Haplogrupuri in Romania si Europa

neur0, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 11:27, said:

Daca nu ti-am explicat, iti repet: sursele pt "cuvinte slave" sunt de la 1000ad. Adica, practic, dupa ce limba romana s-a format.
Intrebarea (una din mai multele pe care le vei avea de pus, pe masura ce intelegi mai mult) e: cum demonstrezi ca limba romana a imprumutat cuvinte din "limba slava", iar nu "limba slava" a imprumutat cuvinte din limba romana?

Chiar vreau sa stiu, uite te ascult: arata-mi demonstratia cum limba romana a imprumutat pe 'suta' din slava. Presupun ca ai studiat, si ai inteles, si imi poti impartasi si mie intelegerea ta.

Editat de criztu, 30 noiembrie 2019 - 15:02.

neur0, on 29 noiembrie 2019 - 21:28, said:

Nu sunt de acord cu termenul 'asimilare', insa. Amalgamare, da. Agatarsii scitici sunt prezenti in arealul Transilvaniei cam prin zorii civilizatiei protodacice de aici, In majoritate toata cultura, obiceiurile, virtutile si pacatele acestora fiind transmise dacilor ulteriori. Ei au adus prelucrarea aurului, viile cu orgiile si betiile, cultul lui Dyonisos (probabil preluat anterior de la grecii pontici si carat cu ei), etc....Apoi, foarte repejor apar celtii pe scena, care adauga alte influente, si doar apoi apare cultura dacica clasica intracarpatica. Inca o metoda de a diferentia CLAR dacii nordici si cei sudici, getii. Nu degeaba Burebista, getul, nu avea la inima multe din obiceiurile fratilor nordici, a pus sa se distruga viile, i-a eliminat pe celti, etc.....
Si da, scitii e ca o denumire generica de popoare inrudite puternic, un fel de natiune. Sarmatii si roxolanii scitici guvernand Dobrogea (Scythia Minor)pana la Burebista. Si as vrea sa se intelega ca dacii insisi erau o conglomeratie de triburi tracice cu aceleasi metehne ca si ceilalti din alte parti; se bateau/pradau intre ei, se tradau reciproc, se aliau, etc.......sper sa inceteze odata mistificarea grosolana dacomana care aduce atat rau obiectivitatii istorice.

Editat de leonardusius, 30 noiembrie 2019 - 15:27.

criztu, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 14:59, said:

Nu pot demonstra ce zici. Lucrurile ar putea sta și invers, cuvântul sută să fi fost împrumutat de slavi de la daco-traci. Că sută este împrumut din slavă este o ipoteză lansată de lingviști, nu un fapt demonstrat. De obicei lingviștii se grăbesc să caute etimologii străine pentru un cuvânt, câteodată forțând agrumentația ca să le iasă.

Dar din moment ce lingviștii se pricep mai bine la lucrurile astea decât mine, pot presupune că așa este.

leonardusius, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 15:23, said:

Zeul Dionis se pare că e de proveniență greacă. Cred e posibil să fi fost preluat de daci direct de la greci.
Roxolanii ar fi fost sarmați. Nu că e extrem de important în discuția asta, pentru că și majoritatea sciților și a sarmaților se crede că erau de origine iraniană. La un moment dat s-au cărat spre Câmpia Panonică, dar mă aștept să-și fi lăsat și ADN-ul pe aici.

Roxolanii împreună cu bastarnii (ăștia erau germanici) și iazigi (sarmați) făceau expediții de jaf în Imperiul Roman. Cum erau stabiliți în statul dac, romanii au venit și i-au bubuit pe daci.

Și goții (tot germanici) se cam fercau pe aici.

Deci în perioada -câteva sute de ani, +câteva sute de ani avem popoare de origine iraniană și germanică care ne vizitează, plus ceva greci, plus ce au adus romanii. Daci habar nu am câți erau. Deci avem ceva ADN încrucișat cu cel al dacilor de atunci.

Editat de neur0, 30 noiembrie 2019 - 16:07.

neur0, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 15:45, said:

Stai asa, nu te grabi. Cum stii tu ca lingvistii se pricep mai bine ca tine? Iti dai seama ca ca sa stii ca gigi se pricepe mai mult decat tine, inseamna ca tu ai suficienta pricepere incat sa evaluezi priceperea lingvistilor. Ori, tu tocmai invers zici: dom'le eu nu ma pricep, dar stiu eu ca lingvistii se pricep mai bine ca mine.

Daca imi permiti, sa-ti explic. Lingvistii sunt niste cioflingari. Unii care fac pe dracu in patru sa-si ia o diploma, ca sa-si asigure o pensie de la Stat.
Iar Statul, are un program politic. dom'le, noi suntem din de la Imperiul Roman. dar, pt ca Rusia are si ea niste doleante, suntem si un pic slavi, sa fie si Rusia multumita, sa vada un pic de bunavointa si din partea noastra. Hai suntem si un pic unguri, sa nu ne ia la ochi coana Eoropa, sa ne faca iar diktat vreun austriac isteric, hai, sa fie toata lumea multumita, noi cultivam moderatia, cate un pic din de toate. Zacusca e ideologia nationala.
Nemtii, in schimb, aia invers. Aia POC! toti suntem arieni, arienii primordiali spiralati au cucerit toata planeta, arienii sunt baza, bine hai voi astia din sud si est da'va dracu sunteti de la Imperiu Roman, da noi suntem arieni primordiali, stim noi avem noi biblia gotica a gasit-o un nene intr-un raft pe noptiera la 1700 toamna, cum sa nu fie autentica, fuj dom'le deaicea, ia da-i un pumn in gura lu asta coae, ce tupeu la el.

Deci te incurajez sa incerci sa discuti cu acesti lingvisti, sa vezi, sa observi, ce se afla in spatele lor. O sa vezi ca din spatele lor, ies niste cabluri ca niste sfori, care duc in neant. O sa intelegi tu, cand o sa te uiti mai bine.

leonardusius, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 15:23, said:

sigur ca au adus.
intrebarea mea, de neculturnic. de unde, au adus, acesti scitici. a mai remarcat careva, ai surse, docomente.

leonardusius, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 15:23, said:

aprob si ader, cu mentiunea ca, cum recunoastem aceasta mistinficare, care este ea.

neur0, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 16:06, said:

Dar te rog, demonstreaza, sau macar pune aicea macar o singura dovada ca Dionis e "de provenienta greaca".

criztu, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 17:16, said:

Scrieri de la cca 1300 î. Ch. care atestă cultul lui Dionis s-au găsit la Palatul lui Nestor în Pylos.

neur0, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 16:06, said:

asta dintr-o perspectiva statica, anti-ungureasca.

caci daca te-ar durea in fund de unguri si de pretentiile lor feudale la pamantul Transilvaniei,
ai ajunge la alte concluzii.


In primul rand orice natiunea moderna este un terci de etnii.
Cel mai bun exemplu este SUA, unde natiunea americana inseamna un amestec de etnii, rase, orientari sexuale, misoginism, #MeTOO, LGBT samd.

Un exemplu apropiat noua si drag noua sunt ungurii.
Ungurii n-au nimic in comun genetic cu animalele alea primitive, cracanate, ochiate descreierate ce au navalit in Panonia in sec 9.

Alt exemplu sunt rusii.
La rusi etnonimul e viking. Meclele lor sunt amestec ce aduce a germanic dar si a hunic.
Ochii slitati la rusi este un marker dominant.

Ce sa mai spunem de bulgaroi.
Etnonimul lor e turci.
Genetic sunt mai degraba vlahi decat greci.

Sau sa ne uitam la greci.
In mare parte sunt slavi, turci, araboi, si alte neamuri semitice.

Nu exista natiune moderna Pura din punct de vedere etnic.
Nici nu mai vorbesc din punct de vedere genetic.
Terci pe toata linia.

La noi, avem nucleul etnic pe vlahi.
Dar astazi acest nucleu etnic e o minoritate.
Personal ma trag din acest nucleu si inteleg prea bine statutul de minoritate.

Iar acest nucelu etnic nu provine nicidecum de la nord de Dunare.
Ci reprezinta colonistii romani stabiliti la dreapta Dunarii.

Editat de enough1453, 30 noiembrie 2019 - 18:17.

neur0, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 18:03, said:

ok, hai ca am dat pe wikipedia rapid si i-a facut si pe mycenieni tot greci.
uite ce zic "traditiile" despre Dyonisus. ca s-a nascut in Tracia. deci e greu.
"Among the greatest deities who according to myth came to Greece from Thrace was the god of wine and ecstatic joy, Dionysus" - https://books.google...RV4AvsQ6AEIRDAE
"It is generally accepted that Dionysus is not a native Greek God, and it is likely he is Thracian in origin (like his mother, Semele)" - https://books.google...RV4AvsQ6AEIYDAI
"Not only Herodotus, but all the ancients believed that Dionysus was a Thracian god and that he had come to Greece" - https://books.google...ehgBIwQ6AEIVTAG

Editat de criztu, 30 noiembrie 2019 - 19:17.

criztu, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 19:04, said:

Ia bagă nasul aici:

https://www.jstor.or...fo_tab_contents

enough1453, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 18:16, said:

Dacă prin vlahi înțelegi traco-daci, aș putea fi de acord.

enough1453, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 18:16, said:

Coloniștii romani ar putea fi niște ț1gani aduși de prin colțurile imperiului. Oricum, nu ai cum să te tragi din acel nucleu decât dacă nucleul a rămas în șatra lor și nu s-a amestecat cu alții. Dar, mă rog, dacă tu ai fantezii că te tragi din nu știu ce prinț colorat, pe mine nu mă deranjează.

Editat de neur0, 30 noiembrie 2019 - 19:23.

neur0, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 19:23, said:

Discutia e ampla. Ca au gasit unii scrieri sau desene pe un palat din Mycene, nu e dovada ca "grecii antici" l-au inventat pe Dionysus.
As fi vrut sa-ti discut ca grecii antici sunt de fapt Dorienii, Ionienii, Aelienii, etc. care au invadat Mycene, dar e atat de stufoasa propaganda, ca n-am... dar cu simpatie iti zic, atat cat am acuma energie, poate revin mai incolo. E propaganda, pretentia ca "grecii antici" l-au inventat pe Dionysus.
Linkul dat de tine nu stiu ce vrei sa gasesc acolo. E o stufozitate cu "ceramica greceasca". Pai in primul rand e o propaganda rasuflata, asta cu "ceramica greceasca". E ca si cum daca tu ai blugi Levi's made in China, astia gata te scot de chinez care vorbeste o limba americana.
Nu exista domnu meu "ceramica greceasca". dar nu am entuziasm.

Asa, ca detaliu care coincide cu preocuparile mele din aceasta perioada, e asocierea Dionysus - Bacchus, Bacchus fiind Bes sau Bess, zeul Bessilor, ma rog, e poveste mare, se ajunge in Egipt, cauta "Bess god Egypt" daca ai chef vreodata. Dionysus e deci de fapt Theon, Ziana, Diana, Gione, Jiu, Iovis, Jupiter, in una din nenumaratele versiuni din babilonia de dialecte indo-europene.
In veci n-o sa demonstrezi vreodata "cine l-a inventat pe Dionysus". Dar, cum bag seama, esti entuziast, si pleci de la niste fundamente, cum eram si io acu 10 ani. E bine, ai timp sa-ti evoluezi si reevaluezi ideile, mai vorbim noi.

Hopaaaa!

Arheologii români scormonesc prin Kârgâzstan să afle dacă ne înrudim cu sciţii.
https://adevarul.ro/...2910/index.html

https://www.eupedia....R1a_Y-DNA.shtml

Iata ceva interesant:

Pana si scito-sarmatii au R1 slav, iar ucrainenii au markerul de la anul 3.ooo BC, din care a evoluat Z283 germanic si Z284 scandinav, idem R1a indo-persan si cel iranian.

Asadar este paradoxal cum un popor considerat foarte recent, este de fapt tatal mai multor popoare antice foarte vechi si in plus nu s-a mutat prea departe de stepele din urma cu 3-4 milenii !!!



99% R1a people belong to subclades of R1a1a1 (R1a-M417), which is divided in the following subclades:
R1a-L664 is essentially Northwest European, found chiefly in West Germany, the Low Countries and the British Isles.
R1a-Z645 makes up the majority of R1a individuals from Central Europe to South Asia.
R1a-Z283 is the main Central & East European branch.
R1a-Z284 is a Scandinavian subclade with an epicentre in central Norway. It is found also in places colonised by the Norwegian Vikings, like some parts of Scotland, England and Ireland. Several subclades were identified, including L448, L176.1, Z287/Z288, Z66 and Z281 about which little is known at the moment.
R1a-M458, primarily a Slavic subclade, with maximum frequencies in Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, but is also fairly common in southeast Ukraine and northwest Russia.
its subclade R1a-L260 is clearly West Slavic, with a peak of frequency in Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, and radiating at lower frequencies into East Germany, East Austria, Slovenia and Hungary.
R1a-Z280 is also an Balto-Slavic marker, found all over central and Eastern Europe (except in the Balkans), with a western limit running from East Germany to Switzerland and Northeast Italy. It can be divided in many clusters: East Slavic, Baltic, Pomeranian, Polish, Carpathian, East-Alpine, Czechoslovak, and so on.
its subclade R1a-L365 is a Pomeranian cluster found also in southern Poland.
R1a-Z93 is the main Asian branch of R1a. It is found in Central Asia, South Asia and Southwest Asia (including among Ashkenazi Jews). R1a-Z93 is the marker of historical peoples such as the Indo-Aryans, Persians, Medes, Mitanni, or Tatars. Z93 also pervaded the genetic pool of the Arabs and Jews.
R1a-F1345 is one of the main Middle Eastern clades.
R1a-CTS6 is the Jewish subclade of R1a, which formed 3500 years ago and has a TMRCA of 2800 years.
History of R1a
The Germanic branch
The first major expansion of R1a took place with the westward propagation of the Corded Ware (or Battle Axe) culture (2800-1800 BCE) from the northern forest-steppe in the Yamna homeland. This was the first wave of R1a into Europe, the one that brought the Z283 subclade to Germany and the Netherlands, and Z284 to Scandinavia. The Corded Ware R1a people would have mixed with the pre-Germanic I1 and I2 aborigines, which resulted in the first Indo-European culture in Germany and Scandinavia, although that culture could not be considered Proto-Germanic - it was simply Proto-Indo-European at that stage, or perhaps or Proto-Balto-Slavic.
Germanic languages probably did not appear before the Nordic Bronze Age (1800-500 BCE). Proto-Germanic language probably developed as a blend of two branches of Indo-European languages, namely the Proto-Balto-Slavic language of the Corded-Ware culture (R1a-Z283) and the later arrival of Proto-Italo-Celto-Germanic people from the Unetice culture (R1b-L11). This is supported by the fact that Germanic people are a R1a-R1b hybrid, that these two haplogroups came via separate routes at different times, and that Proto-Germanic language is closest to Proto-Italo-Celtic, but also shares similarities with Proto-Slavic.
The R1b branch of the Indo-Europeans is thought to have originated in the southern Yamna culture (northern shores of the Black Sea). It was the first one to migrate from the steppes to the west, invading the Danube delta around 4200 BCE, then making its way around the Balkans and the Hungarian plain in the 4th millennium BCE. It is likely that a minority of R1a people accompanied this migration of R1b tribes. Those R1a men would have belonged to the L664 subclade, the first to split from the Yamna core. These early steppe invaders were not a homogeneous group, but a cluster of tribes. It is possible that the R1a-L664 people were one or several separate tribes of their own, or that they mixed with some R1b tribes, notably R1b-U106, which would become the main Germanic lineage many centuries later. The R1b-R1a contingent moved up the Danube to the Panonian plain around 2800 BCE, brought to an end the local Bell Beaker culture (circa 2200 BCE) and Corded Ware culture (c. 2400 BCE) in Central Europe, and set up the Unetice culture (2300-1600 BCE) around Bohemia and eastern Germany. Unetice can be seen as the source of future Germanic, Celtic and Italic cultures, and is associated mainly with the L11 subclade of R1b.
The late Unetice culture expanded to Scandinavia, founding the Nordic Bronze Age. R1a-L664 and R1b (L11 and U106) presumably reached Scandinavia at this time. The people of the Nordic Bronze Age probably spoke a Proto-Germanic language. For over a thousand years while this culture existed, the Proto-Germanic R1b et R1a-L664 tribes would have acquired vocabulary from the pre-existing Corded Ware population that they assimilated, which was itself a blend of Proto-Balto-Slavic languages (linked to haplogroup R1a-Z284) and languages of non-Indo-European origin (linked to haplogroups G2a, I1 and I2). The Nordic Bronze Age was a melting pot of these three populations, which intermingled both genetically and linguistically, little by little creating a new ethnicity and culture as time went by.
The first genuinely Germanic language has been estimated by linguists to have come into existence around (or after) 500 BCE, just as the Nordic Bronze Age came to an end, giving way to the Pre-Roman Iron Age. The uniqueness of some of the Germanic vocabulary copared to other Indo-European languages suggests that borrowings from indigenous pre-Indo-European languages took place (Germanic substrate theory). The Celtic language itself is known to have borrowed words from Afro-Asiatic languages spoken by the descendants of Near-Eastern farmers who had settled in Central Europe. The fact that present-day Scandinavia is composed of roughly 40% of I1, 20% of R1a and 40% of R1b reinforces the idea that the Germanic ethnicity and language had acquired a tri-hybrid character by the Iron Age.

The Slavic branch
The origins of the Slavs go back to circa 3500 BCE with the northern Yamna culture and its expansion across Central and Northeast Europe with the Corded Ware culture. The M458 and Z280 lineages spread around Poland, Belarus, Ukraine and western Russia, and would form the core of the Proto-Balto-Slavic culture. The high prevalence of R1a in Baltic and Slavic countries nowadays is not only due to the Corded Ware expansion, but also to a long succession of later migrations from Russia, the last of which took place from the 5th to the 10th century CE. The Slavic branch differentiated itself when the Corded Ware culture absorbed the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture (5200-2600 BCE) of western Ukraine and north-eastern Romania, which appears to have been composed primarily of G2a-U1 et I2a1b-M423 lineages descended directly from Paleolithic Europeans, with some other Near-Eastern farmer lineages (notably E-V13, J2a and T1a). It is surely during this period that I2a2, E-V13 and T spread (along with R1a) around Poland, Belarus and western Russia, explaining why eastern and northern Slavs (and Lithuanians) have between 10 and 20% of I2a1b lineages and about 10% of Middle Eastern lineages (18% for Ukrainians).
The Corded Ware period was followed in the steppes by the Srubna culture (1800-1200 BCE), and around Poland by the Trzciniec culture (1700-1200 BCE).
The last important Slavic migration is thought to have happened in the 6th century CE, from Ukraine to Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia, filling the vacuum left by eastern Germanic tribes who invaded the Roman Empire. Both the M458 and the Z280 branches are associated with this late Slavic migration, but more particularly Z280.
Interestingly, the Czechs do not carry much Z280, a factor that strongly differentiates them from their Slovak, Hungarian and Slovene neighbours. Czechs R1a belongs in majority to M458, with subclades such as L1029>YP1703 (TMRCA 1800 years), L260>YP256>YP654 (TMRCA 2200 years), L260>YP256>YP254>Y2905 (TMRCA 1850 years) and L260>YP1337 (TMRCA 1750 years). Other R1a clades found in the Czech Republic include Z280>Y35>CTS3402>YP237>YP951 (TMRCA 2500 years) CTS1211>Y35>YP4278 (TMRCA 1850 years), some Z92 and Z93, as well as the Germanic L664 (S3479>S3485>S3477>YP942; TMRCA 1800 years). The age of these subclades concord with the historical Slavic expansion during the Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages.
Regional disparities also exist in ex-Yugoslavia, but among deeper clades. Bosnian and Serbian R1a belongs for the most part to a young clade of CTS1211 (Y33>CTS8816>Y3300>Y5647>YP611>YP3987>YP3992 subclade; TMRCA 950 years), with a minority of older M458 (CTS11962>L1029 subclade; TMRCA 2200 years) and Z92 (Y4459>YP617 subclade; TMRCA 3400 years). Croatian R1a falls almost exclusively within CTS1211, but to another clade (Y35>CTS3402>Y2613>Y2608 subclade, TMRCA 1950 years), with a small minority of YP340>P278.2 (TMRCA 2100 years). The R1a-Y3300 (aka L1280) found in Serbia and Bosnia seems to have expanded from Poland via Hungary during the early medieval period. The Croatian R1a-Y2608 also expanded from Poland during the same period, but via Czechia, Slovakia, Austria and Slovenia.
Bulgarian R1a is very diverse in comparison to Dinaric R1a. Subclades equally divided between M458 (mostly the pan-Slavic L1029 subclade) and Z280, but with a huge diversity within the latter, (Y33>CTS8816, YP237>YP235>L366, YP343>YP39082>YP340, Z92>YP617 and Z92>Z685). There is also a little bit of very old R1a-M198 (M417-), and some R1a-Z93, notably the Y15121 subclade found in Iran, India and the Middle East, and which could have come with the Scythians or other Iranic steppe tribes. Little data is available for neighbouring Macedonia, but it includes at least L1029 (under M458) and L366 (under CTS1211).
Romanians have an even greater diversity of R1a clades than Bulgarians, despite not being speakers of a Slavic language. In fact, not all Romanian R1a is of Slavic origin. It includes Germanic clades (L664>S2894>YP285>YP282 and Z283), Iranian ones (Z93) and Jewish ones (CTS6). The Slavic clades represented include L1029 (under M458>CTS11962) and YP951 (under CTS1211>Y35>CTS3402>YP237>).
Historically, no other part of Europe was invaded a higher number of times by steppe peoples than the Balkans. Chronologically, the first R1a invaders might have come with the westward expansion of the Sredny Stog culture (from 4200 BCE), which led the way to a succession of steppe migrations that lasted for over 2,000 years until the end of the Yamna culture (3500-2000 BCE). These early invasions from the Steppe were probably conducted in majority by R1b men, accompanied by a small number of R1a. Then came the Thracians (1500 BCE), followed by the Illyrians (around 1200 BCE), and much later the Huns and the Alans (400 CE), the Avars, the Bulgars and the Serbs (all around 600 CE), and the Magyars (900 CE), among others. These peoples originated from different parts of the Eurasian Steppe, anywhere between Eastern Europe and Central Asia, thus contributing to the relatively high diversity of R1a subclades observed in Carpathians and the Balkans today, especially in Bulgaria and Romania. Nevertheless, the vast majority of R1a in Southeast Europe today appears to be of Slavic origin.

Genetics
The Ukrainian gene-pool includes the following Y-haplogroups, in order from the most prevalent:[93]
R1a (43%)
I (23% I2a)
R1b (8%)
E1b1b (7%)
I1 (5%)
N1 (5%)
J2 (4%)
G (3%)
T (1%)
Roughly all R1a Ukrainians carry R1a-Z282; R1a-Z282 has been found significantly only in Eastern Europe.

https://en.wikipedia...inians#Genetics



Genetics
In 2017, a genetic study of various Scythian cultures, including the Scythians, was published in Nature Communications. The study suggested that the Scythians arose independently of culturally similar groups further east. Though all groups studies shared a common origin in the Yamnaya culture, the presence of east Eurasian mitochondrial lineages was largely absent among Scythians, but present among other groups further east. Modern populations most closely related to the Scythians were found to be populations living in proximity to the sites studied, suggesting genetic continuity.[3]
Another 2017 genetic study, published in Scientific Reports, found that the Scythians shared common mithocondrial lineages with the earlier Srubnaya culture. It also noted that the Scythians differed from materially similar groups further east by the absence of east Eurasian mitochondrial lineages. The authors of the study suggested that the Srubnaya culture was the source of the Scythian cultures of at least the Pontic steppe.[34]
In 2018, a genetic study of the earlier Srubnaya culture, and later peoples of the Scythian cultures, including the Scythians, was published in Science Advances. Members of the Srubnaya culture were found to be exclusively carriers of haplogroup R1a1a1, which showed a major expansion during the Bronze Age. Six male Scythian samples from kurgans at Starosillya and Glinoe were successfully analyzed. These were found to be carriers of haplogroup R1b1a1a2. The Scythians were found to be closely related to the Afanasievo culture and the Andronovo culture. The authors of the study suggested that the Scythians were not directly descended from the Srubnaya culture, but that the Scythians and the Srubnaya shared a common origin through the earlier Yamnaya culture. Significant genetic differences were found between the Scythians and materially similar groups further east, which underpinned the notion that although materially similar, the Scythians and groups further east should be seen as separate peoples belonging to a common cultural horizon, which perhaps had its source on the eastern Pontic-Caspian steppe and the southern Urals.[35]
In 2019, a genetic study of remains from the Aldy-Bel culture of southern Siberia, which is materially similar to that of the Scythians, was published in Human Genetics. The majority of Aldy-Bel samples were found to be carriers of haplogroup R1a, including two carriers of haplogroup R1a1a1b2. East Asian admixture was also detected. The results indicated that the Scythians and the Aldy-Bel people were of completely different paternal origins, with almost no paternal gene flowe between them.[65]
In 2019, a genetic study of various peoples belonging to the Scythian cultures, including the Scythians, was published in Current Biology. The Scythians remains were mostly found to be carriers of haplogroup R1a and various subclades of it. The authors of the study suggested that migrations must have played a role in the emergence of the Scythians as the dominant power on the Pontic steppe.[36]

https://en.wikipedia...thians#Genetics

Nu exista ceramica greceasca acum 3000 de ani pentru ca lu critza i se aduc blugii din China

De fapt, nu e nimc grecesc pentru ca dorienii e veniti din tara csoabanilor nordunareni deci grecii e o impresie

neur0, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 15:45, said:

la "suta", dex-ul oscileaza intre et.nec., si sl. suto.
acuma chestia e ca de o vreme avem internet si gasim https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/suto , moment in care nu se mai potriveste filmul.

Mount_Yerrmom, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 20:57, said:

se pare ca p-aia cu etimologia homerica a lui "crai/craiasa" n-ai vazut-o la televizor.
The meaning of today’s Romanian crai comes very close the Homeric Greek kreion, found only in the Iliad, being a poetic form, as in the expression kreion Agamemnon ‘king Agamemnon’. At Homer, it is also found only once the feminine form kreiousa ‘queen’ (Iliad 22, 48: cf. Liddel, 993), referring to one of Priam’s wives, which is a strong argument that the form may be of Trojan or Thracian origin, a form that is also almost identical to today’s Romanian crăiasă ‘queen’. These forms are not found in any of the Classical Greek texts, as I have said, with the exception of the Dorian kreioisa

zz_dop, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 21:10, said:

Nu e chiar așa trasă de păr. Au existat ceva triburi trace care au luptat de patea troienilor. O fi intrat cuvântul în uzul ălora și Nea Homer o fi știut că era un cuvânt folosit de troieni și l-a folosit și el.

neur0, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 19:23, said:

traco-dacii sunt o fantezie.
puteai la fel de bine sa spui celto-dacii, sarmato-dacii samd.
ca sa nu mai spun de iliro-celto-daci-traci etc.
kkt pe bat.
pentru fraieri.

neur0, on 30 noiembrie 2019 - 19:23, said:

aiureli.
Colonizarea Balcanilor a inceput la 220 i.e.n.
Prezenta latinofonilor in Balcani, a vorbitorilor de latina, este documentata pana la anul 600.
Adica 800 de ani de prezenta documentata a vorbitorilor de latina
e imposibil s-o stergi cu buretele.

Acesti latinofoni nu proveneau din toate colturile imperiului cum a fost cazul Daciei, la nord de Dunare.

Ci, din contra, colonistii romani din Balcani pot fi foarte clar demonstrati ca provenind din Italia,
localitatile lor erau ridicate la nivel de colonie, element foarte concludent.

Iar vlahii apar exact in locurile unde au existat aceste colonii romane.

Editat de enough1453, 30 noiembrie 2019 - 23:16.