Illyrian-Albanian Continuity

[Garrick]

Whats up with all this talk about serbians, bosnians, and croatians being illyrians. Do any of these people speak a romance language?! I don't need anybody to answer that question because the answer is NO. What about the albanians? Neither do they. Let's take for example bosnians. Just because bosnians today live in a land previouly inhabited by illyrians, that doesn't make them descendants of illyrians. If they were descendants of illyrians, they wouldn't speak a south slavic language. If we were to go by linguistic grounds, then none of these 4 peoples can claim descent from illyrians. As far as the albanians go, there is a difference between albanians and serbians,bosnians and croatians. They predate the serbians, bosnians or croatians in the balkans. Serbian, bosnian and croatian are south slavic languages. Slavic languages are a recent arrival in the balkans that came with the arrival of slavs. As for albanian language, there is 3 possibilities, them being illyrian, thracian, or dacian. Illyrian seems the least likely possiblility, with thracian and dacian being most likely. Whether it's thracian or dacian, both thracians and dacians predate the slavs in the balkans by a long time. So serbs or any other slav for that matter have no right to claim any precedence over albanians in the balkans. Most believe that albanians were originally from a mountainous land. So what are they doing on the eastern coast of the adriatic? They were forced to move by westward and southward migrations of central asian people and slavs. The other option was to stay and get destroyed by populations that were way way bigger than the albanian populations.

You can see today's scientific studies, R1a in the Balkans is very, very old, oldest Balkan haplogroup, in Serbia, Bosnia, Macedonia over 10.000 years old. Today's Balkan I2a is about 2.300 year old. Of course there may be errors in the accurate estimations but do not change substance unless some new finding does not bring change.

For arrival of the Slavs in the Balkans in 6th century? According Y-DNA findings, it is third big movement R1a to Balkans. First movement was a long time ago (you have estimate), and another about 4.500 years.

And for Thracians. Maybe you read that a lot Thracian tribes are Serbs. For Thracian no doubt because it is described in history. Possible they were carriers of I2a (and R1a) haplogroup.

Who are Thracians, Illyrians etc. Only different tribes, not peoples or nations. And it is possible that same haplogroups these tribes are haplogroups Serbs, Macedonians, Bosniacs, Croats, who have almost same haplogroups and belong to the same genera.

When the Illyrians in question there is a mistake in understanding. Province Romana Illyricum and Greek Illyria are not same. Also, it can only be intrepreted as a geographical term. Term Illyrians may signify a collection of unrelated tribes that had possibly different haplogroups and spoke different languages. Possible that southern tribes were mostly E1b1b1a2. And also is possible that middle and north tribes were I2a+R1a. And that tribes among themselves did not have anything in common. Perhaps the Greeks called them by one name because they would otherwise have had to call each tribe separately. Researches Y-DNA of skeletions will give a more accurate picture.

 

[LeBrok]

Just to put things in perspective for you, illyria was not the only place that was romanised. To the west of italy, france and spain, known in roman times as gaul and hispania respectively, were romanised too. Both france and spain speak romance languages, western romance languages, ultimately derived from latin. Their language is hard stone, concrete evidence that they were romanised. You say it would take hundreds of years to romanise illyria. Well, lets take a look at gaul and hispania. Gaul was finally conquered in 52BC by augustus caesar. Thats 116 years after illyria was conquered by the romans. Hispania was finally conquered in 17BC, 151 years after illyria was conquered. If rome was able to romanise gaul and hispania in a shorter period of time, who each one of them were bigger in population and land area than illyria, why wouldnt rome be able to romanise illyria?! When you combine both gaul and hispania together, they were way bigger in population and land area than illyria.

And how do you propose Basques were not Romanised, although they've been surrounded by a sea of Romanised people, and they've belonged to Roman Empire for 5 hundred years?
Can you agree that similar phenomenon could have happened in case of Albanians?

 

[Ike]

@Vetus There are lot of other options. Anyway, if they find human remnants in Bosnia, 2000 years old, and they show up to be a perfect match for ancestors of todays Bosnians, would you believe that Bosnians were Illyrians?

 

[adamo]

Maybe the basque are a non-romanized remnant of the iberian peninsula

 

[vetus]

And how do you propose Basques were not Romanised, although they've been surrounded by a sea of Romanised people, and they've belonged to Roman Empire for 5 hundred years?
Can you agree that similar phenomenon could have happened in case of Albanians?

The Romans had very little interest in the Basque Country and they largely left the Basques alone. There was nothing beyond basque country but the atlantic. The romans were more interested in the mediterranean. They had no interest in the atlantic. The illyrians were a different situation. Beyond them to the east laid thrace and to the northeast the dacians and their gold. Check this link of the north american basque organizations and go to question 7 nabasque.org /Pages /FAQ.htm

 

[vetus]

Vetus There are lot of other options. Anyway, if they find human remnants in Bosnia, 2000 years old, and they show up to be a perfect match for ancestors of todays Bosnians, would you believe that Bosnians were Illyrians?

The bosnian language and culture is not illyrian. There might be some individuals in bosnia who have illyrians genes. But that doesn't make bosnian language and culture illyrian. These individuals are the minority. The majority is bosnian. What that means is that those individuals were illyrians who got assimilated at some time by the bosnians. Even if there is such individuals, they have mixed with bosnians. They will be only partly illyrian in their genes. Just because bosnians are today in the land previously inhabited by illyrians, that doesn't make them automatically descendants of illyrians. If i decide to go tomorrow to central anatolia, modern day turkey and decide to live there, that doesn't make me descendant of the hittites that lived there 3400 years ago just because i live in a land previously inhabited by them.

 

[Ike]

The bosnian language and culture is not illyrian.

What is Illyrian culture, so that we can compare? How do we know who were Illyrians? Romans and Greeks called different peoples Illyrians. Romans called territories Moesia and Illyria, so how do we know there was Illyrian people after all? Fallowing that logic there should be Moesian people too.

There might be some individuals in bosnia who have illyrians genes. But that doesn't make bosnian language and culture illyrian. These individuals are the minority.

Which do you count as Illyrian genes?

The majority is bosnian. What that means is that those individuals were illyrians who got assimilated at some time by the bosnians. Even if there is such individuals, they have mixed with bosnians. They will be only partly illyrian in their genes. Just because bosnians are today in the land previously inhabited by illyrians, that doesn't make them automatically descendants of illyrians.

What do you reckon is an Illyrian DNA, and what is Bosnian?

If i decide to go tomorrow to central anatolia, modern day turkey and decide to live there, that doesn't make me descendant of the hittites that lived there 3400 years ago just because i live in a land previously inhabited by them.

You're talking like I've chosen Bosnian population coincidentally. No it doesn't make you automatically, but there are strong DNA suggestions that major part of Bosnian people lived there during that time.

 

[Marko94]

Albania and Albanians are wrong identity. Albanians call themself Shqiptar and their country Shqiperia.
All connections with the name Alba in ancient sources is irrelevant and not connected with these people or their history.

Because have change term.
From Arbaresh have change to "Shqiptare".
How you explain that?
I think the name "Albania" was given by us in 1400 or 1500.
I think they were the Venetians.

 

[Marko94]

What is Illyrian culture, so that we can compare? How do we know who were Illyrians? Romans and Greeks called different peoples Illyrians. Romans called territories Moesia and Illyria, so how do we know there was Illyrian people after all? Fallowing that logic there should be Moesian people too.

What is albanian culture? Why in albanian language you can find so many words latin and not greek or slavs?
Which are word "albanian" in language albanian?
If they had not existed the Romans and ancient greeks certainly did not know the existence of the illyrians.

 

[LeBrok]

The Romans had very little interest in the Basque Country and they largely left the Basques alone. There was nothing beyond basque country but the atlantic. The romans were more interested in the mediterranean. They had no interest in the atlantic. The illyrians were a different situation. Beyond them to the east laid thrace and to the northeast the dacians and their gold. Check this link of the north american basque organizations and go to question 7 nabasque.org /Pages /FAQ.htm

There was huge Gallia and Britannia too by Atlantic.

Oh, so tell me now why Greece is not Latinized, although in center of Roman Empire.
There are many examples from Roman empire that it was not that easy for people to switch to other language, many resisted to the end. I can bet that people were talking Roman in Illyrian cities much faster than in villages, and that in some secluded villages and mountains illyrian language survived till end of empire. Keep in mind that there was no national program or classes to learn Roman, and that learning of it was voluntary.

 

[vetus]

There was huge Gallia and Britannia too by Atlantic.

Oh, so tell me now why Greece is not Latinized, although in center of Roman Empire.
There are many examples from Roman empire that it was not that easy for people to switch to other language, many resisted to the end. I can bet that people were talking Roman in Illyrian cities much faster than in villages, and that in some secluded villages and mountains illyrian language survived till end of empire. Keep in mind that there was no national program or classes to learn Roman, and that learning of it was voluntary.

Because greece had an alphabet, they had written language, they had books, they had incriptions on stone. It would be extremely hard for rome to romanise greece. And rome borrowed heavily from greece. Romans were admirers of greek culture. Why would they want to destroy that which they admired? Yeah they resisted to the end and they died and theyre no more!! I dont know who youre referring to, show me those examples. Its not about what you can bet. Its about evidence and what you can prove. And romanisation was not voluntary. Now youre starting to speak nonsense. What you need to understand is that illyria was under roman rule for longer than anybody. And illyria was very close to italy. Illyria was completely romanised. Another thing that albanians think proves illyrian descent is the tribe of albanoi mentioned by ptolemy in 150AD. Lets take a closer look at this. Does the word albanoi mean anything in albanian? It means absolutely nothing. Does it mean anything in any other language? Yes. It means something in vlach and in latin which is where vlach is ultimately derived from. Its made up of 2 words alba + noi. Alba means white and noi means we. It basically means we white, or we the white. Albanians dont call themselves albanian in their language. They call themselves shqipetar and their language shqip. It is safe to assume that the albanoi were romanised illyrians. Albanoi spoke latin. Albanians speak shqip. The descendants of albanoi have to be latin speakers. Albania is an exonym. Albanians call themselves shqipetar. Whoever decided to call albania albania was both wrong and right. He was right in calling it albania because that was the land of the albanoi, but they were wrong to assume that shqipetars had anything to do with the albanoi. Albanoi spoke latin, shqipetars speak shqip. The descendants of the romanised albanoi have to be speakers of latin derived language. The albanoi were mentioned in 150 BC, 318 years after illyria was conquered by rome. Thats plenty of time for romanisation to have occured. The albanoi is clearly a latin word and it clearly points that they were people who were romanised. But i will tell you what means something in albanian. Have you heard of a thracian tribe called triballi? Well, it means something in albanian. Its made up of 2 words, tri + balli. Tri means three and balli means forehead or front. It basically means three forehead. And im sure you have heard of bessoi which means believe in albanian.

 

[Nobody1]

@ Vetus

Just to clear it up;
Are you suggesting that the Istriots, Istro-Romanians and Aromanians(Vlachs) are the "true" descendants of the ancient Illyrians?

If i remember correctly than the big problem with ancient Illyrian language was that there are no survived inscriptions only toponyms and recorded personal names;

 

[Marko94]

There was huge Gallia and Britannia too by Atlantic.

Oh, so tell me now why Greece is not Latinized, although in center of Roman Empire.
There are many examples from Roman empire that it was not that easy for people to switch to other language, many resisted to the end. I can bet that people were talking Roman in Illyrian cities much faster than in villages, and that in some secluded villages and mountains illyrian language survived till end of empire. Keep in mind that there was no national program or classes to learn Roman, and that learning of it was voluntary.

When the Roman Empire conquered a territory decided to found the "roman colonies".
What is the meaning of the colonies?
Simple, served to "latinized" local populations.
No word yet on if it was forced Latinization, but definitely in the Latin culture has had strong impact in the local population.
If the Croats, Bosnians and Serbs are "descendants" of the Illyrians then I wonder where the traces of Latin culture?
If there has been a little migration of the Slavs in the Balkans then because they speak a Slavic language? and not a illyrian language?

"L'albanese appartiene alla famiglia linguisticaindoeuropea, come provato nel 1854 dal filologo tedesco Franz Bopp.
Il linguista italiano Matteo Bartoli in forza della grande presenza di elementi e parole comuni al latino riteneva che la lingua albanese fosse una lingua in parte originariamente neolatina, per cui la classificò tra le "parzialmente" lingue romanze balcaniche^[21][22]."

 

[Ike]

From time to time, I hear that Albaninas were Illyrians, then I hear they were Dardanians, then someone is sure they were Pelasgians, than later that they must be Thracians.... If you people have no better facts to support these theories it would be useful if you just quit. Yeah we all know those thories, and we all know they're possible, but wiring same things again and again with nothing new is just exhausting.

Albanians dont call themselves albanian in their language. They call themselves shqipetar and their language shqip. It is safe to assume that the albanoi were romanised illyrians. Albanoi spoke latin. Albanians speak shqip. The descendants of albanoi have to be latin speakers. Albania is an exonym. Albanians call themselves shqipetar. Whoever decided to call albania albania was both wrong and right. He was right in calling it albania because that was the land of the albanoi, but they were wrong to assume that shqipetars had anything to do with the albanoi. Albanoi spoke latin, shqipetars speak shqip. .

1. It is not safe to assume that Albanoi were romanized Illyrians. To assume that, we would have to know that Albanoi were Illyrians, and we know not much about either.
2. How do you know if Tribali, Bessoi and Illyrians wasn't also an exonym?
3. Are you suggesting that todays Albanians were Illyrians, but todays Shqipetars are not?

The descendants of the romanised albanoi have to be speakers of latin derived language. The albanoi were mentioned in 150 BC, 318 years after illyria was conquered by rome. Thats plenty of time for romanisation to have occured. The albanoi is clearly a latin word and it clearly points that they were people who were romanised. But i will tell you what means something in albanian. Have you heard of a thracian tribe called triballi? Well, it means something in albanian. Its made up of 2 words, tri + balli. Tri means three and balli means forehead or front. It basically means three forehead. And im sure you have heard of bessoi which means believe in albanian

1. Tribali could be connected with something on almost every language, be it English, Latin or Hindu. Bessoi also. If you delete Greek suffix -os (which in plural is -oi) you get bes which means rage in Serbian.
Theories like these won't lead us anywhere.

 

[Garrick]

Have you heard of a thracian tribe called triballi? Well, it means something in albanian. Its made up of 2 words, tri + balli. Tri means three and balli means forehead or front. It basically means three forehead.

Do you know historic facts about Triballi?

You can see in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triballi

The term "Triballians" appears frequently in Byzantine and other European works of the Middle Ages, referring exclusively to Serbs.^{[13][14][15][16][17]} Some of these authors clearly explain that "Triballian" is synonym to "Serbian".^{[18][19][20][21][22]} For example, Niketas Choniates (or Acominatus, 1155–1215 or-16) in his history about Emperor Ioannes Komnenos: "... Shortly after this, he campaigned against the nation of Triballians (whom someone may call Serbians as well) ..."^[23] or the much later Demetrios Chalkondyles (1423–1511), referring to an Islamized Christian noble: "... This Mahmud, son of Michael, is Triballian, which means Serbian, by his mother, and Greek by his father."^[24] or Mehmed the Conqueror when referring to the plundering of Serbia.^[25]


Triballi are Serbs.

Eustathius, bishop of Thessaloniki (in XIII century), when describing Serbian Grand Zupan Stefan Nemanja's arrival in Thessaloniki, title him as a "great archont of Tribals." Theodore Metohit for King Milutin says "the ruler of Tribals." Alexius Lambin called Milutin "Archont of Mizans and Tribals." Theodore Hirtakin Serbia called "Tribalia." ...

You can see Maciamo highlights that Thracians were I2a carriers (Serbian main haplogroup):

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...Alps-with-the-Thracians-Dacians-amp-Illyrians

Do you know that Geg Albanians almost don't have I2a haplogroup and it is reason why they are different from all peoples of the Balkans?

For example Tosk Albanians have over 20% I2a.

 

[FBS]

There was huge Gallia and Britannia too by Atlantic.

Oh, so tell me now why Greece is not Latinized, although in center of Roman Empire.
There are many examples from Roman empire that it was not that easy for people to switch to other language, many resisted to the end. I can bet that people were talking Roman in Illyrian cities much faster than in villages, and that in some secluded villages and mountains illyrian language survived till end of empire. Keep in mind that there was no national program or classes to learn Roman, and that learning of it was voluntary.

I agree. We have it confirmed during the ottoman reign, only the cities that had the administrative importance were "turkicized" even though people mostly became bi-lingual and as soon as were freed continued with the old language, even though some kept speaking turkish as symbol of an "urban status". Rural and highlanders never spoke turkish. My predecessors highlanders did not speak a word of Turkish, while my distant cousins of the administrative centers still can speak turkish. There is a town in Kosovo though that never spoke turkish, they resisted it completely. So the empires like Rome did not care what language was spoken in the rural or secluded mountainous areas, so the larger patches of the local population languages were preserved, even those who spoke latin in public might have spoken their language at home. Among Albanians mothers that stayed at home were the ones who preserved the language as well as the religion, especially if the offspring were not mainstream educated.

 

[FBS]

@vetus
I have been doing research for a long time now of the names that refer to Albanians (us). What I have found out is that all the names have one same meaning - "people of the highland". Alp - is mountain, Alb - mountain. "Albanian" has nothing to do with white, that is a too simplistic and nonscientific explanation. Old Albanian name, the endonym, was Arben in Gheg dialect. Albanian has some celtic influences and I found out that "ben" in celtic means mountain, like Ben Nevis. So Arben is Highlander. Dalmatia, I consider that is an old predecessor of Albanian version, again in Gheg, Malcia. Mat, matia, mal, malcia, has the same meaning in different local dialects of Albanian. So Albanians called themselves people of the heights, highlanders. Now the endonym Shqiptar is of a recent history that started to be used after Scanderbegs death. It can be due to the flag, and it is convenient since the eagle lives in the mountains, so it was an "evolution" in the memory of Scanderbeg.

For the record, I am not a professional linguist.

 

[FBS]

Who are Albanians? Mixture of Illyrian, Dardan (a bit different from Illyrian probably, similar but not the same), celtic addition, pelasgic substrate and offshoot of Dorics. This is what I came up so far. It is unrealistic to simply dismiss that Albanians have no part of Illyrian legacy in them. What brought and kept them together is amazing since it is easy to be a member of asuccessful nation/state that has conquered others but to create an identity and keep it for centuries under so many aggressors and foreign reign is very exciting to me. It is easy to be a member of the huge and powerful nation but to be so different and few in numbers among other nations that share among them a lot in common but not so much with Albanians, hm...it makes you think.

 

[Garrick]

@vetus
I have been doing research for a long time now of the names that refer to Albanians (us). What I have found out is that all the names have one same meaning - "people of the highland". Alp - is mountain, Alb - mountain. "Albanian" has nothing to do with white, that is a too simplistic and nonscientific explanation. Old Albanian name, the endonym, was Arben in Gheg dialect. Albanian has some celtic influences and I found out that "ben" in celtic means mountain, like Ben Nevis. So Arben is Highlander. Dalmatia, I consider that is an old predecessor of Albanian version, again in Gheg, Malcia. Mat, matia, mal, malcia, has the same meaning in different local dialects of Albanian. So Albanians called themselves people of the heights, highlanders. Now the endonym Shqiptar is of a recent history that started to be used after Scanderbegs death. It can be due to the flag, and it is convenient since the eagle lives in the mountains, so it was an "evolution" in the memory of Scanderbeg.

For the record, I am not a professional linguist.

It is possible that land of Albanian ancestry was Dalmatia, (maybe still and Istria).

Illyrians were different tribes, and Illyria and Illyricum were geographic terms. Illyrian tribes with dominant E1b1b1a2 are possible ancestors of Geg Albanians, but Illyrian tribes with dominant I2a/R1a are possible ancestors Serbs/Bosniacs/Croats.

 

[Sile]

Because have change term.
From Arbaresh have change to "Shqiptare".
How you explain that?
I think the name "Albania" was given by us in 1400 or 1500.
I think they were the Venetians.

In Venetian, Alba means the Italian word for Pioppo, which means the English word Poplar, which can mean Soft Timber.
IF the venetians named anyone there it was most likely to say forest dwellers....but...Venetians where not around when the Albanoi name emerged in 100AD.
So, the name either came from the latin Albus which means white or ??

Considering that the illyrian language vanished centuries before the Romans arrived due to Celtic immigration, then I do not know what you are saying.

The logical people who hid in the mountains where the ancient Dardanians, who where attacked on 3 sides at the same time for their fertile lands, the illyrians ( one tribe ) attacked from the north, the Thracians from the east and the Macedonians from the south. the dardanians fled into the mountains and became the original ( unsure IMO ) Albanians , while the nation of Albania became Albanians over time.
The Roman surveyors noted no albanians on their survey of modern albania while looking for mine of gold, iron, copper, silver etc etc