Who were and are the Albanians and their DNA

[Johane Derite]

Well no need to be on the offensive. I am merely stating information that has been suggested, by even some Albanians to explain the maritime disparity. Theres also no agenda. I am after all Albanian born in the states, so there is that cultural disjointedness that comes with the Diaspora.

I also try to have a level had as theres always a bias for some, even in the professional arena.

I have also had other Albanians seem to contradict your statement above and claim Elsie is not worth his weight in words. So, really, its hard to juggle and sift through all these things when its not my discipline or focus.

It seems all theory camps have Albanians and non-Albanians alike. Though, many of what we know about paleo-balkan groups is little. With time I suppose we will get closer and closer to the truth as it unravels.

The only thing I am certain of is that Albanians descend mostly from Paleo-Balkan peoples. Which group, or a closely related group, I do not know. Theres very little left of the Illyrians and Thracians to know which group we are related to or from. I suppose Illyrian is the strongest candidate given geography, and where Albanians have been located for most of our known history.

I was under the impression Tosk split from proto Albanian with Gheg in the early middle ages. So you're saying this happened much earlier?

Yes i also have my issues with robert elsie but he did put a lot of work and research into Albanians and he is much more embedded in his subject matter. Vladimir Orel was linguist known for hebrew and also did Albanian on the side. Its still a net positive that he did the work he did but there shoulf be an element of detached skepticism. I hink Elsies analysis of the rhotacism of the dialects is spot on. The presence of ancient latin n-r rhotacism is very significant. Likewise is its lack in slavic loan words very significant. Yes i think the gheg tosk linguistic split is old and that if this isnt taken into account it can produce incorrect linguistic analyses. Matzinger for example is basing his studies on some newly found old catholic documents written in albanian. Obviously they will be very gheg heavy.

 

[Gannicus]

Ok to make you understand better what is my issue us that: how is it possible that albanian language was born by 3 haplogroups who belong to 3 different prehistoric times: paleolithic E-V13, mesolithic J2b, and neolithic R1b, they came together in different times but as you are describing it, it seems like they popped up in the same moment and all together gave birth to albanian culture.
The n what i was trying to do is to understand for every single haplogroup what was his function in the entire picture, but singularly, because in genral i know that all 3 contributed to the birth of albania, what i am focusing is understanding each one (E-V13,J2b,R1b) what were they, who were they, what language spoke, how did they become the same nation/culture/language, i hope i explained it.

 

[LABERIA]

Then about the tosk geg differenciation it should be a really archaic fracture because of tosks being the proper speakers of the language and gegs those who took it in use, this would mean that tosks coming from pannonia with their R1b-L51 + maybe I2, settled in modern day croatia, bosnja and serbia + passes the geg area (kosovo, malizia and shkodra region) and settled south of the shkumbin river giving birth to the epirotes, of course partially what dibran said is true, slavs when coming pushed a mess of different albanian tribes from their native lands towards modern day albanian dpeaking region, so we have the genitic mess up of different hplos that characterizes modern day albanians.

It is impossible to imprison people's imagination, but if we want to be serious we must refer to facts and science. What we know is that the split in Geg and Tosk dialects occurred before slavic invasion. When it happened? We don't know. For the rest i invite you to reread the post 481 of Johane.

 

[Aspurg]

L51 could be Illyrian too. Urnfield culture did have significant influence on ethnogenesis of Illyrians, especially those in the west. This is archaeologically well attested. Certainly some R-U152 clades must have been part of that. Among Serbs there is an isolated clade L2>FGC13619, they have a Greek relative from Corfu. And in the study "Albanians high-resolution analysis of Y-chromosome variability in Calabrian and Sicilian Arbereshe", there are 2 haplotypes that seem FGC13619

ALB248fta ALB TOSK 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 15 13 31 17 15 19 11 15 12 23 R-L2
ALB250fta ALB GHEG 13 24 14 10 11 15 12 14 13 30 17 15 19 11 16 13 24 R-L2

They are both SNP confirmed as L2+, Tosk is certainly in close relation to Montenegrin/Serbian haplotypes, Gheg looks more distant but probably he fits as FGC13619 (dys389=14-30).

So if western Balkan R-U152 is isolated from central European/Italic clades it actually likely is Illyrian. There are already few such clades that might be Illyrian and not Celtic/Roman. For example the clan of Bogićevci from Morača in Montenegro (by tradition they descend from Hoti tribal area) recently were SNP tested as L67* (Z70-), if their distance to Italian clades stays at 3200 years they are also likely to be Urnfield Illyrian IMO.

I'm sure FGC13619 will eventually appear among commercially tested Albanians.

So maybe Gannicus has STR values similar to FGC13619? It's not "official" but this clade does exist among Albanians.

 

[Dibran]

Ok to make you understand better what is my issue us that: how is it possible that albanian language was born by 3 haplogroups who belong to 3 different prehistoric times: paleolithic E-V13, mesolithic J2b, and neolithic R1b, they came together in different times but as you are describing it, it seems like they popped up in the same moment and all together gave birth to albanian culture.
The n what i was trying to do is to understand for every single haplogroup what was his function in the entire picture, but singularly, because in genral i know that all 3 contributed to the birth of albania, what i am focusing is understanding each one (E-V13,J2b,R1b) what were they, who were they, what language spoke, how did they become the same nation/culture/language, i hope i explained it.

Albanian linguistically and culturally does not predate the inception of each individual haplogroups. Albanians also belong to specific clades under these haplogroups. Cultures likely formed from a combination of elements. Proto-Albanian likely had no R1a or I2a1b-Din-Slavic. These could have all contributed to MODERN Albanian in atypical amounts. In the case of Proto-Albanians who are much different than modern Albanians, V13/J2b/R1b were likely the most dominant lineages if not the only ones. Perhaps a Proto-Proto-Albanian group had a more dominant singular line, but all these lines individually in their basal forms predate classical civilizations, when Albanian didnt even exist, and PIE even formed. You're making broad generalizations.

 

[Gannicus]

It is impossible to imprison people's imagination, but if we want to be serious we must refer to facts and science. What we know is that the split in Geg and Tosk dialects occurred before slavic invasion. When it happened? We don't know. For the rest i invite you to reread the post 481 of Johane.

Thank you for the reply, yes i know the correct way of prooving something is to present paper from scientific prooved studies, mine were only suggestions so quite useless, i was just trying to see if whith the stuff i have read till now on mostly eupedia about haplogroups i could think about giving it a better picture cause till now l, to me at least is quite a big mess:
Sile saying it is obvious tosks come from epirotes and gegs from illyrians, others saying we developed in Morava valley east serbia, others ( even do now is debunked ) from carpathian mountains, then with haplos you know better then me what a mess the balkan is, so for the moment being i am just gonna base on what i read from true scientific sources and stop sugesting cause
me it's even worse then before, trying to understand what happens, but still thanks for replying, by errors you learn.
And about the threads of Johane, thanks for remindng me i quite approciated his work even do he didn't seem to do the same with the mess up i created.

 

[LABERIA]

Thank you for the reply, yes i know the correct way of prooving something is to present paper from scientific prooved studies, mine were only suggestions so quite useless, i was just trying to see if whith the stuff i have read till now on mostly eupedia about haplogroups i could think about giving it a better picture cause till now l, to me at least is quite a big mess:
Sile saying it is obvious tosks come from epirotes and gegs from illyrians, others saying we developed in Morava valley east serbia, others ( even do now is debunked ) from carpathian mountains, then with haplos you know better then me what a mess the balkan is, so for the moment being i am just gonna base on what i read from true scientific sources and stop sugesting cause
me it's even worse then before, trying to understand what happens, but still thanks for replying, by errors you learn.
And about the threads of Johane, thanks for remindng me i quite approciated his work even do he didn't seem to do the same with the mess up i created.

The characteristics of Tosk and Gheg in the treatment of the native and loanwords from other languages are evidence that the dialectal split preceded the Slavic migration to the Balkans,^[54][55][38]

References are:
54-Brown, Keith and Sarah Ogilvie. Concise Encyclopedia of Languages of the World. Elsevier, 2008. p. 23:

"In Tosk /a/ before a nasal has become a central vowel (shwa), and intervocalic /n/ has become /r/. These two sound changes have affected only the pre-Slav stratum of the Albanian lexicon, that is the native words and loanwords from Greek and Latin"

55-Fortson, Benjamin W. Indo-European Language and Culture: An Introduction. 2nd edition. Wiley-Blackwell, 2010, p. 392:

"The dialectal split into Gheg and Tosk happened sometime after the region become Christianized in the fourth century AD; Christian Latin loanwords show Tosk rhotacism, such as Tosk murgu "monk" (Geg mungu) from Lat. monachus."

38-Mallory, J. P. and Douglas Q. Adams. Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. Taylor & Francis, 1997, p. 9:

"The Greek and Latin loans have undergone most of the far-reaching phonological changes which have so altered the shape of inherited words while Slavic and Turkish words do not show those changes. Thus Albanian must have acquired much of its present form by the time Slavs entered into Balkans in the fifth and sixth centuries AD"

Sile saying it is obvious tosks come from epirotes and gegs from illyrians,

We don`t consider Epirotes as Greeks. So, in this context there is nothing wrong in the words of Sile.

P.S.
I have an suggestion for the Albanian members. Before talking about our language, at least start to read the page of Wiki on Albanian language. Wiki is not the best and most credible source, but before entering in complicated discussion about haplogroups, take some basic knowledge.

 

[Gannicus]

The characteristics of Tosk and Gheg in the treatment of the native and loanwords from other languages are evidence that the dialectal split preceded the Slavic migration to the Balkans,^[54][55][38]

References are:
54-Brown, Keith and Sarah Ogilvie. Concise Encyclopedia of Languages of the World. Elsevier, 2008. p. 23:

55-Fortson, Benjamin W. Indo-European Language and Culture: An Introduction. 2nd edition. Wiley-Blackwell, 2010, p. 392:


38-Mallory, J. P. and Douglas Q. Adams. Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. Taylor & Francis, 1997, p. 9:


We don`t consider Epirotes as Greeks. So, in this context there is nothing wrong in the words of Sile.

P.S.
I have an suggestion for the Albanian members. Before talking about our language, at least start to read the page of Wiki on Albanian language. Wiki is not the best and most credible source, but before entering in complicated discussion about haplogroups, take some basic knowledge.

Thank man, about sile i wasn't saying he is wrong but i was citing him just to take one of all the different versions that have been published for explaining how we got here, at the end i agree with him, at least about what he said for tosks, i don't know what he thinks for gegs, he just said they are probably the proper-dicti illyrians.

 

[Leka]

more than 2000 years since this clades recent ancestor and modern people. You're ignoring a huge gap of time. Also, you seem to have some reading comprehension problems.

I said like 3 times already that this cluster is probably Proto-Slavic assimilated into the Bastarnae or Gothic movements, and later assimilated into Byzantium. That doesn't mean that this particular cluster arrived with the Sklavenoi in the 5th-7th century(Slavs). It likely was an assimilated Proto-Slav that moved with Goths or Bastarnae earlier.

The proof is in the pudding. As I said, if this particular cluster moved later with the SKLAVENOI it should be popping up in South Slavs. So far, IT DOES NOT. Which, as I repeat as a broken record, could indicate a earlier movement of assimilated Proto-Slavs with Bastarnae and Goths. Do you know nothing of the Bastarnae? They were a loose knit tribal confederation that mixed heavily. The culture they are associated with(Zarubintsy) is also considered the biggest contributor of Proto-Slavic Ethnogenesis.


Yet, I am supposed to believe you who has nothing but an opinion that this cluster moved much later with Sklavenoi. I will believe it when south slav samples start dominating this cluster. Until then, you're going in circles. It is older, and a disjointed branch. Most likely moved earlier into the Balkans. Even Phillip of Macedon employed Bastarnae from North of the Black-Sea to fight the Romans. Including Mithridates who employed them agaisnt Romans as well. It could have been assimilated somewhere in Macedonia before appearing in Modern Greeks. No one can know the exact scenario because they are numerous. Only people with an agenda deal in absolutes.

The samples in Ukraine and Belarus if anything suggest some of the Bastarnae that remained became Jews. Or just other Proto-Slavs.

Ashkenazim are not uniform either. They are not entirely belonging to Jewish Y-DNA lines from the classical Hebrews.

I am not leaving anything out, it’s perhaps your lack of understanding simple phylogenetic trees that’s leading you to all sort of conclusions. What gap? All the major subclades formed and expanded during that time frame and most certainly were part of the slavic migrations as evidence is clearly suggesting. There is no reason to treat a single minor subclade below CTS10228 differently just because it hasn’t been found among south slavs yet. And on top of that postulate nonsense theories with obscure tribes who we know nothing about genetically. As I said, looks like it was a minor subclade that didn’t expand like Z17855 or S17250 did. They could have been a minor tribe that penetrated Greece directly from central/eastern europe as a single unit.

 

[Sile]

Thank you for the reply, yes i know the correct way of prooving something is to present paper from scientific prooved studies, mine were only suggestions so quite useless, i was just trying to see if whith the stuff i have read till now on mostly eupedia about haplogroups i could think about giving it a better picture cause till now l, to me at least is quite a big mess:
Sile saying it is obvious tosks come from epirotes and gegs from illyrians, others saying we developed in Morava valley east serbia, others ( even do now is debunked ) from carpathian mountains, then with haplos you know better then me what a mess the balkan is, so for the moment being i am just gonna base on what i read from true scientific sources and stop sugesting cause
me it's even worse then before, trying to understand what happens, but still thanks for replying, by errors you learn.
And about the threads of Johane, thanks for remindng me i quite approciated his work even do he didn't seem to do the same with the mess up i created.

I said, tosks from epirotes and ghegs from Dardanians
The Dardani (/ˈdɑːrdənaɪ/; Ancient Greek: Δαρδάνιοι, Δάρδανοι; Latin: Dardani), or Dardanians (Δαρδανίωνες) were a tribe which occupied the region that took its name from them of Dardania,[1][2] at the Thraco-Illyrian contact zone; their identification as either an Illyrian or Thracian tribe is uncertain.[3][4] They and their territory were by most writers not considered part of Illyria.[5]
The illyrians first appeared in east austria circa 1600BC and according to the 2017 paper came via the ukrainian steppes. One of their tribes the delmatae reached modern dalmatian circa 600-700BC. they did not reach montenegro and fight the macedonians until 350 to 400BC.
.
.
Dardania in now called kosovo , dardania also had a large piece of Moesia which is now south serbia

 

[Dibran]

I am not leaving anything out, it’s perhaps your lack of understanding simple phylogenetic trees that’s leading you to all sort of conclusions. What gap? All the major subclades formed and expanded during that time frame and most certainly were part of the slavic migrations as evidence is clearly suggesting. There is no reason to treat a single minor subclade below CTS10228 differently just because it hasn’t been found among south slavs yet. And on top of that postulate nonsense theories with obscure tribes who we know nothing about genetically. As I said, looks like it was a minor subclade that didn’t expand like Z17855 or S17250 did. They could have been a minor tribe that penetrated Greece directly from central/eastern europe as a single unit.

What part of me saying they were Proto-Slavic don't you understand? I am supposed to assume you have a complete census of what line was where back then? There is more data showing this cluster among Greeks than there is any data for your opposition to the hypothesis. Like I said, when we start seeing South Slavic samples popping up, I will believe it came with the Sklavenoi. Otherwise your conjecture is just as baseless as you suppose mine to be. It could potentially be a earlier Germanized Proto-Slav that moved with Goths or Bastarnae into the Balkans. I understand enough about genetics to not be so pig headed like yourself by assigning broad generalizations without understanding the complete inner workings of sporadic migrations of peoples all at different times and places. Context is everything. Most all I2a1b-Din in the Balkans is surely Slavic. It doesnt mean that specific cluster arrived with Slavic speakers. Bring forth some South-Slavic samples, or wait for the evidence to speak for itself.

 

[Leka]

Lmao Dibran

Really, I am pig headed?

Sister subclades below Y3120: Z17855 (formed 2300ybp), S17250 (formed 2300ybp), Y4460 (formed 2300ybp) and lastly A2512 (formed 2300ybp) - this expansion could have even been a single event considering how closely related they are...Now if the first three were part of their expansion, and are to be found accross their lands, why the fourth, who was not as fortunate as his ‘brothers’ or ‘cousins’ to expand, should be treated differently?

 

[Dibran]

Lmao Dibran

Really, I am pig headed?

Sister subclades below Y3120: Z17855 (formed 2300ybp), S17250 (formed 2300ybp), Y4460 (formed 2300ybp) and lastly A2512 (formed 2300ybp) - this expansion could have even been a single event considering how closely related they are...Now if the first three were part of their expansion, and are to be found accross their lands, why the fourth, who was not as fortunate as his ‘brothers’ or ‘cousins’ to expand, should be treated differently?

"

You are. You're assuming some branches of Proto-Slavs couldn't have been assimilated or moved with Goths and Bastarnae a little earlier than the Sclavenoi. You're assuming that some cases couldn't have been Germanized Proto-Slavs. You're assuming the all arrived as Slavic Speakers(you know someone who speaks the Slavic language). All conjecture, based on what exactly?

It still stands, where are the South-Slavic samples in that PARTICULAR cluster? I will believe your position when that assumption bears evidence. Until then, that cluster could have been Germanized Proto-Slavs, or even random cases that played out in different scenarios. Maybe even early Antes mercenaries to the Romans prior to the Sclavenoi migration wave.

You're making broad generalizations and assumptions and it fits a clean little picture in your mind. The reality is not always like that. Do you assume all V13/J2b is Albanian? No I assume you do not. You do know Goths were moving through the Balkans in the early middle ages. You do know Bastarnae were moving through ukraine romania and the rest of the Balkans between 200BC-300AD don't you? You do know surviving Bastarnae were absorbed by Goths in the early middle ages and moved through the Balkans don't you?

I wonder where all this I2-Din and R1a was sitting whilst they were moving to and fro? Locked behind a wall? coming down with a flying saucer? I wonder who sounds more ridiculous. Me for suggesting some Proto-Slavs could have been absorbed into the movements of Goth and Bastarnae who moved through and settled their lands, or you for suggesting everyone who carried any and all I2 or Rla only spoke Slavic. Did you have a census of all the speakers? Do you know what haplogroups were where before the modern era?

Conjecture is just that, conjecture. I merely provided a hypothesis given this cluster of I2-Din is not found in SOUTHERN SLAVS, the peoples largely descended from SCLAVENOI. You know, just one branch of the Slavs that moved between the 5th and 7th centuries. Not the Proto-Slavs who could have brought slightly older clusters a century or so earlier under the Goths. Or even as Antes mercenaries to Romans against the Huns some 300 years before the major Slavic migrations....

 

[Aspurg]

I-A2512 obviously doesn't seem to be of Slavic origin, according to currently available data. It was hypothesized they might descend from Bastarnae invasion of Dardania in 175 BC. There were few other instances of Bastarnae presence. A2512 might suggest that at that time (200 BC) Y3120 had not yet entered the process of Slavic ethnogenesis.

 

[Leka]

You write huge walls of nonsense bro, really hard to follow.

Anyway, why don’t you understand that these subclades are really closely related to each other and are pretty young too? If the other three are predominantly slavic why would you assume that the fourth was Germanic or whatever else? You can’t compare these young subclades to V13 and J2b-L283 that expanded during Bronze Age. Maybe to one of their subclades, sure. Like J2b-PH2967 and PH1751 for example that are predominantly Albanian. (It would be like saying Mirdita who are negative for PH1751 that formed 2400 years ago are Albanian while PH1751 some other obscure tribe). Now obviously this subclade didn’t expand like CTS10228 did but I hope you understood my elaboration.

I mean sure, in the end of the day any obscure tribe could have picked up some and brought to the Balkans I guess, but I will believe it only when there is concrete evidence that I can’t refute it. And honestly even if such were the case, I can’t see why that would matter that much when it’s pretty clear that CTS10228 as a whole is a Slavic phenomenon.

 

[Dibran]

You write huge walls of nonsense bro, really hard to follow.

Anyway, why don’t you understand that these subclades are really closely related to each other and are pretty young too? If the other three are predominantly slavic why would you assume that the fourth was Germanic or whatever else? You can’t compare these young subclades to V13 and J2b-L283 that expanded during Bronze Age. Maybe to one of their subclades, sure. Like J2b-PH2967 and PH1751 for example that are predominantly Albanian. (It would be like saying Mirdita who are negative for PH1751 that formed 2400 years ago are Albanian while PH1751 some other obscure tribe). Now obviously this subclade didn’t expand like CTS10228 did but I hope you understood my elaboration.

I mean sure, in the end of the day any obscure tribe could have picked up some and brought to the Balkans I guess, but I will believe it only when there is concrete evidence that I can’t refute it. And honestly even if such were the case, I can’t see why that would matter that much when it’s pretty clear that CTS10228 as a whole is a Slavic phenomenon.

Huge walls of nonsense sure. Same could be said for you since apparently I am repeating myself like a broken record. Most of this shit is pseudo science any way. Geneticists are scientists, not historians. Half of the claims made in this field are all conjecture to begin with, with some basis in reality. It is funny you speak about evidence yet you still have not brought anything to refute the hypothesis. Im still waiting for those South Slavic samples in that cluster I mentioned. Lets see them. Otherwise refrain from responding to me since you have nothing but pomposity to provide.

 

[Leka]

I-A2512 obviously doesn't seem to be of Slavic origin, according to currently available data. It was hypothesized they might descend from Bastarnae invasion of Dardania in 175 BC. There were few other instances of Bastarnae presence. A2512 might suggest that at that time (200 BC) Y3120 had not yet entered the process of Slavic ethnogenesis.

More nonsense

 

[Aspurg]

More nonsense

There is more than enough of archaeological evidence to suggest Bastarnae played part in the ethnogenesis of Slavs, as there is that their origin was from the West.

Genetic evidence supports this. Y3120 has TMRCA of 2300 years, however there is a Frenchman CTS10228 from Lorraine who doesn't share 6 SNP's with Y3120 (TMRCA 3800), indicating Western origin for Y3120. And of course the diversity of older clades in the West is obvious as well. A-DNA results for older clades also support it. Overall Bastarnae are definitely the best explanation for both arrival of CTS10228 from the West and it's subsequent spread with the Slavs. Of course I'm not saying that Y3120 was the only hg among Bastarnae. So, this particular clade found in Greeks doesn't seem to be of Slavic origin, because it separated relatively (for Y3120) long time ago and is not present in Slavic populations (those Jews with it still descend from Greek clades). Look around forums, this has been covered already.

 

[Gannicus]

Guys how many tests are needed still to have good results for albanians? Like i heard that among us there have been done only 300 while we need at least 1000.

 

[Gannicus]

Then any update about the percentages of haplogroups among albanians?