Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 12 of 20 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 276 to 300 of 494

Thread: Palasgians, pre Ancient Greeks...would their DNA be E-V13?

  1. #276
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    noUseForAname
    You think if you repeat something like a parrot that has more weight (excuse, it is non offensive).

    I gave four points, where you made mistakes.
    For one, two, and four you don’t try to answer. It is elaborated.

    The rest is still point 3, something confused you yet.
    But this is last time.

    You can see Eurogenes Genetic Ancestry Project:
    http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/201...est-three.html

    Early European Farmer (EEF)
    : apparently this is a hybrid component, the result of mixture between "Basal Eurasians" and a WHG-like population possibly from the Balkans.


    What is EEF?

    http://bga101.blogspot.com.au/2013/1...europeans.html

    EEF: mixed European/Near Eastern Neolithic farmers

    (Proportion somewhere in Europe can be 5:1 or similar for Neolithic farmers with Near East with regard to WHG, of course it can be different and it depends of location, but it is not point).

    You can see example:
    Ethnicity: Assyrian
    Rounded to the nearest percent.
    My Results

    EEF 101%
    WHG -7.61%
    ANE 6.6%

    Assyrians live in Syria and Iraq. He has EEF 101%, if it means that his ancestors lived in Europe 10,000 years, or more?

    Dude, people in Near East, Anatolia and South Caucasus can have bigger EEF than people in Europe, do you understand it.

    ...
    But to back to fact that EEF is complex (hybrid component)
    ...
    EEF is imprecise

    1. Scientific community use term Early Neolithic Farmers, ENF.
    2. EEF is hybrid component, ENF is based component, if we want to do with WHG and ANE and we should use ENF.


    For example, a simple case.

    We analyze three categories pupils in primary school: excellent > 4.5, very good between 3.5 and 4.5 and average between 2.5 and 3.5. It is all right.
    But can you imagine that someone takes other rule: excellent, very good and good, whereby good are mix between average and very good.

    You can see Eurogenes Genetic Ancestry Project:

    However, this is essentially a stop-gap model (for model in paper Lazaridis et al), which will in all likelihood be replaced by a partly revised and more robust model once someone manages to sequence a genome or two from the Neolithic Near East. That's because EEF is clearly a hybrid component, largely made up of ancient Near Eastern ancestry and something very WHG-like, sometimes in very different proportions depending on the location and archeological context of the EEF genomes being analyzed.

    So what will this new model look like, you might ask? Probably like this, where EEF is replaced by an Early Neolithic Farmer (ENF) component from the ancient Near East, or something very similar.

    ...
    It is not critics of paper of Lazaridis et al. Only clarification.

    ...
    And how someone can give wrong conclusions if he or she pulls one piece from the puzzle.

    ...
    We'll probably know of more ancient European meta-populations as it will be many more studies and many more genomes are sequenced from across Eurasia. But projections from today’s political situations and nations are completely wrongly. Only for the nationalistic bickering. But for it you can find someone else, not me.
    Last edited by Garrick; 09-06-15 at 01:02.

  2. #277
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    26-08-14
    Posts
    200
    Points
    7,381
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,381, Level: 25
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 169
    Overall activity: 5.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b

    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    Don't project today's political affairs with situation before 2000-5000 years before and beyond.All came from Russians? Where do you see the Russians? Are really Thracians, Getae, Dacians, Scythians, Sarmatians and other R1a carriers (among other haplogroup who were carriers) who arrived to the Balkans Russians? Are really unknown tribes with R1a in old times who arrived to the Balkans Russians? Are really Poles, Ukrainians, Serbs, Slovaks, Bulgarian, Czechs, Croats and other Slavic nations, and nonSlavic Hungarians, Romanians etc with significant percent R1a Russians? And all other people with R1a are Russians? Nine percent people in Albania are Russians, hm? People in Iran and India with R1a are Russians? All people with R1a all over the world, in all epochs are Russians. Those Russians, R1a, they're everywhere.
    Seems like you are prejudging everything, of course name as Russian came late (probably 1,000), however proto Slavs would definitely have R1a as a majority (and some of other slight mixtures) according to Maciamo

    Also according to the research "Slavs" and whatever dna they brought, which would have included EEF/ANE/an WHG, just in different proportions from that of the prior inhabitants, are newcomers to the Balkans, arriving in the last 1200 years or so.

    http://www.isabs.hr/registration2013...d_abstract=417


    This might also be the right time when slavic languages were incorporated to Countries like Serbia Bosnia Croatia (and the language serbo-croatian is around 900 ybp) then slavic Macedonian language (nothing related to Macedonia in Greece) 600 ybp and slavic bulgarian 600 ybp. So these newcomers surely had as a majority R1a and maybe some I2a as Maciamo noted because proto slavs are from today west Russia and Belarus, then pushed south to Poland pretty early like around 4,000 ybp and became a majority there since today.

    Thats why i noted before those south countries currently speaking slavic languages have nothing related genetically with proto-slavs, but looks like they incorporated their language fully and their culture at around 1,000 ybp.

  3. #278
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-05-15
    Posts
    247
    Points
    1,402
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,402, Level: 10
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 148
    Overall activity: 44.0%


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Quote Originally Posted by noUseForAname View Post
    Seems like you are prejudging everything, of course name as Russian came late (probably 1,000), however proto Slavs would definitely have R1a as a majority (and some of other slight mixtures) according to Maciamo

    Also according to the research "Slavs" and whatever dna they brought, which would have included EEF/ANE/an WHG, just in different proportions from that of the prior inhabitants, are newcomers to the Balkans, arriving in the last 1200 years or so.

    http://www.isabs.hr/registration2013...d_abstract=417


    This might also be the right time when slavic languages were incorporated to Countries like Serbia Bosnia Croatia (and the language serbo-croatian is around 900 ybp) then slavic Macedonian language (nothing related to Macedonia in Greece) 600 ybp and slavic bulgarian 600 ybp. So these newcomers surely had as a majority R1a and maybe some I2a as Maciamo noted because proto slavs are from today west Russia and Belarus, then pushed south to Poland pretty early like around 4,000 ybp and became a majority there since today.

    Thats why i noted before those south countries currently speaking slavic languages have nothing related genetically with proto-slavs, but looks like they incorporated their language fully and their culture at around 1,000 ybp.
    Not true LOL

  4. #279
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Piro Ilir's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-04-15
    Posts
    1,126
    Points
    5,377
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,377, Level: 21
    Level completed: 66%, Points required for next Level: 173
    Overall activity: 7.0%






    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    Again you make mistake, not 5.8% but 7.8%.

    I used data census, Population in Albania = 2,831,741 (census 2011), of course, there are nonAlbanians, percentage is 12%, (but it doesn't matter, because data are for Albania, and we ignore, and it doesn't change result)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Albania
    Albanian population in Macedonia = 509,083 (census 2002). I can agree that today number of Albanians can be larger but these are official data.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albania...c_of_Macedonia
    Albanian population in Kosovo = 1,616,869 (census 2011)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Kosovo

    You can see: R1a in Albania is 9% (Eupedia). Number of males in Albania = 1.416.000.
    R1a among Albanians in Slavic Macedonia (capital Skopje) is 12.6% (link is beneath). Number of Albanian males = 254,000
    http://www.bjmg.edu.mk/UploadedImages/pdf/11-18.pdf
    R1a among Albanians in Kosovo is 4.42% (link is beneath). Number of Albanian males = 808.000.

    (Number of males is calculated as mean, it is not precise by census but it doesn't change the result because in one population approximately 1/2 are males).

    Number of R1a of Albanian males = 194,488 (total Albanian males = 2,478,000)

    Percentage of Albanian R1a, (total Albania, Macedonia, Kosovo) = 7.8%.

    (If we take 9.1% R1a for Albania, result is 7.9%).
    Most of R 1 and I 2 in Albanian population is of illyrian-thracian origin. Illyrian and thracians were IE people, therefore they had R1 and I2 lineages. Slavs have much more R1 and I 2 because they came after the Albanians and Greeks in Balkans. Slavs are more recent IE migration than Albanians , therefore they have more R 1 and I2 . I2 and E-V13 is pre IE paternal lineage throughout Balkans, probably I think.

  5. #280
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Piro Ilir View Post
    Most of R 1 and I 2 in Albanian population is of illyrian-thracian origin. Illyrian and thracians were IE people, therefore they had R1 and I2 lineages. Slavs have much more R1 and I 2 because they came after the Albanians and Greeks in Balkans. Slavs are more recent IE migration than Albanians , therefore they have more R 1 and I2 . I2 and E-V13 is pre IE paternal lineage throughout Balkans, probably I think.
    I can't say if Albanians or Slavs came to the Balkans first.

    Albanian created between 4 and 6 century in Romania/Moldavia (and maybe part of South Ukraine). Ancestors of Albanians came to todays Albania over Romania/Bulgaria and Slavic Macedonia. Maybe they came before Slavs, maybe no.

    But, we know that R1a and I2a existed in the Balkans before Slavs. We know that Serbs and Romanians, and another peoples are similar. We know that Thracians and Dacians were similar, and that Thracians and Dacians are among Romanians, Serbs, Bulgarians. We know that Bosnians and part of Serbs (Western Serbs) have Illyirian component (and part of Croats, too). It is possible and Albanians, especially Tosk Albanians, who have fairly significant I2 haplogroup (Geg Albanians no, the have the lowest I2 in the whole Balkans, and beyond).

    Slavs were not drastically change the haplogroups in the Balkans, how someone wrongly thinks. They were most numerous in the North in the Panonian Basin (Plain), todays whole Hungary, Baranja, Slavonia, Medjimurje (Croatia), Srem, Banat, Backa (Serbia), and parts of Slovakia, Slovenia and Romania.

    More detailed studies and in different epochs will give better picture. But, one thing we cannot skip. Albanians, Slavic Macedonians, Serbs, Croats and other Balkan people cannot create history which didn't exist. I can understand that myths can be good for national unity but facts are facts.

    All Balkan nations to a lesser or greater extent have some jealousy towards the Greeks, and some people are paranoid. We must say Greeks have great history, Greece is the cradle of European democracy and civilization. Any attempt of appropriation of Greek history by others is foolishness.

  6. #281
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-05-15
    Posts
    247
    Points
    1,402
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,402, Level: 10
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 148
    Overall activity: 44.0%


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Quote Originally Posted by noUseForAname View Post
    Seems like you are prejudging everything, of course name as Russian came late (probably 1,000), however proto Slavs would definitely have R1a as a majority (and some of other slight mixtures) according to Maciamo

    Also according to the research "Slavs" and whatever dna they brought, which would have included EEF/ANE/an WHG, just in different proportions from that of the prior inhabitants, are newcomers to the Balkans, arriving in the last 1200 years or so.

    http://www.isabs.hr/registration2013...d_abstract=417


    This might also be the right time when slavic languages were incorporated to Countries like Serbia Bosnia Croatia (and the language serbo-croatian is around 900 ybp) then slavic Macedonian language (nothing related to Macedonia in Greece) 600 ybp and slavic bulgarian 600 ybp. So these newcomers surely had as a majority R1a and maybe some I2a as Maciamo noted because proto slavs are from today west Russia and Belarus, then pushed south to Poland pretty early like around 4,000 ybp and became a majority there since today.

    Thats why i noted before those south countries currently speaking slavic languages have nothing related genetically with proto-slavs, but looks like they incorporated their language fully and their culture at around 1,000 ybp.
    Balto-Slavic or Slavic was always spoken in Central,Eastern and South Eastern Europe by majority depends in which form the language was changing in it's history,but it's old and stable in it's zone less or more 3000 years.
    Last edited by Милан М.; 10-06-15 at 18:54.

  7. #282
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    26-08-14
    Posts
    200
    Points
    7,381
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,381, Level: 25
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 169
    Overall activity: 5.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b

    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    I can't say if Albanians or Slavs came to the Balkans first.

    You "cant say" are your some kind of Scientist?
    read below some science please


    The most parsimonious and scientific explanation is that Albanians hav been in that area since at least the Bronze Age. Anything else is just more Balkan obfuscation for ethnic partisanship and an attempt to make the Albanians and anyone else who carries it "foreign" to the area when in fact it is the "Slavs" and whatever yDna they carried who are the most recent arrivals

    By far the highest rates of IBD within any populations is found between Albanian speakers—around 90 ancestors from 0–500 ya, and around 600 ancestors from 500–1,500 ya (so high that we left them out of Figure 5; see Figure S12). Beyond 1,500 ya, the rates of IBD drop to levels typical for other populations in the eastern grouping.

    The highest levels of IBD sharing are found in the Albanian-speaking individuals (from Albania and Kosovo), an increase in common ancestry deriving from the last 1,500 years. This suggests that a reasonable proportion of the ancestors of modern-day Albanian speakers (at least those represented in POPRES) are drawn from a relatively small, cohesive population that has persisted for at least the last 1,500 years. These individuals share similar but slightly higher numbers of common ancestors with nearby populations than do individuals in other parts of Europe (see Figure S3), implying that these Albanian speakers have not been a particularly isolated population so much as a small one. Furthermore, our Greek and Macedonian samples share much higher numbers of common ancestors with Albanian speakers than with other neighbors, possibly a result of historical migrations, or else perhaps smaller effects of the Slavic expansion in these populations. It is also interesting to note that the sampled Italians share nearly as much IBD with Albanian speakers as with each other. The Albanian language is a Indo-European language without other close relatives [53] that persisted through periods when neighboring languages were strongly influenced by Latin or Greek, suggesting an intriguing link between linguistic and genealogical history in this case.

    The migration period.
    One of the striking patterns we see is the relatively high level of sharing of IBD between pairs of individuals across eastern Europe, as high or higher than that observed within other, much smaller populations. This is consistent with these individuals having a comparatively large proportion of ancestry drawn from a relatively small population that expanded over a large geographic area. The “smooth” estimates of Figure 4 (and more generally Figures 5 and S17) suggest that this increase in ancestry stems from around 1,000–2,000 ya, since during this time pairs of eastern individuals are expected to share a substantial number of common ancestors, while this is only true of pairs of noneastern individuals if they are from the same population. For example, even individuals from widely separated eastern populations share about the same amount of IBD as do two Irish individuals (see Figure S3), suggesting that this ancestral population may have been relatively small.This evidence is consistent with the idea that these populations derive a substantial proportion of their ancestry from various groups that expanded during the “migration period” from the fourth through ninth centuries [51]. This period begins with the Huns moving into eastern Europe towards the end of the fourth century, establishing an empire including modern-day Hungary and Romania, and continues in the fifth century as various Germanic groups moved into and ruled much of the western Roman empire. This was followed by the expansion of the Slavic populations into regions of low population density beginning in the sixth century, reaching their maximum by the 10th century [52]. The eastern populations with high rates of IBD are highly coincident with the modern distribution of Slavic languages, so it is natural to speculate that much of the higher rates were due to this expansion. The inclusion of (non-Slavic speaking) Hungary and Romania in the group of eastern populations sharing high IBD could indicate the effect of other groups (e.g., the Huns) on ancestry in these regions, or because some of the same group of people who elsewhere are known as Slavs adopted different local cultures in those regions. Greece and Albania are also part of this putative signal of expansion, which could be because the Slavs settled in part of these areas (with unknown demographic effect), or because of subsequent population exchange. However, additional work and methods would be needed to verify this hypothesis.


    For instance, we could argue that the high degree of shared common ancestry among Albanian speakers was because most of these sampled originated from a small area rather than uniformly across Albania and Kosovo. However, this would not explain the high rate of IBD between Albanian speakers and neighboring populations. Even populations from which we only have one or two samples, which we at first assumed would be unusably noisy, provide generally reliable, consistent patterns, as evidenced by, for example, Figure S3.



    period in Balkans.jpg


    bottom row is 2550-4335 years ago, you can see that Albanian is the red colour and sufficiently at the very high percentage then the others at 2550-4335 years ago.
    i suppose proto-slavs (majority R1a as per Maciamo) at that time 4,300 weren't even still in high numbers at today Polad, bur rather located in today west Russia and north Belarus.

    Therefore as the study argues Slavs are the most recent arrivals.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology...l.pbio.1001555

  8. #283
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-05-15
    Posts
    247
    Points
    1,402
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,402, Level: 10
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 148
    Overall activity: 44.0%


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Quote Originally Posted by noUseForAname View Post
    You "cant say" are your some kind of Scientist?
    read below some science please


    The most parsimonious and scientific explanation is that Albanians hav been in that area since at least the Bronze Age. Anything else is just more Balkan obfuscation for ethnic partisanship and an attempt to make the Albanians and anyone else who carries it "foreign" to the area when in fact it is the "Slavs" and whatever yDna they carried who are the most recent arrivals

    By far the highest rates of IBD within any populations is found between Albanian speakers—around 90 ancestors from 0–500 ya, and around 600 ancestors from 500–1,500 ya (so high that we left them out of Figure 5; see Figure S12). Beyond 1,500 ya, the rates of IBD drop to levels typical for other populations in the eastern grouping.

    The highest levels of IBD sharing are found in the Albanian-speaking individuals (from Albania and Kosovo), an increase in common ancestry deriving from the last 1,500 years. This suggests that a reasonable proportion of the ancestors of modern-day Albanian speakers (at least those represented in POPRES) are drawn from a relatively small, cohesive population that has persisted for at least the last 1,500 years. These individuals share similar but slightly higher numbers of common ancestors with nearby populations than do individuals in other parts of Europe (see Figure S3), implying that these Albanian speakers have not been a particularly isolated population so much as a small one. Furthermore, our Greek and Macedonian samples share much higher numbers of common ancestors with Albanian speakers than with other neighbors, possibly a result of historical migrations, or else perhaps smaller effects of the Slavic expansion in these populations. It is also interesting to note that the sampled Italians share nearly as much IBD with Albanian speakers as with each other. The Albanian language is a Indo-European language without other close relatives [53] that persisted through periods when neighboring languages were strongly influenced by Latin or Greek, suggesting an intriguing link between linguistic and genealogical history in this case.

    The migration period.
    One of the striking patterns we see is the relatively high level of sharing of IBD between pairs of individuals across eastern Europe, as high or higher than that observed within other, much smaller populations. This is consistent with these individuals having a comparatively large proportion of ancestry drawn from a relatively small population that expanded over a large geographic area. The “smooth” estimates of Figure 4 (and more generally Figures 5 and S17) suggest that this increase in ancestry stems from around 1,000–2,000 ya, since during this time pairs of eastern individuals are expected to share a substantial number of common ancestors, while this is only true of pairs of noneastern individuals if they are from the same population. For example, even individuals from widely separated eastern populations share about the same amount of IBD as do two Irish individuals (see Figure S3), suggesting that this ancestral population may have been relatively small.This evidence is consistent with the idea that these populations derive a substantial proportion of their ancestry from various groups that expanded during the “migration period” from the fourth through ninth centuries [51]. This period begins with the Huns moving into eastern Europe towards the end of the fourth century, establishing an empire including modern-day Hungary and Romania, and continues in the fifth century as various Germanic groups moved into and ruled much of the western Roman empire. This was followed by the expansion of the Slavic populations into regions of low population density beginning in the sixth century, reaching their maximum by the 10th century [52]. The eastern populations with high rates of IBD are highly coincident with the modern distribution of Slavic languages, so it is natural to speculate that much of the higher rates were due to this expansion. The inclusion of (non-Slavic speaking) Hungary and Romania in the group of eastern populations sharing high IBD could indicate the effect of other groups (e.g., the Huns) on ancestry in these regions, or because some of the same group of people who elsewhere are known as Slavs adopted different local cultures in those regions. Greece and Albania are also part of this putative signal of expansion, which could be because the Slavs settled in part of these areas (with unknown demographic effect), or because of subsequent population exchange. However, additional work and methods would be needed to verify this hypothesis.


    For instance, we could argue that the high degree of shared common ancestry among Albanian speakers was because most of these sampled originated from a small area rather than uniformly across Albania and Kosovo. However, this would not explain the high rate of IBD between Albanian speakers and neighboring populations. Even populations from which we only have one or two samples, which we at first assumed would be unusably noisy, provide generally reliable, consistent patterns, as evidenced by, for example, Figure S3.



    period in Balkans.jpg


    bottom row is 2550-4335 years ago, you can see that Albanian is the red colour and sufficiently at the very high percentage then the others at 2550-4335 years ago.
    i suppose proto-slavs (majority R1a as per Maciamo) at that time 4,300 weren't even still in high numbers at today Polad, bur rather located in today west Russia and north Belarus.

    Therefore as the study argues Slavs are the most recent arrivals.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology...l.pbio.1001555
    Proto-Slavic- unnatested, reconstructed proto-language of all the Slavic languages and there is Slavic speaking group.
    Last edited by Милан М.; 10-06-15 at 18:51.

  9. #284
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    noUseForAname
    Do not make quick conclusions on the basis of one or two articles.

    You made four mistaken conclusions based on article of Lazaridis et al.

    You said that based on this articles Albanians are 10,000 years in the Balkans.

    No. Wrong.

    You can read #253 (and earlier) and #276.

    And today in the another thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    We should have in mind EEF is hybrid component:
    ...
    You should be thanking me what I pointed out some your misconceptions. I put some free time and effort to explain.
    ...

    What is point. This matter is very complex and multidisciplinary, it requires a lot of knowledge from different disciplines, and it goes beyond the knowledge of one person. Many many studies in many different sciences are required to come up with some proper conclusions. One half-cocked conclusion today can be wrong tomorrow because new studies arrive.

  10. #285
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    26-08-14
    Posts
    200
    Points
    7,381
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,381, Level: 25
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 169
    Overall activity: 5.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b

    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post

    You can see Eurogenes Genetic Ancestry Project:
    http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/201...est-three.html

    Early European Farmer (EEF)
    : apparently this is a hybrid component, the result of mixture between "Basal Eurasians" and a WHG-like population possibly from the Balkans.


    What is EEF?
    http://bga101.blogspot.com.au/2013/1...europeans.html

    EEF: mixed European/Near Eastern Neolithic farmers

    Study gives percentages of those populations who have near eastern component


    Sardinian Albanian and Greek has nothing to do with (at least not before 10,000 ybp) with near eastern component, or they might have the very very lowest % then the rest of populations from the source.
    You are either not understanding English (not reading my sources) or you just don't want to be reasonable. Those that they have near eastern component (highest %) are Maltese, Sicilian, ashkenazi jews (read below)

    If so than why would the scientists put Sardinian (90%) Albanian and Greek to the top for Early European Farmers (10,000 ybp)?
    Its all about amount of percentages as for sure everyone would have slight mixtures.


    Check the Figure S9.27 (pg 124) please, Albanians have:

    0% Beduine (Which is of Near Eastern component)

    77% EN (Early Neolithic European)
    2.2% Nagasan
    3.3% WHG
    17.5% Yanmaya


    Fig. S9.24 shows that when WHG admixture is added to EN, residuals for most European populations are reduced, consistent with most Europeans not being descended from EN farmers of Europe. Four populations indicate no change in residuals: Sardinians are the population that is closest to early European farmers 2,7-9,12 with an estimated ~ 90% descent from them. Albanians are second and Greeks third
    (ref. 2 and Fig. S9.23b), while Maltese, Ashkenazi Jews, and Sicilians may have Near Eastern admixture not mediated via early European farmers2.

    Table S9.3: Populations that improve resnorm for European outlier populations when added to a model of EN/WHG/EHG admixture as a 4th ancestral population. We show the top 20 populations that reduce resnorm the most when added to the mixture model. For Maltese, Sicilians, and Ashkenazi Jews these populations tend to be from the Middle East and North Africa

    Maltese Sicilian Ashkenazi Jew

    4th anc. pop. resnorm 4th anc. pop. resnorm 4th anc. pop.resnorm
    Moroccan_Jew 0.000006 Turkish_Jew 0.000006 Cypriot 0.000006
    Lebanese 0.000010 Cypriot 0.000006 Iraqi_Jew 0.000018
    Syrian 0.000010 Moroccan_Jew 0.000009 Turkish_Jew 0.000018
    Tunisian_Jew 0.000011 Druze 0.000012 Moroccan_Jew 0.000020
    Saudi 0.000014 Iraqi_Jew 0.000012 Druze 0.000025
    Turkish_Jew 0.000016 Syrian 0.000014 Lebanese 0.000027
    Libyan_Jew 0.000017 Lebanese 0.000016 Syrian 0.000028
    Jordanian 0.000017 Tunisian_Jew 0.000019 Tunisian_Jew 0.000037
    Palestinian 0.000019 Saudi 0.000021 Saudi 0.000039
    Druze 0.000022 Jordanian 0.000022 Iranian_Jew 0.000039
    Yemenite_Jew 0.000022 Libyan_Jew0.000025 Jordanian 0.000039
    BedouinB 0.000022 Palestinian 0.000026 Palestinian 0.000044
    BedouinA 0.000023 BedouinB 0.000027 Libyan_Jew 0.000044
    Tunisian 0.000024 Yemenite_Jew 0.000028 Yemenite_Jew 0.000045
    Mozabite 0.000024 Tunisian 0.000028 BedouinB 0.000045
    Algerian 0.000025 Mozabite 0.000028 BedouinA 0.000046
    Egyptian 0.000025 BedouinA 0.000028 Tunisian 0.000046
    Saharawi 0.000026 Egyptian 0.000028 Egyptian 0.000046
    Yemen 0.000028 Algerian 0.000029 Mozabite 0.000047
    Esan 0.000030 Saharawi 0.000029 Algerian 0.000047
    Last edited by noUseForAname; 10-06-15 at 03:48.

  11. #286
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,138
    Points
    38,676
    Level
    60
    Points: 38,676, Level: 60
    Level completed: 69%, Points required for next Level: 374
    Overall activity: 52.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    @
    and what about the 14 % Altaic in Albanians?

    Devils advocate
    ΟΘΕΝ ΑΙΔΩΣ OY EINAI
    ΑΤΗ ΛΑΜΒΑΝΕΙΝ ΑΥΤΟΙΣ
    ΥΒΡΙΣ ΓΕΝΝΑΤΑΙ
    ΝΕΜΕΣΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΙΣΗ ΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΟΥΣΙ ΔΕ

    When there is no shame
    Divine blindness conquers them
    Hybris (abuse, opprombium) is born
    Nemesis and punishment follows.

    Εχε υπομονη Ηρωα
    Η τιμωρια δεν αργει.

  12. #287
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    26-08-14
    Posts
    200
    Points
    7,381
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,381, Level: 25
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 169
    Overall activity: 5.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b

    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    You said that based on this articles Albanians are 10,000 years in the Balkans.
    No. Wrong.

    I said (as study argues) current populations of Sardinian, Albanian and Greek are de facto a direct descent (with highest % then other populations) from Early Neolithic European farmers (10,000 ybp). (read above for more explanation)

    I never said Albanian or greek that they were in Balkans at the year 10,000 ybp with the same names (nationalities) as of now (of course not), however current populations of Sardinian, Albanian and Greek are de facto a direct descent (with highest % then other populations) from Early Neolithic European farmers (10,000 ybp).

    I already gave you a lots of facts from above, if you don't want to believe for whatever reason then thats your opinion and i respect that, its just you cannot say "wrong immediately" to a study or to me because i was just representing this study and i wasn't adding anything from my self as per the conclusions above.
    And because you are not a scientist if you want to back something then you are welcome to give other studies which criticize the later.

  13. #288
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    noUseForAname
    What do you don't understand.

    See these data for two men (I wrote without decimals):

    1.
    EEF : 84
    WHG: 8
    ANE: 8

    2.
    EEF: 91
    WHG: 2
    ANE: 7

    What do you conclude?

    ...
    Model of Lazaridis et al is imperfect, it is only first iteration in the way to better, robust models. I wrote why. Don't give wrong conclusions.
    ...

    EEF = ENF + WHG. It will be sequenced ENF, but it will pass the time.

    ENF is Eearly Neolithic Farmers, Near Eastern/European Neolithic farmers
    (Nobody spoke about bedouins. Near East in this sense is area which mostly covers Anatolia/Turkey, Southern Caucasus, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq).

    We have no sequence a genome or two from the Neolithic Near East. We will know much more when we sequenced genomes across from Western Asia and North Africa and wider.

    Newer, better, robusted models will give us much more accurate and better picture. And we can use them.



  14. #289
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,698
    Points
    240,645
    Level
    100
    Points: 240,645, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by noUseForAname View Post
    Study gives percentages of those populations who have near eastern component


    Sardinian Albanian and Greek has nothing to do with (at least not before 10,000 ybp) with near eastern component, or they might have the very very lowest % then the rest of populations from the source.
    You are either not understanding English (not reading my sources) or you just don't want to be reasonable. Those that they have near eastern component (highest %) are Maltese, Sicilian, ashkenazi jews (read below)

    If so than why would the scientists put Sardinian (90%) Albanian and Greek to the top for Early European Farmers (10,000 ybp)?
    Its all about amount of percentages as for sure everyone would have slight mixtures.


    Check the Figure S9.27 (pg 124) please, Albanians have:

    0% Beduine (Which is of Near Eastern component)

    77% EN (Early Neolithic European)
    2.2% Nagasan
    3.3% WHG
    17.5% Yanmaya


    Fig. S9.24 shows that when WHG admixture is added to EN, residuals for most European populations are reduced, consistent with most Europeans not being descended from EN farmers of Europe. Four populations indicate no change in residuals: Sardinians are the population that is closest to early European farmers 2,7-9,12 with an estimated ~ 90% descent from them. Albanians are second and Greeks third
    (ref. 2 and Fig. S9.23b), while Maltese, Ashkenazi Jews, and Sicilians may have Near Eastern admixture not mediated via early European farmers2.

    Table S9.3: Populations that improve resnorm for European outlier populations when added to a model of EN/WHG/EHG admixture as a 4th ancestral population. We show the top 20 populations that reduce resnorm the most when added to the mixture model. For Maltese, Sicilians, and Ashkenazi Jews these populations tend to be from the Middle East and North Africa

    Maltese Sicilian Ashkenazi Jew

    4th anc. pop. resnorm 4th anc. pop. resnorm 4th anc. pop.resnorm
    Moroccan_Jew 0.000006 Turkish_Jew 0.000006 Cypriot 0.000006
    Lebanese 0.000010 Cypriot 0.000006 Iraqi_Jew 0.000018
    Syrian 0.000010 Moroccan_Jew 0.000009 Turkish_Jew 0.000018
    Tunisian_Jew 0.000011 Druze 0.000012 Moroccan_Jew 0.000020
    Saudi 0.000014 Iraqi_Jew 0.000012 Druze 0.000025
    Turkish_Jew 0.000016 Syrian 0.000014 Lebanese 0.000027
    Libyan_Jew 0.000017 Lebanese 0.000016 Syrian 0.000028
    Jordanian 0.000017 Tunisian_Jew 0.000019 Tunisian_Jew 0.000037
    Palestinian 0.000019 Saudi 0.000021 Saudi 0.000039
    Druze 0.000022 Jordanian 0.000022 Iranian_Jew 0.000039
    Yemenite_Jew 0.000022 Libyan_Jew0.000025 Jordanian 0.000039
    BedouinB 0.000022 Palestinian 0.000026 Palestinian 0.000044
    BedouinA 0.000023 BedouinB 0.000027 Libyan_Jew 0.000044
    Tunisian 0.000024 Yemenite_Jew 0.000028 Yemenite_Jew 0.000045
    Mozabite 0.000024 Tunisian 0.000028 BedouinB 0.000045
    Algerian 0.000025 Mozabite 0.000028 BedouinA 0.000046
    Egyptian 0.000025 BedouinA 0.000028 Tunisian 0.000046
    Saharawi 0.000026 Egyptian 0.000028 Egyptian 0.000046
    Yemen 0.000028 Algerian 0.000029 Mozabite 0.000047
    Esan 0.000030 Saharawi 0.000029 Algerian 0.000047
    What do the resnorm statistics of the Maltese, Sicilians, and Ashkenazim have to do with the Albanians?

    Also, how could the results shown in S9.27 (in the Supplementary Info of Haak et al, not Lazaridis et al, btw) possibly lead you to believe that they are consistent with most Europeans not being descendents of EN farmers? ALL Europeans have some descent from EEF.

    Plus, where do you think the majority of the ancestry of the EEF came from? At least 80% of it came from the Near East. Most likely they embarked for Europe from the area where southeast Anatolia meets the Levant, and are probably in part descended from the Natufians. Do you think this ancestry is different in kind if it came 7,000 years ago with the Neolithic versus 4,000 years ago with the Bronze Age? When it came in the Bronze Age to southern Europe it just was mixed with ANE instead of with some WHG. Maybe a little south central Asian was mixed in too, but the Early Near Eastern farmer portion was the same.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  15. #290
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    26-08-14
    Posts
    200
    Points
    7,381
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,381, Level: 25
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 169
    Overall activity: 5.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b

    Country: Canada



    [QUOTE=Angela;459115]
    What do the resnorm statistics of the Maltese, Sicilians, and Ashkenazim have to do with the Albanians?
    That was just a reply to Garrick and to show which European populations have more components % of near eastern.
    Because he was the one saying that Albanians came from Caucus area not even 1,000 years ago, and apparently said that he didn't know if "slavs " or Albanians came as the recent newcomers....where the studies show the different.

    Garrick
    Proto Albanian originated from area Caucasus, today’s eastern Turkey and northern Iran. And it is possible that population who spoke proto Albanian moved over land in the region around Black sea to the Moldavia (Southern Ukraine/Romania). And this population mixed in with E-V13 carriers who were numerous in the area where these two populations merged (maybe in this area E-V13 is numerous and today).
    He even said that
    Garrick
    Albanian has same root as Indic languages (for example Kashmiri) and Iranian languages (for example Baluchi), which can means, if they’re right, that proto Albanian was more to the east far from the Armenian.

    And this was actually from the study HE HIMSELF sourced (completely misrepresented)
    This is the video do
    ne by business insider from the same source (Albanian came from Baluchi?)


    <b style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><em><font color="#333333">

    Russell D. Gray & Quentin D. Atkinson, University of Auckland, New Zealand
    https://www.webdepot.umontreal.ca/Us...ayAtkinson.pdf


    Then he comes into Albanian and Berber language similarity
    http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...tic-similarity


    All this makes me think one of those individuals whom for whatever reason want to show Albanian as foreign as possible. No matter what (facts or no facts) and by consistently attacking and even supposing that Albanians came with Ottomans as they picked them as slaves from Caucus. Believe it or not some Countries still get educated by this in their history books.




    I noted that of course all the european populations have a mixture with near eastern component and EN farmers, however Sardinians Albanians and Greeks have the lowest % (for near eastern component) as their descend more from Early European farmers, and if you read the older posts we were talking only for Early Neolithic to mid Neolithic because before 10,000 ycp Early European farmers either came from Africa or near east (so probably from near eastern farmers)

    Also, how could the results shown in S9.27 (in the Supplementary Info of Haak et al, not Lazaridis et al, btw) possibly lead you to believe that they are consistent with most Europeans not being descendents of EN farmers? ALL Europeans have some descent from EEF.
    Of course all the Europeans have some descend from EEF, i was only noting that (as per study) Sardinians Albanians and Greeks have the highest % as their descend more from Early European farmers, and if you read the older posts we were talking only for Early Neolithic to mid Neolithic because before 10,000 ycp Early European farmers either came from Africa or near east (probably from near eastern farmers).



    Recent discoveries in Europe, such as Cyprus and mainland Greece has shown that farming started early in south east Europe. In Franchthi Cavein Greece there are no certain gathering of plant foods attested before c. 11,000 bc, although large numbers of seeds of the Boraginaceae family may come from plants gathered to furnish soft bedding or for the dye which their roots may have supplied. First appearing at c. 11,000bc are lentils, vetch, pistachios, and almonds. Then c. 10,500bc appear a few very rare seeds of wild oats and wild barley. Neither wild oats nor wild barley become at all common until c. 7000bc[19][20]in Cyprus. The oldest agricultural settlement ever found on a Mediterranean island has been discovered in Klimonas. between 9100 and 8600 bc

    Anthropological and archaeological evidence from sites across Southwest Asia and North Africa indicate use of wild grain (e.g., from the c.20,000b c site of Ohalo II in Israel, many Natufian sites in the Levant and from sites along the Nile in the 10th millennium bc).
    It was not until after 9500 bc that the eight so-called founder crops of agriculture appear: first emmer and einkorn wheat, then hulled barley, peas,lentils,bitter vetch, chick peas and flax. These eight crops occur more or less simultaneously on Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) sites in the Levant
    By 7000 bc, sowing and harvesting reached Mesopotamia.....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_agriculture


    So that might mean that by 10,000 ybp there was already farming in the far south east Balkans that came from north east Africa and the far south west Levant.

    It looks like the peak was south east Africa (could be M-78 Peak) end the far south west Levant (Ohalo) which at the same time might have spread in one direction at Crete and then Peloponnese 10,000 BC (reaching south East Europe without going across through Levant and Anatolia) and the other group spread through Levant Syria and reached Mesopotamia by 7,000 BC.
    Last edited by noUseForAname; 10-06-15 at 05:06.

  16. #291
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    noUseForAname
    Now you change the subject, again. In the Balkans were hunter gatherers 20,000 years ago and more, and what.

    Model of Lazaridis et al is imperfect and it will be replaced with new, more robust model, with more data. Especially when it will be sequenced a genome from the Neolithic Near East, of course and other genomes across Asia and Africa.

    But what you tell now has nothing to do with Albanians. Now it seems that once again interfering admixtures with parental markers.

    See, we don't know from the model of Lazaridis et al when different populations arrived in the Balkans, nor the model deals wit it. Generally it is stupid to use today's national terms for old times' sake, but it is a different story, and there's no chance to convince you not to associate.

    Therefore, if we see what Lazaridis et al find for todays Albanians, it can be much later then you think. I gave admixtures two men what you can conclude, what do you think.

  17. #292
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-05-15
    Posts
    247
    Points
    1,402
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,402, Level: 10
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 148
    Overall activity: 44.0%


    Country: Yugoslavia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    [QUOTE=noUseForAname;459123]
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post

    That was just a reply to Garrick and to show which European populations have more components % of near eastern.
    Because he was the one saying that Albanians came from Caucus area not even 1,000 years ago, and apparently said that he didn't know if "slavs " or Albanians came as the recent newcomers....where the studies show the different.

    Garrick
    Proto Albanian originated from area Caucasus, today’s eastern Turkey and northern Iran. And it is possible that population who spoke proto Albanian moved over land in the region around Black sea to the Moldavia (Southern Ukraine/Romania). And this population mixed in with E-V13 carriers who were numerous in the area where these two populations merged (maybe in this area E-V13 is numerous and today).
    He even said that
    Garrick
    Albanian has same root as Indic languages (for example Kashmiri) and Iranian languages (for example Baluchi), which can means, if they’re right, that proto Albanian was more to the east far from the Armenian.

    And this was actually from the study HE HIMSELF sourced (completely misrepresented)
    This is the video do
    ne by business insider from the same source (Albanian came from Baluchi?)


    <b style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><em><font color="#333333">

    Russell D. Gray & Quentin D. Atkinson, University of Auckland, New Zealand
    https://www.webdepot.umontreal.ca/Us...ayAtkinson.pdf


    Then he comes into Albanian and Berber language similarity
    http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...tic-similarity


    All this makes me think one of those individuals whom for whatever reason want to show Albanian as foreign as possible. No matter what (facts or no facts) and by consistently attacking and even supposing that Albanians came with Ottomans as they picked them as slaves from Caucus. Believe it or not some Countries still get educated by this in their history books.




    I noted that of course all the european populations have a mixture with near eastern component and EN farmers, however Sardinians Albanians and Greeks have the lowest % (for near eastern component) as their descend more from Early European farmers, and if you read the older posts we were talking only for Early Neolithic to mid Neolithic because before 10,000 ycp Early European farmers either came from Africa or near east (so probably from near eastern farmers)



    Of course all the Europeans have some descend from EEF, i was only noting that (as per study) Sardinians Albanians and Greeks have the highest % as their descend more from Early European farmers, and if you read the older posts we were talking only for Early Neolithic to mid Neolithic because before 10,000 ycp Early European farmers either came from Africa or near east (probably from near eastern farmers).



    Recent discoveries in Europe, such as Cyprus and mainland Greece has shown that farming started early in south east Europe. In Franchthi Cavein Greece there are no certain gathering of plant foods attested before c. 11,000 bc, although large numbers of seeds of the Boraginaceae family may come from plants gathered to furnish soft bedding or for the dye which their roots may have supplied. First appearing at c. 11,000bc are lentils, vetch, pistachios, and almonds. Then c. 10,500bc appear a few very rare seeds of wild oats and wild barley. Neither wild oats nor wild barley become at all common until c. 7000bc[19][20]in Cyprus. The oldest agricultural settlement ever found on a Mediterranean island has been discovered in Klimonas. between 9100 and 8600 bc

    Anthropological and archaeological evidence from sites across Southwest Asia and North Africa indicate use of wild grain (e.g., from the c.20,000b c site of Ohalo II in Israel, many Natufian sites in the Levant and from sites along the Nile in the 10th millennium bc).
    It was not until after 9500 bc that the eight so-called founder crops of agriculture appear: first emmer and einkorn wheat, then hulled barley, peas,lentils,bitter vetch, chick peas and flax. These eight crops occur more or less simultaneously on Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) sites in the Levant
    By 7000 bc, sowing and harvesting reached Mesopotamia.....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_agriculture


    So that might mean that by 10,000 ybp there was already farming in the far south east Balkans that came from north east Africa and the far south west Levant.

    It looks like the peak was south east Africa (could be M-78 Peak) end the far south west Levant (Ohalo) which at the same time might have spread in one direction at Crete and then Peloponnese 10,000 BC (reaching south East Europe without going across through Levant and Anatolia) and the other group spread through Levant Syria and reached Mesopotamia by 7,000 BC.
    The map you posted Anatolian hypothesis of IE clearly show that Balto-Slavic or conservative Slavic if you like was one of the first in Europe,according to this map you should admit that Thracians were nothing else but conservative speakers of Slavic language like Mario Alinei explain,why you push South Slavic(Serbo-Croat,Bulgarian) to be 900 years old when maps you post push it back to B.C era and more older then any of the modern Western and Eastern Slavic,how can this migration be from the North then?are you debunk yourself lol,so when i said that the people that conquered the Balkans from the Romans were for the most part one and the same with the one within the empire at least in genetics,there was no major genetic change,neither was migratio gentium en masse but a military conquest.

  18. #293
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by noUseForAname View Post

    <b style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><em><font color="#333333">
    You're big Balto-Slavic promoter here.

    You can see, first Balto-Slavic is created, 0:23.

    And Albanian originated from Balto-Slavic, 0:29.


    Yes, there is a theory that Albanian is branch of Balto-Slavic, of course Albanian is Satem as Balto-Slavic and they have a lot of similarity.

    But I think facts that Albanian is close to Balto-Slavic languages (Dacian, Thracian, modern Slavic and Baltic languages etc.) is because modern Albanian created in Romania probably between 4 and 6 century. A lot of Balto-Slavic/Dacian/Thracian words and of course Eastern Latin (Romanian) entered in Albanian in that time.

    Russel Gray and Quentin Atkinson still be right that Albanian have same root as Iranian (and Indic) languages. My assumption is that proto Albanian is created somewhere between speakers of Armenian and speakers of North Iranian languages. Probably in Caucasus or near (maybe Eastern Anatolia or Northern Iran).

  19. #294
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Piro Ilir's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-04-15
    Posts
    1,126
    Points
    5,377
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,377, Level: 21
    Level completed: 66%, Points required for next Level: 173
    Overall activity: 7.0%






    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    I can't say if Albanians or Slavs came to the Balkans first.

    Albanian created between 4 and 6 century in Romania/Moldavia (and maybe part of South Ukraine). Ancestors of Albanians came to todays Albania over Romania/Bulgaria and Slavic Macedonia. Maybe they came before Slavs, maybe no.

    But, we know that R1a and I2a existed in the Balkans before Slavs. We know that Serbs and Romanians, and another peoples are similar. We know that Thracians and Dacians were similar, and that Thracians and Dacians are among Romanians, Serbs, Bulgarians. We know that Bosnians and part of Serbs (Western Serbs) have Illyirian component (and part of Croats, too). It is possible and Albanians, especially Tosk Albanians, who have fairly significant I2 haplogroup (Geg Albanians no, the have the lowest I2 in the whole Balkans, and beyond).

    Slavs were not drastically change the haplogroups in the Balkans, how someone wrongly thinks. They were most numerous in the North in the Panonian Basin (Plain), todays whole Hungary, Baranja, Slavonia, Medjimurje (Croatia), Srem, Banat, Backa (Serbia), and parts of Slovakia, Slovenia and Romania.

    More detailed studies and in different epochs will give better picture. But, one thing we cannot skip. Albanians, Slavic Macedonians, Serbs, Croats and other Balkan people cannot create history which didn't exist. I can understand that myths can be good for national unity but facts are facts.

    All Balkan nations to a lesser or greater extent have some jealousy towards the Greeks, and some people are paranoid. We must say Greeks have great history, Greece is the cradle of European democracy and civilization. Any attempt of appropriation of Greek history by others is foolishness.
    Nobody mentioned Greeks and their civilization, which in my opinion has nothing to do with modern Greece. You are the first claiming that Albanians came from south Ukraine or North east Romania. This is something really silly and you know it. At a post above you said Albanians came from Anatolia and at another post you said they came from Caucasus . You need to make clear your mind sir. There is not even a single source mentioning an Albanian migration from Ukraine to illyria nor to epirus (except any silly nationalistic theory) . Genetically and linguistically is proven that Albanians are indigenous in West Balkan, at least BC era. If we study the genetic and the tongues of Balkans populations we will have a clear picture of all the spread of populations throughout Balkans.





  20. #295
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Piro Ilir View Post
    Nobody mentioned Greeks and their civilization, which in my opinion has nothing to do with modern Greece.
    This is your opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Piro Ilir View Post
    You are the first claiming that Albanians came from south Ukraine or North east Romania. This is something really silly and you know it.
    No, it is not silly. On the contrary. One of theory is that Albanian created in 4-6 century in Romania. You probably know for Baltic theory and that Albanian is the branch of Balto Slavic. In the video which your college gave you can see that Albanian originate from Balto-Slavic. Albanian has similarities as Balto-Slavic languages, do you know it. And you probably know that Latin words in Albanian came from Romanian (Eastern variant) not from Dalamatian (Western variant). Etc.

    But your college and I have other discussion about New Zealand scientists, who give the model in which Albanian has root as Iranian and Indic languages. And according it Proto Albanian could be in the Caucasus or near. According them Greek and Armenian have same root, and Albanian and Iranian and Indic languages same root. Albanian has some familiarity with Armenian, but if their model is appropriate, more with Iranian/Indic. These scientists are very cited, their model is new, and different from traditional model. Yes, they claim about Anatolian hypothesis, that Proto Indo European originated in Anatolia (contrary from Kurgan hypothesis).

    If they are right it is possible that movement of Proto Albanian speakers people were: Caucasus-area near Black Sea-South Ukraine/Moldavia/Romania. There are people in this forum who pointed this. We will see new scientific findings. For now, for me it can be interesting new paper forthcoming:

    BALKAN GENETIC SIGNALS IN THE ARMENIAN PATERNAL GENE POOL

    http://www.isabs.hr/registration2013...d_abstract=365

    From Abstract:

    On the whole, our results only partly support the version of Balkan origin of the Armenians, and in contrast to it, mainly indicated Neolithic and post-Neolithic ancient human migrations from the Armenian Highland and the Levant to southern Europe.

  21. #296
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    26-08-14
    Posts
    200
    Points
    7,381
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,381, Level: 25
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 169
    Overall activity: 5.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b

    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Милан М. View Post

    The map you posted Anatolian hypothesis of IE clearly show that Balto-Slavic or conservative Slavic if you like was one of the first in Europe,according to this map you should admit that Thracians were nothing else but conservative speakers of Slavic language like Mario Alinei explain,why you push South Slavic(Serbo-Croat,Bulgarian) to be 900 years old when maps you post push it back to B.C era and more older then any of the modern Western and Eastern Slavic,how can this migration be from the North then?are you debunk yourself lol,so when i said that the people that conquered the Balkans from the Romans were for the most part one and the same with the one within the empire at least in genetics,there was no major genetic change,neither was migratio gentium en masse but a military conquest.
    That was just a reply to Garick because he mentioned that Albanian language is a root or derived from Baluchi from the same study he sourced BY HIMSELF.


    Bouckaert et al argues that Serbo Croatian is 900 ybp derived from old church Slavonic around 1,200 ybp and old church Slavonic deriving from Slovenian 1,400 ybp then we have Lithuanian (north steppe region) 1,900 ybp.

    This is consistent with the most recent complex dna study that one group (possibility) of PEI spread from Anatolia through the steppe. However we dont know exactly if Ancient Greek language and Albanian came from steppe or (because it was very close to Anatolia) pushed straight to current Greece and Albania (south east Europe).
    http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...13433.full.pdf

    Bouckaert et al argues that Greek and Albanian split 6,000 ybp from Anatolian and balto slavic split 5,700 ybp.
    We can see that Slavic languages started at 3,100 ybp as the oldest one being Lithuanian (north steppe region) 1,900 ybp. Consistent with my suppositions that Slavic languages came from the steppe (north).
    Therefore we have Lithuanian (north steppe region) 1,900 ybp following Slovenian 1,400 ybp, then 1,200 ybp and old church Slavonic and following Serbo Croatian is 900 ybp


    On the other side Bouckaert et al argues that Ancient Greek and Albanian started at around 5,100 ybp as a separate branches (also separate from balto-slavic and Slavic Languages). So my guess is it couldn't had came from the steppe that early since it started around 5,100 ybp but rather coming straight from Anatolia and not all way around north of black sea and threw the steppe.


    https://theoreticalecology.wordpress...nguage-family/

  22. #297
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    26-08-14
    Posts
    200
    Points
    7,381
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,381, Level: 25
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 169
    Overall activity: 5.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b

    Country: Canada



    Originally Posted by Garrick
    Yes, there is a theory that Albanian is branch of Balto-Slavic, of course Albanian is Satem as Balto-Slavic and they have a lot of similarity.

    Albanian is a separate branch of Balto-slavic, that is known to everyone and the majority of studies say so (especially the recent ones) (see below)

    Bouckaert et al argues that Greek and Albanian split 6,000 ybp from Anatolian and Balto slavic split 5,700 ybp.

    We can see that Slavic languages started at 3,100 ybp as the oldest one being Lithuanian (north steppe region) 1,900 ybp. Consistent with my suppositions that Slavic languages came from the steppe (north).
    Therefore we have Lithuanian (north steppe region) 1,900 ybp following Slovenian 1,400 ybp, then 1,200 ybp and old church Slavonic and following Serbo Croatian is 900 ybp

    O
    n the other side Bouckaert et al argues that Ancient Greek and Albanian started at around 5,100 ybp as a separate branches (also separate from balto-slavic and Slavic Languages). So my guess is it couldn't had came from the steppe that early since it started around 5,100 ybp but rather coming straight from Anatolia and not all way around north of black sea and threw the steppe.
    https://theoreticalecology.wordpress...nguage-family/


    This is consistent with the most recent complex dna study that (possibility) of PEI spread from Anatolia through the steppe. However we dont know exactly if Ancient Greek language and Albanian came from steppe or (because it was very close to Anatolia) pushed straight to far south east Europe.

    http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...13433.full.pdf



    But I think facts that Albanian is close to Balto-Slavic languages (Dacian, Thracian, modern Slavic and Baltic languages etc.) is because modern Albanian created in Romania probably between 4 and 6 century. A lot of Balto-Slavic/Dacian/Thracian words and of course Eastern Latin (Romanian) entered in Albanian in that time.

    Oh now your saying modern Albanian (because you were saying that proto Albanian originated from Caucus Area not even 1,000 ybp). You think that proto Albanians came with Ottoman turks who picked them as slaves from Caucus area?

    Ancient Greek and Albanian started at around 5,100 ybp (south east Europe) as a separate branches (also separate from balto-slavic and Slavic Languages) thousands of years ago before Dscians and Thracian names came in, therefore they are out of the Context here.



    Russel Gray and Quentin Atkinson still be right that Albanian have same root as Iranian (and Indic) languages. My assumption is that proto Albanian is created somewhere between speakers of Armenian and speakers of North Iranian languages. Probably in Caucasus or near (maybe Eastern Anatolia or Northern Iran).
    Seems like (from the same source you placed) you haven't even read the source when you said that Albanian language derives from Baluchi 2.500 ybp when Albanian is 6,500 ybp. Even before indic/Iranian which is 4,600 ybp.

    according to the study these are all separate branches (separating straight from Anatolia) (from older to recent) are: Anatolian, Tocharian, Armenian, Greek, Albanian, Iranian (Indo-Iranian), Indic (indo-Iranian), Slavic, Baltic, Germanic, Italic.....


    Therefore don't give false interpretations of the same study you are sourcing please.


    https://www.webdepot.umontreal.ca/Us...ayAtkinson.pdf

  23. #298
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-05-15
    Posts
    247
    Points
    1,402
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,402, Level: 10
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 148
    Overall activity: 44.0%


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Quote Originally Posted by noUseForAname View Post
    That was just a reply to Garick because he mentioned that Albanian language is a root or derived from Baluchi from the same study he sourced BY HIMSELF.


    Bouckaert et al argues that Serbo Croatian is 900 ybp derived from old church Slavonic around 1,200 ybp and old church Slavonic deriving from Slovenian 1,400 ybp then we have Lithuanian (north steppe region) 1,900 ybp.

    This is consistent with the most recent complex dna study that one group (possibility) of PEI spread from Anatolia through the steppe. However we dont know exactly if Ancient Greek language and Albanian came from steppe or (because it was very close to Anatolia) pushed straight to current Greece and Albania (south east Europe).
    http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...13433.full.pdf

    Bouckaert et al argues that Greek and Albanian split 6,000 ybp from Anatolian and balto slavic split 5,700 ybp.
    We can see that Slavic languages started at 3,100 ybp as the oldest one being Lithuanian (north steppe region) 1,900 ybp. Consistent with my suppositions that Slavic languages came from the steppe (north).
    Therefore we have Lithuanian (north steppe region) 1,900 ybp following Slovenian 1,400 ybp, then 1,200 ybp and old church Slavonic and following Serbo Croatian is 900 ybp


    On the other side Bouckaert et al argues that Ancient Greek and Albanian started at around 5,100 ybp as a separate branches (also separate from balto-slavic and Slavic Languages). So my guess is it couldn't had came from the steppe that early since it started around 5,100 ybp but rather coming straight from Anatolia and not all way around north of black sea and threw the steppe.


    https://theoreticalecology.wordpress...nguage-family/
    Lithuanian is not a Slavic language,so attested Serbian predate the language itself nice theory of yours,Old Church Slavonic is made of Slavic Macedonian dialect not Slovene,but i think all languages in Europe evolve from Albanian,it is at least 10000 years old,i hope you are happy now.

  24. #299
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by noUseForAname View Post
    You think that proto Albanians came with Ottoman turks who picked them as slaves from Caucus area?
    I don't think so. I never said this.

  25. #300
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by noUseForAname View Post
    according to the study these are all separate branches (separating straight from Anatolia) (from older to recent) are: Anatolian, Tocharian, Armenian, Greek, Albanian, Iranian (Indo-Iranian), Indic (indo-Iranian), Slavic, Baltic, Germanic, Italic.....


    Therefore don't give false interpretations of the same study you are sourcing please.
    What false interpretations?

    Before this study I thought that Proto Albanian was the closest to Armenian.

    When New Zealand scientists gave their model I corrected this opinion.

    Now I think that speakers of Proto Albanian were somewhere between speakers of Armenian and speakers of North Iranian languages, in the Caucasus or near (East Anatolia, Northern Iran). It is possible that Proto Albanian is closer to forerunners of North Iranian languages than Armenian.

    I mentioned Baluchi and Singhalese only in the context of their model and the picture they gave:



    Everyone can see according their model: Greek and Armenian have same root; Albanian and Iranian and Indic language have same root (of course distance of separation is long); Baltic and Slavic languages have same root; Celtic, Germanic, Italic languages have same root. And of course all IE languages have same root. And they all separate branches.

    Yes, they are proponents of Anatolian hypothesis, Proto Indo European originated in Neolithic Anatolia (different than Kurgan hypothesis). If their hypothesis has real base I think that J2a carriers played much more role in creating IE languages, not only R (R1a and R1b) carriers.

    I don't know when speakers of Proto Albanian moved from Caucasus or near to Southern Ukraine/Moldavia/Romania. It could be a long process. Maybe trace is different than I (and some members in the forum) mention.

    Dacian theories tell us that modern Albanian created in Romania in new era, started from 2nd century. According them Albanians come very late in the areas today's Albania, till 10 century, one of possible interpretation is in the picture:




    Dacian and Baltic Slavic theories are much more based on facts in comparing with mythical fictional theories about Illyrian or Pelasgian or Ancient Egyptian etc. origin of Albanian.

    ...
    Dacian and Baltic Slavic theories however, don't say us how Albanian speakers came to Carpathian mountains and Romania and where is created Proto Albanian.

Page 12 of 20 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •