[HISTORICAL ISSUE] - Iranian origin of Croats and Serbs

[Hrobatos]

you and him are funny

[dabela]

I dont know what is it that you dont understand? Or maybe i dont understand you?

[slavic_crusader]

Same here.... what do u find funny from us?

[NikeBG]

Edit
Nike BG.... then the whole thing is flawed and everything what we say now is pretty much from what is personally being thought frome each individual....

Genetic researches which claim to tell which modern nations consists of what percentages of which ancient tribes are more than certainly flawed, in my opinion as well. Other fields of history, however, are still quite usable.

[slavic_crusader]

I agree with that Nike BG. Only problem with that u cant apply to everyone

[Hrobatos]

well lets clear things up

two of you claim that Slavs are a genetical group

whuch would mean that statisicly all haplogroups in all slavic nations will be in similar amount, for instance all Slavic nation would have 50% of R1a ( known sas "slavic" haplogroup) 15% of Ia haplogroup,5% of R1b haplogroup , 1% of Ib haplogroup, i made up those numbers, it can be any nnumber but same or similar for all slavs

so all slavic nations would have similar amount of each haplogroup and so they would be one genetic group


but they are not, they are quite geneticly different, check it

[dabela]

Genetic researches which claim to tell which modern nations consists of what percentages of which ancient tribes are more than certainly flawed, in my opinion as well. Other fields of history, however, are still quite usable.

I know that we canot know what percentage of slavic genes we have, but we can be sure we are more slavs than germans or any other... Thats a fact...

[dabela]

whuch would mean that statisicly all haplogroups in all slavic nations will be in similar amount, for instance all Slavic nation would have 50% of R1a ( known sas "slavic" haplogroup) 15% of Ia haplogroup,5% of R1b haplogroup , 1% of Ib haplogroup, i made up those numbers, it can be any nnumber but same or similar for all slavs

no it doesnt... if macedonians have lets say 10 % of greek genes, that is because they are close to greeks, and it doesnt mean that polaks must have it too...

[slavic_crusader]

Hrobatos u made it too broad and general.... I can not speak for everyone and what their genes are.... At least thing i notice is that we are generally tall people, compared to others....

Overall everyone is different. But i see similarities between us slavs but rarely with Italians or Germans, my opinion of course....U also must consider the fact that we are in different geographical positions and things here and there were different compared to other areas. Therefore different areas influenced differently from eachother.... and who knows what else... I hope i made this clear.... But this is very complicated for any race in this day and age

[vilil]

i agree with carpathian wolf. well, if we talk about ancient serbs, we think of the serbs before coming to balkan. large migrations did not happen, and statistically it is not possible.

Yeap. IF migration happened, it should take long period of time. Serbs(Slavs) were not nomad people. Their migration should last decades, even more. Traces of their migration should be found. For example, Scordisci, who founded Belgrade left their traces. But traces do not exist.
Did migration of Serbs happened at all?

when serbs came to balkan,

From where? How? When? Any facts, traces, which support that? Or is it only a theory?

I wonder why is there so much hostility in relation to that theory of Iranian origins of Croats and Serbs.

No hostilities at all. Personally, you can believe what you want, I don't care. Your choice. He, even on this forum, we have some who believe that his newly invented nation, descend from Filip and Aleksandar.

But, what intrigues me. In Serbia today, there are evidences of old cultures. Oldest in Europe. Starcevo, Vinca, Lepenski vir...And noone mention that sites as a cradle of Serbs. Why? Why Serbian people wants to be from Iran, and not from Serbia? There are not evidences that Serbs descend from Starcevo, but also, there are not evidence that there are from Ukraina, Rusia, Iran...

[NikeBG]

I know that we canot know what percentage of slavic genes we have, but we can be sure we are more slavs than germans or any other... Thats a fact...

Actually, while the above-mentioned iGenea still hosted a list with ancient-tribal-percentages-per-modern-country, one of the South-Slavic nations (not sure which - Serbia, Croatia or Macedonia, I think it was Serbia) had more "Teuton" genes than it had "Slavic" ones. Of course, there's also the funny thing that, according to them, Bulgarians have more Thracian genes than Romanians. And Macedonians have some Hunnic genes, while Bulgarians have some Scythian and Phoenecian ones instead.
But I repeat what that quote employee had also said - haplogroups can not be used to identify "recent" races or ethnoses, since the formings of the haplogroups happened too long ago, in prehistory. If comparisons are to be made with ancient populations, more specific genetic markers would be required (and, naturally, the best case would be large-scale researches of valid skeletons (i.e. we know they're of Thracians or Slavs or whatever, not of some Wandering Jew; plus extracting DNA materials from skeletons is a very tricky thing with minimal results) and even larger-scale researches of the modern populations, distributed and selected by the laws of the studies of statistics; which would require so much finances and efforts that I doubt it possible in the near future).

[slavic_crusader]

Intresting.....

[dabela]

Actually, while the above-mentioned iGenea still hosted a list with ancient-tribal-percentages-per-modern-country, one of the South-Slavic nations (not sure which - Serbia, Croatia or Macedonia, I think it was Serbia) had more "Teuton" genes than it had "Slavic" ones.

It wasnt serbia, it was croatia (or maybe even slovenia)... Anyway i think that that reasearch is fake... There are some funny results that i cant believe... turns out macedonians have more old macedonian genes than any other, which i find funny ...

[NikeBG]

Indeed, iGenea has been suspected by many people to serve the purposes of the autochtonist movement. Though all the other genetic researches I've seen aren't much better either (at least the ones from this type, which try to dress different markers with tribal names).

[phoenix[illusion]]

@vilil
ok, if migration did not happen, that should mean that we are illyrian/thracian/dacian

and you're quite wrong. De Administrando Imperio talks about migration of serbs. also today, there are Sorbs (lusatian serbs) on the land of White Serbia (Boika). they now count of 20000 population, but it's cause they were germanized. also, there are texts of veneti, and speaks about serbs from white serbia. and not to talk about our language and name. if there was no migration why do we speak slavic language? why are we called serbs? even if warrior tribes came, it's still migration. and not to talk that in some books, serbs is name for all the slavs.

[vilil]

Credibility of DAI is,,,about toilet paper. And, I'm not going to talk about "historical" books, or something. We all know how, and why, historians write their books.
About the name. What does it mean? Nothing. In USA there are 4 - 5 Belgrade. Founded because of Belgrade Serbia. But it doesn't mean that there live the same people which live in Serbian Belgrade.

Does any traces of migration exist? Again, Serbs were NOT nomadic people with only horses, tents...Yet, there is no proof that migration happened. He,even Cumans left their traces in Balkan. Let's say in Serbia Kumane, Kumanovo in FYRMakedonija...

[phoenix[illusion]]

Credibility of DAI is,,,about toilet paper. And, I'm not going to talk about "historical" books, or something. We all know how, and why, historians write their books.
About the name. What does it mean? Nothing. In USA there are 4 - 5 Belgrade. Founded because of Belgrade Serbia. But it doesn't mean that there live the same people which live in Serbian Belgrade.

Does any traces of migration exist? Again, Serbs were NOT nomadic people with only horses, tents...Yet, there is no proof that migration happened. He,even Cumans left their traces in Balkan. Let's say in Serbia Kumane, Kumanovo in FYRMakedonija...

in fact, i think that DAI is great source. you probably read too much books from Deretic, who describes serbs as one who had their empire before nemanjic, which was all over balkan. bullsh!t. Deretic is in great confusion, firstly he talks about serbs from balkan, then from iran, then from polish lands. by deretic, serbs were all over europe, and suddenly, they were resized in small nemanjic state
there are much more proof that serbs are from slavs then from balkan. non of the roman historians writes about serbs on balkan.
and yes, in usa there are belgrades cause of serbian belgrade. in usa there are too many towns with european citiy's names. and that belgrades are small towns

[slavic_crusader]

Belgrades in America.... OMG!

[vilil]

DAI is shite. Fact. Also, I don't care about Deretic. I said I don't wanna talk about "historians", and their work. Why are you mention any historian? Fook the historians. Only common sense. I only asked you for a "facts" about migration of Serbs. Nothing more, nothing less. Traces of migration? Any?

[NikeBG]

Does any traces of migration exist? Again, Serbs were NOT nomadic people with only horses, tents...Yet, there is no proof that migration happened. He,even Cumans left their traces in Balkan. Let's say in Serbia Kumane, Kumanovo in FYRMakedonija...

The Slavs in general were also "NOT nomadic people with only horses, tents..." Yet, there is quite evident proof of their migration to the Balkans, through the narrative sources (history), the material sources (archaeology), the toponyms (linguistics) etc. Denying the Slavic migration is like denying the moon landings, 9/11 or the Holocaust (i.e. it would require some huge world-wide conspiracy).