• Don't want to see ads? Install an adblocker like uBlock Origin or use a Europe-based privacy-friendly browser like Vivaldi or Mullvad.

Where does the Albanian language come from? [VIDEO]

Here come the EV-13 trolls. So desperate for an identity they come up with fake tales of "EV-13" people.

"No you don't understand. EV-13 are the east Urnfield west Yamnaya south cup holders of the east Channelled Ware Daco-Thracians."

So, we must listen to you desperate J2b2 trolls trying to make us without identity then. :laughing:

Why do you get so triggered when we mention E-V13 in any discussion?

Btw, why do you keep switching accounts and posting between 1337 and enter_tain? Keep it solid man.
 
Or, in order to feed enter_tain ego and his anti-E-V13 buddies, let's pretend and dumb down ourselves that in every single Balkan country and everywhere else E-V13 had a found effect in each country separately after Early Middle Ages. Does it make sense?
 
So, we must listen to you desperate J2b2 trolls trying to make us without identity then. :laughing:

Why do you get so triggered when we mention E-V13 in any discussion?

Btw, why do you keep switching accounts and posting between 1337 and enter_tain? Keep it solid man.

I don't divide people into J2B2/EV-13. I look down upon haplobros who make up fake histories and don't understand that Y-DNAs change in % frequency over thousand of years.
 
Now this camp is reduced to trying to use Matzinger 2005 against Matzinger 2022.

I love how even this troll is lowkey admitting Matzinger is full of shit and makes up crap as he goes. He was just arguing about Matzinger in 2021 vs. Matzinger in 2018, now apparently there's also Matzinger 2005 and Matzinger 2002. :laughing::laughing::laughing:

I've been pretty clear that the Albanian language is grouped with Germanic/Balto-Slavic (from when it was spoken in Central Europe) not Greek/Armenian, so I don't buy into this book. But the Messapian-Albanian connection has been made WAY before Matzinger, regardless of who they quote.
 
Let's not derail the thread now, with the never ending circle.

Albanian language is unresolved yet, the origin.

Matzinger stated that it was part of Balkanic IE without hinting any connection with Greco-Armenian, Hyllested believes it is connected deeply with Greco-Armenian. These are two latest addition on opinion of Albanian language. Whether we like it or not, these two people are respected linguists.
 
The name“Messapic”traditionally designates the pre-Roman language of the 2nd Augustan region, Apulia et Calabria.But,according to the current state of our knowledge, this name (“Messapic language”) is better confined to the inscriptions of the actual Salento peninsula,i.e. south of a hypothetical line connecting Brindisi-Taranto:only in this region is the name of the Messapians (Messāpii,Mεσσάπιοι:the“genuine”Messapians; cf. de Simone 1984 on the Daunia) found in ancient sources (Krahe1937:20−27,1955:14−15; deSimone1979; Lombardo1991:52−53; on the sources in general: Lombardo[ed.]1992), and indigenous inscriptions (about 600 texts of differing lengths) are attested here since about the middle of the 6th century BCE (cf. now MLM I−II; Marchesini1999) .A relatively homogeneous linguistic community, which we may designate by the traditional name “Iapygian” (Nenci 1978), can be considered to have existed in this region at that time. The recent discovery of a Greek incised inscription on a “Laconic”vessel (dated to the 1st half of the 6th century BCE) from Tsakona near Sparta, which testifies to the cult of a “Messapic Zeus”)
 
The Messapians or Messapii were an Indo-European people that inhabited, in historical times, the south-eastern peninsula or “heel” of Italy (Salento, modern Apulia), known variously in ancient times as Calabria, Messapia and Iapygia. Their chief towns were Uzentum (modern Ugento), Rudiae (modern Lecce), Brundisium (modern Brindisi) and Hyria. They spoke the Messapian language. They are often referred to as “the most southerly of the Iapygian tribes”


UXENTUM (Οὔξεεντον, Ptol.: Eth. Uxentinus: Ugento), a town of Calabria, in the territory of the Sallentines, situated about 5 miles from the seacoast, and 16 from the Iapygian Promontory (Capo di Leuca). It is mentioned by both Pliny and Ptolemy among the inland towns which they assign to the Sallentines, and is placed by the Tabula on the road from Tarentum to the extremity of the peninsula. (Plin. Nat. 3.11. s. 16; Ptol. 3.1.76; Tab. Peut.) The name is corruptly written in the Tabula Uhintum, and in Pliny the MSS. give Ulentini, for which the older editors had substituted Valentini. Hence Ptolemy is the only authority for the form of the name (though there is no doubt that the place meant is in all cases the same); and as coins have the Greek legend OZAN, it is doubtful whether Uxentum or Uzentum is the more correct form. The site is clearly marked by the modern town of Ugento, and the ruins of the ancient city were still visible in the days of Galateo at the foot of the hill on which it stands. (Galateo, de Sit. Iapyg. p. 100; Romanelli, vol. ii. p. 43.) Many tombs also have been found there, in which coins, vases, and inscriptions in the Messapian dialect have been discovered.

SALENTI´NI
Eth. SALENTI´NI or SALLENTI´NI (both forms seem to rest on good authority), (Σαλεντῖνοι), a people of Southern Italy, who inhabited a part of the peninsula which forms the SE. extremity, or as it is very often called the heel, of Italy. Their territory was thus included in the region known to the Greeks by the name of Iapygia, as well as in the district called by the Romans Calabria. Strabo remarks that the peninsula in question, which he considers as bounded by a line drawn across from Tarentum to Brundusium, was variously called Messapia, Iapygia, Calabria, and Salentina; but that some writers established a distinction between the names. (Strab. vi. p.282.) There seems no doubt that the names were frequently applied irregularly and vaguely, but that there were in fact two distinct tribes or races inhabiting the peninsula, the Salentines and the Calabrians (Strab. vi. p.277), of whom the latter were commonly known to the Greeks as the Messapians [CALABRIA].


Where the messapic tribe just a local italic tribe that learnt the language from their northern neighbours the Daunians and used it in their trade language with Epirus.............Pyrrhus
 
albanian messapic.jpg
albanian messapic 2.jpg
 

Yes, thanks for linking this image. I made it a while back and the "northernness" of the Iapodes is what planted the idea that there could have been two flows of peoples into south italy.


Then when I read this paper by Camilla Norman it was solidified:

"the theory of a Balkan heritage for the iapygians is based on little more than what has alreadybeen cited above: a handful of later comments by ancient authors, changes in the distribution, sizeand number of sites during the Middle and late Bronze age, and a number of perceived parallels inthe material cultures of either shore. Maria cecilia d’ercole’s contribution in mapping the pathwaysand movement of goods in the southern adriatic during archaic times has significantly helped fleshout the situation.7 recent work by croatian archaeologists who have documented sanctuaries on the‘island bridge’ spanning from the dalmatian coast to the gargano peninsula in daunia, in use fromat least the neolithic period, also adds considerable weight to the argument.8 the traffic was, however,no doubt two-way. the prevailing winds in the upper adriatic and a clock-wise current, in concertwith the ‘island bridge’, gave rise to strong maritime trade route that took in the daunians (furthersignposted by sea-faring craft incised on their stelae9) and Picinians on the west coast, and the Japodians, histrians, liburnians and dalmatians (all ‘illyrian tribes’) on the north and east.10 it was likelymediated by the liburnians, whose thalassocracy it is alleged by appian was propped up by piracy(app. ill. 1.3)"

SOURCE: https://www.academia.edu/33341054/I...toos_string_aprons_and_a_helmet?auto=download


This is very relevant to finding out the haplogroups of the Messapians proper as this northern flow connected with Dalmatia is unlikely to be the source of the Messapic language, which is most densely concentrated in Calabria.

As for the connection of the Thounatae with the name Dauni, this is Papazoglus suggestion of being possible, but it is clearly hypothetical and not as obviously true as Galabroi / Kalabri, Iapode / Iapyge, etc.
 
I saw that your newest sock account was blocked on anthrogenica, but what did you expect the admins to do? You have been banned since 2021 and you're trying to sneak in a site which has banned you for not following its code of conduct.

This paper was supposed to bring new information about Albanian-Illyrian relations? Nobody expected it to do such a thing but it did provide validation for a common Albanian-Messapic ("Illyric") branch.

It framed Albanian as linked with Messapic and in doing so it dismantled the fringe theories which you have been exclusively promoting about Thracian, Cimmerian and everything else from the eastern Balkans and it throwed into the trash bin all ludicrous theories about connections of Albanian to Balto-Slavic.

Since the people who brought Messapic to Italy definitely had J-L283 as a major lineage, it shows once more without a single doubt that J-L283 itself was part of Proto-Albanians. It means that Albanian couldn't have been spoken during the Iron Age anywhere in the eastern Balkans and that J-L283 is one of the haplogroups which connect all Illyrian peoples.

For now we can just wait to see which other haplogroups connected them all and which differentiated them (if any). Our R1b branches and E-V13 will probably be part of the same equation.

That's the biggest problem that you have and the reason why you try to downplay the significance of the study. Albanian has nothing to do with Thracians and the eastern Balkans. If you want to believe that your E-V13 clade was "Thracian" continue believing whatever you want to and wait for the studies which will show what is true and what isn't , but you can't tie your preferences to an entire ethnic group which has nothing to do with Thrace and Dacia. This is over.

I was banned for arguing with Aspurg, and I was most probably reported by Bruzmi since that is how he operates. It's ok I still see all the posts there and lurk freely, but all I did was share pages from this latest new study, something which should be in our common interest right?

If I'm some big bad "misleader" why would I be the first to share this new paper that Bruzmi had been hyping up for months? If I had a penny for every time that you guys use even images I made to try counteract me I would be a rich man.

I have consistently shared Matzinger and Shumacher's argument that Albanian is neither a Thracian nor Illyrian language, and you idiots are still somehow thinking I am arguing that Albanian is a Thracian language.

Its absurd after a point to deal with people so low in basic reading comprehension.

This paper literally brought not one single new evidence about Albanian - Illyrian or Albanian - Messapic relations, not one single analysis of vocabulary or grammar, or argument, it simply argued for connection based on Matzinger's 2005 study, so again, you guys don't even understand what you are arguing.

The new data this paper brought was on some more common connections between Greek and Albanian, something which Matzinger & Shumacher are in agreement with since forever.

This paper didn't dismantle anything. It showed to you that Matzinger is a leading authority in Albanian, Messapic, and Illyrian, and that you will have to accept it.
 
Yes, thanks for linking this image. I made it a while back and the "northernness" of the Iapodes is what planted the idea that there could have been two flows of peoples into south italy.


Then when I read this paper by Camilla Norman it was solidified:

"the theory of a Balkan heritage for the iapygians is based on little more than what has alreadybeen cited above: a handful of later comments by ancient authors, changes in the distribution, sizeand number of sites during the Middle and late Bronze age, and a number of perceived parallels inthe material cultures of either shore. Maria cecilia d’ercole’s contribution in mapping the pathwaysand movement of goods in the southern adriatic during archaic times has significantly helped fleshout the situation.7 recent work by croatian archaeologists who have documented sanctuaries on the‘island bridge’ spanning from the dalmatian coast to the gargano peninsula in daunia, in use fromat least the neolithic period, also adds considerable weight to the argument.8 the traffic was, however,no doubt two-way. the prevailing winds in the upper adriatic and a clock-wise current, in concertwith the ‘island bridge’, gave rise to strong maritime trade route that took in the daunians (furthersignposted by sea-faring craft incised on their stelae9) and Picinians on the west coast, and the Japodians, histrians, liburnians and dalmatians (all ‘illyrian tribes’) on the north and east.10 it was likelymediated by the liburnians, whose thalassocracy it is alleged by appian was propped up by piracy(app. ill. 1.3)"

SOURCE: https://www.academia.edu/33341054/I...toos_string_aprons_and_a_helmet?auto=download


This is very relevant to finding out the haplogroups of the Messapians proper as this northern flow connected with Dalmatia is unlikely to be the source of the Messapic language, which is most densely concentrated in Calabria.

As for the connection of the Thounatae with the name Dauni, this is Papazoglus suggestion of being possible, but it is clearly hypothetical and not as obviously true as Galabroi / Kalabri, Iapode / Iapyge, etc.

And obviously this "island bridge" that connected the Dauni with the Japodians, Histrians, and Liburnians, must have brought some J2b-L283 branches into the Daunii, since it is highly likely the Dalmatian coast had them.

But of course, these people didn't bring the Messapic language.
 
Here we have another interesting reference to the Daunians going to war against the Messapians:
"After the capture of Troy, Diomedes arrived in Argos and denounced his wife Aegialia for her behaviour when she was stirred by Aphrodite. He went to Calydon in Aitolia where he made away with Agrius and his sons. He handed over the rule of the place to his grandfather Oineus. He then sailed for Argos but was swept into the Ionian Sea by a storm. When Daunius, king of the Daunians, saw who it was that had arrived, he begged him for help in warring against the Messapians, for a share of the land and marriage to his daughter. Diomedes agreed to the proposal, drew up his men and routed the Messapians, He took his land which he assigned to the Dorians, his followers. The daughter of Daunius gave him two sons, Diomedes and Amphinomus. He died of old age in the lands of the Daunians and the Dorians buried him with honours on the isle which they called Diomedia after him."
ANTONINUS LIBERALIS, METAMORPHOSES

What is fascinating here is that this event seems to be corroborated by other authors! Pliny the Elder mentions exactly this event of Diomedes and Daunians killing Messapians in Arpi/Argyrippa, but what is more fascinating here is that he doesn't call them Messapians, but refers to the Monadi and the Dardi!

The Daunians seem to have genocided Dardi/Messapi with Diomedes.
EzSG6FfUcAAdrIr
 
Last edited:
E-V13 IMO had a widespread Pan-Balkanic impact, but moreso wherever Eastern Urnfield impact reached archaeologically in Balkans there you will find E-V13 and these are the group of people who introduced the cremation on a pyre deep in Balkans where we mostly find it in Early Iron Age. For example, the Early Iron Age E-V13 Psenicevo came from ritual pit, those E-V13 were either criminals or religious sacrifices, the common people were cremated.

Hyllested put "Illyric" in quotation marks because he is not really sure if Illyrians were a compact group speaking a coherent and similar group of languages or not. It's simply that he doesn't know and he is not sure of.

As for Messapians, the Daunians were tested not Messapians. We need proper results for Messapi to check what kind of Y-DNA combinations they had. Whether they were similar to Daunians or not.

As for Derite's subclade and mine which is the same, FGC33621 is not so frequent as some E-V13 S2979 subclades, but it can be found in several different locations and based on modern distribution it's hard to pinpoint, but this lineage is very likely Middle-Danubian Urnfield lineage considering some split in Central Europe and others in Balkans. And the center was Carpathian Mountains. I guess FGC33621 will be found among South-West Thracians/Ancient Macedonians, Dardanians because some Macedonian Greeks, South Bulgarians have it. Also, of course Berisha and Sopi among Albanians.
Agreed with the bolded part and most of the other points you made. I would also add that it is rather evident that E1b-V13 had an inland origin core from where it then spread in said time frames.

As for the West Adriatic samples those are as you said Daunians, mainly, and one Iapygian from Grotte delle Mura.
 
I was banned for arguing with Aspurg, and I was most probably reported by Bruzmi since that is how he operates. It's ok I still see all the posts there and lurk freely, but all I did was share pages from this latest new study, something which should be in our common interest right?

If I'm some big bad "misleader" why would I be the first to share this new paper that Bruzmi had been hyping up for months? If I had a penny for every time that you guys use even images I made to try counteract me I would be a rich man.

I have consistently shared Matzinger and Shumacher's argument that Albanian is neither a Thracian nor Illyrian language, and you idiots are still somehow thinking I am arguing that Albanian is a Thracian language.

Its absurd after a point to deal with people so low in basic reading comprehension.

This paper literally brought not one single new evidence about Albanian - Illyrian or Albanian - Messapic relations, not one single analysis of vocabulary or grammar, or argument, it simply argued for connection based on Matzinger's 2005 study, so again, you guys don't even understand what you are arguing.

The new data this paper brought was on some more common connections between Greek and Albanian, something which Matzinger & Shumacher are in agreement with since forever.

This paper didn't dismantle anything. It showed to you that Matzinger is a leading authority in Albanian, Messapic, and Illyrian, and that you will have to accept it.


You were banned because you were spamming multiple threads with pseudo-linguistic fringe theories about Dorians and Phrygians. After you got banned all the regulars could focus on real subjects and discussions instead of having to deal with the constant production of conspiracy theories that degenerated all serious debates. Nobody is reposting anything by you on anthrogenica, rest assured about it. You were banned for all the right reasons. Instead of socking and getting banned again and again, why don't you think about why so many people really don't want to have any sort of interaction with anything by you. It's rather sad that after so many bans, all you have to say is "I can still lurk in there and check what they're talking about".

It's ludicrous that you're trying to make Daunians as "not originally Messapic-speakers" because these tribes sometimes fought against each other. It's like saying that Old Norse Norway and Old Norse Sweden aren't both part of the same Norse group because Norwegian and Swedish elites sometimes fought against each other in the past or that Greek city states weren't "really" Greek because they fought each other. It's a truly pointless and ridiculous "argument".

Daunians and all other Iapygians were one people. They had one language, culture and genetic profile. We have abundant evidence about these people. You're really bothered by the fact that J-L283 plays a significant role in connecting Albanians and Iapygians because it shows that Albanian obviously couldn't be spoken anywhere east of Dardania before the Romans arrived and that Proto-Albanians couldn't have been just E-V13, an idea which was ludicrous since the start since Albanian is IE.

The genetic connection between Messapic and Albanian speakers has been proven to contain J2b-L283 and it'll likely be proven to have contained our main R1b branches and E-V13. and Illyrians may have J2a and I2a-M223 as minor hgs. That's all there is to it. Nothing about Thrace or Dacia.
 
Messapic language is called that only, due to it being found in Messapic lands ........................we all know the Daunians also spoke this language.

I am starting to think that the Daunian migration from ancient Croatian lands to Foggia Italy area brought a "pure" Illyrian/japodian/messapic language ....and over time taught this language to the local italic populace in the heel of Italy

it would make sense as no J2-L283 has been found in the heel of Italy.

It also coincides with the presented post of a Daunian invasion of Messapic lands

my thoughts

 
Messapic language is called that only, due to it being found in Messapic lands ........................we all know the Daunians also spoke this language.
I am starting to think that the Daunian migration from ancient Croatian lands to Foggia Italy area brought a "pure" Illyrian/japodian/messapic language ....and over time taught this language to the local italic populace in the heel of Italy
it would make sense as no J2-L283 has been found in the heel of Italy.
It also coincides with the presented post of a Daunian invasion of Messapic lands
my thoughts

That image is not up to date, Torzio, it does not entail the Grotta delle Mura sample. And it is actually rather logical that the Illyrians mixed with Italic tribes which was also obvious in the autosomal DNA of the Daunian J2b-L283 samples which plot in the midst of Illyrians and Italics, although shifted towards Illyrians, obviously.
 
The Iapygians or Apulians (/aɪəˈpɪdʒiənz/; Greek: Ἰάπυγες, Ĭāpyges; Latin: Iāpyges, Iapygii, Umbrian Iabuscer) were an Indo-European speaking people, dwelling in an eponymous region of the southeastern Italian Peninsula named Iapygia (modern Apulia) between the beginning of the first millennium BC and the first century BC. They were divided into three tribal groups: the Daunians, Peucetians and Messapians.

Messapic (/mɛˈsæpɪk, mə-, -ˈseɪ-/; also known as Messapian; or as Iapygian) is an extinct Indo-European language of the southeastern Italian Peninsula, once spoken in Apulia by the Iapygian peoples of the region: the Calabri and Salentini (known collectively as the Messapii), the Peucetians and the Daunians.

The leading view among scholars, already mentioned by ancient sources and supported by archaeological evidence, is that Iapygians have migrated from the Western Balkans towards southeastern Italy in the early first millennium BCE.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iapygians
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messapic_language

The above is the general consensus with regards to Iapygians and Messapians. As Albanians, we should all be proud that we finally have genetic evidence that connects them to us, at least in the form of Y haplogroup J2b-L283.
 
You were banned because you were spamming multiple threads with pseudo-linguistic fringe theories about Dorians and Phrygians. After you got banned all the regulars could focus on real subjects and discussions instead of having to deal with the constant production of conspiracy theories that degenerated all serious debates. Nobody is reposting anything by you on anthrogenica, rest assured about it. You were banned for all the right reasons. Instead of socking and getting banned again and again, why don't you think about why so many people really don't want to have any sort of interaction with anything by you. It's rather sad that after so many bans, all you have to say is "I can still lurk in there and check what they're talking about".

It's ludicrous that you're trying to make Daunians as "not originally Messapic-speakers" because these tribes sometimes fought against each other. It's like saying that Old Norse Norway and Old Norse Sweden aren't both part of the same Norse group because Norwegian and Swedish elites sometimes fought against each other in the past or that Greek city states weren't "really" Greek because they fought each other. It's a truly pointless and ridiculous "argument".

Daunians and all other Iapygians were one people. They had one language, culture and genetic profile. We have abundant evidence about these people. You're really bothered by the fact that J-L283 plays a significant role in connecting Albanians and Iapygians because it shows that Albanian obviously couldn't be spoken anywhere east of Dardania before the Romans arrived and that Proto-Albanians couldn't have been just E-V13, an idea which was ludicrous since the start since Albanian is IE.

The genetic connection between Messapic and Albanian speakers has been proven to contain J2b-L283 and it'll likely be proven to have contained our main R1b branches and E-V13. and Illyrians may have J2a and I2a-M223 as minor hgs. That's all there is to it. Nothing about Thrace or Dacia.

I think the Albanian language is most tied to r1b-z2705, so again trying to portray me as forcing some sort of E-V13 only scenario(?) is pure projection from your end. As is the rest just total garbage you project on to me.

The Messapic language is most densely found in the heel of Italy, old Calabria, with comparatively barely any messapic language finds in the Daunian regions, even though there are acounts that Calabrians later expanded all the way into Daunia.

The heel had way more flow from the south and strait of Otranto, so this again opens up for a totally different flow of people and trade than the utmost northern regions where you had rich flow with j2b-l283 rich regions such as that of the Iapodians.

Trying to infer that the Calabrian southern regions, Messapia proper, have j2b-l283 when we still don't have any actual results from these regions is motivated by obvious propaganda purposes when its clear these two regions had very different influences.
 
Back
Top