Where does the Albanian language come from? [VIDEO]

[Johane Derite]

This is again a case of projection. We are reading the same text indeed, but you are the one who completely missed the point of Wilkes.

There are no contradictions in the claims, rather in your misapprehension of them. This is like a colourblind person complaining why his apple has no colour.

The Latin language is not the Proto-Albanian language, are you aware of this? I will try simplify this. Latin and Proto-Albanian were two different languages

When Wilkes says:

"If the Komani-Kruja cemeteries represent a Romanized Christian population bordered by new Slav settlements on the north and south, then the ancestors of the historical Albanians were pastoral communities on the higher ground behind the plains.

The tripartite linguistic division of the area has been recognized in some late medieval documents relating to the Shkoder region."



What he means is that the ancestors of the historical Albanians were not the ones who were Romanized (LATIN speaking, not Proto-Albanian) who lived in Komani-Kruja culture cemeteries.

The word "Tripartite" means "three-parts" as in Albanian, Latin, Slavic, in this case.

He is saying that proto-Albanian speakers were nomadic shepherds (Transhumance) that did not live in Komani-Kruja or Slavic settlements.

What language were these proto-Albanian shepherds speaking? I think for now it was the Dardani, based on a fusion of the arguments that come from Noel Malcolm about Dardani shepherds, Matzinger and all the other linguists about which zone to seek out proto-Albanian language, etc, etc.

It is much harder to trace archaeologically and historically such shepherd populations, but since we know the richest Albanian vocabulary is precisely this part, this is where we must start and localise a minimal zone / region they lived and worked in, and then from there on out expand the search.

[Excine]

"I have long wondered whether the blood feuding of Albanians and Maniots has a common origin (both have high E-V13) or developed independently of each other due to external circumstances." @AlbHistory on Twitter; 'E-V13 is a bloodfeud spreading Y-dna'

https://twitter.com/albhistory/statu...314798593?s=21

I'm not making this up.

[Johane Derite]

What language were these proto-Albanian shepherds speaking? I think for now it was the Dardani, based on a fusion of the arguments that come from Noel Malcolm about Dardani shepherds, Matzinger and all the other linguists about which zone to seek out proto-Albanian language, etc, etc.

It is much harder to trace archaeologically and historically such shepherd populations, but since we know the richest Albanian vocabulary is precisely this part, this is where we must start and localise a minimal zone / region they lived and worked in, and then from there on out expand the search.

Shepherds are also a conservative economic position, since they are partially self reliant, they have to sell their goods on the market and stuff, but insofar as they have their flocks they don't have to assimilate into a foreign language group, etc, to survive. Whereas this type of pressure is exerted in the towns which would have been latin or greek or illyrian possibly in earlier periods.

So if the proto-Albanians were shepherds, it is unlikely they would have had towns and inscriptions of their owns, our only hope would be to find their linguistic traces in injections of their peoples into other settled communites that have writing traditions. So a name may pop up here or there, but eventually disappear. A lot of these types of problems appear. We should not expect a symmetrical terrain where every people was writing or doucmenting.

[Hawk]

What complicates the issue is that a lot of the E-V13 might have appeared in Albanians fairly late, with provincial Romans retreating and in Albanians in general, most of the timings are rather shallow and recent, with a lot of founder effects. Another issue is, that there was a broad zone of mixture and interaction between Illyrians and Daco-Thracians, going right through the later Albanian territories, especially their more likely somewhat Northern position, since the Late Bronze Age. There were numerous people which had a Thracian substrate and Illyrian adstrate or vice versa. E.g., the Srem group was more Illyrian, but had a Dacian substrate, while the Triballi were Daco-Thracians, but had Illyrian influences. This means there are a lot of options how this could work out linguistically and genetically both ways.

Oh really? Being uniformly present among Albanians? How is that even possible?

I think you guys are pushing agenda on the other hand, Daco-Thracian/Balto-Slavic continuum to appease Balkan Slavs. But both of you will loose in the end.

I checked the E-V13 outlier after hearing J2b2-L283 Illyrian similarity or Geto-Scythian and the sample has overhelmly Aegean autosomal despite in the model having Carpathian_Neolithic and scoring so low of it totally excluding Geto-Scythian possibility, or Illyrian-like.

As for Triballi, they were closer to Channeled-Ware/Carpathian Urnfielders than Dacians or Thracians who used biritual practices, inhumation on tumuli (one elite Thracian tomb already has R1b-Z2103) and cremation.

The same can be said of proper Dardani, reading archeoligists they related the real Dardanians with the Channeled-Ware/Belegis-Gava groups, though Serbian archaeologists like to use Daco-Mysian, that's up to interpretation.

[Johane Derite]

The same can be said of proper Dardani, reading archeoligists they related the real Dardanians with the Channeled-Ware/Belegis-Gava groups, though Serbian archaeologists like to use Daco-Mysian, that's up to interpretation.

This is why i often insist on the importance of the balkan-anatolian doublets.

So far chanelled ware does seem to be the common denominator between troy and balkan dardani.

There are no prechanneled ware brnjica like finds in troy, neither are there glasinac finds in troy. So these two cultures dont seem to be the ones to explain the doubling of mysians, dardanians, etc.

[Johane Derite]

Unless some brnjica dardanians hybridised to the chanelled ware culture and kept their name with some conservative brnjica shepherd dardanians retaining their pre-chanelled ware language. This is also possible but way more improbable

[Riverman]

Oh really? Being uniformly present among Albanians? How is that even possible?

Its all about the timing, when exactly. A later and even very late arrival, like with Celts, Germanic groups and Slavs, is likely for some subclades, but much less so for others. Its especially more likely or at least possible for which have a shallow time debth in Albanians while being fairly common in other people to the North and East. There are Albanian subclades which look both old for E-V13, possibly date to the transitional period, and being rather concentrated in the Balkans and people clearly affected by more recent Balkan people migrations. So I'm not saying that E-V13 as a whole came late, not at all, it was in the region, present in Kosovo and Macedonia for example, presumably since the Late Bronze Age, for sure since the Early Iron Age (Psenichevo and Bosut-Basarabi).

As for Triballi, they were closer to Channeled-Ware/Carpathian Urnfielders than Dacians or Thracians who used biritual practices, inhumation on tumuli (one elite Thracian tomb already has R1b-Z2103) and cremation. The same can be said of proper Dardani, reading archeoligists they related the real Dardanians with the Channeled-Ware/Belegis-Gava groups, though Serbian archaeologists like to use Daco-Mysian, that's up to interpretation.

Those using biritual burials in the earlier periods being always more likely to have been influenced by other people, especially Illyrians (like Srem group) or Cimmerians-Scythians (like especially some Eastern steppe influenced Daco-Thracians and e.g. Mezocsat/Thraco-Cimmerian horizon). No contradiction to me.

This is why i often insist on the importance of the balkan-anatolian doublets.
So far chanelled ware does seem to be the common denominator between troy and balkan dardani.
There are no prechanneled ware brnjica like finds in troy, neither are there glasinac finds in troy. So these two cultures dont seem to be the ones to explain the doubling of mysians, dardanians, etc.

The preceding groups in the region, before Encrusted Pottery and Channelled Ware expanded into the region, were probably closer to Mokrin and more Southern Neolithic derived groups. The Channelled Ware people mixed with them, probably, but we see that their rites and artefacts simply replace the locals, sometimes rapidly, sometimes more gradually, but in the end, little remaind.
And like you say, its common Fluted Ware, Knobbed Ware and "Barbarian Ware" which did eventually reach Anatolia, and these are all Channelled Ware products. Also, we know that if not the Phrygians too, the Thyni and Bithyni were Thracians in Anatolia. So there is indeed a strong relation of Daco-Thracians with related tribes in Anatolia. The situation is pretty similar to the one of Belgae and Gallic tribes on the continent and those which expanded with La Tene to Britain.
There too the same ethnonyms and relations appear, as with the Balkan tribes vs. the Anatolian ones of recent Balkan, mostly Channelled Ware origin.

The only thing about this which bothers me is that Anatolia has a rather low rate of E-V13, though its still higher in those areas than more to the centre and East. And it would be unlikely that the Thyni and Bythyni left a big mark of continuity on the region.

The Bithyni (/ˈbɪθɪnaɪ/; Greek: Βιθυνοί) were a Thracian tribe who, along with the Thyni, migrated to Anatolia. Herodotus, Xenophon and Strabo all assert that the Bithyni and Thyni settled together in what would be known as Bithynia and Thynia. According to Herodotus, the Bithynian Thracians originally lived along the Strymon river, and were known as Strymonians.

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

The Strymon river was one of the routes the Channelled Ware people took South from the Danubian basin:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struma...an_topo_de.jpg

[Riverman]

To sum up what I expect for the Southern Central Balkan, important for the Proto-Albanian story:
- possible low level E1b1b, even E-V13 presence in the Neolithic period
- possible first sligth increase in the Middle Bronze Age
- massive increase during the expansion of Channelled Ware/Belegis II-G�va, which did largely replace local Paracin/Brnjica and expanded down the river valleys, especially the Morava.
- slight drop overall, stronger one in some regions, because of the Illyrian and Celtic expansions in the Iron Age
- slight drop in the Roman era, because of the provincial influx
- again a big increase at the end of the Roman era, because of Pannonians and Northern Balkan provincials pushing South, trying to evade the tribal aggression of the migration period
- general decrease with the Slavic expansion, but some new subclades might have been brought by the Slavs directly from the Carpathian-Pannonian sphere, as well as Vlach contacts with early Albanians at the same time

[Hawk]

There was no Illyrian or Srem group in Stambolovo burial mound. He was a Thracian from Iron Age: https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...-age-bulgaria/

And Genetiker firmly believes he is not E, I, J or G. But, rather R1b or R1a, and the most likely option is R1b-Z2103.



Here you can find more information: https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014...arian-genomes/

[Riverman]

He doesn't really know, but even if, it would be no surprise, because Yamnaya R-Z2103 was in the region before (compare Mokrin) and might have been present both among Daco-Thracians and Cimmerians. The question is really when and how - in which frequency - E-V13 appears. And the most important aspect is, that it has to expand rapidly, radically, in the transitional period. We know this from the modern distribution and phylogeny. Exactly in the transitional period, when Channelled Ware/Urnfield expanded, E-V13 had a series of massive founder effects. You know it from all main clades and subclades of the haplogroup.
This is what we really have to account and this means that, considering all the now excluded other options, that we will see striking dominance of E-V13 in the Daco-Thracians, either from Channelled Ware from the start, or the Eastern groups with Psenichevo-Basarabi. That not all of them were E-V13, especially after their original networks were broken up by the Cimmerians, doesn't hurt.

By the way: Going by both the modern and ancient distribution, it is very clear that R-Z2103 is fundamentally closer to E-V13 than J-L283 in the Bronze Age. So if these two had some relationship at some group, I wouldn't wonder at all. But the distribution of J-L283 is way more peculiar. In a way, its like R-Z2103 was between those two.

[Hawk]

This is why i often insist on the importance of the balkan-anatolian doublets.
So far chanelled ware does seem to be the common denominator between troy and balkan dardani.
There are no prechanneled ware brnjica like finds in troy, neither are there glasinac finds in troy. So these two cultures dont seem to be the ones to explain the doubling of mysians, dardanians, etc.

It's a valid point btw. Of course the final say has ancient DNA with a lot of samples. But, unfortunately in case of Central Balkans we have to rely on Pre and Post logic since the groups heavily used cremation.

[Johane Derite]

It's a valid point btw. Of course the final say has ancient DNA with a lot of samples. But, unfortunately in case of Central Balkans we have to rely on Pre and Post logic since the groups heavily used cremation.

Yeah, also this is further complicated by the fact that we do really have to remember that a lot can change in 200 years, let alone 800, etc..



"Given the scarcity of the material, it is extremely difficult to date Thracian as a language.

It seems however that one can claim with relative certainty that the language was spoken through the Iron Age and into the Roman Era.

There are examples of the Linear B forms from Crete which have been interpreted as Thracian names, cf. e.g. o-du-ru-we (Dat./Loc.sg.) KN C 902.6, (Gen.sg.) o-[du-ru-wo KN Cο 910 apparently to Trac. name Ὀδρύσαι (Odrysai), which might well point to the existence of Thracian as a separate linguistic unit in the chronology comparable to those of Mycenaean Greek (Hajnal 2003, 134).

If we assume that the hypothetical Balkan linguistic unity (irrespective of genetic or more typological sorts) was still present around 2000 BC, we may claim that, after the first wave of migration of the Proto-Greek tribes, the other Balkan groups (Proto-Thracian/Proto-Macedonian/Proto-Phrygian) occupied the historical regions of Macedonia and Thracia, and the migrations around 1200 BC caused some movements to push the ancestors of Phrygians to the Asia Minor and the Doric tribes to the South.

In such a hypothetical scenario, Thracians would have remained in their historical settlements, or even have spread to the North and East.

Thracian remained the predominant language in the Central Balkans possibly until the Slavic invasion.

For example, the Slavic version of the place name Plovdiv seems to continue the Thracian form Pulpudeva rather than the Greek Phillippopolis, despite the strong Hellenization of the material culture in the area; the quick Romanization after Roman conquest would indicate influence of both languages (Greek and Latin).

The singular mention of the monks speaking “Bessian” language in one of the monasteries in the Sinai in the 6th cent. (around 570 AD), by Antonius Placentinus is worth noting.

Later Symeon the Metaphrast (10th cent.) in his biography of Saint Teodosius the Cenobiarch (423-529) claimed that Thracian was spoken in a monastery, built on Mount Sinai, when Teodosius visited (i.e. in the 5th cent.):

“There were four churches (…), one for each of the three nations of which his community was chiefly composed, each speaking a different language (…). The nations into which the community was divided were the Greeks, who were by far the most numerous, and consisted of all those that came from any provinces of the empire; the Armenians, with whom were joined the Arabians and Persians; and, thirdly, the Bessi, who comprised all the northern nations below Thrace, or all who used the Runic or Sclavonian tongue.

Each nation sung the first part of the mass to the end of the gospel in their own church, but after the gospel all met in the church of the Greeks, where they celebrated the essential part of the sacrifice in Greek and communicated all together...”.



This reference could suggest a scenario where the remnants of Thracian were still in use by the time of the appearance of Slavic tribes in the Balkans."



https://www.academia.edu/49080142/Th...PQaPkQRgb5UkoM

[Hawk]

I15544

Grave No. 15

tooth

Timacum Minus, Slog Necropolis

261-418 cal CE (1685±20 BP, PSUAMS-8725)

1581

42

M

0.415502693

209.5

HV9

[0.983,0.998]

E1b1b1a1b1(xE1b1b1a1b1a1)

E-M78,E-L618,E-V13,E-Z1057,E-CTS1273,E-BY3880

496395

Balkans IA cluster

1

n/a (no relatives detected)

0

0

787

0.00525

1.346

[0,0.013]

ds.half

S15544.Y1.E1.L1

0.095204232

0.635499

0.063

I15546

Grave No. 26

tooth

Timacum Minus, Slog Necropolis

M

0.408705086

111.8

L2a1+143+16189 (16192)

[0.978,0.991]

J2b2a1

J2,J-M102,J-Z534,J-Z1825,J-Z593,J-M241,J-L283,J-Z622,J-Z600,J-Z585,J-Z615,J-Z597

398014

Balkans IA cluster

1

n/a (no relatives detected)

n/a (too few SNPs)

n/a (too few SNPs)

482

0.00194

0.647

[0,0.008]

ds.half

S15546.Y1.E1.L1

0.028128868

0.468395

0.131

I15556

Grave No. 123

tooth

Timacum Minus, Slog Necropolis

U

FAIL

11.93

H10d

[0.932, 0.985]

..

..

FAIL

N/A

1

n/a (no relatives detected)

n/a (too few SNPs)

n/a (too few SNPs)

0

n/a (<200 SNPs)

n/a (<200 SNPs)

n/a (<200 SNPs)

ds.half

S15556.Y1.E1.L1

0.01582275

0

0.17

I15548

Grave No. 28

tooth

Timacum Minus, Slog Necropolis

M

0.417242591

167.5

W+194

[0.987,0.997]

J2b2a1

J2,J-M102,J-Z534,J-Z1825,J-Z593,J-M241,J-L283,J-Z622,J-Z600,J-Z585,J-Z615,J-Z597,J-Z2507,J-Z638,J-Z1297,J-Z1295,J-Z8421,J-Z631,J-Z1043

528299

Balkans IA cluster

1

n/a (no relatives detected)

0

0

1212

0.00751

2.347

[0.001,0.014]

ds.half

S15548.Y1.E1.L1

0.279264646

0.793591

0.058

Along with the numerous recorded injuries (cuts on thehead and the fused fissure of the right tibia (grave 15),injuries to the processus zygomaticus (grave 26) andinjuries to the head in the region of the asterion (grave123)), what is surely worth mentioning are the cases ofscurvy observed in the individuals buried in graves 28and 76, which would indicate that they moved over tothe Timok valley, or that they resided over a longerperiod of time outside of this fertile area, which couldprovide fruit and vegetables rich in vitamins.Although the grave finds from phase I of the Slognecropolis do not essentially differ from those fromgraves of the subsequent phase (Pl. II–III), the component of the regular Roman army is more prominent,which is reflected in the finds of crossbow fibulae (Pl.II, 1, 6) and bronze belt sets (Pl. III, 1–2). Generally, itis possible that they are members of the same militaryunit, pseudocomitatenses Timacenses auxiliarii, or officers of the II Aurelia Dardanorum equestrian cohort,which unquestionably made up the Timacum Minusgarrison from the middle of the 2nd to the end of the 3rdor the beginning of the 4th century, possibly even to thelast quarter of the 4th century, that is to the Battle ofHadrianopolis in 378.95 However, what should not beruled out are the equestrian units of Numeri Dalmatorum,testified to by stamps on bricks from the 4th phase of thefortification reconstruction, during the period of thereign of Valentinian I and Valens (364–375).96 Thatthey were really warriors is also confirmed by, amongother things, a cut inflicted by a sharp blade, most likely a sword or knife, on the mentum and a fissure of theright tibia (grave 91), an injury on the right femur(grave 99) and a myositis ossificans traumatica notedon the left tibia (grave 141).


https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._Timacum_Minus

This is what i found from Serbian sources, so those two J2b2-L283 and one E-V13, of course based on graves, they suspect to be either Dardanian or Dalmatians. Or it could be the two J2b2-L283 are Dalmatians and the E-V13 is Dardanian. We cannot know for sure, maybe the autosomal can give us a hint.

[Dibran]

"I have long wondered whether the blood feuding of Albanians and Maniots has a common origin (both have high E-V13) or developed independently of each other due to external circumstances." @AlbHistory on Twitter; 'E-V13 is a bloodfeud spreading Y-dna'
https://twitter.com/albhistory/statu...314798593?s=21
I'm not making this up.

Blood feuding is common to many Albanians. It makes no sense to tie a tradition dating back ages to one specific haplogroup. Plenty of high J2b-L283 areas that were heavy in blood feuding.

[Hawk]

Blood-feuds are common thing in Mediterranean and Anatolia, so indeed nothing to do with Y-DNA thing. But, him bringing it here just to find something indirectly to put down Derite. Typical foxy Bruzmoids.

[Johane Derite]

Blood-feuds are common thing in Mediterranean and Anatolia, so indeed nothing to do with Y-DNA thing. But, him bringing it here just to find something indirectly to put down Derite. Typical foxy Bruzmoids.

Totally irrelevant to what was being discussed, but also funny because yet again it shows that a big problem here is that they have no reading comprehension.

The quote they put out says:

"a common origin (both have high E-V13) or developed independently of each other due to external circumstances."

I.e. there is no dogmatic claim being made here.

Maniots don't have high L283 as far as I know, so with a common cultural practice and not too far away, and possible shared paternal origins within the two groups, it would be wrong not to speculate whether the cultural practice comes from a common root culture. Whether it is a conservative archaic culture practice that was retained by Maniots. This speculation is done obviously with the awareness that also it is possible it just developed independently without a common root due to external circumstances.

In Dukagjin and in Malesi, bloodfeuding didn't develop independently of each other, they have a common origin from a common shared cultural mileu.

[Riverman]

Blood-feuds are common thing in Mediterranean and Anatolia, so indeed nothing to do with Y-DNA thing. But, him bringing it here just to find something indirectly to put down Derite. Typical foxy Bruzmoids.

The main relevance is, that clan fights can largely annihilate specific lineages or replace them in a region. In a more regular peasant setting, many lineages will survive side by side unless their are rare and unusual circumstances, which can appear though, easily, but not as often as in societies which practise feuds on a regular basis.
The dominance of specific, rather young subclades in some regions inhabited by Albanians can possibly explained by blood feuds, which can change frequencies more regularly and drastically than in regions in which peasants lived under a strict law, like in most parts of Germany for that time.
Such sweeps from one clan which replaced another could change the frequencies and distribution of haplogroups in Albanians in unexpected ways and probably some older lineages of importance being now rare to non-existent. That's something only large scale testing for every time period and region could reveal. I expect more autosomal than uniparental continuity in Albanians from Late Antiquity/migration period on.
This is why Albanians have a lot of more recent founder effects, some postdate the ethnogenesis of the people by many centuries.

[Hawk]

Totally irrelevant to what was being discussed, but also funny because yet again it shows that a big problem here is that they have no reading comprehension.

The quote they put out says:

"a common origin (both have high E-V13) or developed independently of each other due to external circumstances."

I.e. there is no dogmatic claim being made here.

Maniots don't have high L283 as far as I know, so with a common cultural practice and not too far away, and possible shared paternal origins within the two groups, it would be wrong not to speculate whether the cultural practice comes from a common root culture. Whether it is a conservative archaic culture practice that was retained by Maniots. This speculation is done obviously with the awareness that also it is possible it just developed independently without a common root due to external circumstances.

In Dukagjin and in Malesi, bloodfeuding didn't develop independently of each other, they have a common origin from a common shared cultural mileu.

It's just an attempt of character assassination, in order to completely deligimate what you said/quoted.

What's next? Matzinger goes by the username of torzio in eupedia?

[Excine]

Hawk, the same individual who said I was Bruzmi in order to deny my existence as a living being :P.

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...418#post633418

Seems like I punctured a hole.

[torzio]

It's just an attempt of character assassination, in order to completely deligimate what you said/quoted.

What's next? Matzinger goes by the username of torzio in eupedia?

LOL

whatever you want to fabricate

just stop getting your history from facebook and twitter

[Johane Derite]

Bardhyl Demiraj, arguing on a single toponym (Pëdhana) as continuing "Bassania" argued that this was proof an old Albanian sound change, however the /ss/ to /dh/ is regarded as too improbable, and Stadtmuller long ago found a more straightforward etymology from Latin. Pedaneus, further evidence of a romanised population living in Mat, Drin, Fan valley, Black Drin, Lezhe - Ulpiana.

[Johane Derite]

Noel Malcolm also accepts that there was a Latinised Illyrian population living in Komani-Kruja culture. This people obviously are not the proto-Albanian language speakers:



"Typical of the seventh to ninth centuries are the remains of small townships based on hill-forts, such as the one at Koman in the mountains of north-central Albania, where a Christian and probably Romanized (Latin-speaking) population must have led a rather limited existence."

I wonder what haplogroups these latinised Illyrians carried?

[Johane Derite]

Linguists believe the name of the Albanoi is related to an IE word referring to mountains.


Compare with the "Gorani" people whose name is constructed from Slavic. "Gora" [mountain].

This seems to fit with Wilkes idea bout proto-Albanian speakers being shepherds high up in the mountains

[Johane Derite]

Wilkes argues that the proto-Albanians were nomadic shepherd (transhumance) migrants.


Noel Malcolm argues a similar point, that these proto-Albanian migrants originated from the highlands in the Kosovo region before expanding into Albania.

Noel Malcolm is pretty clear that the proto-Albanians were shepherds living in the higher grounds, similar to Wilkes.


Like Wilkes, he also refers to the Latin speaking peoples that penetrated even into remote areas into the Northern Albanian mountains.

[Johane Derite]

If we see the distribution of Komani-Kruja culture and compare it to Latin placenames and inscriptions, we see that there is an overlap. Interestingly, the presence of Komani-Kruja culture necropolis in Corfu has fit an argument for Proto-Albanian speaking culture, but a Latinised local population is totally feasible.

Likewise we see a pocket on the south west Tosk regions (Lab regions) where some Greco-Illyrian placenames persisted and where we find Latin inscriptoins as well as Greek ones. Possibly this is related to why there is a higher L283 presence in South West Albania compared to other Tosk regions?