Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: I-Z17855 origins

  1. #11
    Registered Users
    Posts
    251
    Sex
    Location
    north africa
    Ethnicity
    berber
    Nationality
    Morocco
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y141637*
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a

    Morocco Algeria MoroccoPreColonial Byzantine Empire
    this branch represents the Slavic expansion in the 3rd century CE in the Balkans

  2. #12
    Banned
    Posts
    845
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Albanian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V13

    Albania
    Quote Originally Posted by capsian View Post
    this branch represents the Slavic expansion in the 3rd century CE in the Balkans
    It is 6th century actually. Right after: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plague_of_Justinian

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hawk For This Useful Post:

     capsian (03-04-2021),  excine (03-06-2021)

  4. #13
    Registered Users
    Posts
    498
    Ethnicity
    Macedonian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y16729
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by vasil View Post
    I am standing behing my statement completely I do agree that Z17855 outside of the Balkans is of pre-Bulgarian Slavic origin but in the Balkans it is definitely from Antes migrating to Eastern Balkans(maybe also Y18331) to later become Bulgarians as far as its presence in Western Balkans is concerned I would even go as far as to say that it spread there during the expansion of the First Bulgarian Empire during Krums dynasty and just to prove that i am not at all unreasonable i will say that i do think that ALL PH908 in the Balkans is originaly Serbian and maybe some S17250>PH908- and there is for sure Serbian input in Western Bulgaria and its strongest in Northwestern Bulgaria where we only have a single Z17855 and its from a village that had settlers from Teteven area(where my father is actually from) which is at the western edge of Central Balkan Mountains on the border with Shops/Torlaks/Northwestern Bulgarians. As far as ethnic identification is concerned i have no problem with people identifying however they want like my PH908 ancestors identified as Bulgarians at least since the Late Middle Ages Z17855 guys from the Western Balkans can identify as Serbs, Macedonians, Albanians but i dont agree with changing history for the sake of an ideology.
    This blog has quite good and detailed analysis of the various I-Y3120 subclades in the Balkans and other countries: http://blog.vayda.pl/en/i2a-dinaric-subclade-y3120-2/

    I-Z17855 here is called Din C. It gets painfully obvious that this is a minor subclade of I-Y3120 and percentage wise it's strongest in Romania, North Macedonia and Bulgaria while it's almost inexistent in the western Slavic countries as well as Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia while it's less than <5% in Serbia. It reaches somehow a comparable Eastern Balkan percentage in Montenegro however the difference with the Eastern Balkan is that it's quite minor when compared to it's brother I-PH908 which is quite strong in the western Slavic countries.
    The non-existence of I-Z17855 or the very minor presence at least makes me think that the tribes known as Sclavenoi from the Prague-Korcak Culture weren't the progenitors of TMRCA of I-Z17855 but it was a lineage that came in prominence in a group living to the east of these Sclavenoi and such people were the Antes from the Penkovka culture as you correctly mentioned.
    I believe that both I-Z17855 and TMRCA were born in Ukraine, somewhere close to Dnieper. These would correspond with the Antes from the historical sources as you correctly pointed out.

    After the Goths departed from the region of the lower Danube under the pressure of Huns and after the region was depopulated, a new population, coming from both Prague-Korcak and Penkovka filled the void. This new population that was equally represented by people from both cultures brought both PH908 and Z17855 in equal numbers. We can confidently say that this Slavic population that took this eastern path along the eastern slopes of the Carpathians is the ancestral population of the Bulgarians and the Macedonians.
    However when these tribes crosses Danube they settled not only in Bulgaria and Macedonia but also in Dalmatia as well which is well known from historical sources. So some I-Z17855 Serbs and Montenegrins are descendants of these early migrants. The original Serbs didn't migrate through the same path as the Slavic ancestors of the Bulgarians and the Macedonians but they came later and used a different path. When they arrived in the Balkans they subdued the earlier Slavic migrants in Dalmatia and Serbia that must have had equal number of PH908 and Z17855, a picture similar to the one of the Bulgarians and Macedonians. This is very obvious when we look in detail in the Serbian subclades downstream of I-Y3120 which are dominated by PH908.
    Distance to: Aspar_scaled
    0.01995435 35.00% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2 + 65.00% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02156914 40.60% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av1 + 59.40% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02223177 55.20% Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215 + 44.80% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19
    0.02300447 61.80% BGR_IA:I5769 + 38.20% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19

  5. #14
    Registered Users
    Posts
    38
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-M67

    Serbia Croatia
    Quote Originally Posted by broder View Post
    Bastarni theory was simply created by some Serbs with absolutely no basis or evidence whatsoever. Not even worth mentioning.
    It is definitely worth mentioning. Maybe you misunderstood it, nobody is claiming that the Bastarnae invaded the Balkans and brought this haplogroup with them.
    The theory is that Bastarnae brought it from Western Europe to Ukraine, and proto-Slavs absorbed it there.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to slavomir For This Useful Post:

     Pribislav (03-04-2021)

  7. #15
    Registered Users
    Posts
    83
    Sex
    Location
    Bulgaria
    Ethnicity
    NW Bulgarian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Y151633>I-FT10714
    mtDNA (M)
    H4d

    Bulgaria North Macedonia Greek Macedonia European Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    This blog has quite good and detailed analysis of the various I-Y3120 subclades in the Balkans and other countries: http://blog.vayda.pl/en/i2a-dinaric-subclade-y3120-2/

    I-Z17855 here is called Din C. It gets painfully obvious that this is a minor subclade of I-Y3120 and percentage wise it's strongest in Romania, North Macedonia and Bulgaria while it's almost inexistent in the western Slavic countries as well as Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia while it's less than <5% in Serbia. It reaches somehow a comparable Eastern Balkan percentage in Montenegro however the difference with the Eastern Balkan is that it's quite minor when compared to it's brother I-PH908 which is quite strong in the western Slavic countries.
    The non-existence of I-Z17855 or the very minor presence at least makes me think that the tribes known as Sclavenoi from the Prague-Korcak Culture weren't the progenitors of TMRCA of I-Z17855 but it was a lineage that came in prominence in a group living to the east of these Sclavenoi and such people were the Antes from the Penkovka culture as you correctly mentioned.
    I believe that both I-Z17855 and TMRCA were born in Ukraine, somewhere close to Dnieper. These would correspond with the Antes from the historical sources as you correctly pointed out.

    After the Goths departed from the region of the lower Danube under the pressure of Huns and after the region was depopulated, a new population, coming from both Prague-Korcak and Penkovka filled the void. This new population that was equally represented by people from both cultures brought both PH908 and Z17855 in equal numbers. We can confidently say that this Slavic population that took this eastern path along the eastern slopes of the Carpathians is the ancestral population of the Bulgarians and the Macedonians.
    However when these tribes crosses Danube they settled not only in Bulgaria and Macedonia but also in Dalmatia as well which is well known from historical sources. So some I-Z17855 Serbs and Montenegrins are descendants of these early migrants. The original Serbs didn't migrate through the same path as the Slavic ancestors of the Bulgarians and the Macedonians but they came later and used a different path. When they arrived in the Balkans they subdued the earlier Slavic migrants in Dalmatia and Serbia that must have had equal number of PH908 and Z17855, a picture similar to the one of the Bulgarians and Macedonians. This is very obvious when we look in detail in the Serbian subclades downstream of I-Y3120 which are dominated by PH908.
    I agree with you up to the migration south of the Danube of Penkovka or Ipotesti–Candesti as they call it in Romania but after that i think that the Antes that settled in Macedonia and Thessalia were not Z17855 but Y18331 and that is why its so old there on the other hand as i already said Z17855 in Macedonia probably represents the western expansion of the First Bulgarian Empire during Krums dynasty from somewhere arround the Rhodopes and its presence in Montenegrins is due to later migration from Macedonia. As far as PH908 is concerned i dont really buy the crap about Heraclius settling the Serbs and Croats in the Western Balkans as part of a second settlement of Slavs in my opinion it was just an effort to save face from the Byzantine side. The Sclaveni in my opinion are just the Srbi and Hrvati who came from Prague-Korchak culture and the same story in historical sources about them attacking Thessaloniki and then going back north and settling in the Dinaric Alps between the Adriatic and Morava keeps reapeating itself and when you factor in the fact that there was such an attack of Thessaloniki in 550 and Germanus managed to push them back it all starts to make sense. Again to say in my opinion PH908 and S17250>PH908- in Shopluk/Torlak area probably represents some later movement of Serbians east of the Morava and its presence in Macedonia represents even later movements from Shopluk/Torlak area to the south. And because the stuff about ethnicity has to be discused together with this stuff i will say that Bulgarians have to accept the fact that there is Serbian input in Western Bulgaria, Macedonians have to accept that pre-20th century there were only Serbians and Bulgarians and Serbs have to accept that the Slavic speaking population of Montenegro and Kosovo are definitely mixed with Albanians and Bulgarians from Macedonia and just to be safe i am not misunderstood I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE IDENTIFYING HOWEVER THEY WANT.
    Last edited by vasil; 03-05-2021 at 05:02 AM.

  8. #16
    Registered Users
    Posts
    498
    Ethnicity
    Macedonian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y16729
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by vasil View Post
    I agree with you up to the migration south of the Danube of Penkovka or Ipotesti–Candesti as they call it in Romania but after that i think that the Antes that settled in Macedonia and Thessalia were not Z17855 but Y18331 and that is why its so old there on the other hand as i already said Z17855 in Macedonia probably represents the western expansion of the First Bulgarian Empire during Krums dynasty from somewhere arround the Rhodopes and its presence in Montenegrins is due to later migration from Macedonia. As far as PH908 is concerned i dont really buy the crap about Heraclius settling the Serbs and Croats in the Western Balkans as part of a second settlement of Slavs in my opinion it was just an effort to save face from the Byzantine side. The Sclaveni in my opinion are just the Srbi and Hrvati who came from Prague-Korchak culture and the same story in historical sources about them attacking Thessaloniki and then going back north and settling in the Dinaric Alps between the Adriatic and Morava keeps reapeating itself and when you factor in the fact that there was such an attack of Thessaloniki in 550 and Germanus managed to push them back it all starts to make sense. Again to say in my opinion PH908 and S17250>PH908- in Shopluk/Torlak area probably represents some later movement of Serbians east of the Morava and its presence in Macedonia represents even later movements from Shopluk/Torlak area to the south. And because the stuff about ethnicity has to be discused together with this stuff i will say that Bulgarians have to accept the fact that there is Serbian input in Western Bulgaria, Macedonians have to accept that pre-20th century there were only Serbians and Bulgarians and Serbs have to accept that the Slavic speaking population of Montenegro and Kosovo are definitely mixed with Albanians and Bulgarians from Macedonia and just to be safe i am not misunderstood I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE IDENTIFYING HOWEVER THEY WANT.
    I believe there are no historical accounts that Antes settled on their own in Greece and Macedonia. The Slavic population that settled there were clearly called Sclavenoi by the Roman sources but relying on archaeological sources we also know that there were elements from both Prague-Korcak and Penkovka in Ipotesti-Candesti.
    As for I-Y18331, there is no indication these arrived with the Slavs. And if these were Antes you would expect to see them in Bulgaria and Romania as well which we don't.
    What we see is quite a diversity of I-Y18331 in Greece and Macedonia. There is also a big Jewish cluster downstream of I-Y18331. The Jews arrived and settled in the Roman Empire first before migrating to other parts of Europe. So this cluster was picked up by the Jews in the Roman Empire before the arrival of the Slavs. There are other indicators that these Y18331 group arrived in Greece and Macedonia earlier than the Slavs. The Chuvash sample on Yfull shares common ancestor with Greeks around the time of the Chernyakhov Culture and just before the Huns arrived from the east. You are probably aware that the Chuvash language is probably the closest thing to proto-Bulgar and the Bulgars were part of the Hunnic confederation. It's not a rocket science to connect the dots here and that members of these subclade would have assimilated into Huns and Romans before the Slavic expansions. It's telling these subclade is missing largely in Bulgarians and Serbs and if ever shows up, they would probably have close cousins in Macedonia and Greece which will indicate a recent migration.

    You can't generalize and make it as simple as you've put it. If Sclavenoi were just Serbs and Croats the Roman sources would have called them as such. Instead they called these first migrants Sclavenoi and not Serbs or Croats. It's indicative because they clearly mentioned the Serbs and the Croats as part of another migration. Also I believe the accounts about them doesn't say anything about attacking Thessaloniki but they were invited to settle around Thessaloniki and from there they migrated to their current place. It's important to note that this account is anachronistic and is from the time of Constantine VII Flavius Porphyrogenitus reigning from 6 June 913 to 9 November 959 while he speaks of arrival of the Serbs in the first half of the 7-th century. Because of this, we can't take this account for granted, the same with Gesta Hungarorum written in the 12-th or 13-th century which speaks of Vlachs in Transylvania in the late 9-th century. Furthermore, the first Serbian ruler known by name in the account is Višeslav in c.780 AD. Everything before him is unknown with the first ruler being some unknown Prince.

    Another thing is that the Bulgarians but also the Serbs and Croats seem to be of non-Slavic origin. At the time both Serbs and Bulgarians were clearly Slavic, 9-th century, they've started to make alliances with other Slavic tribes or to conquer them, enlarging their territory and assimilating the others. Only from that point on, you can speak about Bulgarians and Serbs. That's what happened when the Bulgarians conquered Macedonia. They imposed their rule to the other Slavic tribes there and from that point only the Bulgarian name survived and the Greeks clearly referred to the Slavic people in Macedonia as Bulgarians. Only from that point on we can speak about Bulgarians in Macedonia, a process that reflects first and foremost the dialectal continuum between the people of Bulgaria and Macedonia.
    Distance to: Aspar_scaled
    0.01995435 35.00% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2 + 65.00% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02156914 40.60% HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av1 + 59.40% ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR65
    0.02223177 55.20% Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215 + 44.80% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19
    0.02300447 61.80% BGR_IA:I5769 + 38.20% UKR_Chernyakhiv_Legedzine:MJ19

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Aspar For This Useful Post:

     Pribislav (03-06-2021)

  10. #17
    Registered Users
    Posts
    38
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    J-M67

    Serbia Croatia
    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    You can't generalize and make it as simple as you've put it. If Sclavenoi were just Serbs and Croats the Roman sources would have called them as such. Instead they called these first migrants Sclavenoi and not Serbs or Croats. It's indicative because they clearly mentioned the Serbs and the Croats as part of another migration. Also I believe the accounts about them doesn't say anything about attacking Thessaloniki but they were invited to settle around Thessaloniki and from there they migrated to their current place. It's important to note that this account is anachronistic and is from the time of Constantine VII Flavius Porphyrogenitus reigning from 6 June 913 to 9 November 959 while he speaks of arrival of the Serbs in the first half of the 7-th century. Because of this, we can't take this account for granted, the same with Gesta Hungarorum written in the 12-th or 13-th century which speaks of Vlachs in Transylvania in the late 9-th century. Furthermore, the first Serbian ruler known by name in the account is Višeslav in c.780 AD. Everything before him is unknown with the first ruler being some unknown Prince.

    Another thing is that the Bulgarians but also the Serbs and Croats seem to be of non-Slavic origin. At the time both Serbs and Bulgarians were clearly Slavic, 9-th century, they've started to make alliances with other Slavic tribes or to conquer them, enlarging their territory and assimilating the others. Only from that point on, you can speak about Bulgarians and Serbs. That's what happened when the Bulgarians conquered Macedonia. They imposed their rule to the other Slavic tribes there and from that point only the Bulgarian name survived and the Greeks clearly referred to the Slavic people in Macedonia as Bulgarians. Only from that point on we can speak about Bulgarians in Macedonia, a process that reflects first and foremost the dialectal continuum between the people of Bulgaria and Macedonia.
    Actually, there are multiple medieval sources which say Serbs and Croats are Sclavenoi, and even that they originate from Sclavenoi.
    Medieval authors clearly viewed them as such, and when Sclavenoi are mentioned, it could just be a less specific name for Serbs, for example.

    What does archaeology say on this? Are there traces of 2 waves of Slavic settlement in the Western Balkans?

    I also fail to see this paralel between Serbs and Bulgarians. A Bulgar elite subjugated a population of Slavs and Vlachs, and from then on we can speak about Bulgarians.
    Serbs on the other hand weren't an elite, they were a large population and settled a compact territory, and expanded very little outside this territory until the 1200s.
    The only tribe which Serbs possibly assimilated early on are the Diocleans.

  11. #18
    Registered Users
    Posts
    57
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Z17855*
    mtDNA (M)
    X2f

    Bulgaria
    Quote Originally Posted by Velislav View Post
    Yes, I-Y3120 (aka YP196 aka S20602) seems to be very Slavic. Everything below Y3120 is connected to the Slavic migrations.

    Pheter from this forum made a good map for Z17855 - it is a Bulgarian branch, roughly said.

    Attachment 43665
    So its like the map of the First Bulgarian Empire? Avitohol seed is strong.

  12. #19
    Registered Users
    Posts
    83
    Sex
    Location
    Bulgaria
    Ethnicity
    NW Bulgarian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Y151633>I-FT10714
    mtDNA (M)
    H4d

    Bulgaria North Macedonia Greek Macedonia European Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Plashiputak View Post
    So its like the map of the First Bulgarian Empire? Avitohol seed is strong.
    Not Avitohol seed is trong but more like peasant slavic seed is trong.

  13. #20
    Registered Users
    Posts
    83
    Sex
    Location
    Bulgaria
    Ethnicity
    NW Bulgarian
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Y151633>I-FT10714
    mtDNA (M)
    H4d

    Bulgaria North Macedonia Greek Macedonia European Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    I believe there are no historical accounts that Antes settled on their own in Greece and Macedonia. The Slavic population that settled there were clearly called Sclavenoi by the Roman sources but relying on archaeological sources we also know that there were elements from both Prague-Korcak and Penkovka in Ipotesti-Candesti.
    As for I-Y18331, there is no indication these arrived with the Slavs. And if these were Antes you would expect to see them in Bulgaria and Romania as well which we don't.
    What we see is quite a diversity of I-Y18331 in Greece and Macedonia. There is also a big Jewish cluster downstream of I-Y18331. The Jews arrived and settled in the Roman Empire first before migrating to other parts of Europe. So this cluster was picked up by the Jews in the Roman Empire before the arrival of the Slavs. There are other indicators that these Y18331 group arrived in Greece and Macedonia earlier than the Slavs. The Chuvash sample on Yfull shares common ancestor with Greeks around the time of the Chernyakhov Culture and just before the Huns arrived from the east. You are probably aware that the Chuvash language is probably the closest thing to proto-Bulgar and the Bulgars were part of the Hunnic confederation. It's not a rocket science to connect the dots here and that members of these subclade would have assimilated into Huns and Romans before the Slavic expansions. It's telling these subclade is missing largely in Bulgarians and Serbs and if ever shows up, they would probably have close cousins in Macedonia and Greece which will indicate a recent migration.

    You can't generalize and make it as simple as you've put it. If Sclavenoi were just Serbs and Croats the Roman sources would have called them as such. Instead they called these first migrants Sclavenoi and not Serbs or Croats. It's indicative because they clearly mentioned the Serbs and the Croats as part of another migration. Also I believe the accounts about them doesn't say anything about attacking Thessaloniki but they were invited to settle around Thessaloniki and from there they migrated to their current place. It's important to note that this account is anachronistic and is from the time of Constantine VII Flavius Porphyrogenitus reigning from 6 June 913 to 9 November 959 while he speaks of arrival of the Serbs in the first half of the 7-th century. Because of this, we can't take this account for granted, the same with Gesta Hungarorum written in the 12-th or 13-th century which speaks of Vlachs in Transylvania in the late 9-th century. Furthermore, the first Serbian ruler known by name in the account is Višeslav in c.780 AD. Everything before him is unknown with the first ruler being some unknown Prince.

    Another thing is that the Bulgarians but also the Serbs and Croats seem to be of non-Slavic origin. At the time both Serbs and Bulgarians were clearly Slavic, 9-th century, they've started to make alliances with other Slavic tribes or to conquer them, enlarging their territory and assimilating the others. Only from that point on, you can speak about Bulgarians and Serbs. That's what happened when the Bulgarians conquered Macedonia. They imposed their rule to the other Slavic tribes there and from that point only the Bulgarian name survived and the Greeks clearly referred to the Slavic people in Macedonia as Bulgarians. Only from that point on we can speak about Bulgarians in Macedonia, a process that reflects first and foremost the dialectal continuum between the people of Bulgaria and Macedonia.
    Like slavomir said Sclaveni was probably just a less specific term used by the Byzantines who probably didnt know of the terms Srbi and Hrvati and maybe it originated as a term that united them ie you have the Srbi and Hrvati tribes on their own but together they are the Sclaveni. This thing about the Serbians, Croats and Bulgarians not being Slavs is complete crap and is totaly not supported by anything maybe you can say Bulgarians and Serbs are South Slavs because we mixed with the local population and the Croats show some Celto-Germanic admixture but saying we are not Slavic is insane and btw the Slavic speaking population in Macedonia shows the lowest amount of Slavic admixture out of all Slavs in the world barelly enough to even be considered Slavs and not Vlacho-Albanians now as far as the original Bulgar tribe is concerned yes they werent Slavic but we are obviously not descended from them they just gave the name of the state because they founded it and ruled it. On the subject of Y18331 there is a person from the I2a project with origins from a village in the region of Sliven in Thrace that has ordered Big Y and is predicted to be Y18331>A2512 the origin of the Bulgarian population in lowland Thrace is probably from the Rhodopes, Aegean Thrace and Aegean Macedonia so maybe he makes a branch with the guy from Thasos who is close buy or he is just basal A2512 but no matter what it pushes the clade further east there is also a Thransylvanian who is predicted to be Y18331>A2512>A10959>Y23116 which is the Jewish cluster who are by the way Eastern European Jews and so that line is probably just a local Slavic line that they absorbed which is pretty commong among them so it turns out that my theory about Y18331 coming to the Balkans with the Slavs on the eastern side of the Carpathians isnt that far fetched and of course there is no other such group other than the Antes or it could be that it was brought as an absorbed Antian line by the Kuber group of Bulgars which is a more cringy theory but it doesnt seem at all likely that it was brought with the Sclaveni from the Prague-Korchak culture.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. R1b- L2 Origins
    By Celticvikings in forum L2
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-18-2021, 07:58 AM
  2. Origins of AMH:
    By Boreas in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-27-2018, 05:00 AM
  3. My origins
    By Afshar in forum Turkish
    Replies: 216
    Last Post: 08-17-2017, 03:06 PM
  4. GPS origins
    By firemonkey in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-06-2016, 08:10 PM
  5. M64. Origins ?
    By rick_r in forum R1b-Z2103/Z2105
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-20-2016, 06:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •