely that they were a succesful/expansive people situated somewhere in the marsh-steppe region. We can't say more than that.
 
There's no credible hypothesis. The ruler of the invading Magyars descended from the same I2a group, so it is likely that they were a succesful/expansive people situated somewhere in the marsh-steppe region. We can't say more than that.


Those Magyars were only confirmed positive for L621 and there are several clades separating CTS10228 from L621 that are over 6000 years apart. Whether or not some could be positive further downstream isn't certain. Most were predicted negative downstream though. For all we know those Magyars form a unknown branch under I-L621.

We can say that I2a1b-CTS10228 was participating in Proto-Slavic ethnogenesis thats for sure. Nearly 100 percent of people under CTS10228 are Slavs. Also, all confirmed CTS10228 samples(albeit from the middle ages only) were all heavily East-European admixed/"Polish-Like".
 
So I mean, most West/East Slavs are different to South Slavs. Wondering why that is?

I have read that there was a tribe called the Sclavenians which conquered and ravaged the whole of the Balkans peninsula. Could they just have been dominant I2a? Why is there this big genetic difference between north/south? I mean I'm aware Slavs aren't a "race" rather a culture/language. But who were the I2a Slavs before Slavs existed? Were they Dacians? The Balkan Slavs have many similar haplogroups to Romanians, moreso than to Russians and Poles.

I've also heard crazy theories about I2 coming from Celts/Gauls, this sounds wild to me, any credence to it?

Or, if im understanding things about the haplogroup correctly, were the I2a Slavs just a minor tribe that had a population explosion and went south?

Since haplogroup in general is pre Indoeuropean they were part of almost every culture in Europe, Gauls are least likely since they seem to be R1b dominant, no one can give you definitive answer we don't have enough results. But everyone seems to forget something very important while talking about genes, especially about Din I2, the place where its most dominant is scarcely populated due to geography and was always area of emigration, there are probably less then 500 000 people living in Hercegovina region. And 10% of Russian population is over 14 000 000 people, more than 100% of Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Hercegovina, Montenegro and Macedonia. There are more I2 carriers in Russia then in the Balkans even if you are generous and include Romania and Hungary.
 
We need more ancient dna to determine. R1a was not found alongside i2a-din in the recent viminacium and mediaval serbia study

It is possible that i2a-din belonged to a group in central/south europe that was always cremating and only stopped from middle ages due to romans changing everyone's culture and slavic assimilations after that. A similar case for v13
 
This topic need to be revived.

As I see the I2a1 haplo group joined the R1a people somewhere in North from Carpathians, in Poland or somewhere east from that territory. But who were they?
Maybe the split between Baltics and Slavs was due to the appearance of I2a. Or am I false?

Which tribe the I2a1 people were belonged to?
 
This topic need to be revived.

As I see the I2a1 haplo group joined the R1a people somewhere in North from Carpathians, in Poland or somewhere east from that territory. But who were they?
Maybe the split between Baltics and Slavs was due to the appearance of I2a. Or am I false?

Which tribe the I2a1 people were belonged to?
For now, the most likely option is that I2a branches together with R1a branches form the original White Croats. This is what could be proven historiographically and genetically, but for confirmation we need archaeogenetics.
We do not know when R1a came into contact with the I2a group, so it is difficult for us to determine when the Slavization of the I2a group began.
 
For now, the most likely option is that I2a branches together with R1a branches form the original White Croats. This is what could be proven historiographically and genetically, but for confirmation we need archaeogenetics.
We do not know when R1a came into contact with the I2a group, so it is difficult for us to determine when the Slavization of the I2a group began.

I2a was in central Europe and especially strong in Urnfield Lusatians, R1a came from further east and mixed with these probably in late iron age when Lusatian culture ended
 
Last edited:
I2a was in central Europe and especially strong in Urnfield Lusatians, R1a came from further east and mixed with these probably in late iron age when Lusatian culture ended
Do we have Lusatian I2a samples for this? Which subclades were there?
I'm mainly interested in my own y hg history.
 
Do we have Lusatian I2a samples for this? Which subclades were there?
I'm mainly interested in my own y hg history.

No one has bothered to excavate Lusatians and they cremated so will be difficult to find bones.

Based on what we have so far I-CTS10228 was likely an Urnfield line and we know it wasn't Illyrian because they were J2b l283 -



You can see presence of upstream lines in Swabian Germans (Brits are like half German), Poland and France -

I'm not too familiar with ancient German history or language but it seems Swabian is a bit different to normal German. Maybe proto Swabians were assimilated by the proto Germanics that came from north in iron age after Urnfield and Hallstatt ended.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240330-145436 (1).png
    Screenshot_20240330-145436 (1).png
    678.8 KB · Views: 126
Last edited:
We don't have proof, but Lusatian Culture is an educated safe bet. They largely cremated their deaths hence we don't have aDNA from them.
 
I2a was in central Europe and especially strong in Urnfield Lusatians, R1a came from further east and mixed with these probably in late iron age when Lusatian culture ended
To date, we have more R1a (Z280/M458/M417/L664) found in Central Europe, and none of I2a-Din. Let that sink in.
 
To date, we have more R1a (Z280/M458/M417/L664) found in Central Europe, and none of I2a-Din. Let that sink in.

I2a-din is which line exactly? You think I2a-din teleported to Europe from Mars? It's ancestors have been in Europe for 30,000 years, it is obvious that this line was present in bronze age central Europe
 
Last edited:
I2a-din is which line exactly? You think I2a-din teleported to Europe from Mars? It's ancestors have been in Europe for 30,000 years, it is obvious that this line was present in bronze age central Europe
I2a-Din - CTS10228

I was playing a bit of a devils advocate here. I know it was in Central Europe. However, your absolutist remark "I2a was in central Europe and especially strong in Urnfield Lusatians, R1a came from further east and mixed with these probably in late iron age when Lusatian culture ended" is asinine.

We have plenty of R1a going back even to the Bronze Age as far West as Germany, and not one I2a-CTS10228 has been found.

While I am sure it will eventually pop up; your insistence that R1a came from East to Central Europe in the Iron Age (when we have ancient DNA that says otherwise), and I2a (like CTS10228) was in Central Europe since the Bronze age (which we have none of that particular clade yet), is a baseless remark that is merely stated because it feeds your pre-concluded assumptions not on evidence but guesswork.

Considering a mostly Western I2a clade today (non-existent in modern Eastern Europeans), was found to dominate the Trziniec Culture (bearers of Balto-Slavic admixture), it is quite plausible that I2a-CTS10228 was also within the zone of Trziniec-Komarov-Sosnica Complex from Central Eastern/Eastern Europe.
 
I2a-Din - CTS10228

I was playing a bit of a devils advocate here. I know it was in Central Europe. However, your absolutist remark "I2a was in central Europe and especially strong in Urnfield Lusatians, R1a came from further east and mixed with these probably in late iron age when Lusatian culture ended" is asinine.

We have plenty of R1a going back even to the Bronze Age as far West as Germany, and not one I2a-CTS10228 has been found.

While I am sure it will eventually pop up; your insistence that R1a came from East to Central Europe in the Iron Age (when we have ancient DNA that says otherwise), and I2a (like CTS10228) was in Central Europe since the Bronze age (which we have none of that particular clade yet), is a baseless remark that is merely stated because it feeds your pre-concluded assumptions not on evidence but guesswork.

Considering a mostly Western I2a clade today (non-existent in modern Eastern Europeans), was found to dominate the Trziniec Culture (bearers of Balto-Slavic admixture), it is quite plausible that I2a-CTS10228 was also within the zone of Trziniec-Komarov-Sosnica Complex from Central Eastern/Eastern Europe.

If you are talking about R1a in general you should also say I2a in general. If you want to talk about specific lines then CTS10228 was already found in Bronze Age Croatia and is present in modern German Swabians, French etc. Anyway I believe the ancestral lines also played a role in Urnfield central Europe -

An R1a was found in the Tollense battle but it didn't seem to be originally from central Europe, further east. However based on what little evidence we have so far it looks like (generalized) R1a played a bigger role in Urnfield than E-V13 did, E-V13 is the proper mystery

Trzciniec was R1a, where is the study that found I2? -

"Mittnik et al. (2018) examined the remains of seven possible Trzciniec individuals buried in Turlojiškė, Lithuania between 2,100 BC and 600 BC. The three samples of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup R1a1a1b (two samples) and CT."
 
Last edited:
If you are talking about R1a in general you should also say I2a in general. If you want to talk about specific lines then CTS10228 was already found in Bronze Age Croatia and is present in modern German Swabians, French etc. Anyway I believe the ancestral lines also played a role in Urnfield central Europe -

An R1a was found in the Tollense battle but it didn't seem to be originally from central Europe, further east. However based on what little evidence we have so far it looks like (generalized) R1a played a bigger role in Urnfield than E-V13 did, E-V13 is the proper mystery

Trzciniec was R1a, where is the study that found I2? -

"Mittnik et al. (2018) examined the remains of seven possible Trzciniec individuals buried in Turlojiškė, Lithuania between 2,100 BC and 600 BC. The three samples of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup R1a1a1b (two samples) and CT."

Let's make one thing clear. All branches of R1a have been found in Central Europe. BA-IA, minimal or no. So we don't need to speak generally here. We know however, given your insistence on CTS10228, is that you were making a point with this branch, which has only been found in Scandinavia (maybe Neolithic).

It has been mentioned numerous times that this BA Croatia sample was in fact a medieval sample, and likely has contamination. It was never carbon dated either. His mtDNA had recent matches going back to the medieval, and not the Bronze Age. The site itself had numerous remains from later medieval, and he was autosomally quite Slavic. Unless you are proposing Slavs lived in the Bronze Age Croatia?

That's an old study. there is a 2023 study (forget the name) where a large amount of Trziniec samples were sequenced and carbon dated. The overwhelming majority were I-L233, which ironically is largely western european today - https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-L233/. It's the same study as the one that had the Bronze Age R1a-M458 in Brodzica, South East Poland.

Additionally, you mention I-S19848 which I have told you numerous times, CTS10228 is downstream of, in a parallel branch CTS4002. The branch with the French/German samples make up less than 1% of that entire branch. What's more, as we can see, I-L233 was dominating Balto-Slavic Trziniec, despite it's complete lack/representation today. Also, that branch with the french and german sample are not related until the Neolithic with CTS4002 which is almost exclusively found in Slavs today.

It's highly possible I-L621 was also occupying a similar zone to I-L233 in Trziniec.
 
Let's make one thing clear. All branches of R1a have been found in Central Europe. BA-IA, minimal or no. So we don't need to speak generally here. We know however, given your insistence on CTS10228, is that you were making a point with this branch, which has only been found in Scandinavia (maybe Neolithic).

It has been mentioned numerous times that this BA Croatia sample was in fact a medieval sample, and likely has contamination. It was never carbon dated either. His mtDNA had recent matches going back to the medieval, and not the Bronze Age. The site itself had numerous remains from later medieval, and he was autosomally quite Slavic. Unless you are proposing Slavs lived in the Bronze Age Croatia?

That's an old study. there is a 2023 study (forget the name) where a large amount of Trziniec samples were sequenced and carbon dated. The overwhelming majority were I-L233, which ironically is largely western european today - https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-L233/. It's the same study as the one that had the Bronze Age R1a-M458 in Brodzica, South East Poland.

Additionally, you mention I-S19848 which I have told you numerous times, CTS10228 is downstream of, in a parallel branch CTS4002. The branch with the French/German samples make up less than 1% of that entire branch. What's more, as we can see, I-L233 was dominating Balto-Slavic Trziniec, despite it's complete lack/representation today. Also, that branch with the french and german sample are not related until the Neolithic with CTS4002 which is almost exclusively found in Slavs today.

It's highly possible I-L621 was also occupying a similar zone to I-L233 in Trziniec.

We have already seen that the Urnfield Tollense warriors were similar to Slavs (with more WHG autosomal) so CTS10228 from Bronze Age Croatia being similar to modern Slavs is no surprise. It is only a matter of time before this shows up again in bronze age central Europe, if they tested all the Tollense bones it may have shown up (they only tested a small amount due to "lack of funding")

The upstream clades from CTS10228 are all found in Swabian Germans, doesn't matter how much or how little percent they make up, it shows there is continuity in that region while the mutations happened. You need to understand that CTS10228 and previous clades existed prior to the expansion of Slavs, it's history lies in bronze age central Europe (Urnfield). Where is this ancient CTS10228 that was found in Scandinavia?
 
Last edited:
All Slavic languages descend from Old Church Slavonic which was coined in Balkans, from where it spread north trough christianization.
 

This thread has been viewed 12835 times.

Back
Top