Who were and are the Albanians and their DNA

[Salento]

I will say 1400-1500 Arberesh migration..


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

In same case Arbëreshë + mix, but not all.
The amount of Balkans % in Puglia is too similar from North to South.
The bulk of the Balkan DNA is Ancient Illyrians.
After mixing with the local Italics they became the Iapygians (Daunians, Peucetians, and Messapians).

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

 

[Salento]

I don't know what exactly they mean by that Macedonian part, but my guess is that 2 part Albanian should be caused by earlier migrations from the other side of the Adriatic (like the Illyrians, Messapians, etc.) with additional Arbereshe admixture while the 1 part Macedonian could probably show a slight Slavic admixture. For example a Macedonian could be 80% Albania/local + 20% Slavic. If that's the case, then its a recent arrival that could have been brought by Arbereshe or Slavs like Croatians (since some settled in South Italy) together and it wouldn't be strange that a Croatian+Albanian can show up as a Montenegrin or Albanian.

Or that Macedonian could possibly be part Albanian, part Slavic, part Greek since there is Greek presence in Puglia. Too many guesses but that's all I could think.

That’s great, thanks. Got it now.
All valid points.

 

[Yetos]

Hahaahahahahhaha, LoL I didn't know about top channel since two weeks ago, and I am albanian, while he probably has memorized every single episode of it, LOL, then there's a mistery, how does he know what arguments Marin Memaj (top channel's journalist) treats thinking that they are only in albanian with no subtitles, logic tells me that only way he can understand them is that he knows albanian...

cause every time i laugh with my heart,
especially the episode with Achilleus
I show it to my friends also,
it is was one of the top comedies I 've ever seen

one almost got drown from the crackers, and the laugh.

 

[Zanatis]

cause every time i laugh with my heart,
especially the episode with Achilleus
I show it to my friends also,
it is was one of the top comedies I 've ever seen

one almost got drown from the crackers, and the laugh.

What's the Achilles story then? I'm in for some laughing material if it is really funny.

 

[Gannicus]

+Zantais
What is your thaught about where E haplgroup originated?
E people, even ancient egyptians, looked quite white to have originated in africa, how do you explain that?

 

[Zanatis]

+Zantais
What is your thaught about where E haplgroup originated?
E people, even ancient egyptians, looked quite white to have originated in africa, how do you explain that?

I don’t care bro, really.

It could have originated anywhere in the world. What matters is the last 3-4000 years max to be able to link it with meaningful migrations for us like Indo-Europeans, Illyrians, Thracians, Celts, Italics, etc.

We don’t know how the ancient Egyptians looked like exactly. I mean we do have some ancient autosomal results showing they had less SSA admixture but the tombs tested could have belonged to colonizers from the Balkans or Galatians during the Ptolemaic period or could be just isolated cases. Plus who said they all looked the same? They could have had hundreds of phenotypes.

I see you have the fear of Albanians not being local or white but try to understand that thousands of years ago things were different and actually the first Europeans of haplogroup I had darker skin and were less advanced than Middle Easterns for example. So if you’re really into that being white crap you’d better hope your ancestors sailed from Lebanon rather than being local.

 

[Gannicus]

I don’t care bro, really.

It could have originated anywhere in the world. What matters is the last 3-4000 years max to be able to link it with meaningful migrations for us like Indo-Europeans, Illyrians, Thracians, Celts, Italics, etc.

We don’t know how the ancient Egyptians looked like exactly. I mean we do have some ancient autosomal results showing they had less SSA admixture but the tombs tested could have belonged to colonizers from the Balkans or Galatians during the Ptolemaic period or could be just isolated cases. Plus who said they all looked the same? They could have had hundreds of phenotypes.

I see you have the fear of Albanians not being local or white but try to understand that thousands of years ago things were different and actually the first Europeans of haplogroup I had darker skin and were less advanced than Middle Easterns for example. So if you’re really into that being white crap you’d better hope your ancestors sailed from Lebanon rather than being local.

Ok, thqnk you really much fo replying to me, I understand your points, and I actually knwo that whit skin genes startes spreading around 8000 bc, and yes you are right about my fear of nor being local, my efforts where actually to see if we could proove the total origin of our haplos in europe or asia, but thank you for clariying.

 

[LATGAL]

The evidence is scarce, but Matzinger brings up the possibility of a Paleo-Balkanic macrogroup that includes Illyrian, Phrygian, Greek & Messapian and, of course, modern Albanian. Within this family Albanian seems to be closest to Messapian, but there is too little evidence to say that there's a direct descent. He places the homeland of the proto-Albanians in Moesia Superior & Dardania (so southern Serbia and Kosovo) due to the relative lack of early Greek influence in Albanian, which was strong in the regions of present day Bosnia, Dalmatia.

For the southern expansion Matzinger proposes a date after Christianisation & increasing Roman influence. The early Christian Albanians had a pastoral economy and ousted the pagan, agricultural Slavs whom they encountered in the coastal regions. This is reminds me of what Matasovic said about the interaction between Albanian & Slavic - Albanian borrowed words pertaining to industry and agriculture from Slavic, while Slavic borrowed words pertaining martial values and family relations from Albanian.

Edit: I'll translate the conclusion of the paper later this evening.

Some of Matzinger's articles are available in Albanian online too:

http://www.academia.edu/6702154/Shqiptaret_iliret

I reread the paper you posted, with some translation help and some interpretation and I wasn't far off in what I remembered of Matzinger's general positions. Some general points he makes, some in addition to what you wrote:

- Strong Latin influence in the lexicon, weak Greek

- Based on the toponyms he thinks are directly inherited in Albanian versus adopted from an intermediate language, the proto-Albanian urheimat is roughly the area of the Diocese of Dacia minus Praevalitana

- A connection with Illyrian proper and what we know of Thracian seems to be rejected (so the theory connecting Albanians to "Bessians" from the Eastern Balkans) with some other related language of the inner Balkans being put forth as a likely possibility. A very exact location within the previous area might be hard to pinpoint considering their apparent pastoralist mobility when they emerge historically

- The Albanian migration into their current general territory, before their late medieval migrations, proceeds from north to south probably in AD times (~ 3rd to 9th century)

- He makes reference to the interesting ancient Albanoi situated in north Albania but he thinks the ethnonym might have just been adopted by newcomers, not unlike the German Prussians taking over a Baltic ethnonym

- His view is that the variety of the Balkan languages we don't have too much data on is likely understated (he also makes reference to Katicic's attempt to find separate Illyrian dialects based on onomastics etc.) and that Albanian might belong to a common Balkan group of IE alongside Greek, Armenian, Phrygian, Thracian, Illyrian

and so on.

 

[LABERIA]

Some of Matzinger's articles are available in Albanian online too:
http://www.academia.edu/6702154/Shqiptaret_iliret
I reread the paper you posted, with some translation help and some interpretation and I wasn't far off in what I remembered of Matzinger's general positions. Some general points he makes, some in addition to what you wrote:
- Strong Latin influence in the lexicon, weak Greek
- Based on the toponyms he thinks are directly inherited in Albanian versus adopted from an intermediate language, the proto-Albanian urheimat is roughly the area of the Diocese of Dacia minus Praevalitana
- A connection with Illyrian proper and what we know of Thracian seems to be rejected (so the theory connecting Albanians to "Bessians" from the Eastern Balkans) with some other related language of the inner Balkans being put forth as a likely possibility. A very exact location within the previous area might be hard to pinpoint considering their apparent pastoralist mobility when they emerge historically
- The Albanian migration into their current general territory, before their late medieval migrations, proceeds from north to south probably in AD times (~ 3rd to 9th century)
- He makes reference to the interesting ancient Albanoi situated in north Albania but he thinks the ethnonym might have just been adopted by newcomers, not unlike the German Prussians taking over a Baltic ethnonym
- His view is that the variety of the Balkan languages we don't have too much data on is likely understated (he also makes reference to Katicic's attempt to find separate Illyrian dialects based on onomastics etc.) and that Albanian might belong to a common Balkan group of IE alongside Greek, Armenian, Phrygian, Thracian, Illyrian
and so on.

The Albanians came to Epirus in late medieval times, the Greeks of Epirus were just as 'autochthonous' and a minority of Albanians existed in the Greek part of Epirus along the coast much like a Greek minority existed in the Albanian part, in the Southwest at the time of the Balkan Wars. So there was no 'gifting' and there were respective 'occupations'. In that area, both states ended up incorporating territory that was mostly inhabited by their own people respectively with some minorities inevitably left out. I won't get into the more contentious issues. (Unless of course you're referring only to the specific part of Greek Epirus that was inhabited by Albanians, i.e. much of the Western part, in which case some of my comments can be safely ignored but based on past interactions you think that the whole of Epirus was inhabited only by Albanians and we're basically retreading the same ground here again and again, but apparently that's how it is)
A text full of inaccuracies is apparently 'stating facts'.

Yes, all are inaccurate, leftist, marxists, jewish, etc. I can make a long answer to your post, but i am interested if you can elaborate your theory about this migration of the Albanians in Epir in late middle age.

I was referring to your summary below. The addition about "leftists, Marxists and Jews" is your own fantasy and you added that for very transparent reasons.
The quoted text had its problems too but when we can't agree on some more basic things, which is fair enough and has become clear abundantly after plenty of conversations, there's little use to get into the details.

Ok, thank you, i understand your point. So you will continue to say that Albanians arrived in Epir in the late middle age but you will not elaborate this your theory.

I think it's time for you to explain this theory of the medieval migration of the Albanians. Now i think this is a moral obligation for you, a matter of credibility.

 

[LATGAL]

Read some Ducellier, he refers to them. Actually even sources that you yourself have brought (like Giakoumis who almost takes some sort of intermediate stance where Greco-Albanian cohabitation in Epirus -specifically the area of Gjirokaster- is "quite old", while still explicitly referring to later Albanian migrations) refer to those.

Particularly weird thing to ask after a post that refers to a(n obviously not necessarily correct, an Illyrian connection is obviously plausible too with Albanians being 'native' to Central-North Albania and related contemporary Gheg-speaking territories but Matzinger thinks it doesn't relate to the phonological evidence; ancient DNA data will clarify this likely more than linguistics ever did) theory that doesn't even bring the Albanians in south Albania before late antiquity/medieval times.

And you're certainly not one to talk about "moral obligations" since our previous interactions have shown me that you're occasionally an outright liar (or just "misunderstand" your own sources). So no need for that sort of talk.

 

[LABERIA]

Read some Ducellier, he refers to them. Actually even sources that you yourself have brought (like Giakoumis who almost takes some sort of intermediate stance where Greco-Albanian cohabitation in Epirus -specifically the area of Gjirokaster- is "quite old", while still explicitly referring to later Albanian migrations) refer to those.

Particularly weird thing to ask after a post that refers to a(n obviously not necessarily correct, an Illyrian connection is obviously plausible too with Albanians being 'native' to Central-North Albania and related contemporary Gheg-speaking territories but Matzinger thinks it doesn't relate to the phonological evidence; ancient DNA data will clarify this likely more than linguistics ever did) theory that doesn't even bring the Albanians in south Albania before late antiquity/medieval times.

And you're certainly not one to talk about "moral obligations" since our previous interactions have shown me that you're occasionally an outright liar (or just "misunderstand" your own sources). So no need for that sort of talk.

Thanks for the suggestion but i am not discussing here with Ducellier or Giaokumis but with you or better, i am trying to install a discussion with you and understand better your point of view. As always you are avoiding a honest discussion.
About the outright liar, you are free to follow my example in my previous post and quote me. Only in this way people can trust you.

 

[blevins13]

Thanks for the suggestion but i am not discussing here with Ducellier or Giaokumis but with you or better, i am trying to install a discussion with you and understand better your point of view. As always you are avoiding a honest discussion.
About the outright liar, you are free to follow my example in my previous post and quote me. Only in this way people can trust you.

Which Giakoumis are you talking about?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

 

[LABERIA]

Which Giakoumis are you talking about?
Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

Giakoumis, Konstantinos (2003). "Fourteenth-century Albanian migration and the ‘relative autochthony’ of the Albanians in Epeiros. The case of Gjirokastër."
One of many theories of the Greeks and others about Albanians. From Caucasus Albania to 'relative autochthony'.

 

[Johane Derite]

Some of Matzinger's articles are available in Albanian online too:

http://www.academia.edu/6702154/Shqiptaret_iliret

Just beginning reading this Albanian text of his and already the first page it seems so emotionally loaded and histrionic that is not becoming of a scientist. There are many snide jabs that make me call into question his objectivity.

Photo of Joachim Matzinger

- Strong Latin influence in the lexicon, weak Greek

Firstly, This is overstated and what you would expect of Illyrians with their entanglement with the Roman Empire:

(Also, since Illyrian is not known, it isn't know just how similar to Latin it was in the first place. They could have had cognates)


Secondly, Cabej demonstrated that a lot of the Latin that Albanian and Romanian share is also shared by Greek. For example:


Latin: Conventus
Albanian: Kuvénd
Romanian: Cuvint
Greek: Kuvenda, Kuvendiazo


Thirdly, what is understated is that Cabej demonstrated DORIC words in Albanian.

Fourthly, what he also demonstrated, without foreseeing these Matzinger-like attacks, is that the directionality of shared words in Albanian and Romanian tends to go from Albanian - > Romanian and not the other way around.

For example:

The Albanian word "Këlbasë" and the Romanian word "Gălbează" for "fluke": a parasitic flatworm.

Here is the Romanian wiki: https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viermele_de_gălbează?oldformat=true

In Albanian the word "Kalb" means "to rot" and "Kelb" means the "rot" itself. Romanian doesn't have this word for "Rot" which is obviously the root. In Albanian the suffix "-zë" is also
in the word "irizë" which means "cancer."

Another example:

In Romanian the word ""Moş" means "forefather" or "old man" while "Moaşa" means "midwife" or "old lady."
In Albanian Moshë means Age. So the borrowing is obviously from Albanian a la "Aged-one".

Mot in Albanian means "weather" or "year."

These related root terms don't exist in Romanian, showing that they are isolated borrowings.


This actually lines up perfectly with an actually DOCUMENTED settling of Illyrians in Dacia:

The low percentages of PF7562 and Z2103 in Croatia and Bosnia (for the time being there are no data for Montenegro) can be explained by the consequences of the suppression of the Great Illyrian uprising, which covered exactly these lands: the Romans sold into slavery whole Illyrian tribes, mainly to Italy, others - almost completely exterminated, some the tribes themselves moved to Dacia.

Quotes from Wikipedia:
"The Amantines firmly resisted the Romans and after the defeat were sold into slavery."
"Brevki lived in the middle reaches of the Sava between Vrbas and Drina, they were one of the strongest and most warlike tribes of the Union." In the 6th year, immediately after the Great Illyrian Uprising began, they joined the desyatyat under the leadership of Baton I. However, after the suppression of the uprising, they were sold into slavery During the reign of Trajan, Roman citizenship was granted, and later in the Roman army there were 9 cohortes of Breucorum, which also included representatives of other tribes, many of which moved to Dacia, where they gradually merged with the local m population. "
"The Dalmatian tribes - pirusts and desidiata, almost insurmountable due to the inhabiting in the mountains, the indomitable nature, as well as the exceptional combat skills and mainly the narrowness of the wooded gorges, were suppressed only when they were almost completely killed not only under the leadership of Caesar, but by his own strength and weapons. "
"The Dawns were the first to revolt under the leadership of the Balkans and the Danube region. The role of the Daesitiates in the rebellion was immense, which contributed to their ultimate disappearance. "
"Pirustae along with other Pannonians and Illyrians like the Sardeates were later settled in Dacia."
"Azali was the name of the Illyrian tribe." After the Great Illyrian Revolt the Azali were deported by the Romans. "
"Sardeates or Sardiotai (Latin Sardeates) was an Illyrian tribe close to Jajce." Sardeates were later settled in Dacia. "
"Baridustae were an Illyrian tribe that was later settled in Dacia along with Pirustae and Sardeates."
"With the disintegration of the Roman Empire, the Gothic and Hunnic tribes raided the Balkan peninsula, forcing many Illyrians to seek refuge in the highlands."

- Based on the toponyms he thinks are directly inherited in Albanian versus adopted from an intermediate language, the proto-Albanian urheimat is roughly the area of the Diocese of Dacia minus Praevalitana

This is what he says more clearly:

Considering all these considerations and taking into account the references to the Romanian
Ethnogenesis, so only one area can be searched, that is in the area
the late antique provinces Moesia superior, Dacia ripensis, Dacia mediterranea and
Dardania is located.

- A connection with Illyrian proper and what we know of Thracian seems to be rejected (so the theory connecting Albanians to "Bessians" from the Eastern Balkans) with some other related language of the inner Balkans being put forth as a likely possibility. A very exact location within the previous area might be hard to pinpoint considering their apparent pastoralist mobility when they emerge historically

- He makes reference to the interesting ancient Albanoi situated in north Albania but he thinks the ethnonym might have just been adopted by newcomers, not unlike the German Prussians taking over a Baltic ethnonym

- His view is that the variety of the Balkan languages we don't have too much data on is likely understated (he also makes reference to Katicic's attempt to find separate Illyrian dialects based on onomastics etc.) and that Albanian might belong to a common Balkan group of IE alongside Greek, Armenian, Phrygian, Thracian, Illyrian

and so on.

This is a google translation of his paper:

Southwest: 'Illyrian'; no inscriptions, few glosses (uncertain), anthroponomics, toponomastics
Northwest: 'Istrian-Liburnian' (?); Name territory shows relations to the Venetian; Middle Dalmatian name area
Southeast: Thracian; few inscriptions (unintelligible), glosses, anthroponomics, toponomics northeast: Dacian; no inscriptions, glosses, anthroponomics, toponomics
Central Balkans:? (At least own name of Pannonian name area)
[+ Southern Italy (Puglia): Messapic; Language of Balkan immigrants, inscriptions, glosses, anthroponomics, toponomics] Examinations of the ancient Balkan names (in particular Radoslav KATIČIĆ, which builds on older preparatory works) have given three names to the eastern Adriatic:
(1) In the North: Istrian-Liburnian Named area,
(2) Central Dalmatian area Middle Dalmatian name area (with clear relationship to the name area in Pannonia),
(3) South: South Dalmatian name area: coincides more or less with the settlement area of ​​the ethnic groups called ancient Illyrii proprie dicti.


It now follows that the Albanian, since it can neither be Illyrian nor Thracian,
then just the continuation of one of these two independent Old Balkan language
represents. The following aspects are to be considered in this assumption, or in the future
to elaborate in detail:
The Albanian not only has special old (!) Lexical similarities with some
other idg languages ​​(such as Armenian, Greek and Phrygian), but
also special grammatical matches. In Indo-European studies has become
since the late 80s, the view revealed that a special subgroup
which is called Balkan Indo-European. Despite some preliminary work,
In this area further research is needed.
- To what extent also the other, well-known antique idg. Balkan languages ​​Illyrisch
and Thracian, must first be investigated, especially after
a thorough re-examination of the onomastic material.
- The Albanian shows a few matches with the Messapian,
which is just as much a language of the old Balkan area, and only secondarily to southern Italy
was brought.



So, Albanian has the most in common with Messapian, which concidentally is the one with the most actually words written down? Is not the contradiction of proto-albanians being in Dacia and somehow magically teleporting
all the way to Apulia (which has higher Balkan autosomal dna) a bit not feasible?

How can Albanian simultaneously be impotent and hyper potent as to obtain all Illyrian territories and remove their language all the while not being documented in any document as doing so?

 

[Johane Derite]

It is clear that his analysis is a product of misinterpreting the Artefact (not artifact) produced by his own ignorance of Illyrian history.

Artefact: An artificial product or effect observed in a natural system, especially one introduced by the technology used in scientific investigation or by experimental error.

 

[blevins13]

Giakoumis, Konstantinos (2003). "Fourteenth-century Albanian migration and the ‘relative autochthony’ of the Albanians in Epeiros. The case of Gjirokastër."
One of many theories of the Greeks and others about Albanians. From Caucasus Albania to 'relative autochthony'.

I believe he teaches at Henri Cili so called university in Tirane.....I did not know he was an expert in linguistics.....pseudoscience.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

 

[LABERIA]

I believe he teaches at Henri Cili so called university in Tirane.....I did not know he was an expert in linguistics.....pseudoscience.
Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

Yes, he teaches at Naim Çili University. Hahahahaha
Anyway, i have to admit that from Caucasus Albania to 'relative autochthony' is a Great Leap Forward. Let's see where will end this charade.

 

[blevins13]

Yes, he teaches at Naim Çili University. Hahahahaha
Anyway, i have to admit that from Caucasus Albania to 'relative autochthony' is a Great Leap Forward. Let's see where will end this charade.

Got his Ass. Prof from the University of Durres, probably did not have what it takes for Tirana......ha ha ha ha.....read his paper on Himara....pick and choose charlatan.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

 

[Ownstyler]

Teaching at a particular university does not make your work unscientific. The best measure is the actual work, where the person has published, and where they completed their PhD. That said, his conclusions in the Himara paper seem very biased. Looking at his appendices I reached completely different ones.

 

[LATGAL]

Just beginning reading this Albanian text of his and already the first page it seems so emotionally loaded and histrionic that is not becoming of a scientist. There are many snide jabs that make me call into question his objectivity.

Whatever disagreements there are, and it isn't like Matzinger's theory is the be-all end-all of things, it's clear that he is a serious contemporary scholar. I'm sure no one can fully "objectively evaluate" the evidence when it comes to such contentious issues (and I mean that in the sense of the evidence pointing either way).

(Also, since Illyrian is not known, it isn't know just how similar to Latin it was in the first place. They could have had cognates)

I'm sure linguists can generally tell the difference between cognates and loanwords, this specific point seems to be one that virtually all linguists I've come across seem to agree with (though most likely via secondary means).

Secondly, Cabej demonstrated that a lot of the Latin that Albanian and Romanian share is also shared by Greek.

Though this particular point isn't about the existence of Latin in other Balkan languages on its own, but the relative ratio of Latin/Greek. But in general, that's not the only piece of evidence Matzinger thinks exists for the conclusion that proto-Albanian was spoken overall somewhat to the northeast of the current territory since you read the paper.

Thirdly, what is understated is that Cabej demonstrated DORIC words in Albanian.

I wouldn't say it's understated. The potential specifically West Greek words are very few as far as I know and some are uncertain whether specifically from that kind of dialect.

Fourthly, what he also demonstrated, without foreseeing these Matzinger-like attacks, is that the directionality of shared words in Albanian and Romanian tends to go from Albanian - > Romanian and not the other way around.

Actually if I understood him correctly Matzinger seems to make that point that the pre-Romance language of the ancestors of the Romanians (i.e. around Moesia) might even have been related to proto-Albanian so the common words might be explained that way.

This is what he says more clearly:

Considering all these considerations and taking into account the references to the Romanian
Ethnogenesis, so only one area can be searched, that is in the area
the late antique provinces Moesia superior, Dacia ripensis, Dacia mediterranea and
Dardania is located.

Indeed, so the diocese of Dacia minus Praevelitana.