Southern Kosove is sparsely tested. Look at it closer. What you’re seeing there as Southern Kosove are mostly targeted Bytyci and Thaçi-Zogaj samples.Take a look at that map from Rrenjet. South Kosova is almost 50% R1b, West Macedonia is 35% R1b. No one here talking about that. Even in southern Albania there place where R1b is #1 haplogroup. But these EV13 trolls want credit for "Proto-Albanians". Northern Kosova is the only place where EV-13 goes >40%. Northern Albania is >40% J2B2. But there are also places where EV-13 is like 10-15%, even in Kosova.
This is what happens with founder effects. You have the same groups but in radically different % city-by-city, village-by-village, even amongst modern Albanians.
Albanian Y-DNAs vary vastly area-by-area, but they are almost identical autosomally.
Where does the Albanian language come from? [VIDEO]
- Thread starter Johane Derite
- Start date
I agree. But the Albanian name follows an Albanian sound change from the Slavic that occurred over many hundreds of years I believe, kinda like how Berat comes from Belgrade ?
Would you agree with Anscombe that as a town its been Albanian since late sixteenth century? Seems to be possibly the case.
Hawk
Regular Member
- Messages
- 2,290
- Reaction score
- 1,125
- Points
- 113
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13
There is some sort of pattern or algorithm (not computer algorithm perse) which they follow in order not to fall into sampling bias, they have couple of prerequisites when they do sampling. Each paper goes to peer review for that. Like making sure no close relatives in the study, not focusing in solely the same area, usually sampling from the capital are good starting point for the diversity but still not 100% verified.
Johane Derite
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,851
- Reaction score
- 886
- Points
- 113
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U1a1a
I mention these mysterious conservative mountain people since finds of this kind were also found at Viminacium, which was 47% EV13
""Most of this territory was now within the provinces of Dardania and Macedonia.
The very fact that this is a mountainous inaccessible area, testifies sufficiently about the level of government organization that the Romans might have had over this population.
Larger roman camps or fortified residences as symbols of authority were far away from this territory (Naissus, Ulpiana, Scupi) or were situated in the plains of this region (Timacum Minus, Felix Romuliana)."
This is really interesting, it's as if these mysterious conservative mountain people had all the perfect conditions to not be linguistically assimilated by the Romans. They also fall in the exact territory where countless linguists,
even supporters of the Illyrian camp, argue had a proto-Albanian speaking people there before the slavs.
The author here assumes these mysterious conservative highlanders were Thracians, Bessi specifically, but what if they weren't?
I wonder if we got to test some of their remains, would they be R1b-z2705 dominant, alongside some EV13 branches also?
Johane Derite
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,851
- Reaction score
- 886
- Points
- 113
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U1a1a
These mysterious conservative mountain people that lived in the Nish/Shtip zone and started moving west around 100AD practiced cremation, and only after 300AD does inhumation also start to appear alongside cremations.
"Administratively, this region has always been a border territory between several provinces, which, along with the inaccessible mountainous terrain,
was a great obstacle to the Roman establishment of authority over this population.
This might explain the phenomenon of such a conservative population, with burial practices and pottery styles and traits that originate from prehistory and that existed in this area all the waythrough the Late Antiquity, perhaps even into Early Byzantine period."
mount123
Regular Member
- Messages
- 993
- Reaction score
- 679
- Points
- 93
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- J2b-L283>Y126399
- mtDNA haplogroup
- J1c7a
Since you've mentioned it, the claim of a serious debate on Anthrogenica in those specific threads is indeed comedic. Not just Zanatis (Dushman) who has posted all sorts of embarrassingly inhumane pocket theory stuff but also Karagjozmuti/Karagjoz (ShpataeMadhe/TaktikatEMalet) and his Slavic autochthonous claim just because he has tested for a Slavic Y DNA. This guy has 4 puppet accounts with grammatically incorrect and dumb names.
„I think it does make sense and probably not just for v13 but for r-z2103 and possibly even i2 lines as all 3 of these have failed to turn up so far in iron age southern europe.“ or his cringe pigmentation comments. Funny how he lies about the E1b-V13 and R1b-Z2103 aDNA coverage and tries to link it to medieval I2a-Slav, absolutely pathetic.
Imagine all academic papers refuting these non sense theories and you have Lalueza-Fox specifically addressing I-Y3120 as being Slavic that arrived in the medieval era and that guy with 4 sock accounts (probably more) still holds on to a baseless lie.
Are we surprised that he wasn't reported over there? Clearly not.
Very serious debates indeed.
Excine
Regular Member
- Messages
- 376
- Reaction score
- 153
- Points
- 43
- Ethnic group
- Albanian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-FT19186
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H2a1c
No, he's very, very, very wrong. As usual Derite without doing any research of his own, read something which he liked by Riverman, adopted it and then spread rampant misinformation.
"Individuals from the first cluster fall on an area of the PCA delimited by the “Balkan Iron Age cline” (Figure 1A). Consistent with this, we model the ancestry of this Balkans Iron Age Cluster
as predominantly deriving from Iron Age (IA) groups from nearby areas in the Balkans, with 67% Aegean Bronze Age-related ancestry and the remainder Slovenia Iron Age-related ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.1). A local origin is supported by a high frequency of Ychromosome lineage E-V13, which has been hypothesized to have experienced a Bronze-to-Iron Age expansion in the Balkans and is found in its highest frequencies in the present-day Balkans"
The quote is saying that the autosomal cluster identified as "Balkan Iron Age Cluster" represents 47% of all samples in Viminacium. A local origin for this cluster is further supported by the high frequency of E-V13 in this cluster. "47% of all samples in Viminacium are part the local cluster" doesn't mean that half of them are E-V13 since many of the samples are actually women or belong to other haplogroups nor does it mean that all E-V13 belong to this cluster.
The samples:
7/25 males E-V13 + 1/25 E-L618. 28-32% of males from Viminacium are E-V13, not 47% and one of them doesn't even belong to the Balkan IA cluster, but to the Near Eastern one.
The pre-Roman local layer in Viminacium is Celtic and Illyrian, not Tribbalian or Moesian. Moesians don't even exist. It's a made-up tribe by the Romans to refer to Dardanians after Rome appropriated the mythical Dardanians as their ancestors.
Territory of Roman Viminacium From Celtic to Slavic Tribes
https://www.academia.edu/2274871/Territory_of_Roman_Viminacium_From_Celtic_to_Slavic_Tribes
Johane Derite
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,851
- Reaction score
- 886
- Points
- 113
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U1a1a
No, he's very, very, very wrong. As usual Derite without doing any research of his own, read something which he liked by Riverman, adopted it and then spread rampant misinformation.
"Individuals from the first cluster fall on an area of the PCA delimited by the “Balkan Iron Age cline” (Figure 1A). Consistent with this, we model the ancestry of this Balkans Iron Age Cluster
as predominantly deriving from Iron Age (IA) groups from nearby areas in the Balkans, with 67% Aegean Bronze Age-related ancestry and the remainder Slovenia Iron Age-related ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.1). A local origin is supported by a high frequency of Ychromosome lineage E-V13, which has been hypothesized to have experienced a Bronze-to-Iron Age expansion in the Balkans and is found in its highest frequencies in the present-day Balkans"
The quote is saying that the autosomal cluster identified as "Balkan Iron Age Cluster" represents 47% of all samples in Viminacium. A local origin for this cluster is further supported by the high frequency of E-V13 in this cluster. "47% of all samples in Viminacium are part the local cluster" doesn't mean that half of them are E-V13 since many of the samples are actually women or belong to other haplogroups nor does it mean that all E-V13 belong to this cluster.
The samples:
7/25 males E-V13 + 1/25 E-L618. 28-32% of males from Viminacium are E-V13, not 47% and one of them doesn't even belong to the Balkan IA cluster, but to the Near Eastern one.
The pre-Roman local layer in Viminacium is Celtic and Illyrian, not Tribbalian or Moesian. Moesians don't even exist. It's a made-up tribe by the Romans to refer to Dardanians after Rome appropriated the mythical Dardanians as their ancestors.
Territory of Roman Viminacium From Celtic to Slavic Tribes
https://www.academia.edu/2274871/Territory_of_Roman_Viminacium_From_Celtic_to_Slavic_Tribes
Moesians don't exist and were a made up tribe by the romans? Balkan moesians are already mentioned by homer in the iliad in the 700s bc before the balkans were ever even a speck in the romans eyes.
If these are the lengths you are willing to go to in order to cope and fuel delusion, just to not face the fact that the highest ev13 percentage has been found in viminacium, moesian territory, then you dont even deserve a response anymore.
Johane Derite
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,851
- Reaction score
- 886
- Points
- 113
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U1a1a
No, he's very, very, very wrong. As usual Derite without doing any research of his own, read something which he liked by Riverman, adopted it and then spread rampant misinformation.
"Individuals from the first cluster fall on an area of the PCA delimited by the “Balkan Iron Age cline” (Figure 1A). Consistent with this, we model the ancestry of this Balkans Iron Age Cluster
as predominantly deriving from Iron Age (IA) groups from nearby areas in the Balkans, with 67% Aegean Bronze Age-related ancestry and the remainder Slovenia Iron Age-related ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.1). A local origin is supported by a high frequency of Ychromosome lineage E-V13, which has been hypothesized to have experienced a Bronze-to-Iron Age expansion in the Balkans and is found in its highest frequencies in the present-day Balkans"
The quote is saying that the autosomal cluster identified as "Balkan Iron Age Cluster" represents 47% of all samples in Viminacium. A local origin for this cluster is further supported by the high frequency of E-V13 in this cluster. "47% of all samples in Viminacium are part the local cluster" doesn't mean that half of them are E-V13 since many of the samples are actually women or belong to other haplogroups nor does it mean that all E-V13 belong to this cluster.
The samples:
7/25 males E-V13 + 1/25 E-L618. 28-32% of males from Viminacium are E-V13, not 47% and one of them doesn't even belong to the Balkan IA cluster, but to the Near Eastern one.
The pre-Roman local layer in Viminacium is Celtic and Illyrian, not Tribbalian or Moesian. Moesians don't even exist. It's a made-up tribe by the Romans to refer to Dardanians after Rome appropriated the mythical Dardanians as their ancestors.
Territory of Roman Viminacium From Celtic to Slavic Tribes
https://www.academia.edu/2274871/Territory_of_Roman_Viminacium_From_Celtic_to_Slavic_Tribes
Ok, big deal, so i got the number wrong, last time i looked at this paper was a year ago, and i remember ev13 being the highest represented haplo which is true, and so just assumed it had been calculated from males there for the 0-550AD period.
So, i will reword it then: Ev13 is the dominant local lineage at viminacium, where such rectangular vessels as the mysterious conservative mountain people of Dardania/Macedonia also appear.
torzio
Regular Member
- Messages
- 3,984
- Reaction score
- 1,242
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Eastern Australia
- Ethnic group
- North East Italian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- T1a2 - SK1480
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H95a
No, he's very, very, very wrong. As usual Derite without doing any research of his own, read something which he liked by Riverman, adopted it and then spread rampant misinformation.
"Individuals from the first cluster fall on an area of the PCA delimited by the “Balkan Iron Age cline” (Figure 1A). Consistent with this, we model the ancestry of this Balkans Iron Age Cluster
as predominantly deriving from Iron Age (IA) groups from nearby areas in the Balkans, with 67% Aegean Bronze Age-related ancestry and the remainder Slovenia Iron Age-related ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.1). A local origin is supported by a high frequency of Ychromosome lineage E-V13, which has been hypothesized to have experienced a Bronze-to-Iron Age expansion in the Balkans and is found in its highest frequencies in the present-day Balkans"
The quote is saying that the autosomal cluster identified as "Balkan Iron Age Cluster" represents 47% of all samples in Viminacium. A local origin for this cluster is further supported by the high frequency of E-V13 in this cluster. "47% of all samples in Viminacium are part the local cluster" doesn't mean that half of them are E-V13 since many of the samples are actually women or belong to other haplogroups nor does it mean that all E-V13 belong to this cluster.
The samples:
7/25 males E-V13 + 1/25 E-L618. 28-32% of males from Viminacium are E-V13, not 47% and one of them doesn't even belong to the Balkan IA cluster, but to the Near Eastern one.
The pre-Roman local layer in Viminacium is Celtic and Illyrian, not Tribbalian or Moesian. Moesians don't even exist. It's a made-up tribe by the Romans to refer to Dardanians after Rome appropriated the mythical Dardanians as their ancestors.
Territory of Roman Viminacium From Celtic to Slavic Tribes
https://www.academia.edu/2274871/Territory_of_Roman_Viminacium_From_Celtic_to_Slavic_Tribes
did you read all the paper
what about
During 1st century B.C. at the Scordiscian settlements in the Danubian region, finds of Thracian and Illyrian pottery should be expected. However, only Dacian ceramics was found
6. The feature of Dacian ware found at the Scordiscians settlements is that it was never wheel-thrown, while the usual Celtic gray pottery was wheel-thrown.
torzio
Regular Member
- Messages
- 3,984
- Reaction score
- 1,242
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Eastern Australia
- Ethnic group
- North East Italian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- T1a2 - SK1480
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H95a
Excine
Regular Member
- Messages
- 376
- Reaction score
- 153
- Points
- 43
- Ethnic group
- Albanian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-FT19186
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H2a1c
There is a huge difference between 28% and 47%, it is a very big deal. The pre-Roman people in the site of Viminacium are Celts and Illyrians, many others settled there after the city's foundation. 1/3 E-V13 is a reasonable percentage that we'll find in many areas of the Balkans, but it doesn't imply anything more than the fact that even in a huge multi-ethnic city a good part of the population where natives of the Balkans. E-V13 decreases north of Viminacium, but it probably remains the same in Dardania.
Exactly what I said: the Moesi didn't exist. Homer doesn't mention any Balkan Mysians. The Mysians of Homer are a west Anatolian people who had nothing in common with the Balkans. Their name was transplanted in the Balkans by the Romans.
DILYANA BOTEVA
Society and Myths: How was the Name of Moesia Invented?
https://www.academia.edu/48895776
The strict chronological synopsis of the contemporary information (Table 1) could, in my opinion, help find a plausible solution as it shows not only when the name of the Mysians/Moesians appeared in the region. Thanks to this synopsis it becomes also evident that a local ethnonym surprisingly disappeared despite being widely popular in the ancient writings (including those reporting the military operations of the provincial governors of Macedonia during the first half of the 1st century BC and shortly after the mid-1st century BC). I am speaking about the Dardani, whose name has gone through a dramatic metamorphosis in the Roman literature: up to the mid-1st century BC they are known mostly as antagonists of the Roman army (Table 1, nos. 3, 4, 8.4 and 8.5).
At a certain point the ethnonym of the Dardani vanished from the contemporary literature of the late 1st century BC. After a short hiatus it re-appeared in the texts of Roman intellectuals as a synonym for Trojans and accordingly as an element of the Roman genealogy which starts with the Trojan Aeneas.
Rome’s unwillingness to speak about the Balkan Dardani as Roman enemies is attested for the time postdating 19 BC (but most probably actually predating 19 BC by several years), needed an adequate substitute for the politically unfitting ethnonym.
In this context it is necessary to try to find out who and when substituted the troubled ethnonym of the Balkan Dardani with the Mysi/Moesi.
The decision — made almost certainly by Tiberius, — to label the lands of the Balkan Dardani with the name Mysia/Moesia could be explained by the fact that the legendary Dardani were connected with Troas in Mysia in Asia Minor which was part of the eastern territories ruled or dominated by Rome; the same was true also for the Balkan Dardani who occupied lands lying relatively close to Asia Minor.
The decision — made almost certainly by Tiberius, — to label the lands of the Balkan Dardani with the name Mysia/Moesia could be explained by the fact that the legendary Dardani were connected with Troas in Mysia in Asia Minor which was part of the eastern territories ruled or dominated by Rome; the same was true also for the Balkan Dardani who occupied lands lying relatively close to Asia Minor.
To summarize: A strict chronological synopsis of the contemporary information indicates that the name Moesia appeared most probably as a result of the myths, advertised persistently within the Roman society under Augustus. The need to choose an acceptable name for the region in question was actually faced by Tiberius, who had to find out how to cover the politically incorrect ethnonym of the Dardani, who were both a traditional enemy of the Roman governors of Macedonia in the Balkan Danubian region, but also considered to be identical with the Trojans, the Roman predecessors in Asia Minor. Thus, emperor Tiberius introduced on the Balkans a toponym from northwestern Asia Minor, Mysia/Moesia, first attested in the Lower Danubian lands only in early AD 16. Accordingly, the initial territory of the province of Moesia covered the lands of the Balkan Dardani and the adjacent region to the north as far as the Danube.
Exactly what I said: the Moesi didn't exist. Homer doesn't mention any Balkan Mysians. The Mysians of Homer are a west Anatolian people who had nothing in common with the Balkans. Their name was transplanted in the Balkans by the Romans.
DILYANA BOTEVA
Society and Myths: How was the Name of Moesia Invented?
https://www.academia.edu/48895776
The strict chronological synopsis of the contemporary information (Table 1) could, in my opinion, help find a plausible solution as it shows not only when the name of the Mysians/Moesians appeared in the region. Thanks to this synopsis it becomes also evident that a local ethnonym surprisingly disappeared despite being widely popular in the ancient writings (including those reporting the military operations of the provincial governors of Macedonia during the first half of the 1st century BC and shortly after the mid-1st century BC). I am speaking about the Dardani, whose name has gone through a dramatic metamorphosis in the Roman literature: up to the mid-1st century BC they are known mostly as antagonists of the Roman army (Table 1, nos. 3, 4, 8.4 and 8.5).
At a certain point the ethnonym of the Dardani vanished from the contemporary literature of the late 1st century BC. After a short hiatus it re-appeared in the texts of Roman intellectuals as a synonym for Trojans and accordingly as an element of the Roman genealogy which starts with the Trojan Aeneas.
Rome’s unwillingness to speak about the Balkan Dardani as Roman enemies is attested for the time postdating 19 BC (but most probably actually predating 19 BC by several years), needed an adequate substitute for the politically unfitting ethnonym.
In this context it is necessary to try to find out who and when substituted the troubled ethnonym of the Balkan Dardani with the Mysi/Moesi.
The decision — made almost certainly by Tiberius, — to label the lands of the Balkan Dardani with the name Mysia/Moesia could be explained by the fact that the legendary Dardani were connected with Troas in Mysia in Asia Minor which was part of the eastern territories ruled or dominated by Rome; the same was true also for the Balkan Dardani who occupied lands lying relatively close to Asia Minor.
The decision — made almost certainly by Tiberius, — to label the lands of the Balkan Dardani with the name Mysia/Moesia could be explained by the fact that the legendary Dardani were connected with Troas in Mysia in Asia Minor which was part of the eastern territories ruled or dominated by Rome; the same was true also for the Balkan Dardani who occupied lands lying relatively close to Asia Minor.
To summarize: A strict chronological synopsis of the contemporary information indicates that the name Moesia appeared most probably as a result of the myths, advertised persistently within the Roman society under Augustus. The need to choose an acceptable name for the region in question was actually faced by Tiberius, who had to find out how to cover the politically incorrect ethnonym of the Dardani, who were both a traditional enemy of the Roman governors of Macedonia in the Balkan Danubian region, but also considered to be identical with the Trojans, the Roman predecessors in Asia Minor. Thus, emperor Tiberius introduced on the Balkans a toponym from northwestern Asia Minor, Mysia/Moesia, first attested in the Lower Danubian lands only in early AD 16. Accordingly, the initial territory of the province of Moesia covered the lands of the Balkan Dardani and the adjacent region to the north as far as the Danube.
Excine
Regular Member
- Messages
- 376
- Reaction score
- 153
- Points
- 43
- Ethnic group
- Albanian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-FT19186
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H2a1c
Since the Southern Arc papers will have many samples from Bronze Age and Iron Age Anatolia, we'll be able to also check all claims about E-V13 in Anatolia and "Dardanians of Troy". I'm really curious to see if they're pure fictional tales.
enter_tain
Banned
- Messages
- 737
- Reaction score
- 113
- Points
- 0
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- J2B2-L283/Z638
What claims are you going to check? You don't even know what Dardanians in the Balkans had for Y-DNA, but you're going to confirm Anatolians.
I wouldn't be surprised if a huge chunk of Roman Imperial admixture was EV13 related, but that has nothing to do with Dardanians or whatever.
enter_tain
Banned
- Messages
- 737
- Reaction score
- 113
- Points
- 0
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- J2B2-L283/Z638
Yes, a site that exclusively samples Albanians is not reliable. What's reliable is what you want. R1b is #1 Y-DNA south Kosova, places in south Albania, west Macedonia.
But that doesn't fit into your "EV-13 Proto-Albanians" "J2B2-Illyrians" horseshit. Let's sweep the oldest IE Y-DNA in the Balkans under the rug.
Hawk
Regular Member
- Messages
- 2,290
- Reaction score
- 1,125
- Points
- 113
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13
How did Tiberius name the province Moesia because they thought they descend from mythical Dardanians and they picked the name Moesia from the Mysi, when they could have picked Dardania/Troy directly. The Mysi were likely just one of several Danubian tribes migrating in North-West Anatolia either related to Phrygians or Thracians. We don't know about this part yet.
Don't embarrass yourself further. We are speaking of Thracians the biggest European nation in classical times right after Celts/Gauls and suddenly in your imaginations they don't exist at all.
Also, there was no Illyrians in Eastern Serbia, neither in Early/Middle Bronze Age neither in Iron Age or Classical times, the Maros Culture was sampled only because they used inhumation otherwise i am pretty sure the Serbian archaeologists would have been far more interested to test the Vatin Culture and Dubovac Zuto Brdo who unfortunately practiced cremation en masse.
Furthemore, you guys bring biased logic and say Romania bears little E-V13, true. Because Romanians are not really direct descendands of Dacians not even it's their main component. Look at Dalmatia where J2b2-L283 was a major Y-DNA in Iron-Age/Classical time and today is totally insignificant. The reason? Mostly to do with catastrophic war with Romans were many young Dalmatian males ended up in South Italian mines as slave workers, some pandemics latter, and then Slavic migrations, same scenario happened latter very likely to Dacians except for Free Daci who were a menace to Romans for decades.
Bring this other fact forward as well. Don't try to cherry-pick what you like.
Johane Derite
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,851
- Reaction score
- 886
- Points
- 113
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U1a1a
This is why its important to actually go directly to primary sources about ancient subjects, and not base opinions on tertiary sources.
The Balkan Mysians are directly referred to in Book 13 of the Iliad.
Zeus looks away from Anatolia to Thrace, the balkans, the land of the Thracian horsemen, Mysians, Hippemolgi, and the Abii.
The Romans didn't "invent" or "make up" the moesians. They had a say in delineating the borders of the region, and these changed with reforms and were not static, but to try claim that there was no such thing as Moesians is absolutely absurd.
Pliny the Elder directly writes about the Balkan Moesians referencing older authors:
"There are authors who say that the Moesi, the Brygi, and the Thyni crossed over from Europe, and that from them are descended the peoples called the Mysi, Phryges, and Bithyni."
Pliny the Elder
Natural History
1-11, 5.41.1
But there is another reason this position about the Moesians being made up and just being a roman cover name Dardanians is absurd from your own vantage point.
The fact of Thracian placenames being the majority of placenames in Dardania, and let alone Moesia.
You are claiming absurdly that Viminacium was only Illyrian and Celtic, then why is this region dominated by Thracian toponymy? Illyrians and Celts spoke Thracian?
Of the 69 placenames recorded within the Dardania region by Procopius (not including Naissus region):
7 are Illyrian
36 are Thracian
2 are Celtic
4 are Greek
17 are Latin
Some Thracian examples are "Dardapara", "Besiana", etc.
Johane Derite
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,851
- Reaction score
- 886
- Points
- 113
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U1a1a
This is from the very text you took this screenshot from:
"Based on archaeological artefacts one can get the picture of Celtic dominancy in productionand standardized industry. During 1st century B.C. at the Scordiscian setlements in the Danubianregion, finds of Thracian and Illyrian pottery should be expected.
However, only Dacian ceramicswas found6. The feature of Dacian ware found at the Scordiscians setlements is that it wasnever wheel-thrown, while the usual Celtic gray potery was wheel-thrown.
From the end of2nd, throughout 1st century B.C. and in 1st century A.D., Dacian pottery has been recorded at thewhole territory occupied by the Scordisci.
On the other hand, the political situation indicatesthat the Celts were subordinated to the Dacians, but we cannot determine an exact mutualrelationship.Due to the Roman military pressure, it is likely that the Scordisci were probably not ableto keep the production at the same level. Therefore for everyday use, rough potery in domestictradition was produced, which corresponded to one of the population segments – the Daciancomponent7.
However, it is also interesting that Dacianpottery was discovered on most of the siteson the Limes (Fig. 1). It can be found not onlyduring the mentioned period from 2nd centuryB.C. until 1st century A.D., but far into 3rdcentury when strong barbarian Dacia wasa long Romanized province8."
The conclusion? Obvious strong Daco-Mysian presence in this region.
This thread has been viewed 613520 times.