Where does the Albanian language come from? [VIDEO]

I am not sure why people don’t really seem to get the idea behind population modeling. Just because someone plots a certain way on a PCA it doesn’t have to equal actual ancestry. It is not even intended to do so, but of course can in very few clear cut contexts.

As for all of the repetitive noise in regards to E1b samples (e. g. Naissus, Himera): they don’t plot „exactly like an Illyrian group“, period.
 
Fake it till you make it... Something which came to my mind when reading your Convo, Paleo, with Bruzmi on the other forum. His initial reaction when the avalanche of Illyrian samples was just getting started with Patterson/Reich, imagine putting Medieval samples in a "supposed PCA" with multiple actual Bronze and Iron Age samples to conclude "correlation". The quality of this guy's mantra does show with these posts more. Perhaps his private messaging real self will come out in future posts? Doubtful since he really is trying to hide it as much as he can:
Bruzmi said:
I have added all J2b and E-V13 aDNA samples in one PCA
Bruzmi said:
PCAancient.png
The overlap is obvious in the Balkans. I can't see how "Illyrian-like" groups which didn't have both J2b-L283 and E-V13 can have existed.


Do I need to say more? If the word bizarre needs some prime example:

Bruzmi said:
Homogeneity is an autosomal feature. It's not about haplogroup < patrilineal descent. Haplogroups are not population groups and they don't carry any culture. This also tells us that we need to abandon this weird male-centric fetishization which treats haplogroups as if they were self-standing entities which reproduced by themselves.

J-L283 has this profile because they intermarried (took & gave wives and husbands) from other clans which were non-J-L283. In my opinion, this is what created this very similar autosomal profile for many of the J-L283 and also E-V13 samples which have been found.

Setting aside those "cannot be Illyrians as they are from the fringes of Illyria" comments.




 
I am not sure why people don’t really seem to get the idea behind population modeling. Just because someone plots a certain way on a PCA it doesn’t have to equal actual ancestry. It is not even intended to do so, but of course can in very few clear cut contexts.

As for all of the repetitive noise in regards to E1b samples (e. g. Naissus, Himera): they don’t plot „exactly like an Illyrian group“, period.

They (Brumi, Exine, etc...) are possessive about certain samples, if the PCA shows them near Illyrians, they start behaving as if these samples belong to them. Zero analytical approach.
 
Fake it till you make it... Something which came to my mind when reading your Convo, Paleo, with Bruzmi on the other forum. His initial reaction when the avalanche of Illyrian samples was just getting started with Patterson/Reich, imagine putting Medieval samples in a "supposed PCA" with multiple actual Bronze and Iron Age samples to conclude "correlation". The quality of this guy's mantra does show with these posts more. Perhaps his private messaging real self will come out in future posts? Doubtful since he really is trying to hide it as much as he can:


Do I need to say more? If the word bizarre needs some prime example:



Setting aside those "cannot be Illyrians as they are from the fringes of Illyria" comments.

Even if my model was incorrect, the Himera's E-V13 should be picking the same components as the Illyrian samples if they are the same. The fact they they pick different options on the menu is clear cut proof they are not the same.

 
Even if my model was incorrect, the Himera's E-V13 should be picking the same components as the Illyrian samples if they are the same. The fact they they pick different options on the menu is clear cut proof they are not the same.

Im starting to think that E1b came from egyptian migrants and colonists after J-L283.
 
Because E-V13 is not Illyrian, than there is a evil plot to make them Africans? Wanderer until some months back you were all cursing Riverman for suggesting E-V13 comes Daco-Thracian zone, not only that, but your camp were proponents that E-V13 was some loser haplogroup being big brothered by various IE groups, smacked around, eating left overs like some gypsy class in any given society.

It turns out E-V13 has its own successful story. Now you are on a mission to baptize any E-V13 that lacks south Thracian profile as some Illyrian variant. I won't object if that's the case, but the Himera's E-V13 are not Illyrians.

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...an-case/page31?p=662431&viewfull=1#post662431
 
Because E-V13 is not Illyrian, than there is a evil plot to make them Africans? Wanderer until some months back you were all cursing Riverman for suggesting E-V13 comes Daco-Thracian zone, not only that, but your camp were proponents that E-V13 was some loser haplogroup being big brothered by various IE groups, smacked around, eating left overs like some gypsy class in any given society.

It turns out E-V13 has its own successful story. Now you are on a mission to baptize any E-V13 that lacks south Thracian profile as some Illyrian variant. I won't object if that's the case, but the Himera's E-V13 are not Illyrians.

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...an-case/page31?p=662431&viewfull=1#post662431
Ev13 is common in north africa. And map shows migrations out of africa in the middle east and europe.
Egypt colonized parts of the middle east before, and egyptians have migrated to greece, sicilly and the medditeranean in ancient times. Its not even evil, theres dna evidence of it and ancient sources showing that greeks recieved migration from north africa anatolia and the middle east.
And they would migrate into roman provinces. I don't even know you characterized it as evil unless you think its evil to be mixed race or that middle easterners and north africans are inherently evil just because.
Theres alot of cool ancient history from the middle east and egyptians. I dont know why its even a bad thing necessarily.
J-L283 really is european but I think from the medditerenean and agean and balkans. Some people want to attribute from yanmaya.
When you can find ancient ev13 close to 2000BC - 3000BC then I might believe it came from indo european migration into europe. But it really looks like it came from egyptians.
 
Im starting to think that E1b came from egyptian migrants and colonists after J-L283.
Perhaps you're confusing the nomenclatures. When people say E1b in this thread they mean E1b-V13 which has absolutely nothing to do with "Egyptians". As for its history or other Paleo-Carpatho-Balkan lineages there is more than enough sources you might want to read about.
 
Ev13 is common in north africa. And map shows migrations out of africa in the middle east and europe.
Egypt colonized parts of the middle east before, and egyptians have migrated to greece, sicilly and the medditeranean in ancient times. Its not even evil, theres dna evidence of it and ancient sources showing that greeks recieved migration from north africa anatolia and the middle east.
And they would migrate into roman provinces. I don't even know you characterized it as evil unless you think its evil to be mixed race or that middle easterners and north africans are inherently evil just because.
Theres alot of cool ancient history from the middle east and egyptians. I dont know why its even a bad thing necessarily.
J-L283 really is european but I think from the medditerenean and agean and balkans. Some people want to attribute from yanmaya.
When you can find ancient ev13 close to 2000BC - 3000BC then I might believe it came from indo european migration into europe. But it really looks like it came from egyptians.

E-V13 is very uncommon in Northern Africa, and whatever there is it looks like it is mainly from Byzantine Empire period, some Byzantine garrisons.

But, yeah, ultimately during Paleolithic-Mesolithic the ancestor of E-V13 was an inhabitants of one of Mesolithic Egyptian Cultures. Along the Nile river likely. But, that's approximately more than 12k years.
 
Perhaps you're confusing the nomenclatures. When people say E1b in this thread they mean E1b-V13 which has absolutely nothing to do with "Egyptians". As for its history or other Paleo-Carpatho-Balkan lineages there is more than enough sources you might want to read about.
Is there a map and list of ancient E1b-v13 samples? Like how they have for J-L283?
 
It turns out E-V13 has its own successful story. Now you are on a mission to baptize any E-V13 that lacks south Thracian profile as some Illyrian variant. I won't object if that's the case, but the Himera's E-V13 are not Illyrians.

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...an-case/page31?p=662431&viewfull=1#post662431
Indeed. Some intuitions and guesses on Thracians based on actual archeological foreknowlegde have been very spot on. Thinking of Riverman, Hawk etc. Which leads me to this: I would generally advice to trust leaks from international individuals as there was some fake news spread in the past by some people. I am talking about the supposedly rich Z2103, "G2a" and "J2a" Thracians that never actually existed. An Israeli friend of mine has thankfully told me at the time that they are all but one E1b-V13 which was also in line with the screenshot of a lecture about EIA Kapitan Andreevo. Not really what some guy here posting on this thread lied to me about (name starts with the letter A, who got the info from the supposedly insider Bruzmi who's allegedly in the, how he called it, "know group" lol). Not cool.

 
Indeed. Some intuitions and guesses on Thracians based on actual archeological foreknowlegde have been very spot on. Thinking of Riverman, Hawk etc. Which leads me to this: I would generally advice to trust leaks from international individuals as there was some fake news spread in the past by some people. I am talking about the supposedly rich Z2103, "G2a" and "J2a" Thracians that never actually existed. An Israeli friend of mine has thankfully told me at the time that they are all but one E1b-V13 which was also in line with the screenshot of a lecture about EIA Kapitan Andreevo. Not really what some guy here posting on this thread lied to me about (name starts with the letter A, who got the info from the supposedly insider Bruzmi who's allegedly in the, how he called it, "know group" lol). Not cool.

Ok looking at this i see two clearly labeled Ev 13. Are other ones here E-v13?
I only see 2 and one of them doesnt have yamnaya admixture.
They only have overlapping uralic, GEO_CHG and western serbian Iron Gates scores and its at very low levels.
I am not sure what GEO is is.
4ccf85c432610fa83254523f78fed076.jpg
 
Ok looking at this i see two clearly labeled Ev 13. Are other ones here E-v13?
I only see 2 and one of them doesnt have yamnaya admixture.
They only have overlapping uralic, GEO_CHG and western serbian Iron Gates scores and its at very low levels.
I am not sure what GEO is is.


GEO is Georgia, CHG is Caucacus Hunter Gatherer. E-V13 block is not Yamnaya derived, some individuals show Yamnaya because they absorbed high amount of aDNA from the R1b-Z2103 block, by expanding on their territory.
 
Indeed. Some intuitions and guesses on Thracians based on actual archeological foreknowlegde have been very spot on. Thinking of Riverman, Hawk etc. Which leads me to this: I would generally advice to trust leaks from international individuals as there was some fake news spread in the past by some people. I am talking about the supposedly rich Z2103, "G2a" and "J2a" Thracians that never actually existed. An Israeli friend of mine has thankfully told me at the time that they are all but one E1b-V13 which was also in line with the screenshot of a lecture about EIA Kapitan Andreevo. Not really what some guy here posting on this thread lied to me about (name starts with the letter A, who got the info from the supposedly insider Bruzmi who's allegedly in the, how he called it, "know group" lol). Not cool.



I'm pretty sure Brumi is in the know. He smugly wrote that there will not be any papers coming from Bulgaria, Kosovo, Romania, Bosnia for at least two years, so the E-V13 mystery and his bs will carry on. He chose to lie to his followers and they respect him for it.:LOL:

However, he omitted Serbia when he bragged on how long we'll have to wait. Any samples coming out of from Serbia will be quite valuable and damning, and we will likely see them next year.
 
as I said many times....until someone clears up what the dacians spoke before taking the Latin route ( that is changing to a latin syntax ), one cannot make a call on Albanian ...............there seems to be a link of albanian with pre-latin based Dacian language
 
Not really what some guy here posting on this thread lied to me about (name starts with the letter A, who got the info from the supposedly insider Bruzmi who's allegedly in the, how he called it, "know group" lol). Not cool.


He said that Proto-Thracians weren't E-V13 based on BA samples and guess what? They weren't and nobody thinks what only a small fringe group propagated on internet fora supports.

Proto-Thracians were in Thrace in the Bronze Age:

The discoveries of massive migrations from the steppe both westward into Central and Western Europe (4, 8), and eastward into South Siberia (4) and Central/South Asia (34), have provided powerful evidence for the theory of steppe Indo-European origins by linking populations all the way from Northwest Europe (36) to India and China through common steppe ancestry. The present study adds further support to the theory by the discovery of ubiquitous ancestry from the steppe in the Bronze Age Balkans [where, indubitably, Indo-European, Paleo-Balkan languages such as Thracian and Illyrian (41) were spoken], including individuals of predominantly steppe ancestry; (...) (Lazaridis, Southern Arc, Papers)

Matzinger considers them to have moved there in 2600-2500 BC:

M21.png


When Bruzmi was saying that Cetina will be J-L283 long before the publication of the Southern Arc, you were supporting Riverman and the rest of that group who really didn't want Cetina to be J-L283 and now you're pretending here that you always supported Cetina to be J-L283.
 
The oldest contacts between Latin and Proto-Albanian go back to the 2nd century BCE, after the victory of the Romans against the Illyrian king Genthios in 168 BCE, or even the 3rd century BCE, when the Romans first invaded the Illyrian coast in 229 BCE...

Along with now-extinct Dalmatian, Romanian is a possible candidate for Balkan-Latin sources of Albanian borrowings... As for their languages, Mihăescu unlike, for example Çabej sought to reduce common lexical characteristics of Albanian with Romanian. He maintained among other things that Latin reflexes are older in Albanian than in Romanian, for example, faqe 'face' < Lat. facies; Romanian has the younger form faţă < Lat. facia...

In view of the absence of historical documents, the discussion on these questions largely depends on the characteristics of the (reconstructed) languages, which in the case of Albanian even concerns the central question of their Illyrian or Thracian heritage. In addition to some terms going back to a common Balkan or even Mediterranean substrate... the main question is, whether Albanian borrowings from non-classical Latin can be derived from Proto-Romanian (or eastern Balkan Latin) or whether Albanian has common characteristics only with Dalmatian (western Balkan Latin). In any case, possible contacts with Romanians do not concern the oldest layer of Latin influences on Albanian, as they go back to times when only the coast was Romanized and not the central Balkan areas. What is more, Albanian has preserved Latin characteristics that did not survive in any Romance language, that is, from before the regionalization of Latin, or at least may be found elsewhere only in very conservative varieties; see, for example, the preservation of Latin k, g before front vowels Albanian has in common with Sardinian varieties, the conservation of the neuter in Latin borrowings or archaic Latin lexemes like ōs 'mouth' > Alb. vesh 'ear', vetus, veteris > Alb. i vjetër 'old', where Romance languages, including Romanian, show only derivations...

Mihăescu differentiated four categories of common terms of Albanian with Romanian, which in a way contrary to Çabej's opinion also reflects different chronological stages:

1) Latin words of extended circulation, preserved not only in Albanian and Romanian, but also in western Romance languages (including Italian). This is the largest group in Mihăescu's corpus, containing 270 items like altare '(sacrificial) altar' > Alb. Lter, Ro. altar; arena > Alb. rërë (Geg rênë), Ro. arină; aurum > Alb. ar, Ro. aur.

2) Latin words, common to Albanian and western Romance languages (partially also to Dalmatian), but not found in Romanian. Mihăescu counted 151 elements in this groups, for example, amicus 'friend' > Alb. mik; causa 'thing' > Alb. kafshë 'animal, thing'; fides 'belief' > Alb. fe; servire 'to serve' > Alb. shërbenj.

3) Latin words found only in Romanian and Albanian. Mihăescu's corpus contains 39 of them, of which 19 are terms of wider circulation in these languages, like canticum 'song' > Alb. këngë, Ro. cîntec; sessus ‘plain’ > Alb. shesh, Ro. şes. Twelve of them are uncertain because of formal or semantic inconsistencies, for example, hospitium, *hostip(it)ium > Alb. shtëpi 'house', Ro. ospăţ ‘banquet’; dirigere > Alb. dërgonj ‘to send’, Ro. drege ‘to make’. The rest of them consist of local Hellenisms like spodium (> Grk. σπούδιον) > Alb. shpuz ‘embers’, Ro. spuză.

4) Latin loans preserved only in Albanian. In Mihăescu's opinion, the 85 items he counted are especially useful for knowledge of Latin and help determine the territory and the date of the influence of the Roman culture on the ancestors of the Albanians. In referring to Jokl, he remarked that the basic agricultural terminology of the ancient Albanians is clearly Latin, for example, apparamentum 'provision' > parmendë 'plough', *hibernium (cf.. hibernus 'wintery') > vërri 'winter pasture'. Flora and fauna terms in this group according to Mihăescu are mainly Mediterranean or refer at least to humid territories, as, for example, olivaster > ullashtër 'wild olive-tree', catta > gatë 'heron'. Additional information comes from religious terms, which, being partially pre-Christian, turned into Christian ones and followed without interruption the western (Roman) Church, while the ancestors of the Romanians oriented themselves by the Byzantine model, for example, Lat. Saturni dies > Alb. e shtunë 'Saturday' (≠ Ro. sâmbătă), Lat. Christi natale > kërshëndella ‘Christmas’ (≠ Ro. Crăciun, etymology unclear).

In his final summary, Mihăescu listed words from several parts of speech showing that Albanian borrowed from Classical Latin, whereas the corresponding Romanian terms go back to Vulgar Latin. Among the Albanian borrowings he cited alterare > ndërronj ‘to change’, gaudimentum > gazmend ‘joy’, caltha ‘marigold, violet’ > i, e kaltër ‘blue’, ingratus > i, e ngratë ‘pitiable’, showing according to the author that it would be a fallacy to suppose that the Latin elements of Romanian and Albanian have a common “Balkan Latin” source. In his opinion, Roman influence spread on the Balkans along different tracks.
 
As for consonant clusters the most important case is the integration of ancient Latin borrowings with ct [kt], which had three different results in Albanian, ft, jt, t, without any clear conditions for the individual developments (Çabej, 1976, p. 54). So, Albanian has ft (< pt) contrary to Romanian (and Dalmatian) pt and assimilated tt in Italian, for example, in luftë ‘war’ ← Lat. lucta, versus Ro. luptă, It. lotta. However, it has jt ← ct as in Alb. drejt ‘straight, right’ ← Lat. directu‑, versus Ro. drept, It. dritto, contrary to later integrations like t ← ct in Alb. fryt (≠ frujt in older times) ‘fruit’ ← Lat. fructu-, versus Ro. frupt, It. frutto. The Latin cluster ks (x) did not have uniform results either, resulting, for example, in Alb. kofshë ‘thigh’ ← Lat. coxa, versus Ro. coapsă, It. coscia, but Alb. frashër ‘ash’ ← Lat. fraxinu-, versus Ro. frasin, It. frassino.

When Proto-Albanian borrowed words with originally velar consonants from classical Latin, they still had kept their pronunciation before front vowels, contrary to their palatalization in most modern Romance languages, with the exception of Sardinian. Only afterward did an internal palatalization before front vowels occur in Albanian, both in inherited words and in loanwords: k, g > kʲ, gʲ / V[-back]. Well-known examples in modern Albanian, going back to this sound change, are Lat. caelum ‘sky’ → Alb. qiell, centum ‘100’ → qind. It is a problem for historical linguistics that the same happened to be the case in southern Balkan-Romance varieties (Dalmatian, Liburnian).10 As a consequence, it often remains unclear if Albanian in such cases borrowed directly from Latin before the corresponding internal change, for example, Italian k, g > [tʃ], [dʒ] /V[–back], or only afterward from one of its Balkan vernaculars, differing in this respect from western Romance. Latin borrowings of the older layer have preserved a very conservative form of Latin, often found in Albanian alone, sometimes accompanied by peripheral Romance varieties like Sardinian, Romanian, or other forms of Balkan Romance.

Excerpts from Breu's paper. Albanian has nothing to do with Dacian or any language which spoken in the eastern Balkans or even the more eastern part of the central Balkans.
 
Excerpts from Breu's paper. Albanian has nothing to do with Dacian or any language which spoken in the eastern Balkans or even the more eastern part of the central Balkans.

nothing to do with the Latin based Dacian language is what he states................he says nothing about the pre-Latin Dacian language
 

This thread has been viewed 604692 times.

Back
Top