Stable population structure in Europe since the Iron Age

[mount123]

of course ...............as I have been stating for many years...Illyrian migrated from north to south in the western balkans

That was fairly obvious since the Illyrian Iron Age samples and later samples with an East Adriatic migration pattern. It is also evident that J2b-L283 as a whole played an important role in the formation of the Illyrian ethnogenesis during Iron Age as a continuity from the Middle Bronze Age Dalmatian Posusje culture. There is a variety of clades under J2b-L283 in Illyrians.

[mount123]

Thanks for the update and the compressed list.

Do you know, by chance, if the Z600 assignment for the Serbian is his final placement? That would be a big deal to find a “pure” Z600 there.

Interesting to see CTS6190 down there in Montenegro, although this was a very young sample. The Z1043 is not surprising and I would expect more ancient samples from underneath Z638 as they sample more southern locations in the western Balkans. There has been a bias so far towards Z38240 lineages in the Balkans because researchers from the NW Balkans (where Z38240 may have been more numerous) are aggressively getting samples tested from a wide variety of sites. I wonder what the root causes are for the lack of sampling further south?

Lastly, have all the BAMs from this study been analyzed? Seems like there might be some stragglers out there. I’m curious if any L283 will pop up outside the Balkans.

ArchetypeOne has answered your question regarding the Svilos Z600 samples. There seems to be a J2b-L283 from R10620 Poland Weklice_WEK_299 https://www.yfull.com/tree/j-z2507/ I don't know about the certainty of his classification.

I don't really know about the lack of sampling further South. I found nonetheless interesting that there was a AD continuity for some Illyrians even though undergoing displacement processes initiated by the Roman empire and lastly Balkan migrations and of course the Slavic incursion that has completely replaced them.

As for the Southern regions: I would be thrilled to see Iron Age Illyrian samples from Montenegro, Northern Albania, South Dalmatia. Kosovo would also be interesting I am specifically thinking of tribes like the Autariatae etc. We have multiple Iron Age sites in Kosovo but archeaogenetics is not a inland pioneer discipline as I have said before and there are no funds; add to that the fact that international institutes do not really care about collaborating with local archeologists.

[Hawk]

Yes, that was my first thought too. Also keeping in mind that these are AD samples not BCE. Population dynamics can change. Compare them to Latins that are R1b-U152 in the Iron Age, in the AD times there would definitely be also absorbed or other lineages.

That's right, let's wait for more context and we can deduce patterns.

[mount123]

R3544 Gardun, Croatia J-Z1043+ https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z1043/

Nice to see this Z638>Z631>Z1043 in the heart of Dalmatia.

"Tilurium was an Illyrian fortified settlement of the Delmatae.

Tilurium was the location a Roman cohort in the territory of the Delmatae. The site is now located on the hill of Gardun near Trilj."

Some might be more knowledgable about Gardun's history, so would appreciate if you could provide more info on it.

[Hawk]

I have feeling that the E-V13 sample from Croatia was a native Liburni, his autosomal attestes to that, but let's wait for more samples in and around the area, if E-V13 shows more in numbers, especially during EIA, then the Liburni probably had E-V13 as well.

Distance to:	R3745_G25sim
0.02135231	HRV_EIA:I26742
0.02188054	HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ28
0.02188191	SVN_EIA:I5692
0.02341567	ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b
0.02404052	HRV_EIA:I23995
0.02590205	HRV_LIA_La_Tene:I26735
0.02637746	HUN_IA_La_Tene:I25510
0.02661861	HRV_EIA:I23911
0.02669018	ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR109
0.02683462	HRV_EIA:I24882
0.02693762	Iberia_Northeast_c.8-12CE:I10895
0.02710305	ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR33
0.02716342	HUN_BA:I7040
0.02771237	HUN_La_Tene:I18491
0.02780191	HRV_MBA:I4331
0.02835847	ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR105
0.02840800	SVK_IA_Vekerzug:I12099
0.02849406	HUN_BA:I7043
0.02899867	SVN_EIA:I5691
0.02918528	HUN_IA_La_Tene:I18529
0.02968548	DEU_Roman:FN_2
0.02972332	HRV_EIA:I24639
0.02973758	Iberia_Northeast_c.8-12CE:I10892
0.03011753	HRV_MBA:I4332
0.03024920	ITA_Collegno_MA:CL94
0.03030058	HUN_LBA:I25504
0.03044316	SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros:I23206
0.03048734	HUN_MA_Szolad:SZ43
0.03066944	ITA_Rome_MA:RMPR55
0.03077947	ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity:RMPR110
0.03084784	HRV_MBA:I26774
0.03088598	ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN013
0.03092146	HRV_MBA:I24342
0.03095832	HRV_EIA:I23904
0.03104102	SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros_oAegean:MOK17A
0.03104872	Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:E09538
0.03111460	HUN_LBA_EIA:I11683
0.03162944	HRV_EIA:I24638
0.03182008	SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros:I23205
0.03217586	ITA_Daunian:ORD009
0.03219537	Bell_Beaker_Bavaria:I5524
0.03225426	ITA_Etruscan_Casenovole:CSN009
0.03243744	HUN_IA_La_Tene:I18834
0.03276637	HUN_IA_Syrmian_SremGroup:I18259
0.03277571	HUN_IA_La_Tene:I18528
0.03291308	CZE_LBA_Knoviz_o3:I13794
0.03293640	HUN_EIA_Prescythian_Mezocsat:I18239
0.03308259	CHE_IA:SX18
0.03317762	CZE_LBA_Knoviz_o3:I15961
0.03340025	ITA_Collegno_MA:CL23

[Hawk]

The Iron Age La Tene E-V13, was from a site which Hungarian Archaeologists indentify as Pannonian-Illyrian site. So, we should expect a pattern where Pannonian-Illyrians had E-V13 indeed.

[Hawk]

Postedby rafc, R1b-L51:

R3542 (Beli_Manastir, Croatia, 1619.75bp): https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-FGC22516/

Eastern Croatia this time, wonder what was his ancestry. Celtic, Tumulus derived Pannonian-Illyrian?

[Riverman]

Postedby rafc, R1b-L51:

Eastern Croatia this time, wonder what was his ancestry. Celtic, Tumulus derived Pannonian-Illyrian?

I guess its a real Celt.

As for the E-V13 from Liburnian territory, this area had cremation and Channelled Ware influences, was an international hub, many Greek settlers too. He is autosomally Illyrian, but that could be achieved in a couple of generations of mixture too. Both the Veneti and Liburnians had closer ties to the Channelled Ware and Thraco-Cimmerian people, Urnfielders in general, than most regular Illyrians. You see it in their burial rites as well.

Actually the second sample from Croatia is even more interesting, because that's in deep Illyrian territory with �ćitarjevo. Not unaffected by UF, but that's imho the better case for an Illyrian E-V13, however he came up from earlier migrations.

[Hawk]

I see they are using these github repositories: https://github.com/genid/Clean_tree2

https://github.com/genid/Yleaf

They build this locally using a Linux distro and put the BAM files as arguments in order to deduce the Y-DNA and subclade.

Anyone knows how reliable are them?

They have few stars and to be honest the code and code organization is not ok-ish (but perhaps these guys are geneticists who occasionally write Python).

I can see they do have tests, but keep it locally. Interesting why they did it so.

[Riverman]

I see they are using these github repositories: https://github.com/genid/Clean_tree2

https://github.com/genid/Yleaf

They build this locally using a Linux distro and put the BAM files as arguments in order to deduce the Y-DNA and subclade.

Anyone knows how reliable are them?

They have few stars and to be honest the code and code organization is not ok-ish (but perhaps these guys are geneticists who occasionally write Python).

I can see they do have tests, but keep it locally. Interesting why they did it so.

Many of the Austrian and Viminacium samples seem to be confused or missing. What a pity. First no yDNA assignment, not even a basic one, then this. Obivously its complaining on a high niveau, considering this landslide of interesting samples, but kind of unnecessary and annoying troubles.

[Hawk]

I guess its a real Celt.

As for the E-V13 from Liburnian territory, this area had cremation and Channelled Ware influences, was an international hub, many Greek settlers too. He is autosomally Illyrian, but that could be achieved in a couple of generations of mixture too. Both the Veneti and Liburnians had closer ties to the Channelled Ware and Thraco-Cimmerian people, Urnfielders in general, than most regular Illyrians. You see it in their burial rites as well.

Actually the second sample from Croatia is even more interesting, because that's in deep Illyrian territory with �ćitarjevo. Not unaffected by UF, but that's imho the better case for an Illyrian E-V13, however he came up from earlier migrations.

Who knows, we already have R1b-L51 in Middle Bronze Age Croatia, depending on his terminal subclade i cannot deduce that he is Celtic derived, he seems to have a generic overlap.

[mount123]

Who knows, we already have R1b-L51 in Middle Bronze Age Croatia, depending on his terminal subclade i cannot deduce that he is Celtic derived, he seems to have a generic overlap.

Wasn't R1b-L51 from MBA Central Bosnia? Vucedol?

[Hawk]

Wasn't R1b-L51 from MBA Central Bosnia? Vucedol?

Not sure, i think it was Croatia somewhere. But need to verify. There was also weird enough one R1b-V88, very likely Mesolithic survivor, but we don't see it anymore in Iron Age and onwards.

edit, he is indeed from MBA Croatia, but R1b-L2, a R1b-L51 variant:

p.s Ignore the last result, everyone agreed it's just a wrongly timed sample.

I4331	I4331	VV1, Grave 2A	MathiesonNature2018	Direct: IntCal20	3519	29	1618-1517 calBCE (3305±20 BP, PSUAMS-2257)	Croatia_MBA	Veliki Vanik	Croatia	43.194	17.344	1240K	1	3.141	711092	M	n/a (no relatives detected)	J-Z38240	J2b2a1a1a1b~	I1a1	ds.half	S4331.E1.L2	PASS	..	1	1	1	1	1	Croatia.Serbia	Croatia	C.EBA	0	0.814	0.012	0.005261	0.052	0.556	0.392	0.013	0.018	0.022	17.8	0.005261	Use	Ignore_Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Ignore_Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Ignore_Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP_o	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	0.000522
I4332	I4332	VV3, Grave 2C	MathiesonNature2018	Direct: IntCal20	3508	32	1613-1508 calBCE (3290±20 BP, PSUAMS-2258)	Croatia_MBA	Veliki Vanik	Croatia	43.194	17.344	1240K	1	3.228	729628	F	n/a (no relatives detected)	n/a (female)	n/a (female)	W3a1	ds.half	S4332.E1.L2	PASS	..	1	1	1	1	1	Croatia.Serbia	Croatia	C.EBA	0	0.838	0.012	0.292624	0.039	0.584	0.377	0.013	0.018	0.021	18.0	0.292624	Use	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	0.465057
I26726	I26726	G1; P9176_Z-C	This study	Direct: IntCal20	3411	28	1507-1415 calBCE (3190±30 BP, Beta-423457)	Croatia_MBA	Gudnja cave	Croatia	42.833333	17.7	1240K	1	9.93	896713	M	n/a (no relatives detected)	..	..	J1c3	ds.half	S26726.Y1.E1.L1	PASS	..	1	1	1	1	1	Croatia.Serbia	Croatia	MBA	0	0.813	0.013	0.133441	0.021	0.554	0.425	0.014	0.017	0.022	19.3	0.133441	Use	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	0.623172
I24342	I24342	Tumulus 3, G1; P8545	This study	Direct: IntCal20	3410	23	1501-1421 calBCE (3185±20 BP, UCIAMS-233623)	Croatia_MBA	Velim-Kosa	Croatia	43.90391	15.702382	1240K	1	6.288	820306	M	n/a (no relatives detected)	R-L2	R1b1a1b1a1a2b1	T2b23	ds.half	S24342.Y1.E1.L1	PASS	..	1	1	1	1	1	Croatia.Serbia	Croatia	MBA	0	0.776	0.014	0.105953	0.109	0.517	0.374	0.014	0.019	0.022	17.0	0.105953	Use	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP_highWHG	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	NA
I26893	I26893	Tumulus MS 07; 111/2; P9223	This study	Context: Archaeological - Period	3325	101	1550-1200 BCE	Croatia_MBA	Mušego/Mon Sego	Croatia	45.068212	13.70839	1240K	1	7.25	861181	F	n/a (no relatives detected)	n/a (female)	n/a (female)	U8b1b1	ds.half	S26893.Y1.E1.L1	PASS	..	1	1	1	1	1	Croatia.Serbia	Croatia	C.EBA	0	0.779	0.012	0.254391	0.068	0.513	0.419	0.014	0.018	0.021	20.0	0.254391	Use	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	0.009832
I26774	I26774	Tumulus MS 07; lubanja 2, 11; P9211	This study	Context: Archaeological - Period	3325	101	1550-1200 BCE	Croatia_MBA	Mušego/Mon Sego	Croatia	45.068212	13.70839	1240K	1	3.469	827364	F	n/a (no relatives detected)	n/a (female)	n/a (female)	J1c2	ds.half	S26774.Y1.E1.L1	PASS	..	1	1	1	1	1	Croatia.Serbia	Croatia	C.EBA	0	0.78	0.013	0.676328	0.077	0.522	0.401	0.014	0.018	0.021	19.1	0.676328	Use	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	0.238978
I26773	I26773	Tumulus MS 07; Nebengrab 1, lubanja 1, 9; P9210	This study	Context: Archaeological - Period	3325	101	1550-1200 BCE	Croatia_MBA	Mušego/Mon Sego	Croatia	45.068212	13.70839	1240K	1	1.967	728296	F	n/a (no relatives detected)	n/a (female)	n/a (female)	J1c2	ds.half	S26773.Y1.E1.L1	PASS	..	1	1	1	1	1	Croatia.Serbia	Croatia	C.EBA	0	0.808	0.013	0.122906	0.053	0.536	0.41	0.014	0.019	0.022	18.6	0.122906	Use	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	0.886359
I18719	I18719	P3779; BzV 10a	This study	Context: Archaeological - Period	3200	144	1500-1000 BCE	Croatia_MBA_LBA	Bezdanjača Cave	Croatia	44.8520052	15.4199444	1240K	2	3.747999	825868	M	n/a (no relatives detected)	I-Y3120	I2a1a2b1a1	HV0a1a	ds.half,ds.half	S18719.Y1.E1.L1,S18719.Y1.E2.L1	PASS	..	1	1	1	1	1	Croatia.Serbia	Croatia	LBA	0	0.747	0.011	0.245044	0.117	0.496	0.386	0.012	0.016	0.019	20.3	0.245044	Use	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP_lowEEF	Croatia.Serbia_3900.to.2700BP	7E-06

[mount123]

Not sure, i think it was Croatia somewhere. But need to verify. There was also weird enough one R1b-V88, very likely Mesolithic survivor, but we don't see it anymore in Iron Age and onwards.

edit, he is indeed from MBA Croatia, but R1b-L2, a R1b-L51 variant:

p.s Ignore the last result, everyone agreed it's just a wrongly timed sample.

Interesting in Patterson/ Reich et. al. there is a J2b-L283 sample from Velim Kosa I24345, ~950 BCE, Croatia_MBA_LBA_EIA, Velim-Kosa, J-L283

Unfortunately he is low coverage.

[kingjohn]

Rafc anlaysis anthrogenica:
Last one I managed to get:
R3742 (Zadar_Relja, Croatia, 1772.75bp):
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-Y16161/
It would seem likely this is one of those Near Eastern profiles.

P.s
Nice e-m123> z-841> e-L791
Would be interesting were this individual
Fall autosomally speaking
Zadar was a roman colony from 48bc
He could be :
A)Roman auxilary soldier of near eastern background
B)or he could be antolian trader or administrator
Who fall on the near eastern cluster
The same cluster of the 2 e-m123 individuals
From viminicium serbia
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...08.30.458211v1

[Hawk]

The problem with Liburnian sample is that it was a site with people from all over Roman republic.

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

But the E-V13 autosomal point to a local origin instead. There was no Dacian or Thracian soldiers positioned here. I am outside so i cannot check this paper fully. Someone can go through it in detail, i saw a graph with people with foreign origin.

[torzio]

The problem with Liburnian sample is that it was a site with people from all over Roman republic.

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

But the E-V13 autosomal point to a local origin instead. There was no Dacian or Thracian soldiers positioned here. I am outside so i cannot check this paper fully. Someone can go through it in detail, i saw a graph with people with foreign origin.

Liburnians controlled much of Dalmatia in late bronze-age to early iron-age ...............we only see Dalmatia come up very strong, basically after the decline of the Liburnians ( around 733BC when they lost Corfu to the Corinthians ) .................Liburnians where left with only their homeland and the colony in Picene italy until circa 400BC

[Riverman]

The problem with Liburnian sample is that it was a site with people from all over Roman republic.

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

But the E-V13 autosomal point to a local origin instead. There was no Dacian or Thracian soldiers positioned here. I am outside so i cannot check this paper fully. Someone can go through it in detail, i saw a graph with people with foreign origin.

I went through the paper and they mention explicitly one soldier which might have been from the Balkans, people from Italy, many from Greece (majority of foreigners) and the Levante. There are so many options and any foreign admixture would be lost, largely, latest after 4-5 generations for most tools to detect, unless it was Subsaharan or East Asian etc. involved.
Wouldn't wonder whether its a local from earlier times, but its impossible to tell unless we get more lineages of E-V13 from Liburnians.

[Excine]

The problem with Liburnian sample is that it was a site with people from all over Roman republic.

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

But the E-V13 autosomal point to a local origin instead. There was no Dacian or Thracian soldiers positioned here. I am outside so i cannot check this paper fully. Someone can go through it in detail, i saw a graph with people with foreign origin.

Iader wasn't Liburnian though and the Iadasenoi are called Illyrians not Liburnians in ancient sources. The E-V13 is most likely from the 1st century CE (22-121 CE)

‘Illyrians’ in ancient ethnographic discourse
Danijel Dzino

Diodorus provides very valuable details of the Greek colonisation of the central Adriatic islands Vis (Issa) and Hvar (Pharos) in the early fourth century BC, corresponding with the expansion of Syracusan ambitions in the Adriatic under Dionysius I. He recorded the Greek conflict at Pharos with the indigenous population from the mainland in 385/4 BC, whom he calls ‘Illyrians’ . These Illyrians might well be the Iadasinoi from the Liburnian city of Iader (modern Zadar), mentioned on the inscription found on the island of Hvar, which celebrates the triumph of the Pharians over the ‘Iadasinoi and their allies’. There is also an inscription from the central Adriatic island of Vis dated to the fourth century BC, showing that the indigenous population from the mainland were seen as ‘Illyrians’ by the Greek colonists. The inscription celebrates one Kalias, who died fighting the indigenous population. The term ‘Illyrians’ is used twice, once as ‘Illyrian ship’ (or land) and the second time as ‘Illyrian land’ (Ἰλλυριον γῆς)

In Müller’s edition of Pseudo-Scylax from GGM, the inhabitants of the coast between the Liburni and Chaonia are called ‘Illyrians’: the Hierastamnoi (Iadasinoi), Boullinoi, Hyllaei, Nestoi, Manioi, Autariatas Enkheleis, Taulantioi.

[enter_tain]

Actually, kudos to Riverman for initiating a very concise clarification on archaeological situation of Bronze to Iron Age Balkans, we didn't progress our understandings before that. You are simply 100 levels below him on understandings and you should admit it and progress your understandings. What you do is, you just throw one-liners and out of context ramblings.

Also despite having so much of trolling tendencies and narcissistic nature Huban/Oroku-Saki is quite knowledgeable as well.

I'm 100 levels below you too, and who got proven right? Go back to collecting pots and pans.

You guys are completely delusional thinking you're going to find some "urheimat" of EV-13 dominance. There is nothing scientifically saying that there should be an EV-13 dominant population anymore. Only the original E population tens of thousands of years back.

[enter_tain]

Imagine being such an emotional child that you're hoping to glorify your Y-DNA haplogroup with random stories and fake populations/migrations.

[torzio]

Iader wasn't Liburnian though and the Iadasenoi are called Illyrians not Liburnians in ancient sources. The E-V13 is most likely from the 1st century CE (22-121 CE)

‘Illyrians’ in ancient ethnographic discourse
Danijel Dzino

Diodorus provides very valuable details of the Greek colonisation of the central Adriatic islands Vis (Issa) and Hvar (Pharos) in the early fourth century BC, corresponding with the expansion of Syracusan ambitions in the Adriatic under Dionysius I. He recorded the Greek conflict at Pharos with the indigenous population from the mainland in 385/4 BC, whom he calls ‘Illyrians’ . These Illyrians might well be the Iadasinoi from the Liburnian city of Iader (modern Zadar), mentioned on the inscription found on the island of Hvar, which celebrates the triumph of the Pharians over the ‘Iadasinoi and their allies’. There is also an inscription from the central Adriatic island of Vis dated to the fourth century BC, showing that the indigenous population from the mainland were seen as ‘Illyrians’ by the Greek colonists. The inscription celebrates one Kalias, who died fighting the indigenous population. The term ‘Illyrians’ is used twice, once as ‘Illyrian ship’ (or land) and the second time as ‘Illyrian land’ (Ἰλλυριον γῆς)

In Müller’s edition of Pseudo-Scylax from GGM, the inhabitants of the coast between the Liburni and Chaonia are called ‘Illyrians’: the Hierastamnoi (Iadasinoi), Boullinoi, Hyllaei, Nestoi, Manioi, Autariatas Enkheleis, Taulantioi.

Are you saying Liburnians are not Illyrians ?

[torzio]

Liburni, an Illyrian people on the NE coast of the Adriatic, once dominated a large part of the coast of *Illyricum (Strabo 6. 2. 4) but by the Roman period they were confined to the sector between the river Arsia (mod. Raša) on the west side of Istria (2) and the Titius (Krka), where the Delmatae began. The Liburni were famous as seafarers

[Oroku Saki]

Iader wasn't Liburnian though and the Iadasenoi are called Illyrians not Liburnians in ancient sources. The E-V13 is most likely from the 1st century CE (22-121 CE)

‘Illyrians’ in ancient ethnographic discourse
Danijel Dzino

Diodorus provides very valuable details of the Greek colonisation of the central Adriatic islands Vis (Issa) and Hvar (Pharos) in the early fourth century BC, corresponding with the expansion of Syracusan ambitions in the Adriatic under Dionysius I. He recorded the Greek conflict at Pharos with the indigenous population from the mainland in 385/4 BC, whom he calls ‘Illyrians’ . These Illyrians might well be the Iadasinoi from the Liburnian city of Iader (modern Zadar), mentioned on the inscription found on the island of Hvar, which celebrates the triumph of the Pharians over the ‘Iadasinoi and their allies’. There is also an inscription from the central Adriatic island of Vis dated to the fourth century BC, showing that the indigenous population from the mainland were seen as ‘Illyrians’ by the Greek colonists. The inscription celebrates one Kalias, who died fighting the indigenous population. The term ‘Illyrians’ is used twice, once as ‘Illyrian ship’ (or land) and the second time as ‘Illyrian land’ (Ἰλλυριον γῆς)

In Müller’s edition of Pseudo-Scylax from GGM, the inhabitants of the coast between the Liburni and Chaonia are called ‘Illyrians’: the Hierastamnoi (Iadasinoi), Boullinoi, Hyllaei, Nestoi, Manioi, Autariatas Enkheleis, Taulantioi.

You copied that text from your cousin Bruzmi. He has a brain, I'll grant him that.

There doesn't seem to be archeological evidence that the population of Iader was anything other than Liburnian. Iader was a major Liburnian archeological site. It wasn't Delmatae or something else.

The V13 find in question is Roman, nothing Liburnian/Illyrian about it. Iader was settled by Romans already in the time of Octavian (40-30 BC), so there were real Roman settlers there in significant numbers.

[Hawk]

I'm 100 levels below you too, and who got proven right? Go back to collecting pots and pans.

You guys are completely delusional thinking you're going to find some "urheimat" of EV-13 dominance. There is nothing scientifically saying that there should be an EV-13 dominant population anymore. Only the original E population tens of thousands of years back.

Lol, it's just you being pissed off the things not turning as you expected.