#370292

Anonymous

Anyway these are the flaws in your theory:

1) If Paleo-Balkanians were E then why did Greeks view Illyrians as different people both in looks and language.
2) If Slavs were both R1a and I, that would mean Dalmatia (which was very populated) was empty before Slavic arrival even thought we know Slavs didn’t settle the cities right away rather only started to merge with Dalmatians as a very slow process. Last Dalmatian dialect speaker died in 1898.
3) Only 6% of Croatian Haplogroup pool is made of E-V13, that would be impossible to be the only trace of native Dalmatian population.
4) If Slavs from the begging were I and R1a hybrid, intact Slavic populations of central Belarus would have far higher amount of it. Hp I2 is non-existant in all Slavic countries except southern Slavs (which migrated to a land that already had it’s population, it would be logical they have their imprint then no?) and Ukraine which is in close proximity with South Slavs and yet there is also very low, just 12%.
5) If E and J are “southern-European”, and I and R1a are Slavic where is the genetic imprint brought to Balkans by Turks, Turkic Bulgars and neolithic farmers as Berbers?
6) If E-V13 is again southern-European as you say and was among Romanised paleo-Balkanians as Vlach then why is it’s amount in Romania only 6% of it’s whole genetic pool and yet they are the biggest remnants of Vlach population in Balkans and carriers of Romance language while it has much bigger I2 percentage (18%)?
7) Again why would E-V13 then leave the largest imprint among Albanians than among Greeks and almost non-existent among old Dalmatians even thought last two were few dozen times larger populations than off Albanians and their ancestors. 

In generally your theory doesn’t provide a good reason why would only South Slavs have a I2a imprint while West and East Slavs don’t while we know through history it was only the South-Slavs that were migrating and settling already a inhabited land. I’m sorry man, it’s too flawed.

Haplogroup I yes, it’s mutation I2a2a mutated in the period of the arrival of R1a, or even after. Slavs never were one tribe of people, that is the reason why the Slavic sea is so vast. If I2a2a is noted in the Balkans before the first arrival of the Slavs, that means before ~400 CE let’s say, or sometimes before the common era, then it is possible that I2a2a is an Illyrian marker rather than a Slavic one. But remember only if I2a2a predates, not other Haplogroup I mutations.


    [li]We look at each other as different people as well. Greeks saw non Helens as others, were they of different racial stock, is impossible to say, I do not believe so. Fairer complexion, E-V13 Albanians are fairer than E-V13 Greeks even today.[/li]
    [li]Yes it was vastly empty before Slavic arrival, according to the Roman chronicles. Thats why land was given to the Slavs to settle and act as foederati of the Empire.[/li]
    [li]Not much native Illyrians lived in the north, were conquered, exiled and extinguished by Rome 800 years before Croats arrived, what Croats saw weren’t only Illyrians, but romanised folk of Illyricum mostly living in the cities.[/li]
    [li]As far as I read, all Slavs have I2a2a and R1a, not just one, nonetheless the I2a2a branch of Slavs may have migrated to the south before it was largely dominated by R1a, which was more numerous than a very young Haplogroup I mutation (I2a2a was only 1400 years old, before it migrated, making it a very small population in comparison to R1a). That Illyrians migrated north and were assimilated by Slavs is possible but not supported by any findings.[/li]
    [li]E-V13 and J2 are mediterranean haplogroups. Turks assimilated Greeks of the Byzantine Empire (almost no ethnic Turks exist today in Turkey, mostly turkified Greeks and the rest) the J2 imprint can be seen as both Greek and later ‘Turkish’. Turkic Bulgars were assimilated in almost 200 years, they were a small aristocrat population that never intermixed with lesser Slavs, their imprint as well as the asiatic Turkic one can be seen as non-existent.[/li]
    [li]Romanians are a largely mixed population of various people, mostly of Slavic substratum and Romanic superstratum, meaning that the larger Slavic population was dominated by the smaller Roman population (like the case with the Bulgarian Slavs and the Bulgars, Rus Slavs and Varangians, French Gauls and Romans), thus being Slavs in core, as one can see by their tradition and heritage, but speaking a romanic language[/li]
    [li]Because Albanians didn’t intermix as much with other ethnicities like Greeks did, meaning that they are a far more smaller population than the Greeks – 17mil Greeks, 7mil Albanians. Albanians lived and still live in remote areas with non-existent foreign influx, and as I hear they intermarry inbetween kin, this may or may not be true.[/li]

Once again almost all Slavs have an I2a2a imprint, the smaller groups that migrated and isolated, a higher percentage, greater groups that stayed and intermixed with larger haplogroups like R1a, smaller percentage, which is logical.

Slavorum

4 User(s) Online Join Server
  • Adam's Song
  • HicksGhostLDN
  • Das Rheinenfuchs
  • m1tric