Slavs come from Serbs

Haplogroup I2 is basically indigenous to the Balkans, how you got slavicised I can't say for sure but it happened gradually culminating in the standardization of serbo Croatian in the 19th century, while the entirety of the coastal region spoke an extinct romance language up until around 1900.

>Haplogroup I2 is basically indigenous to the Balkans

Why is it significant then in all the places associated with the Slavic migrations?

And why is it so low in the Albanian/Greek populations?

>how you got slavicised I can't say for sure but it happened gradually culminating in the standardization of serbo Croatian in the 19th century, while the entirety of the coastal region spoke an extinct romance language up until around 1900.

The Slavs didn't settle the coastal areas, and you're speaking as if the Southern Slavs were speaking some kind of Balkanoid-Slavic creole language until the 19th century, which is nonsense.

There is no historical evidence of South-Slavs having any Non-slavic origins, linguistically or otherwise. All there is is muh haplogroup or muh dark hair

Croat and Serbian ethnogenesis both seemingly talk about their arrival to the Balkans in the 7th century, all I'm saying is that if haploshits are anything to go by the idea of a Slavic elite slavicising the people of the area makes sense.

Also sorry about that last post, haplogroup I2 is not indigenous to the balkans per se but indigenous to Europe as a whole it merely has the highest concentration in the Balkans

>if haploshits are anything to go by the idea of a Slavic elite slavicising the people of the area makes sense.

>Slavic elite

Slavs were a communal peasant people divided into tribes. What elite?

It would make sense if they were some technologically advanced warrior nation, or if they were a culturally-superior economic powerhouse. (Such as the Greeks, Huns, or the Romans) but poor, backwards (in medieval times) and relatively peaceful tribes subjugating and dominating an alleged 3x larger "Balkanoid" population who has superior Greco-Roman technology, culture, language and religion?

That sounds like a fairy tale.

Also it's completely ignoring the fact that the Balkans were severely depopulated by the 7th century due to rampant Hunnic and Avar pillaging. And that the Roman Emperor Heraclius (according to the DAI) granted the Serbs/Slavs land on the western Balkans in order to repopulate the Balkans.

Why would an Emperor give land to a foreign people if there were already sufficient numbers of locals?

I2 is not slavic. In the balkans it's found in the mountains, where the Slavic R1a is always found in the valleys and flatland. I2 is probably Thracian- Illyria and has nothing to do with slavs. Check the the oldest clades are found in Sardinia and England( from doggerland)

Weren't Serbs/Croats invited by Heraclius to police/guard the Balkans?

>I2 is probably Thracian- Illyria

Why then such a small % amongst the Albanians?

I2a1 is the second most common haplogroup amongst all Slavs (East West and South), how is this possible?

Also all of the early Serbian states (7th-10th century) were founded in the I2a1 nucleus (in the mountains).

How were these "thracians/illyrians" so quickly Slavicized (in less than a century) ?

The name can be older than all slavic nations. Lusitian Serbs are pretty much just Poles after all and Croats (same people as Serbs) also trace their origins from some place between Vistula and Bug, so that is that.

>The name can be older than all slavic nations.

That's the point. It's the first name for what we call today "Slavs".

>Lusitian Serbs are pretty much just Poles after all

That's an anachronism. The slavic Serb tribe existed well before the term "polish/poland" came to exist.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorbs_(tribe)

So are they "pretty much just Poles" or are Poles "pretty much just Lusatian Serbs"?

Because Albanians didn't exist till 11th century. They are just local tribe that population expanded recently due to Eurocucks - Kosovo and western Macedonia. Their I2a1 is concentrated in the southern parts of Albania 14% - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Albanians

Also between 19 to 20 in Greece, how do you explain this? Together with r1a it makes, 40-50%, so the Greeks imported 50% of their population froms Slavs? Nice one.

Why is it not found in majority in Russia, Western Poland or Baltics, where the R1a dominates?
I2a1 were local population that got subjigated or displace by the Slavsic r1a, but they are not Slavs.

Slavs are direct descendants of the Dutch. The Dutch colonized most lands the Slavs have inhabited for hundreds of years, and slavs have come from the Dutch intermarriages with Sarmatians.

...

Hes right for the wrong reason. Dutch are closes to Doggerland, where the whole I2 group originates. When it submerged, WHG migrated to Eastern Europe.

>Their I2a1 is concentrated in the southern parts of Albania 14%

It's actually most highly concentrated in northern Albania on the border with Montenegro. And both areas were historically heavily settled with Slavs.

>Also between 19 to 20 in Greece, how do you explain this? Together with r1a it makes, 40-50%, so the Greeks imported 50% of their population froms Slavs? Nice one.

Well Old Church Slavonic did emerge from Northern Greece. In fact some say that Cyril and Methodius themselves were half-Slavic.

>Why is it not found in majority in Russia, Western Poland or Baltics, where the R1a dominates?

Why do the Slavs have to be one haplogroup? There are theories that both R1a and I2a1 are Slavic, that the Slavs themselves were a hybrid people who migrated west.

>I2a1 were local population that got subjigated or displace by the Slavsic r1a, but they are not Slavs.

How did the superior and more numerous Roman/Byzantine citizens get utterly cucked by a small group of backwards peasant Slavs?

Why is the early Serbian state and all Serbian dynasties (7th-11th centuries) centered in a over-50% I2a1 zone?

Ok moron, I was trying to be friendly , but picka ti materina serbian shit.
Why the Balkanic population autosomal dna is closer to Italy and Spain ( other Mediterraneans countries) and not with Poland or Ukraine???

I am 100% Bulgarian with I2a1, this is my autosomal, where are the fuckin slavs? Fuck you Russian proxy!

How did more numerous Persian/Iranian citizens get utterly cucked by a small group of backwards peasant Macedonian Greeks?

Also Cyril wrote the Alphabet, because he was paid by the Moravians to do it.

>How did more numerous Persian/Iranian citizens get utterly cucked by a small group of backwards peasant Macedonian Greeks?

>Comparing the 7th century Slavs to Alexander the Great.

Slavs were pacifistic and communal farmers...the ancient Macedonian army is one of the greatest armies of all history.....and today those Persians/Iranians still speak Persian.

You're I2a1, and you're a Slav. Doesn't that prove the point?

Why do Belarusians/Russians and Ukrainians have over 20% I2a1?

Why do Moldovians have 35% I2a1? Are they Thracians too?

>Rus: Paserb
I"v never heard this word. Usually it is "pAsynok" for stepson, not "paserb"

They cluster together in autosomal. Why do they also have 20% like Romania and Bulgaria, but don't cluster with them? Why the typical r1a slavic is dominant in the Slavic core and decrease in periphery and we see the opposite in the Balkans? Why is there no Dinaric phenotype in the northern slavic countries?
I2a1 is not originally slavic, today is part of the Slav culture in language, but it was subjugated in one way or another.

>Why do they also have 20% like Romania and Bulgaria, but don't cluster with them? Why the typical r1a slavic is dominant in the Slavic core and decrease in periphery

If all of "X" people, leave location "Y", and settle location "Z" - will there be anymore "X" in "Y"?

Also the "slavic" R1a is dominant in Iran and Afghanistan...why is it deemed "Slavic" just because its frequent in Poland or Russia?

Leaving haploshits alone, historically and logically explain how could the few backwards and peaceful Slavic tribes subjugate the superior and higher numbered Roman-Byzantine citizens?

Secondly, why would the Roman Emperor give free land in his empire to foreign Slavic tribes, if there were already plenty of native subjects already there?

The root *sъrbъ has been variously connected with Russian paserb (пacepб, "stepson"), Ukrainian priserbitisya (пpиcepбитиcя, "join in"), Old Indic sarbh- ("fight, cut, kill"), Latin sero ("make up, constitute"), and Greek siro (ειρω, "repeat").[6]
Polish linguist Stanisław Rospond (1906–1982) derived the denomination of Srb from srbati (cf. sorbo, absorbo).[7]
Sorbian scholar H. Schuster-Šewc suggested a connection with Proto-Slavic verb for "to slurp" *sьrb-, with cognates such as cepбaть (Russian, Ukrainian), cepбaць (Belarusian), srbati (Slovak), cъpбaм(Bulgarian) and cepeбaти (Old Russian).[8]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_the_Serbs_and_Serbia

Then why all the I2a1 left and settled, but not the r1a? I2a1 is found predominantly in the mountainous regions, why would you settle there? The settling of Slavic r1a makes sense, they were farmers and settled in the plains, we see the majority of the r1a today in the plains.

The R1a in Asia is a different subclade eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1a_Y-DNA.shtml

Because they were roman citizens by that time. Some of them went to the other provinces,some of them stayed, some of them went to the mountain awaiting a rescue, which never came. Then they resettled and since Slavic was the language of their new overlords, they learned it.
Slavs were never mentioned to slaughter local populations, they traded and lived with them.

Roman Empire gives free land to goths, arabs and other nasty people, Slavs were not an exception.

eupedia.com/forum/threads/33419-Was-I2a-CTS10228-(dinaric)-an-ancient-Slavic-king?p=502719&viewfull=1#post502719

This guy has a nice theory, which explains the western Balkans and can explain the eastern with Dacians/Thracians

>Roman Empire gives free land to goths, arabs and other nasty people, Slavs were not an exception.

The Visigoths were given land to settle in the Roman Empire, but after a few generations were assimilated into Romans/Latin-speakers.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visigoths

And the Visigoths were a dominant warrior people, how did the submissive Slavs dominate the centuries-old Roman society, while Visigoths couldn't?

>Some of them went to the other provinces,some of them stayed, some of them went to the mountain awaiting a rescue, which never came.

If there were more Roman citizens than there were Slavs, surely they wouldn't have to run into the mountains for rescue.

> I2a1 is found predominantly in the mountainous regions, why would you settle there?

It's found highest in the Dinaric karst regions to be exact, and that is where the newly settled Serbs first settled and created their early tribal states.

There were still rivers and plains in the Dinaric I2a1 regions.

The I2a1 cluster around Moldovia/Ukraine doesn't even match with the location of Dacia.

I mean, were illyrians, dacians and thracians the same thing or were they not? And since Albos don't have I2a1, are they not illyrians-dacians-thracians then?

/haploshit logic

I haplogroup are just markers for the indigenous population of europe is south Slavic countries have a large amount of I haplogroup if just means when the slavs arrived they didn't kill many indigenous men and take their women.

>I haplogroup are just markers for the indigenous population of europe

So albanians and greeks aren't indigenous, ok.

>is south Slavic countries have a large amount of I haplogroup if just means when the slavs arrived they didn't kill many indigenous men and take their women.

Did the Slavs watch others fuck? Were they into balkanoid cuckold porn?

How did a couple slavic cavemen completely Slavicize millions of superior and enlightened Roman Citizens?

We wuz paleo-balkanianz

Well they expanded and needed allies to fight the evil Byzantines, that's why they used the natives. They are not cucks, they imposed their culture and language on them.

The natives were already Roman citizens for over 800 years....any non-Greco-Roman balkan language was extinct by 200AD, why would Byzantine people fight the Byzantines?

Also, the Balkan Slavs were Byzantine subjects, they were loyal to the Byzantines since the Byzantines gave them that empty land.

> They are not cucks, they imposed their culture and language on them.

How? Why would a Roman citizen who's more educated, speaks a more popular language, Christian, and more numerous - take on a slavic language and convert to Slavic paganism to live in a mudhut?

We wuz native balkanianz and shiet

I2 has highest diversity in poland. It is slavic.

Because the Mediterranean was one large cultural and human corridor and the north was relatively isolated and thus more culturally and ethnically homogenic.

Just look at the IV century migration/invasion of Goths and bandwagoners, it started off in the Balkans and spreaded to northern Italy, southern France and Spain.

>Also between 19 to 20 in Greece, how do you explain this? Together with r1a it makes, 40-50%, so the Greeks imported 50% of their population froms Slavs? Nice one.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezeritai
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melingoi
The more you know.

Exactly.

"Virtually all Dinaric I2a falls under the CTS10228 (aka CTS5966 or L147.2) subclade, and the majority to the S17250 ramification, who descend from a common patrilinear ancestor who lived only 1,800 years ago."

eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml

I2 came to the Balkans with the Slav migrations.

So which haplogroups in the Balkans (if any) in your opinion indicate the presence of the pre Slavic population?

Why the fuck are you arguing with this serv? He has a brain like a potato. It's funny, all of the slavs in the balkans seem to have some sort of identity crisis, especially bosniaks. Did not expect serbs to have it this much tho considering they'd clean up russias dickcheese within one second.

>So which haplogroups in the Balkans (if any) in your opinion indicate the presence of the pre Slavic population?

The pre-Slavic Balkan Haplogroup would be E1b and J2 markers which are primarily associated with the Hellenic-Semitic-Mediterranean civilizations.

Not him but:
V13, R1b, J2b2, J2a, G.

Also forgot to mention here that there is Gothic influence defined by a subclade which I can't currently remember. Gothic settlements in the Balkans predate the slavic ones. There's also a norman clade of i1.

If I2 is Slavic why the fuck is Sardinia so densley I2?

Wtf am I reading

Sardinians have a different clade that split around 17,000 years ago.

ancestraljourneys.org/europeanneolithicdna.shtml

There is I2a1 in Croatia in Starcevo culture. Its there long before the slavs.

>haploshit discussions on Armenian kebab trading interchanges on the internet

That sample is a neolithic sample. Long before Illyrians, Thracians, Hellenes even existed, you moron.

Exactly, it's in the region long before any other invasion.

If you're implying some sort of continuity between the neolithic sample and modern Balkan slavs then you are simply wrong.

That's the point.jpg

read

*Proto-Slavic

Sardinians have a separate subclade that predates the Slavic ethnogenesis

The Starcevo culture has nothing to do with the I2a1.

I2a1 almost exactly matches up with the early medieval Serbian principalities.

How am I wrong? Yhe same haploshit is found in the region, the autosomal DNA clusters with other mediteraneans. With more than 70% combined r1a and I2a1, the Balkans must be grouping with Ukraine and Poland, but that not the case.
People change their language, but not their dna.

>People change their language, but not their dna.

Then answer this

>How am I wrong? Yhe same haploshit is found in the region
do you know what clade the neolithic sample belonged to? if not, then shut the fuck up, moron

>DNA clusters with other mediteraneans
cause of admixture with the locals, specifically vlachs

> With more than 70% combined r1a and I2a1
some regions have a higher frequency and others have a lower frequency, i2 peaks in herzegovina which is pretty much the homeland in the balkans of the balkan-slavic ethnogenesis

>People change their language, but not their dna.
ok????

So you ignore the I2a1 found there?
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4389623/

Don't worry, this year there is big genetic study on Ancient Greece and you will shit bricks when they find I2a1

Ancient Greece is R1b, most likely.

If I2a1 is balkan Slavic what's all the R1a doing down there? Did a bunch of Poles decide to come down to the balkans to mingle with the proto Serbs who were also actually proto poles as well because all Slavs are actually Serbs?

This thread is getting complicated.

The fuck you cannot understand? The Slavs R1a defeated the Byzantines and conquered the land and imposed their language and culture on the locals. They didn't invade empty lands.
What am I saying is that they proportions of R1a explains their proximity with other Slavic populations by autosomal DNA, but with combination with I2a1, its too low. Hence I2a1 cannot be Slavic.

Think of it this way; R1a lived to the east of poland and I2a lived in Poland. I2a is most likely speaking germanic or some other sort of non-slavic language. R1a mingles with I2a and slavicizes it. I2a moves to the Balkans 700 A.D

>bringing autosomal shit when we talk about y-dna
hahahahahhahahaahaha

I'd say E1b, it matches the Ancient Greek civilization more or less.

I'm not very sure, I think even J2a was more common than V13, a lot of the V13 and R1b are brought by Arvanites and their frequencies coorelate very well with their settlements.

>y-dna is separate from the other chromosomes

This is bait right?

But why is there R1a in the Balkans then?

There's some turbo we wuzin itt

You get around 50% of the autosomal with the y.

It came together with I2a. Seriously dude, it's not hard to grasp, what the fuck?

I wish desu

Both I2a and R1a were a part of the Slavic ethnogenesis (+1000BC)

The other guy isn't me.

>The Slavs R1a defeated the Byzantines and conquered the land and imposed their language and culture on the locals. They didn't invade empty lands.

Read the DAI. The lands were empty. The Byzantine Emperor personally gave them those lands, they didn't attack him. They became loyal subjects with autonomy in the Empire.

Learn who the Avars and Huns were and what they did to the balkans 300AD-640AD. Not one inner-balkan city remained inhabited by the end.

>but with combination with I2a1, its too low.

I2a1 reaches 30% in parts of Ukraine and Belarus dude.

>Why are we discussing haploshits that have nothing to do with modern ethnicities

>I2a1 is balkan Slavic

Sardinia disproves this theory: I2a1 is a Neolithic lineage from Anatolia. The one in Sardinia belongs to a different subclade than the one in the Balkans though.

Because I2 is found before the Slavs in the region.

And as I said many times above, I2a1 settles in the mountains, which doesnt make sense, when the R1a settles in the rich flatland.
The autosomal difference also.

read you god damn retard

best baiter in the thread desu almost got me

But if they settled empty lands, they will be pure Slavs, why are they not close with the other pure Slav countries ???

>I2a1 settles in the mountains, which doesnt make sense, when the R1a settles in the rich flatland.

You autist. Read this.
>and that map assuming it was like that 1500 years ago.

This whole thread is bait asking if all Slavs stem from the Serbs.

>Learn who the Avars and Huns were and what they did to the balkans 300AD-640AD. Not one inner-balkan city remained inhabited by the end.

Exactly! That's proves the point that I2a1 moved to the mountains and the R1a got the land. Then it mixed by changing the language and culture with the new masters.

That's irrelevant. It's still a Neolithic lienage, so pre-Slavic by definition.

Do you have a single fact to back that up?

>But if they settled empty lands, they will be pure Slavs, why are they not close with the other pure Slav countries ???

1. obviously there were native balkanians left and were assimilated - but they were the minority.

2. Not all Slavs genetically equal even before the migrations south. Obviously the Serbs had some sort of elite status amongst the early Slavs.

Sucks desu, I'd like a nice serious haplotard discussion on Veeky Forums. Has anyone here tested?

Slavic migration ring a bell?

draganprimorac.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Croatian-national-reference-Y-STR-haplotype-database_.-Molecular-biology-reports-2012.pdf

Regions settled with these Slavs are rich in R1a and low on I2a1

Strange that I2a1 (I1b) is the second most frequent haplogroup amongst all Slavs (with R1a).

Why so? You can say the same thing for
Strange that I1 is the second most frequent in German countries
Strange that J2 is the second most frequent in Latin countries

>I-L621 is typical of the South Slavic populations of south-eastern Europe, being highest in Bosnia-Herzegovina (>50%) in Croats.[3] There is also a high concentration of I-L621 in north-east Romania and Moldova. Several groups have determined the common occurrence of this subclade in the South Slavic-speaking populations to be the result of "pre-Slavic" paleolithic settlement in the region. Peričić et al. for instance places its expansion to have occurred "not earlier than the YD to Holocene transition and not later than the early Neolithic”.[13][14][15] Decidedly, the Slavic population can be divided into two genetically distinct groups: one encompassing all Western-Slavic (Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, etc.), Eastern-Slavic (Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, etc.) and a few Southern-Slavic populations (north-western Croats and Slovenes), characterized by Haplogroup R1a, and one encompassing all remaining Southern Slavs (Serbs, Bosniaks, southern Croats, Montenegrins, Macedonians and Bulgarians) but also the non-Slavic Romanians, characterized by Haplogroup I2a1b2 (I-L621). According to Rebała et al., this phenomenon is explained by "contribution to the Y chromosomes of peoples who settled in the Balkan region before the Slavic expansion to the genetic heritage of Southern Slavs.[16] It is attributed to the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture in what is now modern day Ukraine, Romania and Moldova. L69/S163 - Removed from I in 2011 and IJK in 2012.[17]

Go to sleep momcilo you have gymnazia in the morning

Well it's strange according to the theory that I2a1 is a paleo-balkan marker. If that's the case Russia and Belarus would have >1% I2a.

Check and Starcevo culture.

...

google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?hl=pl&authuser=0&mid=131mHMXo8l7tgnlMT-bC5JY1iDg0&ll=48.26741215252896,31.122610500000064&z=5

"The Starčevo culture, sometimes included within a larger grouping known as the Starčevo–Kőrös–Criş culture, is an archaeological culture of Southeastern Europe, dating to the Neolithic period between c. 6200 and 4500 BCE."

>6300-4500BC

which is before Slavs even existed, how can you prove they weren't part of the Slavic ethnogenesis?

Also, the mapping of the Starcevo civilization does not match I2a1 densities.

Because the I2a1 people were already there, before R1a carriers of Slavic language came. Check the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture, same shit different year.

I2a1 mixed with Slavs, became Slavs, but the original carriers and inventors of the language or whatever the fuck you want it is R1a.

See yourself, an I2a1 carrier trying to impress his R1a masters and you are a proud "slav". There are not enough DNA results from that period to prove any of your points.