Paleo Balkan Languages

[Dreptul Valah]

The massive expansion of the Yamnaya tribes to the N,NW,W,and more or less mingling with the locals ,had led to the creation of the Corded Ware culture.



From a certain period,most of the IE efforts were probably concentrated in the area of the Corded Ware,the power that they gained with this massive expansion is demonstrated by the conquest of lot of the original Yamnaya land.
In the Central European part,SW of the Corded Ware,some of the tribes managed to remain quite originally Steppe,R1b,before they were later integrated; Unetice was clearly formed in the CW territory, Urnfield and the Amber road from the Baltic to South -Central Europe,Italy prove these connections.




CW further expanded to SE,forming the Sintashta and Abashevo,Indo-Iranian cultures,that's why it is safe to say that this culture was a second homeland for the IE people.



Linguistically we have to see a certain degree of standardization, at least some strong ties in this space,and,since I'm talking about a migration here,some loss of the original IE terms also.



For example, the specific connections between Baltic and both Latin or Sanskrit.




Since Paleo-Balkanics seem to come from the Catacomb, Babyno,ultimately from Yamnaya, their languages have probably preserved some earlier IE words,traits, common with the ones that have the same," direct" ,steppe origin, from the approx. same period,Bell Beaker looks like an option here.



But the Beakers and other R1b tribes were assimilated into the CW-based populations,such as Latins,Celts,Germanic.




That's why this Beaker or generally Danubian Yamnaya IE substratum of the Western Centum has to be analyzed, I'd search into Ancient Iberian languages too or in the IE ,not Latin,loans of the Basque,still,these common words have to be specific, not Pan-Corded Ware.

 

[LABERIA]

I also see no major problem in the map even to the point of view of Albanian nationalists (though of course it may be a bit unreliable and get things wrong here and there, with borders receding or advancing more than they should). On a broad scale I think it's well within the understanding of many professional linguists. It seems to me some people just thought that labeling Dalmatian-Pannonian as a separate category implied it was not an Illyrian language, but that is not what that means. It's just that some linguists believe there was a northern branch of dialects (Dalmatian-Pannonian) and a southern one ("Illyrian proper" in this map). And the reach of Illyrian in the map extends to most of Albania, so I don't know what triggered the usual people so much (because the dark blue color didn't take the entire territory of present-day Albania perhaps?). The eastern presence of Illyrian also under direct influence (or maybe partial confluence, a close sprachbund) with Moesian and Thracian in the area around Kosovo/Southern Serbia also fits what linguists have thought likely in the ancient Balkans.

Again you are wrong. But first i am curious what you in the "New World" know about the point of view of Albanian nationalists?
Anyway, the discussion here is not about Albanian nationalists. Here we are discussing about a map that remind us the map used to illustrate an chauvinistic Greek ideology called Megali Idea, so it`s greek nationalism.
And when someone ask:

In what scientific discoveries is this map based on ?

Here arrive the answer:

I saw it on Lazaridis' twitter.

This is the source:
https://smerdaleos.wordpress.com/2018/10/27/συμβουλές-προς-ιλλυροδίφες-1/

Is it incorrect?

After that Lazaridis & Co solved through the genetics the problem of the white pages of Greek history, demonstrating the continuity of the Greek nation, something that is not accepted by the theory that sees the chain of this continuity broken at least three times, they have decided to expand their interest outside national borders.

 

[gidai]

Location in 1st Century BC

[/IMG]

I think it's very hard to know which languages were spoken in the Balkans 2000 or more years ago. There were probably more languages and dialects than are now. From tribe to tribe, languages were different in some degree?

 

[Dreptul Valah]

Pg.67,Yamnaya, Catacomb,Babyno,have the same rite,barrow,sunken graves



http://www.academia.edu/28547337/EN..._OBLAST_ARCHAEOMETRY_CHRONOMETRY_AND_TAXONOMY



https://books.google.ro/books?id=QG...QAQ#v=onepage&q=barrow grave catacomb&f=false

 

[Ygorcs]

Again you are wrong. But first i am curious what you in the "New World" know about the point of view of Albanian nationalists?
Anyway, the discussion here is not about Albanian nationalists. Here we are discussing about a map that remind us the map used to illustrate an chauvinistic Greek ideology called Megali Idea, so it`s greek nationalism.

My view about these discussions as "petty" is not tied to Albanian nationalism at all, but with all the quarrels ("Balkanic" or not) about very minor stuff (e.g. if a certain tradition first started in this or that ethnic group, if a certain ethnicity 1000 or 2000 years ago lived in this or that tiny piece of land, if the reach of a certain ancient tribe/ethnicity extended or retreated a few kilometers here and there, if a certain specific word came into or from this or that language...). Everything descends into a sort of ethnic dispute as if those people had invisible and impenetrable borders between themselves, and it's not just a matter of cultural/historic curiosity, it's seen as a real competition with a very real prize. For me all of that sounds like a waste of time and a (perhaps willful) ignorance about how dynamic, mixed and complex the formation of the culture, genetics and traditional territories of modern ethnicities certainly were (even when their "core" root can be dated to a very long time ago), especially in a region with such a huge background of population movements and interactions such as the Balkans.

When I commented about a "New World perspective", I meant that perhaps we're just much more aware of the fact that we just can't pretend we have any pure connection to any ancient people, that we've borrowed lots of stuff not just from ethnic groups that admixed into the modern populations (but also from total foreigners via cultural diffusion), and just can't trace all our traditions, genes and (particularly) modern state/ethnic territories back to one specific root many centuries ago (and cling to it as if our modern nation's existence depended on it), because the sociocultural dynamics were not just historically recent, but also profoundly disruptive - so there is just no illusion that what we see around us is directly tied to some people who lived in the same region 2000 years ago, and we just couldn't care less if "our" people or another people occupid this or that piece of land several centuries ago, because we accept the fact that political, social and cultural dynamics are always changing borders, ethnic identities and so on.

All I see in most "Balkanic quarrels" is a lot of people projecting present-day rivalries and ethnic distinctions back into the remote past, claiming a direct and intact connection with very old populations, trying to extend the past reach of their ethnic groups as much as possible (inevitably leading to conflicts with other people who have the same aim) and fervorously believing that it's very relevant to prove that this or that tradition/land/word/person/anything "rightfully belongs" to their people. I find it pretty petty though I understand that sometimes it's really hard not to get into that game when you see nationalists of all stripes and nations making hyperbolic or downright stupid claims that negate part of another people's history.

 

[Ygorcs]

@Ygorcs

We do not know who is behind blogs,
only what is written, and all we can do is find if it is true/correct or not.

And that's mainly what matters if we're talking about amateur bloggers. They don't have the "authority" of a true science researcher. If the content written is true, it is true, and if it is wrong, it is wrong even if the person who wrote it was the most renowned scientists on earth.

 

[gidai]

Thanks Ygorcs. Yours comment I find the most clear, because I think the same.

 

[Ygorcs]

Here we are discussing about a map that remind us the map used to illustrate an chauvinistic Greek ideology called Megali Idea, so it`s greek nationalism.
And when someone ask:

Could you explain to me what exactly in the map supports that so-called Megali Idea of Greek nationalists? What's the "giveaway" of that?

 

[Ygorcs]

I think it's very hard to know which languages were spoken in the Balkans 2000 or more years ago. There were probably more languages and dialects than are now. From tribe to tribe, languages were different in some degree?

Probably those "languages" were more like specific and distinct dialect continuum formed by related speech variants. Whether they were similar languages or just dialects is a subjective matter...

 

[Dreptul Valah]

And ,we can certainly track these words,like Romanian manz,Albanian mez,Italian manzo,Basque mando (a mule;IE loan),ultimately related to Jupiter Menzana and Thracian mezenai.



The other related words only come from the Insular Celtic languages:



Irish menn,mennan,young animal



Cornish min,haedus


Gaelic minnseach,a lamb



Breton menn gavr,a lamb



Interesting pastoralist confusion,Thracian-Illyrian-Romanian-Albanian horse,foal,while in the Insular Celtic it means a lamb,goat's kid.




https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/manzo#Italian



http://groznijat.tripod.com/thrac/thrac_6.html

 

[LABERIA]

Could you explain to me what exactly in the map supports that so-called Megali Idea of Greek nationalists? What's the "giveaway" of that?

Location in 1st Century BC

[/IMG]

Map of Megali Hellas after the Treaty of Sèvres and featuring a picture of Eleftherios Venizelos.

 

[Yetos]

Here we are discussing about a map that remind us the map used to illustrate an chauvinistic Greek ideology called Megali Idea, so it`s greek nationalism.

Oh boy

When someone shows the moon,
SOME WATCH THE FINGER.

No body search if it true/correct
Or if it is false/wrong.

Just stupid spam to spam Stupid things,
and to move the conversation elsewhere,

WE MUST STOP SCIENCE, WE MUST STOP SEARCH,
Cause at end of WW1 Greeks were part of SEVRES TREATY !!!!!!

WOW
what a scientific proof, and remarkable search !!!


Hmm

WE MUST ALSO STOP GENETICAL SEARCH ON BALKANS,
CAUSE GREEKS WERE NOT ONLY PART OF SEVRES TREATY,
BUT ALSO PART OF LAUSANNE TREATY


:useless: :useless: :useless: :useless:

What can someone say ?

what languages were spoken 3000 years before,
it has to do with the Sevres treaty 100 years before

So I wonder,In what langauge Sevres treaty, who ended a disaster and to Lausanne treaty,
and exchange of millions of peoples and refuggees etc etcwas written?

Getto-Thracian? Illyrian? Brygian? Celtic? maybe Anatolian IE languages? :innocent: :innocent: :innocent:


So the Megale Idea Μεγαλη ιδεα, meaning by word great idea, by true meaning is High hope,
was nothing more than a peace treaty after WW1 ??????
like all common treatties after a war?

But we must stop search and science,
cause Greeks were part of Sevres treaty

The Megale idea,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Sèvres

thanks to it we must science and search !!!!!
otherwise what??? the Greek nationalists will raise and punch our nose???

 

[Ygorcs]

Map of Megali Hellas after the Treaty of Sèvres and featuring a picture of Eleftherios Venizelos.

Well, so basically a nationallist map that represents yet another case of the ludicrous confusion/overlap of modern and past ethnic identities and territories (exactly part of the same problem found in other countries, particularly in the Balkans) automatically negates the likelihood that that linguistic map is broadly correct? I don't see any logical cause-and-consequence link between one thing and the other. It just seems to me that those Greek nationalists stupidly believe that their modern nation has a right to all the lands where Greek was once arguably spoken. Not any novelty, just another demonstration of those petty quarrels I told you about in the previous comments. Besides, basically the linguistic map under discussion claims that Greek was spoken in most of present-day Greece (except for Thracian in the northern border zone) as well as in some small parts of southern Albania and southern Macedonia/FYROM near the boder with present-day Greece. Borders advancing or retreating some kilometers across 10, 20 centuries are totally unsurprising, not a real game-changer. I don't see any major "Greek threat" there... especially because that was more than 2000 years ago, even before Romans landed on the Balkans (the linguistic makeup shown there is pre-Roman so more like 2200 years ago).

 

[Yetos]

Well, so basically a nationallist map that represents yet another case of the ludicrous confusion/overlap of modern and past ethnic identities and territories (exactly part of the same problem found in other countries, particularly in the Balkans) automatically negates the likelihood that that linguistic map is broadly correct? I don't see any logical cause-and-consequence link between one thing and the other. It just seems to me that those Greek nationalists stupidly believe that their modern nation has a right to all the lands where Greek was once arguably spoken. Not any novelty, just another demonstration of those petty quarrels I told you about in the previous comments. Besides, basically the linguistic map under discussion claims that Greek was spoken in most of present-day Greece (except for Thracian in the northern border zone) as well as in some small parts of southern Albania and southern Macedonia/FYROM near the boder with present-day Greece. I don't see any major "Greek threat" there... especially because that was more than 2000 years ago, even before Romans landed on the Balkans (the linguistic makeup shown there is pre-Roman so more like 2200 years ago).

YGORCS

that map is SEVRES TREATY,
A teaty that lasted 2-3 years,

realize that,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Sèvres

it has nothing to do with Nationalism,
but a treaty after WW1


in this treaty, Also Italy took lands,
the Dodecanese islands,
Why Laberia is not mentioning Italy's nationalists to Megale idea?

France also took lands and sphere of Influence,
Why Laberia is not mentioning Francais Nationalists?

Do not bite the hook,

By this treaty,
France Took Syria and lebanon
Greece took Smyrna and Lost It, that is why is called Megale idea, (true meaning is High Hope / great expectation, by word meaning is great idea)
Italy took Dodecanese islands
G Britain took Palestine!!!
Armenia was recognised as state,

Search the purpose why Laberia is mentioning only Greeks as Nationalists in this part of this treaty
on a subject (Paleo-balkan languages) tottaly different !!!!!

 

[Nik]

Location in 1st Century BC

[/IMG]

Without getting involved in petty discussions as someone might call them, this map is pretty much "ok" or lets call it politically correct.

The issue seems to come from the southern limit of Illyrian Proper while in my opinion "Illyrian proper" shouldn't even be that far South to begin with. Most of Central and South Albania should have a South Illyrian division extending all the way down to Epirus with with lines of influences even into Acarnania and Aetolia.

But then again linguists perhaps try to make things simpler for themselves by claiming that by the 1st century BC the entire area was already fully Hellenized just like Makedon.

Now in the case of Makedon, we do know that it was predominantly inhabited by either Illyrian, Paeonian, Thracian, Brygian, Pierian, etc. and that even the majority of the ruling families were somewhere from the mountainous areas of Epirus (especially Orestis), which in itself is a disputed area.

The problem is that we see several Balkan tribes with similar names, Illyrian Atintani - Epirote Atintanes - Thracian Tyntani, Illyrian Amantini - Epirote Amantes, Dalmatian Pelagonians - Epirote Pelagonians, Illyrian Siculotae - Sicels of Sicily (a tribe that together with the Sicani could have been originally Illyrian or from Illyria), Galabri (Dardani) - Calabri (Apulia), Apuli (Dacians) - Apuli (Illyrians of South Italy Apulia), Chaonians (Epirus) - Chonians or according to Aristotle Chaonians in both Croton and Apulia, who are mentioned together with Oenotrians to have occupied both sides of the Ionian sea in Italy and Epirus.

The list goes on with Chonians also in Asia Minor, as well as Dardanians, Paeonians, Brygians/Phrygians and many Thracian tribes that settled in Asia Minor.

I'm not saying the map is wrong, but it seems a bit exaggerated the fact that it describes Epirus and Northern Macedonia as fully Hellenized by the 1st century BC.

But all of the above were later Hellenized and Romanized as we know.

 

[Ygorcs]

Without getting involved in petty discussions as someone might call them, this map is pretty much "ok" or lets call it politically correct.

The issue seems to come from the southern limit of Illyrian Proper while in my opinion "Illyrian proper" shouldn't even be that far South to begin with. Most of Central and South Albania should have a South Illyrian division extending all the way down to Epirus with with lines of influences even into Acarnania and Aetolia.

But then again linguists perhaps try to make things simpler for themselves by claiming that by the 1st century BC the entire area was already fully Hellenized just like Makedon.

Now in the case of Makedon, we do know that it was predominantly inhabited by either Illyrian, Paeonian, Thracian, Brygian, Pierian, etc. and that even the majority of the ruling families were somewhere from the mountainous areas of Epirus (especially Orestis), which in itself is a disputed area.

The problem is that we see several Balkan tribes with similar names, Illyrian Atintani - Epirote Atintanes - Thracian Tyntani, Illyrian Amantini - Epirote Amantes, Dalmatian Pelagonians - Epirote Pelagonians, Illyrian Siculotae - Sicels of Sicily (a tribe that together with the Sicani could have been originally Illyrian or from Illyria), Galabri (Dardani) - Calabri (Apulia), Apuli (Dacians) - Apuli (Illyrians of South Italy Apulia), Chaonians (Epirus) - Chonians or according to Aristotle Chaonians in both Croton and Apulia, who are mentioned together with Oenotrians to have occupied both sides of the Ionian sea in Italy and Epirus.

The list goes on with Chonians also in Asia Minor, as well as Dardanians, Paeonians, Brygians/Phrygians and many Thracian tribes that settled in Asia Minor.

I'm not saying the map is wrong, but it seems a bit exaggerated the fact that it describes Epirus and Northern Macedonia as fully Hellenized by the 1st century BC.

But all of the above were later Hellenized and Romanized as we know.

Excellent analysis of the map, thank you very much. Now I understand better what's at stake in this discussion.

 

[Tutkun Arnaut]

Die Welt: Greeks are NOT REAL Greeks ​

​

​

Subscribe for our daily news via e-mail:
Your e-mail: Now, check your e-mail and confirm subscription!
Journalist Berthold Seewald, editor of the cultural history in "Die Welt" newspaper, in an article entitled "History before Tsipras: Greece has broken even earlier the order in Europe", said that today's Greeks are descendants of Slavs, Byzantine and Albanians.

According to the journalist, Greece ruined the peace order established in Europe in the Congress of Vienna in 1815 after the fall of Napoleon. Seewald says that one of the reasons for this behavior of the Greeks is that they are not really European, "Shqiptarja" reports.

"The idea that modern Greeks are descendants of Socrates and Pericles and not a mix of Slavic, Byzantine and Albanians is a tenet in the education system in Europe," he writes.

His analysis is based on the book of Jacob Philipp Fallmerayer, who said that, based on Slavic and Albanian names - among other information - "Hellenic race has disappeared from Europe" and that "no pure Hellenic blood flows in the veins of the Christian population in modern Greece ". /Albeu.com/

Published on: July 19, 2015 - 2:26 pm​

​

Why is the infraction for Angela? The article was on the Conservative German magazine called die welt. You have to learn to live with the truths other people say, not only Lazaridis says. Lasaridis says today Greeks are exactly the one who were in antiquity, but obviously many people, including Germans of Die welt do not agree.

 

[Ygorcs]

Die Welt: Greeks are NOT REAL Greeks ​

​

​

Subscribe for our daily news via e-mail:
Your e-mail: Now, check your e-mail and confirm subscription!
Journalist Berthold Seewald, editor of the cultural history in "Die Welt" newspaper, in an article entitled "History before Tsipras: Greece has broken even earlier the order in Europe", said that today's Greeks are descendants of Slavs, Byzantine and Albanians.

According to the journalist, Greece ruined the peace order established in Europe in the Congress of Vienna in 1815 after the fall of Napoleon. Seewald says that one of the reasons for this behavior of the Greeks is that they are not really European, "Shqiptarja" reports.

"The idea that modern Greeks are descendants of Socrates and Pericles and not a mix of Slavic, Byzantine and Albanians is a tenet in the education system in Europe," he writes.

His analysis is based on the book of Jacob Philipp Fallmerayer, who said that, based on Slavic and Albanian names - among other information - "Hellenic race has disappeared from Europe" and that "no pure Hellenic blood flows in the veins of the Christian population in modern Greece ". /Albeu.com/

Published on: July 19, 2015 - 2:26 pm​

​

Why is the infraction for Angela? The article was on the Conservative German magazine called die welt. You have to learn to leave with the truths other people say, not only Lazaridis says. Lasaridis says today Greeks are exactly the one who were in antiquity, but obviously many people, including Germans of Die welt do not agree.

Sounds very legit without any ancient DNA and even any modern DNA analysis. It's very interesting that Greeks are supposedly another entirely new people unrelated to ancient Greeks, but Greeks on a PCA look exactly like slightly more North European-shifted Greek Cypriots and Greek Anatolians and are very visibly on a cline between North Balkanic and the least admixed Anatolian Turkish people. And Greek islanders are much less north-shifted than mainland Greeks. And they also look close to reasonably South Italians and Sicilians... and so on... All of which, of course, is exactly what we'd expect if Greeks had retained at least a relevant amount of genetic continuity from their ancestors broadly in the same region.

 

[Angela]

Die Welt: Greeks are NOT REAL Greeks ​

​

​

Subscribe for our daily news via e-mail:
Your e-mail: Now, check your e-mail and confirm subscription!
Journalist Berthold Seewald, editor of the cultural history in "Die Welt" newspaper, in an article entitled "History before Tsipras: Greece has broken even earlier the order in Europe", said that today's Greeks are descendants of Slavs, Byzantine and Albanians.

According to the journalist, Greece ruined the peace order established in Europe in the Congress of Vienna in 1815 after the fall of Napoleon. Seewald says that one of the reasons for this behavior of the Greeks is that they are not really European, "Shqiptarja" reports.

"The idea that modern Greeks are descendants of Socrates and Pericles and not a mix of Slavic, Byzantine and Albanians is a tenet in the education system in Europe," he writes.

His analysis is based on the book of Jacob Philipp Fallmerayer, who said that, based on Slavic and Albanian names - among other information - "Hellenic race has disappeared from Europe" and that "no pure Hellenic blood flows in the veins of the Christian population in modern Greece ". /Albeu.com/

Published on: July 19, 2015 - 2:26 pm​

​

Why is the infraction for Angela? The article was on the Conservative German magazine called die welt. You have to learn to live with the truths other people say, not only Lazaridis says. Lasaridis says today Greeks are exactly the one who were in antiquity, but obviously many people, including Germans of Die welt do not agree.

Am I supposed to be impressed? English newspapers published what Hitler and Goebbels and Ribbentrop and the whole merry crew said.


If you knew how to read you would know that the paper from the Reich group on the Mycenaeans never said or implied that the modern Greeks are the same as the Mycenaeans. If you think that scientists like Reich and all the others listed as co-authors on that paper have some anti-Albanian agenda then you're delusional. You don't even appear on their radar.

If this writer cites Fallmerayer, who was neither a geneticist nor an anthropologist, then he's a moron. We took care of Fallmerayer on the threads about the genetics of the Peloponnese and the Mycenaean paper. If you don't like what genetics shows it's just too bad.

The next person who posts provocative nonsense on this thread and ruins it is going to join you in internet Siberia.

Am I clear?

 

[Dreptul Valah]

And ,we can certainly track these words,like Romanian manz,Albanian mez,Italian manzo,Basque mando (a mule;IE loan),ultimately related to Jupiter Menzana and Thracian mezenai.
The other related words only come from the Insular Celtic languages:
Irish menn,mennan,young animal
Cornish min,haedus
Gaelic minnseach,a lamb
Breton menn gavr,a lamb
Interesting pastoralist confusion,Thracian-Illyrian-Romanian-Albanian horse,foal,while in the Insular Celtic it means a lamb,goat's kid.
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/manzo#Italian
http://groznijat.tripod.com/thrac/thrac_6.html

Further connections,Mandonius,a chieftain of the Illergetes,an Iberian tribe,all of these related to manz,Illyr and Getae.



The relation between Mandonius and manz is obvious, since this was the younger brother of Indibilis.



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