Southern Illyrians & Mycenean Greeks on a PCA plot

[Riverman]

Riverman was quite insistent upon the i1 in Albanians being from Slavicized Goths.

Being half Kabashi and therefore i1, I wouldn't mind if it's a Gothic sample , but obviously I would definitely prefer it to be Illyrian

Key is always the phylogeney and TMRCA. Most I1 in the Balkans clearly connects to Germanic samples so far. There is no indication for the majority of it being older in the region.

 

[Jovialis]

Iberomaurusian is likely a relic from E-L618 incursion among Anatolian and latter EEF farmers. But, the E-V13 mutation seems to have been quite diluted with this autosomal, having completely EEF and latter on Steppe on the admix.

Iberomaurusian looks like a mix of ANA + Dzudzuana(Caucasus). The Dzudzuana admixture probably made the Ancient North Africans less robust and less archaic looking.

Iberomaurusians are the ANA, the samples are from Talforat in the Pleistocene.

Natufians were a mix of ANA + Paleolithic Caucasus (Dzudzuana).

 

[Jovialis]

Iberomaurusians are the ANA, the samples are from Talforat in the Pleistocene.

Natufians were a mix of ANA + Paleolithic Caucasus (Dzudzuana).

Despite the fact that the pre-print for Lazaridis' paper has not come to peer-review, academics have move forward with using Iberomaurusian, to decern true Levantine/North African ancestry.

Because Natufians were 73% Dzudzuana (Anatolia_N-like), themselves. Thus a ton of overlap, leading to confounded analysis.

 

[Fustan]

Key is always the phylogeney and TMRCA. Most I1 in the Balkans clearly connects to Germanic samples so far. There is no indication for the majority of it being older in the region.

Duh, everyone knows it's Germanic. Your point and what you really held on was that it came to Albanians via Slavs, Gothic -> Slav -> Albanian, and couldn't possibly have directly gone from Gothic -> (Proto-)Albanians.

 

[Johane Derite]

I think Albanian I1 has possibility of being one of the "migratory" populations of Komani culture because of the Puka cluster which matches directly with the area of Koman.


From William Bowden:

"Nallbani suggests that Koman should be associated with the late Roman defence of the Drin valley and a key point in the economic network of Prevalitaine and Dardania. She argues that the
main cemetery begins in the 5th to 6th centuries with furnished burial continuing into the 9th century. New skeletal analysis from the sites has also revealed interesting details. Of particular
note are two tombs from Koman that collectively contained 25 individuals (12 adults and 13 sub-adults). Buchet has argued that two skeletons exhibit Asiatic cranial morphology and that this,
alongside Avar grave goods, suggests people of Asiatic origin in Koman. Two skeletons also showed healed cranial trauma, which it was suggested indicated a violent social climate.


At Lezha, meanwhile, new excavations recovered 150 skeletons for osteological analysis, while further detailed information was recovered in the types of tombs and the organization
of what appeared to be three separate cemeteries outside the city walls. These were in different locations from the Roman cemetery, although late use of the Roman cemetery
is also suggested by the presence of 7th-century belt fittings . Buchet’s conclusions from osteological analyses were intriguing. He argued that it was possible to
distinguish three broad morphological groups spread unequally across three phases of burial. He suggested that the Early Medieval population was more gracile and noted the high
number of 15-19 year. The high mortality in this age group suggests hard life and insanitary conditions with no clear pathologies in young men suggesting injury or trauma.
However, Buchet suggested that this increased presence of young people coincides with arrival of new grave goods, and argues that the high numbers of young people and
the pattern of their mortality are consistent with the presence of a migratory populations.

...


With the exception of Buchet’s suggestions outlined above, Nallbani and her colleagues’ preliminary conclusions about the identity of the Koman and Lezha populations have been
relatively uncontroversial. They pointed to the occasional presence of items such as fibulae (particularly of Veţel type) and argued that these items could prove a Slav or Avar
presence at Lezha at the end of the 6th century, after texts record that it had been lost to the Slavs. They further suggested that the cemetery was started ex novo in the 6th century
and represents a population of both Slavs and locals. They also noted the presence of similar Slav or Avar type items associated with female burials at Kruja.


...

Nallbani’s informed analysis of the material from the Albanian cemeteries places them firmly in the context of a Byzantine-Mediterranean sphere of the late 6th to 8th cemetery, but Ceka’s
complaint is primarily driven by her notion of objects indicating ethnic groups, straying into the familiar territory of traditional culture history. Indeed, while many archaeologists have
retreated from overt culture-history in relation to the to the Early Medieval cemeteries, we have yet to see widespread adoption of a more theoretically driven approach to the Albanian
assemblages in which they are treated as expressions of multiple identities. These can be based around age, gender, occupation, social class, geographic origins, ethnic group
membership and can operate across a wide spectrum of possibilities. As I have argued elsewhere, the Albanian cemetery material is susceptible to such approaches,
which although often inconclusive are ultimately more rewarding than debating questions that hinge on notions of ethnicity as a defined entity.


The Albanian cemeteries point to a dynamic and fluid situation in the early Middle Ages in which identities were redefined and coalesced around power structures that were dramatically
different to those of the 5th and 6th centuries (that were arguably based around the church and an increasingly centralised Byzantine State). An increasingly militarised environment
is reflected in the growing adoption of symbols of military status in civilian contexts (a process that has been widely recognised from elsewhere in the Western Roman Empire . Nallbani
has pointed to items at Koman paralleling finds on the Danubian limes and it seems apparent that the Koman graves and others (which obviously include weapons) reflect
this wider militarization of status representation. This was a society, however, that remained in contact with long distance exchange networks, albeit ones that were no longer serviced
with low denomination bronze coinage. The rich variety of grave goods present in the Albanian cemeteries and the variations in the burial rituals employed is striking and, as I have
suggested previously, hints that the use of this material was subject to rapid change and was fraught with social uncertainty."

William Bowden
CONFLICTING IDEOLOGIES AND THE ARCHAEOLOGY
OF EARLY MEDIEVAL ALBANIA
2019


So we should expect at the least: locals, avars, and slavs in the komani-kruja culture, but possibly germanics also were present.

 

[Riverman]

I-y16434

Duh, everyone knows it's Germanic. Your point and what you really held on was that it came to Albanians via Slavs, Gothic -> Slav -> Albanian, and couldn't possibly have directly gone from Gothic -> (Proto-)Albanians.

I never said it couldn't have been from Germanics directly, but rather that it is possible for some subclades to have arrived with Slavs in the Albanians. Possible doesn't mean that it couldn't have been otherwise.

An example is: I-Y16436 on FTDNA or on YFull:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y16440/

The Albanian while numerous subclade is extremely shallow. Upstream are a Belorussian and there is a parallel, more diverse/older branch with Serbians/Croats: I-Y16434 (FTDNA)

That's a case where we have just Slavs upstream and parallel in the crucial times - so far. Any new samples could change that and I can hardly say it definitely came with Slavic speaking people. Its just possible to likely. The Albanian subclade split about 500-800 years ago. From the South Slavs they split about 400-700 AD, which means it could have been both. From the Belorussian this Balkan group split much, much earlier and otherwise there are just no samples I know of.

If the Serbian/Croatian samples would themselves be of Vlach/Albanian descent, that would be something in favour of an older local Germanic origin instead of a later Slavic arrival.

 

[Hawk]

I never said it couldn't have been from Germanics directly, but rather that it is possible for some subclades to have arrived with Slavs in the Albanians. Possible doesn't mean that it couldn't have been otherwise.

An example is: I-Y16436 on FTDNA or on YFull:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y16440/

The Albanian while numerous subclade is extremely shallow. Upstream are a Belorussian and there is a parallel, more diverse/older branch with Serbians/Croats: I-Y16434 (FTDNA)

That's a case where we have just Slavs upstream and parallel in the crucial times - so far. Any new samples could change that and I can hardly say it definitely came with Slavic speaking people. Its just possible to likely. The Albanian subclade split about 500-800 years ago. From the South Slavs they split about 400-700 AD, which means it could have been both. From the Belorussian this Balkan group split much, much earlier and otherwise there are just no samples I know of.

If the Serbian/Croatian samples would themselves be of Vlach/Albanian descent, that would be something in favour of an older local Germanic origin instead of a later Slavic arrival.

IMO he is just bluffing you. He knew exactly that you never ever talked about any Sardinian theory but he just put it there to create a false image on you by others. Now picks on insignificant stuff.

 

[Angela]

Despite the fact that the pre-print for Lazaridis' paper has not come to peer-review, academics have move forward with using Iberomaurusian, to decern true Levantine/North African ancestry.

Because Natufians were 73% Dzudzuana (Anatolia_N-like), themselves. Thus a ton of overlap, leading to confounded analysis.

Exactly right, as Anatolia Neolithic also had influx from Levantine Neolithic. Makes it damn hard to untangle the strands.

 

[Excine]

I'm quite intrigued by it; Montenegro, or at least the southeastern portion of it, is a hotspot for E-V13, considering that we know that a lot of it transmitted during the Middle Ages, I'm curious whether any will be discovered during the Iron Age.

Pribislav updated us,

"I'd like to summarize in one post everything I know at the moment about upcoming Lazaridis et al. paper, "The genetic history of the Southern Arc: a bridge between West Asia and Europe". It'd be nice if others would pinch in as well with any other details I might've missed.

We know for sure the samples will cover almost 4000 years long period (~3500 BC - 500 AD), and the territory [at least] from Moldova in the east to Croatia in the west to Greece in the South.

-there will be unknown number of Late Tripylliansamples from Moldova:


2019 – present. In collaboration with Moldovan Academy of Science, The National Museum of History of Moldova (Ministry of Culture of Moldova), Harvard University and Grand Valley State University from Michigan, USA established a joint project for Geo-Genetical research on ancient DNA human bone samples of the various Late Tripyllian archaeological groups from Moldova in April 2019 aiming to discover the Roots of Europe and most possible place of origin of the Indo-European language family. This project is still ongoing, but part of human bones provided with my full scholarship and initiative is reflected in upcoming 2021 Science’s article publication “The genetic history of the Southern Arc: a bridge between West Asia and Europe” with my co-authorship (submitted for review panel on August 3, 2021)


https://ku-dk.academia.edu/DrHenrySh...urriculumVitae


-there will be 35 Croatia_MLBA samples from Bezdanjača cave (the same cave from which we got dubious I18719:I2-Y3120 sample in Patterson et al.):


Furthermore, analysis of ancient DNA was carried out on as many as 35 samples and provided important data on kinship, geographical origin, and population structure of these Bronze-Age inhabitants of Lika. Perhaps the most interesting piece of information is that among the 35 analysed individuals, ten were confirmed relatives that belonged to four families.


https://www.academia.edu/62464826/Finds_from_the_Bezdanjaca_cave_near_Vrhovine


-there will be sample(s?) from Greece, one of which (I7833; 252-412 AD; Vranas Marathon; Late Antiquity/Greek Roman) was featured in the supplementary spreadsheet of the Viminacium/Danubian Limes paper:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...ntary-material


Furthermore, one of the co-authors of the paper confirmed there will be: ~80 samples from Croatia(including those 35 from Bezdanjača), 1 (or 10?)samples from Bosnia & Herzegovina, ~20 samples from Montenegro, ~10 samples from Serbia and ~20samples from North Macedonia, so at least 130 samples from former Yugoslav republics only. We also have leaked info about BA/IA samples from Albania and Bulgaria that were also sequenced by Harvard Lab, so it would make perfect sense those samples are a part of this paper. Several Slovenia_IA samples featured in the supplementary spreadsheet of the Viminacium/Danubian Limes paper were not published in Patterson et al. (I5686 and I5687 from Dolge Njive and I5694 from Metlika-Hrib), so we might expect them to show in Lazaridis paper as well. Romania isn't mentioned anywhere, but could be in play given its geographical position. I've also seen other rumours on various fora, including that there will be samples from Troy, Anatolia and even Middle East, so considering all of the above we might be looking at the new Narasimhan-size behemoth from Harvard. As for its publication date, it should be out very soon, since it's currently going through second (and hopefully final) peer review process.

 

[Excine]

^ I wonder if, any of the samples in Serbia will be in southern Serbia.

 

[mount123]

Pribislav updated us,

"I'd like to summarize in one post everything I know at the moment about upcoming Lazaridis et al. paper, "The genetic history of the Southern Arc: a bridge between West Asia and Europe". It'd be nice if others would pinch in as well with any other details I might've missed.

We know for sure the samples will cover almost 4000 years long period (~3500 BC - 500 AD), and the territory [at least] from Moldova in the east to Croatia in the west to Greece in the South.

-there will be unknown number of Late Tripylliansamples from Moldova:


2019 – present. In collaboration with Moldovan Academy of Science, The National Museum of History of Moldova (Ministry of Culture of Moldova), Harvard University and Grand Valley State University from Michigan, USA established a joint project for Geo-Genetical research on ancient DNA human bone samples of the various Late Tripyllian archaeological groups from Moldova in April 2019 aiming to discover the Roots of Europe and most possible place of origin of the Indo-European language family. This project is still ongoing, but part of human bones provided with my full scholarship and initiative is reflected in upcoming 2021 Science’s article publication “The genetic history of the Southern Arc: a bridge between West Asia and Europe” with my co-authorship (submitted for review panel on August 3, 2021)


https://ku-dk.academia.edu/DrHenrySh...urriculumVitae


-there will be 35 Croatia_MLBA samples from Bezdanjača cave (the same cave from which we got dubious I18719:I2-Y3120 sample in Patterson et al.):


Furthermore, analysis of ancient DNA was carried out on as many as 35 samples and provided important data on kinship, geographical origin, and population structure of these Bronze-Age inhabitants of Lika. Perhaps the most interesting piece of information is that among the 35 analysed individuals, ten were confirmed relatives that belonged to four families.


https://www.academia.edu/62464826/Finds_from_the_Bezdanjaca_cave_near_Vrhovine


-there will be sample(s?) from Greece, one of which (I7833; 252-412 AD; Vranas Marathon; Late Antiquity/Greek Roman) was featured in the supplementary spreadsheet of the Viminacium/Danubian Limes paper:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...ntary-material


Furthermore, one of the co-authors of the paper confirmed there will be: ~80 samples from Croatia(including those 35 from Bezdanjača), 1 (or 10?)samples from Bosnia & Herzegovina, ~20 samples from Montenegro, ~10 samples from Serbia and ~20samples from North Macedonia, so at least 130 samples from former Yugoslav republics only. We also have leaked info about BA/IA samples from Albania and Bulgaria that were also sequenced by Harvard Lab, so it would make perfect sense those samples are a part of this paper. Several Slovenia_IA samples featured in the supplementary spreadsheet of the Viminacium/Danubian Limes paper were not published in Patterson et al. (I5686 and I5687 from Dolge Njive and I5694 from Metlika-Hrib), so we might expect them to show in Lazaridis paper as well. Romania isn't mentioned anywhere, but could be in play given its geographical position. I've also seen other rumours on various fora, including that there will be samples from Troy, Anatolia and even Middle East, so considering all of the above we might be looking at the new Narasimhan-size behemoth from Harvard. As for its publication date, it should be out very soon, since it's currently going through second (and hopefully final) peer review process.

Hopefully we will get also more EIA/IA samples from core Dalmatia and more MBA Posusje Samples.

That sample was not dubious it was just a modern contaminated I2a-Slav sample with a typical Slavic auDNA profile (the embarrassing "autochthonous Slav" theory still has a lot of fans). Fingers crossed they did not do the same messy work on these other samples.

 

[mount123]

We also have leaked info about BA/IA samples from Albania and Bulgaria that were also sequenced by Harvard Lab, so it would make perfect sense those samples are a part of this paper.

Finally :awesome:

 

[enter_tain]

We really need some Late Iron Age samples from the southern Balkans. Early Bronze Age is not going to describe modern Balkan nations anymore than Early Bell Beakers in England are going to describe modern day English people. Probably going to be some Z2103 steppe heavy people whose language died out.

 

[broder]

I never said it couldn't have been from Germanics directly, but rather that it is possible for some subclades to have arrived with Slavs in the Albanians. Possible doesn't mean that it couldn't have been otherwise.

An example is: I-Y16436 on FTDNA or on YFull:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y16440/

The Albanian while numerous subclade is extremely shallow. Upstream are a Belorussian and there is a parallel, more diverse/older branch with Serbians/Croats: I-Y16434 (FTDNA)

That's a case where we have just Slavs upstream and parallel in the crucial times - so far. Any new samples could change that and I can hardly say it definitely came with Slavic speaking people. Its just possible to likely. The Albanian subclade split about 500-800 years ago. From the South Slavs they split about 400-700 AD, which means it could have been both. From the Belorussian this Balkan group split much, much earlier and otherwise there are just no samples I know of.

If the Serbian/Croatian samples would themselves be of Vlach/Albanian descent, that would be something in favour of an older local Germanic origin instead of a later Slavic arrival.

The Serbian/Croatian samples belong to the Macura clan who hail from Monte. They were recorded during Middle Ages as being ‘Latini’, meaning Catholic. So most definitely Alb or Vlah.

This is the main problem with your half cooked theories. You never dig down deep, you mostly rely on the flags that you see on yfull and block tree.

 

[Excine]

The Serbian/Croatian samples belong to the Macura clan who hail from Monte. They were recorded during Middle Ages as being ‘Latini’, meaning Catholic. So most definitely Alb or Vlah.

This is the main problem with your half cook theories. You never dig down deep, you mostly rely on the flags that you see on yfull and block tree.

Milan Sufflay and a few others believe they were of Alb origin.

 

[Hawk]

The Serbian/Croatian samples belong to the Macura clan who hail from Monte. They were recorded during Middle Ages as being ‘Latini’, meaning Catholic. So most definitely Alb or Vlah.

This is the main problem with your half cook theories. You never dig down deep, you mostly rely on the flags that you see on yfull and block tree.

It doesn't make any difference for its ultimate origin connected to Germanic migrations.

 

[broder]

It doesn't make any difference for its ultimate origin connected to Germanic migrations.

It does when one postulates that they first went through a Slavic phase.

I am not saying that’s impossible, but based on the current data the most likely scenario to me seems be that it got there from the Germanic tribes that perhaps were in the service of Rome. Probably during the Komani-Kruja period that Derite mentioned.

He was claiming the same thing few months ago about BY4465 as well.

 

[Hawk]

It does when one postulates that they first went through a Slavic phase.

I am not saying that’s impossible, but based on the current data the most likely scenario to me seems be that it got there from the Germanic tribes that perhaps were in the service of Rome. Probably during the Komani-Kruja period that Derite mentioned.

He was claiming the same thing few months ago about BY4465 as well.

I'll stick with models that work and are robust. Highly speculative pathways remain speculative, so I1 is a specific Germanic clade, and whenever we have seen it it was within the context of Germanic people.

As for E-V13 subclades, yeah, couple of people are pushing that, that's something which that dungeon and dragons J2b-L283 wikipedia kid Bruzmi makes propaganda in his own way.

 

[mount123]

I'll stick with models that work and are robust. Highly speculative pathways remain speculative, so I1 is a specific Germanic clade, and whenever we have seen it it was within the context of Germanic people.

As for E-V13 subclades, yeah, couple of people are pushing that, that's something which that dungeon and dragons J2b-L283 wikipedia kid Bruzmi makes propaganda in his own way.

Wasn't Bruzmi the guy that since the first MBA J2b-L283 sample from ancient Dalmatia and further the EIA/IA Illyrian samples was whining about the absence of E1b-V13 in the ancient Western Balkans? I highly doubt that he is J2b-L283.

I agree with you on this one he is very much off with his "opinions". I just saw on Anthrogenica that a while back he used a sneaky PCA plot model in which he used medieval and celtic La tene E1b-V13 samples to conclude that apparently J2b-L283 and E1b-V13 samples from the same time frame cluster with each other

Nevertheless he cannot be taken serious since he is just a nationalist that has to cope. Also what a f'ing weird obsession he has...

 

[Illyria]

Can't wait for that paper. I hope there's a good mix of BA & IA samples