Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 15 of 18 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 375 of 438

Thread: Southern Illyrians & Mycenean Greeks on a PCA plot

  1. #351
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    25-12-21
    Posts
    506

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2B2-L283/Z638

    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    That comment is ridiculous, because
    a) Pottery was far more important at that time, having a meaning for the people which goes far beyond consumption, like tradition, spritiuality, distinction etc.
    b) Channelled Ware in particular was a complete package, they even brought their own, unique and completely new weapons and customs, among which cremation in larger cemeteries in urns and with scattered ashes with them.

    That argument of "pots not people" crowd in New Archaeology was wrong 5 decades ago and its still wrong. If its just one type of artefact, maybe, but if its complete package, they don't migrate and expand without carriers, without people.

    Most of the time when people like you go ad hominem against me, they can't even properly define what exactly is wrong. They just don't like the result.
    What result don't we like??? The result that Iron Age Albanians are literally a stone's throw away from modern Albanians?

    You type "Chanelled Ware" on Google and there's like 2 obscure studies and 100 Riverman posts. That's how important it is. It's not even relevant enough to have a Wikipedia page.

    You've legitimately written more about "Chanelled Ware" than the actual archeologists who found them.

  2. #352
    Regular Member blevins13's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-10-16
    Location
    Tirana
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,047

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103>BY611
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H7i1

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeni pushed, imho, Proto-Greeks into the Aegean. They heavily influenced Gáva itself, mainly through the intermediate Wietenberg-Noua fusion in Transylvania. Psenichevo is imho simply a mix of Gáva (either directly from the North East, like their pottery looks like it) or indirectly via Belegis II-Gáva, which reached the Lower Danube as welll. They simply mixed with the locals, which were pretty much Aegean like still, and got additional steppe influences from the Cimmerians and Scythians, as well as local and other Pannonian influences (Brnjica, Encrusted Pottery especially).

    The archaeological connections are pretty clear, going from the North Carpathians to the Aegean, whereas the J-L283 dominated Illyrian zone was going from the Upper Adriatic, Bell Beakers-Tumulus culture-Italian Apennine down. So these were simply two different cultural spheres, with different connections, dominated by different haplogroups.
    So according to you where were the proto-Greeks residing before being pushed, and when this event happened.


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

  3. #353
    Regular Member blevins13's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-10-16
    Location
    Tirana
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,047

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103>BY611
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H7i1

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by enter_tain View Post
    I don't understand how Riverman doesn't exhaust himself writing a bunch of bullshit all the time. This dude has gone so far off the deep end with his "theories", there's no connection to reality anymore.

    Watch there's another Riverman in the year 4000, arguing that the United States, Canada, UK, etc... didn't actually exist. It was all the "Starbucks Culture" because they found Starbucks cups in all these places.
    It seems that he is on something good. He has already solved all the Balkan mysteries, including the origin of Mycenaean, where also Lazaridis did not dare to go further.


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

  4. #354
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,222

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by blevins13 View Post
    Yes probably one of the first waves.
    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
    Indeed, in Hawk's post it shows those R1b-M269 subtypes show in the BA:

    https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...l=1#post650056

  5. #355
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,222

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    I think this lends some support to my model of BA South Italy being modeled as a steppe/Minoan two-way (similar to Lazaridis et al. 2017 and Celmente et al. 2021), with contributions from the Aegean and eastern Mediterranean on a sporadic cline.

  6. #356
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,222

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    I think this lends some support to my model of BA South Italy being modeled as a steppe/Minoan two-way (similar to Lazaridis et al. 2017 and Celmente et al. 2021), with contributions from the Aegean and eastern Mediterranean on a sporadic cline.
    https://imgur.com/CmyH381

  7. #357
    Regular Member real expert's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-09-16
    Posts
    585


    Country: Germany



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    Bell Beakers were considered by the "pots not people" crowd just a "social happening" and "trade network phenomenon". What is the reality? In some regions they eliminated within their sphere nearly 95 % of the local male lineages and replaced them. The autosomal replacement varies, but is in one of the highest ballparks every recorded in prehistory.
    Yes, they did adopt elements into their package, before swarming out, largely. But here too: Where you got the whole cultural package, they did replace, with a few exceptions.

    And I highly doubt the conclusion of Reich, its simply impossible. Even if the PIE would have been sitting somewhere around the Caucausus, that there was no penetration of Anatolia before the Iron Age, nothing recognisable at all, is simply not possible. I can only attribute it, if he presents any sort of data in that direction, as bad sampling strategy.
    I'm particularly curious about Cernavoda into Troy. Whether they tested those groups and what's the outcome. If they didn't test it, that's like talking about "Yamnaya expansion" while ignoring Sredny Stog and the Lower Don cultural centre in the period before. Its just missing the point, either deliberately or by accident...........

    There is indeed an issue with how geneticists access and deploy historical arguments. That genetic evidence can provide clues to unrecorded historical events is surely one of the key potential uses of ancient DNA, but how can we ensure that such a clue is historically meaningful? If ancient DNA can lead to the discovery or even the solution of unknown human events—migration, war, settlement, conquest, etc.—it's essential to make sure that genetic data is interpreted according to scenarios that make sense historically and archaeologically, and often this requires foremost a greater sensitivity toward what is referred to as the “identity” of an excavated site. In addition, a certain acquaintance with how ancient populations may have been structured socially, ethnically, and politically is required. It's of significance if what we regard as an intrusive genetic element appears in a common tomb or in an elaborate elite burial. In fact, the categories used by historians, archaeologists, and anthropologists when they examine ancient remains can be complex and probably not be easily assigned to a biological context.

  8. #358
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    1,642


    Country: Austria



    3 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by enter_tain View Post
    You type "Chanelled Ware" on Google and there's like 2 obscure studies and 100 Riverman posts. That's how important it is. It's not even relevant enough to have a Wikipedia page.

    You've legitimately written more about "Chanelled Ware" than the actual archeologists who found them.
    Part of the reason for this is that the actual regional cultures run by different names and many papers are not in English. To complicate things even more, the regional cultures themselves run by different names in different nations. Like one of the main Pre-Gva cultures of the area between Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Ukraine was Suciu de Sus. You find in Hungarian way more hits if you search for Felsőszőcs, which is the same place, just the Hungarian version.
    And in English you have different names for the Pottery: Gva style, channelled pottery, pottery with channels, fluted ware, fluted pottery, pottery with cannelures, sometimes even Protovillanova or Hallstatt style, especially in the oldest articles.

    Maps:


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

    Among experts its being widely known and its appeareance marks the beginning of a new epoch in the Balkans, because it marks the Late Bronze to Iron Age transition. Its being used to relatively date finds in stratigraphies even. And among others in the book of Kristian Kristiansen its core group of Gva being considered Proto-Thracian. A view held up by a minority, but a solid one with many researchers in the last decades.

    Here another point of view on the subject, note that Fluted Ware horizon being the same as channelled ware/pottery or cannelure pottery etc. Just different names for the same phenomenon. In Bulgaria they prefer Fluted ware, for whatever reason:
    The Early Iron Age comprises the period between the eleventh and the sixth centuries BC, according to the conventional chronology for Bulgarian archaeology (Fig. 2).1 The beginning of the Iron Age in Thrace is marked to a much greater extent by significant changes in the local culture than by the introduction of iron technology. It is widely accepted that there were two phases within the Early Iron Age, divided by the end of the ninth century BC.2 An additional third, late phase is assumed for some regions, for example, Northeastern Thrace, but rejected for the area south of the Central Balkan. The end of the Early Iron Age is characterised by general changes in the local cultures, among which are a sharp increase in the number of imports, novelties in burial practices, local production of wheel-made pottery, and, in many regions, urbanisation. The Early Iron Age culture developed based on that of the previous Late Bronze Age. The Late Bronze Age, or at least its later stage, is characterised by the PlovdivZimnicae-Cerkovna (PZC) complex, which was spread over nearly the whole territory of Thrace.3 The complex bordered in the northeast on Coslodgeni and in the northwest on the southeastern variant of the Central European Urnfield culture (Urnenfelderkultur); here it is called the Lower Danube Culture with Incrusted Pottery.4 The Danube River divided the regions of the PZC complex and the Verbicioara and Tei cultures, although the border is not very distinct and there were probably areas on both sides of the river where these cultures met and mixed. To the west and south, the complex ends with the Rhodopes. Aegean Thrace shared the same style of handmade pottery, but also had pottery classes in the Mycenaean style.5 To the west, PZC was in contact with the Koprivlen culture, which had an affinity with the Central Balkan culture of Brnica.6 The neighbouring region, further still to the west, namely Macedonia, differed in that it had an additional class of Matt-painted pottery.7
    So at first Encrusted Pottery (which fled Tumulus culture and Channelled Ware from Pannonia) and Brnjica (which fled Channelled Ware) made their appearance. This already shows what happened: It was a multiple chain reaction event, caused by first Tumulus culture, then Channelled Ware, expanding in Pannonia and the Balkans. This also caused parts of the Sea Peoples migrations and Protovillanova in Italy being a related branch within Urnfield. In the next stage:

    Within a rather short period, the PZC complex was replaced by a new pottery style. This change is considered to mark the beginning of a new period, namely the Early Iron Age, although the first iron artefacts did not appear until at least a century later. In fact, the sites that date to the first centuries of the Iron Age lack metal artefacts in general and the earliest iron objects are most often found out of context. Bronze continued to be used, as shown by European-style artefacts of the Ha AHa B1 period like the socket axes, but also artefacts in the Aegean style, such as trunnion axes.9 An investigation of all early iron artefacts in Thrace as well as bronze ones at the end of the Bronze Age and in the first centuries of the Early Iron Age is still pending; thus pottery is the most reliable archaeological material for following the chronological stages in the cultural development of Thrace and, together with the information from excavated grave structures, for distinguishing regional groups. The initial phase of the Early Iron Age was firstly identified with the group of incised, decorated pottery named Catalka.10 The research that followed proved that such incisions were very few on the ornamented pottery of this first stage. The fluted ware proved to be the only pottery decorated in the new style, which led to associating this stage instead with a horizon of the fluted ware.11 Besides their decoration, these are also pottery types that are new to the beginning of the Early Iron Age. Few shapes of the previous PZC complex continued with the first stage of the Fluted ware horizon and those which did should be considered as remnant elements. Their presence in this early stage together with the continuous development of both settlements and necropoleis are the reasons for some researchers to consider this period a transitional one between Bronze Age and Iron Age.12
    The new pottery style replaced that of the Late Bronze Age within quite a short period within the first Early Iron Age stage and kept being conservative for the entire Early Iron Age. The prototypes of the new shapes and the fluted decoration are to be found in the Urnfield cultures of the central part of Eastern Europe.19 The fluted decoration evolved first in the final stages of the Lower Danube Culture with Incrusted Pottery in the Ha A1 period, under influences from the Middle and Lower Danube.20 Slightly later it became popular over nearly all of Thrace and it is much more likely to represent a new fashion than a major migration. The reasons could be found in a general reversal of the direction of contacts in Thrace from south/southeast to northwest. It looks very probable that Thrace fell strongly under the influence of the cultures from the Carpathian basin, because of their potential to provide sufficient metal sources. This trend may even have strengthened during the time of the general crisis that hit the Eastern Mediterranean region. A similar trend is marked for the contacts of Troia imports from the East Mediterranean that are numerous in the Troia VI layers cease in the following layer, Troia VIIb, where they are mainly of northwestern origin.21

    They mention migration but tend to interpret it otherwise (pots no people preference). But ancient DNA already shows that E-V13 wasn't there before, but appeared in the main Channelled Ware successor, which is Psenichevo. So its ancient DNA to decide whether the massive and radical change caused by Channelled Ware as a cultural complex, which encompassed much more than just the ceramic, was a demic diffusion, even replacement event or not. But since we have many samples from the Bronze Age without E-V13, but plenty of afterwards, things are going in the right direction.

    Already if looking at the massive change of the culture in all Channelled Ware affected areas, there can be no doubt it was a migration, from the archaeological point of view, but the question remains which extent. Like did a minority come in, without replacing a lot of the locals, and just spread the culture then. Or was it really a fairly massive replacement event? That's up to ancient DNA to solve this once and for all. Just like they did it with Bell Beakers.

    Quote Originally Posted by blevins13 View Post
    So according to you where were the proto-Greeks residing before being pushed, and when this event happened.


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
    I don't know, but considering their style and the incoming steppe push, Bulgaria/Lower Danube is likely, after they had come down from the Western steppe from MCW/Catacomb before. That's what the results of Central-Eastern European genetic profiles (according to the authors) appearing with the MBA-LBA transition in the Aegean might suggest. We need to wait for the results from those paper, like there are so many other results we know about which need forever to get published.

  9. #359
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    04-04-19
    Posts
    106


    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Dushman View Post
    As I’ve said before, pots are art and creative art influences neighbouring regions and further. Let’s focus on solid facts like yDNA and auDNA otherwise we’ll never agree.

    About the models using Tuscany, modern Tuscans appear by coincidence to be the closest to IA Illyrians. The problem there stands with Polish_South because it doesn’t represent Slavic input but rather a Slavo-Daco-Celto-Scytho-Germanic input.

    We know how the migration period brought many populations from the Carpathians and Pannonia down to the Balkans, either fleeing or joined the migrating/pillaging/invading tribes, which increased the pseudo-Slavic input in the Balkans.

    And we know that there are Albanians (my family members included) who are genetically an “Illyrian relic” and not touched by the Northern Balkan and North East European admixture.
    Interesting! can you share their Eurogenes K13,K15 and Dodecad K12b results if you don't mind?

  10. #360
    Regular Member Hawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-11-19
    Posts
    1,482

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13

    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    Part of the reason for this is that the actual regional cultures run by different names and many papers are not in English. To complicate things even more, the regional cultures themselves run by different names in different nations. Like one of the main Pre-G�va cultures of the area between Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Ukraine was Suciu de Sus. You find in Hungarian way more hits if you search for Felsőszőcs, which is the same place, just the Hungarian version.
    And in English you have different names for the Pottery: G�va style, channelled pottery, pottery with channels, fluted ware, fluted pottery, pottery with cannelures, sometimes even Protovillanova or Hallstatt style, especially in the oldest articles.

    Maps:


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

    Among experts its being widely known and its appeareance marks the beginning of a new epoch in the Balkans, because it marks the Late Bronze to Iron Age transition. Its being used to relatively date finds in stratigraphies even. And among others in the book of Kristian Kristiansen its core group of G�va being considered Proto-Thracian. A view held up by a minority, but a solid one with many researchers in the last decades.

    Here another point of view on the subject, note that Fluted Ware horizon being the same as channelled ware/pottery or cannelure pottery etc. Just different names for the same phenomenon. In Bulgaria they prefer Fluted ware, for whatever reason:


    So at first Encrusted Pottery (which fled Tumulus culture and Channelled Ware from Pannonia) and Brnjica (which fled Channelled Ware) made their appearance. This already shows what happened: It was a multiple chain reaction event, caused by first Tumulus culture, then Channelled Ware, expanding in Pannonia and the Balkans. This also caused parts of the Sea Peoples migrations and Protovillanova in Italy being a related branch within Urnfield. In the next stage:






    They mention migration but tend to interpret it otherwise (pots no people preference). But ancient DNA already shows that E-V13 wasn't there before, but appeared in the main Channelled Ware successor, which is Psenichevo. So its ancient DNA to decide whether the massive and radical change caused by Channelled Ware as a cultural complex, which encompassed much more than just the ceramic, was a demic diffusion, even replacement event or not. But since we have many samples from the Bronze Age without E-V13, but plenty of afterwards, things are going in the right direction.

    Already if looking at the massive change of the culture in all Channelled Ware affected areas, there can be no doubt it was a migration, from the archaeological point of view, but the question remains which extent. Like did a minority come in, without replacing a lot of the locals, and just spread the culture then. Or was it really a fairly massive replacement event? That's up to ancient DNA to solve this once and for all. Just like they did it with Bell Beakers.



    I don't know, but considering their style and the incoming steppe push, Bulgaria/Lower Danube is likely, after they had come down from the Western steppe from MCW/Catacomb before. That's what the results of Central-Eastern European genetic profiles (according to the authors) appearing with the MBA-LBA transition in the Aegean might suggest. We need to wait for the results from those paper, like there are so many other results we know about which need forever to get published.
    Good explanation, IMO giving it a generalized label for now as Eastern Urnfield Cultures is more correct to differentiate from Western Urnfield (Celtic, Villanova and Central/Western Europe variants), since similar cultures in Carpatho-Danubian hemisphere belonging to Eastern Urnfield hemisphere used different techniques like channeling, flutes, stamped ornamentation, incised etc, etc. I don't know the relationship of these techniques, their difference needs to be treated as a variable within the whole package differentation of material culture.

    Personally if you ask me, because there was a confusion somewhere else, Albanian archaeologists have beautifully explained that Glasinac-Mat and Trebeniste shouldn't be treated as exactly the same culture, but they should be treated as two cultures which formed the historical Illyrians with a prevailing importance on Glasinac-Mat complex.

    According to Frano Prendi and Yugoslav archaeologists Matt-Painted Pottery Culture from South Albania had an Early/Middle Bronze Age influence from Belotic-Bela Crkva which in turn if i am not wrong is considered as precursor of Glasinac Culture. Channeled-Ware or as Albanian archaeologists label it Kanellure might be the Bronze to Iron Age influence or as Frano Prendi generalized them into as Pannonian Urnfield influence, but he thought they came by sea, somewhere from Liburnia directly landing in South Albania and down to Greece. His detailed explanation shouldn't matter, or it shouldn't be really an issue even if the trajectory he proposed is not totally correct, but he did mention the enrichment of iron weapons, flame shaped spears etc, etc.

  11. #361
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    1,642


    Country: Austria



    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    Good explanation, IMO giving it a generalized label for now as Eastern Urnfield Cultures is more correct to differentiate from Western Urnfield (Celtic, Villanova and Central/Western Europe variants), since similar cultures in Carpatho-Danubian hemisphere belonging to Eastern Urnfield hemisphere used different techniques like channeling, flutes, stamped ornamentation, incised etc, etc.
    Fluting/channling/cannelure is largely synonymous. Stamped ornamentation is something which developed later, connecting Bosut-Basarabi and Psenichevo-Babadag. Typical are "S"-shaped motifs. Such stamps combined with channelling and encrustations are what emerges in the Southern Channelled Ware sphere, after break up. Its what I sometimes called the Psenichevo-Basarabi horizon and it shows the influences of Encrusted Pottery, possibly, on the Channelled Ware people of the Lower Danube.
    The classical incisions being the older type of decoration, found in a fairly wide area, including later Gva territories and at the Lower Danube.

    So its quite specifically Gva/Channelled Ware if talking about channelled, fluted, cannelure decorated pottery in this period in the Balkans, partly even in Asia minor.
    The channelling being commonly combined with knobs, but channelling can appear without, as can knobs appear without. Brnjica used knobbed pottery as well, and cremation also, so they might be an at least culturally affine group before Channelled Ware pushed them out.

    Personally if you ask me, because there was a confusion somewhere else, Albanian archaeologists have beautifully explained that Glasinac-Mat and Trebeniste shouldn't be treated as exactly the same culture, but they should be treated as two cultures which formed the historical Illyrians with a prevailing importance on Glasinac-Mat complex.

    According to Frano Prendi and Yugoslav archaeologists Matt-Painted Pottery Culture from South Albania had an Early/Middle Bronze Age influence from Belotic-Bela Crkva which in turn if i am not wrong is considered as precursor of Glasinac Culture. Channeled-Ware or as Albanian archaeologists label it Kanellure might be the Bronze to Iron Age influence or as Frano Prendi generalized them into as Pannonian Urnfield influence, but he thought they came by sea, somewhere from Liburnia directly landing in South Albania and down to Greece. His detailed explanation shouldn't matter, or it shouldn't be really an issue even if the trajectory he proposed is not totally correct, but he did mention the enrichment of iron weapons, flame shaped spears etc, etc.
    Both happened, some came by sea, these were the main groups from Italy/Mediterranean, which formed the core of the Sea Peoples, but even the Sea Peoples got joined by kind of dispossessed Mycenaeans and (Carpathian) Channelled Ware warbands.

    The bulk which ended up in Northern Greece in particular, however, and those which moved in over land, deeper into the country, those were all from the Carpathian zone, largely from the first expansion along the Danube, Belegis II-Gva. And these Belegis II-Gva warriors did penetrate Albania, especially Northern Albania as well. But their influence seems to have been not strong enough in all regions, to completely turn the population. In some areas they marched just through, while plundering and going on towards Thrace, Asia minor and beyond.

    So what remained of them got soaked up by the locals and newly incoming Illyrians from the North West.

    I would compare it with Celtic groups which moved deep into Eastern and South Eastern Europe, but with some exceptions, most of them got eventually pushed back or assimilated into other regional people. Same here: The Thracian ethnicity was only established in their strongholds, but their influence and admixture was much wider spread.

    Just like in the next period the Frg group in Austria was probably not Thracian as such, but heavily influenced, both culturally and genetically, by the Thraco-Cimmerians and Basarabi. It really shows, that they have very close ties to the Thracians, whether they spoke Thracian themselves or were Celts or belonged to an unknown group, we don't know. But we have the artefacts, the burials and the evidence for individuals and small groups from Basarabi coming there. Especially elite warriors at first and elite brides and their retinue later.

    Similarly there was a strong Channelled Ware influence and later intermarriage, with bride exchange networks, throughout the Balkans. It runs from the Black Sea to Austria, from Poland to Northern Greece.

    But only in their core settlement zones people became truly Thracian. Hallstatt for example being born by a lot of these Carpathian and Thraco-Cimmerian influences reaching Central Europe. But its unlikely that even the strongest influenced groups (like Frg) became actually Thracian. In Albania the influence was initially stronger, but got pushed back it seems, same for Greece.

    How much of the Channelled Ware groups, which for some time had their own burial grounds, cemeteries and settlements in e.g. parts of Greece, being later incorporated and assimilated into the local population, or finished off, or moved out, that's hard to evaluate without ancient DNA evidence. Because as soon as their signatures disappear and dissolve, all these options are possible.
    Last edited by Riverman; 04-07-22 at 17:02.

  12. #362
    Regular Member Johane Derite's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-06-17
    Posts
    1,636

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U1a1a

    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    Fluting/channling/cannelure is largely synonymous. Stamped ornamentation is something which developed later, connecting Bosut-Basarabi and Psenichevo-Babadag. Typical are "S"-shaped motifs. Such stamps combined with channelling and enstrustations are what emerges in the Southern Channelled Ware sphere, after break up. Its what I sometimes called the Psenichevo-Basarabi horizon.
    The classical incisions being the older type of decoration, found in a fairly wide area, including later G�va territories and at the Lower Danube.

    So its quite specifically G�va/Channelled Ware if talking about channelled, fluted, cannelure decorated pottery in this period in the Balkans, partly even in Asia minor.
    The channelling being commonly combined with knobs, but channelling can appear without, as can knobs appear without. Brnjica used knobbed pottery as well, and cremation also, so they might be an at least culturally affine group before Channelled Ware pushed them out.

    Personally if you ask me, because there was a confusion somewhere else, Albanian archaeologists have beautifully explained that Glasinac-Mat and Trebeniste shouldn't be treated as exactly the same culture, but they should be treated as two cultures which formed the historical Illyrians with a prevailing importance on Glasinac-Mat complex.



    Both happened, some came by sea, these were the main groups from Italy/Mediterranean, which formed the core of the Sea Peoples, but even the Sea Peoples got joined by kind of dispossessed Mycenaeans and (Carpathian) Channelled Ware warbands.

    The bulk which ended up in Northern Greece in particular, however, and those which moved in over land, deeper into the country, those were all from the Carpathian zone, largely from the first expansion along the Danube, Belegis II-G�va. And these Belegis II-G�va warriors did penetrate Albania, especially Northern Albania as well. But their influence seems to have been not strong enough in all regions, to completely turn the population. In some areas they marched just through, while plundering and going on towards Thrace, Asia minor and beyond.

    So what remained of them got soaked up by the locals and newly incoming Illyrians from the North West.

    I would compare it with Celtic groups which moved deep into Eastern and South Eastern Europe, but with some exceptions, most of them got eventually pushed back or assimilated into other regional people. Same here: The Thracian ethnicity was only established in their strongholds, but their influence and admixture was much wider spread.

    Just like in the next period the Fr�g group in Austria was probably not Thracian as such, but heavily influenced, both culturally and genetically, by the Thraco-Cimmerians and Basarabi. It really shows, that they have very close ties to the Thracians, whether they spoke Thracian themselves or were Celts or belonged to an unknown group, we don't know. But we have the artefacts, the burials and the evidence for individuals and small groups from Basarabi coming there. Especially elite warriors at first and elite brides and their retinue later.

    Similarly there was a strong Channelled Ware influence and later intermarriage, with bride exchange networks, throughout the Balkans. It runs from the Black Sea to Austria, from Poland to Northern Greece.

    But only in their core settlement zones people became truly Thracian. Hallstatt for example being born by a lot of these Carpathian and Thraco-Cimmerian influences reaching Central Europe. But its unlikely that even the strongest influenced groups (like Fr�g) became actually Thracian. In Albania the influence was initially stronger, but got pushed back it seems, same for Greece.

    How much of the Channelled Ware groups, which for some time had their own burial grounds, cemeteries and settlements in e.g. parts of Greece, being later incorporated and assimilated into the local population, or finished off, or moved out, that's hard to evaluate without ancient DNA evidence. Because as soon as their signatures disappear and dissolve, all these options are possible.
    What I'm curious about is the channelled ware in Albania.

    These migrants came and brought this new culture to Albania, specifically in regions where Taulanti would be later.

    It is impossible they spoke the same language as the Glasinac people already there before them and connected with Bosnia.

    So which language did these channelled ware migrants bring to Albania?

    Did they conquer the local glasinac speaking people and wipe out their language, or assimilate to their language, or live separately with two different languages?

    "As we have already stressed, the mass evacuation of the Albanians from their triangle is the only effective course we can take. In order to relocate a whole people, the first prerequisite is the creation of a suitable psychosis. This can be done in various ways." - Vaso Cubrilovic

  13. #363
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    28-03-20
    Posts
    1,642


    Country: Austria



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Johane Derite View Post
    What I'm curious about is the channelled ware in Albania.
    These migrants came and brought this new culture to Albania, specifically in regions where Taulanti would be later.
    It is impossible they spoke the same language as the Glasinac people already there before them and connected with Bosnia.
    So which language did these channelled ware migrants bring to Albania?
    Did they conquer the local glasinac speaking people and wipe out their language, or assimilate to their language, or live separately with two different languages?
    That's very hard to answer, because unlike for the Morava-Vardar region, where the Serbian teams have done a great job, I know much too little about how complete the package of the Channelled Ware using people in Albania was. Both in Albania and Bulgaria, the archaeological research, or at least the one I could find, is far too incomplete or not as easily accessable as that of Hungary, Romania and Serbia. There were experts invited to a symposium, which pubished a great publication for other areas, but the Albanian contribution was finally missing largely.
    What we know however, is that a large fraction of the Channelled Ware seems to have come not directly from the North, but rather from the East. This would suggest that they either spoke Thracian or Paeonian, rather originally. However, how the local fusion was, nobody really knows.
    I mean if they would turn out, in their early phase, largely non-J-L283 and with a lot of E-V13, well, that would be a clear result. But since many of the Channelled ware migrants cremated and we probably never will get samples from these, we can only judge by later percentages, which can be always misleading.

    In heavily mixed zones, its always the most difficult to assess the outcome in patrilineages and autosomes. We really need ancient DNA to be sure.

    But my personal guess would have been they spoke originally Thracian.

    If that guess, its really just a guess, would be true, it would be mean that a Thracian wedge in Kosovo-Northern Albania, coming from Belegis II-Gva (Thracian) and the Macedonian mixed groups (could be Paeonian too there!) would have been between the more Northern Illyrians and the Southern groups. Later, these would have been annihilated, removed or simply assimilated. That's up to ancient DNA results.

    Its worth to note that especially in Northern Kosovo, we deal with a high concentration and strong position of Belegis II-Gva/Channelled Ware. So those should have been, without a doubt, Thracian speaking. Even if more Southern Channelled Ware groups would be mixed or more local in ancestry, and spoke a different language. The very Northern groups, in Kosovo, these surely were turned to Thracian. The impact there was too strong.
    My guess/bet goes with Thracian therefore for all territories, and I have an even stronger opinion on the Northern Kosovo group. Big centres of Belegis II-Gva being too close and influential. That should have been Thracian in the LBA-EIA.

  14. #364
    Regular Member kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    1,719

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Rare e-fgc7391
    MtDNA haplogroup
    h3ap

    Country: Uruguay



    posted in anthrogenica:
    maybe it is a leak


    p.s
    https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villaricos
    that would be interesting i am guessing a mycenaean profile
    ancestery :
    mostly western jewish here is the overlapp with south europe[U]

    "Know where you came from and where you are going."

    Direct paternal line : mizrahi from damascus

  15. #365
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    20,970


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    The date is important. Is this part of the Copper Age coming to Iberia??? Or is it later and just part of the pattern of the Greeks establishing trading colonies along the Med in the first century B.C.?


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

  16. #366
    Regular Member kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    1,719

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Rare e-fgc7391
    MtDNA haplogroup
    h3ap

    Country: Uruguay



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    The date is important. Is this part of the Copper Age coming to Iberia??? Or is it later and just part of the pattern of the Greeks establishing trading colonies along the Med in the first century B.C.?
    I think the second option
    If i will know more about it i will
    Post more information

  17. #367
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    15-11-21
    Posts
    20


    Country: Italy



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by kingjohn View Post
    I think the second option
    If i will know more about it i will
    Post more information
    It's from this vid Carles Lalueza-Fox, in conversation with David Reich, "Inequality: A Genetic History"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEcfm7i1ysQ&t=2542s

  18. #368
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-08-20
    Posts
    351

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13>Z17107

    Country: Albania



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by lacreme View Post
    Interesting! can you share their Eurogenes K13,K15 and Dodecad K12b results if you don't mind?
    Eurogenes K13: Dukagjin,26.01,12.17,23.94,8.66,25.29,1.54,0,0.31, 2.08,0,0,0,0
    Dodecad K12b: Dukagjin,5.85,0.72,0.67,0,34.29,22.77,0,0,6.58,0.9 5,28.17,0

    Eurogenes K13: Dukagjin2,25.78,11.81,23.1,7.72,24.94,2.72,0,1.15, 1.67,0.54,0.29,0,0.28
    Eurogenes K15: Dukagjin2,16.07,17.42,10.75,0.35,18.78,7.48,22.72,3.14,0,0.69,1.62,0.51,0,0,0.45
    Dodecad K12b: Dukagjin2,5.71,0.09,1.97,0,33.75,21.91,0,0,6.1,1.5 ,26.74,2.22
    Last edited by Dushman; 05-07-22 at 03:18.

  19. #369
    Regular Member kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    1,719

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Rare e-fgc7391
    MtDNA haplogroup
    h3ap

    Country: Uruguay



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Carnimirie View Post
    It's from this vid Carles Lalueza-Fox, in conversation with David Reich, "Inequality: A Genetic History"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEcfm7i1ysQ&t=2542s
    Thanks for sharing
    So they were greeks who lived
    In a punic colony interesting

  20. #370
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    20,970


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    3 members found this post helpful.
    As in North Africa, a port city where different groups mingled. The only place in the ancient world where everyone in a port city was a "native", is apparently Italy. :)

  21. #371
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Posts
    1,360

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2-M223
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H2A3

    Ethnic group
    Italian-Sicily-South
    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Dushman: Thanks for the Coordinates. My distances for these Greeks living in Punic Cities.

    Distance to: PalermoTrapani_ANCESTRY
    12.61969096 DodecadK12bukagjin2
    12.68788793 DodecadK12bukagjin

    Oh, I don't no why the hell that stupid clown sometimes pops up.

  22. #372
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-10-16
    Posts
    1,135


    Country: Albania



    Speaking of genetic diversity that we see, Illyrians were not so Mycenaean-like. So what does this mean about Dorians being a nearly identical population (does that still hold water?) that destroyed the Mycenaean civilization? Why weren't Classical Peloponnesians pulled north?
    Who knows.

  23. #373
    Advisor Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Posts
    7,222

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1b2a2a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b7

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Palermo Trapani View Post
    Dushman: Thanks for the Coordinates. My distances for these Greeks living in Punic Cities.

    Distance to: PalermoTrapani_ANCESTRY
    12.61969096 DodecadK12bukagjin2
    12.68788793 DodecadK12bukagjin

    Oh, I don't no why the hell that stupid clown sometimes pops up.


    If you click on advanced options for posts, scroll down a bit and tick this box to disable them.

  24. #374
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    73
    Posts
    5,336

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    You are exaggerating lol, in Iron Age, all Balkan populations were stabilized and were Italian-like. I doubt they were separate race at all. Epirotans/Macedonians probably had quite some Steppe, not as much as more Northern Balkan tribes but still.
    Are you meaning 'Italianlike' = some level well mixed+homogenized pop? For a so mountaious region? I doubt. It's why some pop's with ancient DNA "looks" emerge later in history here and there, even if not parfectly identical with the ancestral ones.

  25. #375
    Banned
    Join Date
    27-08-20
    Posts
    351

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13>Z17107

    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Palermo Trapani View Post
    Dushman: Thanks for the Coordinates. My distances for these Greeks living in Punic Cities.

    Distance to: PalermoTrapani_ANCESTRY
    12.61969096 DodecadK12bukagjin2
    12.68788793 DodecadK12bukagjin

    Oh, I don't no why the hell that stupid clown sometimes pops up.
    For you specifically I got this Albanian interesting sample to compare. :)

    AlbanianGheg,6.07,0.93,3.22,0,29.64,20.1,0,0,6.5,0,33.54,0

    The South-Westernmost shifted Albanian coordinates I've ever seen, followed by this sample as the most North-Western shifted:

    AlbanianGheg2,
    2.5,0.34,0,0,32.38,27.87,0,0,7.31,0.83,28.77,0

Page 15 of 18 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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