Illyrian-Albanian Continuity

[Garrick]

Wait a minute, this isn't true because the first theory the illyrian theory was worked and proposed in the 18 century by the swedish Johann Erich Thunmann, so this theory couldn't be the only one even back there.

You didn't understand it, or maybe I wasn't clear enough. Originally theory from XIX century considered that Albanians were exclusively Caucasus people.

We know today that Albanians have more E-V13 and J2 carriers (originate probably from Middle East/Egypt) than R1b ht35 carriers (originate probably from Caucasus).

I agree with you that haplogroups and languages can be two different things but haplogroups help a lot us to keep track a movement of population.

Today Romanians don't think that Albanians are Dacian people but it is possible that Albanian population originate somewhere in today's Romania/Moldavia.

Yes, there are more scientists and assumptions and theories, but some new discoveries encountered.

One example, Pella tablet shows that Greek dialect was spoken in Macedonia, and it is strong argument that Ancient Macedonian language was a dialect of North Western Greek.

I don't see no one proof (number: 0) that Albanian has link with Illyrian, and we can talk here for years, but without evidence, there's no point.

 

[Garrick]

As an alternative to the Illyrian hypothesis; I'll agree somewhat and stand by my theory that the Albanian culture, may have originated around the Black Sea. Maybe the area around Ukraine, Moldova, or Anatolia. (Now Turkey). And these people migrated Westward into the Balkans, at some point.



Also, there is a problem to the Illyrian hypothesis. If the Albanians are Illyrians, and so are the Bosnians, Croats, and Slovenians. Then how does this explain some Bosnians, Croats and Slovenians having totally different Y-DNA and mtDna distinct markers, such as I2a2? And a lack of mtDna T. Haplogroup I2 is more rarer in Albanian peoples and mtDna haplogroup T is actually a lot more abundant. The Illyrian theory would seem very logical; but there are very distinct contradictions that require more research and analysis. It suggests that either Y-DNA I2 isn't Illyrian, and neither are Slovenes, Croats or Bosnians. Or either the Albanians are not Illyrians. Because the genetic relation between these people are actually seem to be very minimal; despite them both inhabiting the Illyrian Urheimat. It seems very unlikely and contradictory that they would have a similarity in Illyrian origins; unless Albanians once shared the DNA of Slovenes, Bosnians, and Croats and then were later taken over by a different people. (Making Albanians no more Illyrian) It is more rational to assume that Slovenes, Bosnians and Croats were the original Illyrians who were conquered by invading Slavic cultures.


My theory of Albanians with a Black Sea or Anatolian origin, seems more likely genetically, than the traditional Illyrian theory.


I believe Albanians may actually be a people originating from near the Black Sea (which is now either Ukraine or Turkey) or the Caucuses. I'm not sure if they are an Illyrian people, and this theory (my hypothesis) seems to be the only alternative. I was having a debate on that earlier.


I disagree with you, though, that the E-V13 haplogroup may have an original Afro-Asiatic origin. I believe it may be Caucasian. If it did originate from Afro-Asiatic speakers, this would mean that E-V13 probably originated from a place like Crete or Cyprus, where Afro-Asiatic speakers have passed through; during several conquests and migrations.



As far as I know, there are no records of any Afro-Asiatic culture actually settling into Europe; besides only the Phoenician colonists; and also, the Moorish conquest of the Iberian peninsula, as well as Sardinia, Sicily and Maltese. etc.


If Albanians are indeed Illyrians, how did J2b and E-V13 become their two most distinctive haplogroups? Were they actually spread there by the invading Ottoman Turks and their Empire? This means the original Albanian "Illyrians", have become admixed by a foreign culture.

There is problem that Bosniacs, (Western) Serbs, Croats, Slovenians were originally Illyrians because I2a haplogropup. It is surely a lot of Slavic people were I2a carriers and maybe they who came to Balkan had much more I2a than R1a.

There are scientists who claim that R1a came to the Balkan in three waves, and that first wave was 9.000 years ago, and last wave was with Slavs. Probably Thracians had R1a and I2a too. There are scientists who claim that Thracian is Balto-Slavic or archaic Slavic.

But it is possible that Illyrians had R1a and I2a too. It is much bigger probability than separation R1a and I2a. I2a are always with R1a and for it exists explanation, but it is not for this topic.

I can suppose that Illyrians were mix a lot of different tribes, who members were R1b carriers (Italo-Celtic), R1a/I2a carriers (and Bosniac academics can have somewhat right but surely not in the sense that I2a is originally Bosnian because this is nonsense), E1b1b carriers etc.

Maybe you're right for movement of E1b1b carriers. Maybe they moved across Caucasus. In that way Albanians mostly originate from Caucasus. But today there is a belief that Albanians are from Romania/Moldavia and it is very close Black Sea. Yes it is that area, it can covers Ukraine too. Unlike Illyrian theory which has not be proven, this theory gives possible explanation. Yes, haplogroups help us to come to this theory. But event this theory is not easy to prove.

 

[Melancon]

Albanian is a language of the extensive Indo-European family and is thus related to a certain degree to almost all other languages of Europe. The Indo-European character of the language was first recognized in 1854 by the German linguist Franz Bopp (1791-1867). At the same time, Albanian shows no particularly close historical affinity to any other language or language group within the Indo-European family, i.e. it forms a language group of its own.Despite Albania’s geographical proximity to Greece, linguistic contacts with ancient Greek seem to have been sporadic. Roman trading settlements on the Illyrian coast and Albania’s absorption into the Roman Empire, however, left noticeable traces in the language. Borrowings from Latin, which took place over a period of several centuries, were so massive as to threaten the very structure of the language. Cultural contacts with the Slavs (Bulgarians and Serbs), Turks and Italians have also left substantial strata of vocabulary in Albanian.Not only in its vocabulary, but also in its morphology and syntax, Albanian shows many traits in common with other Balkan languages, due both to extinct substrata languages (Illyrian, Thracian, Dacian) and to centuries of parallel development. Among these traits are: a postpositive definite article; the fusion of the genitive and dative case endings; the formation of the numbers 11-19 by “one on ten”; the absence of a grammatical infinitive; and the formation of the future tense with the verb “to want.”

We must remember, as I stated earlier; that Albanian is an agglutinative language. Making it's grammatical syntax different from many Indo-European languages such as Greek and Slavic, that surround the Albanians; neighboring them in the Balkans. Greek and Slavic are fusional languages. The only other Indo-European languages that are non-extinct and still vibrant; that show agglutination in their grammar, are Armenian and Persian. This suggests that, as I claimed earlier, the Albanian language and culture may be an extremely old form of Indo-European.

Give me proof that Thracian, Dacian and Illyrian are agglutinative languages. From what I know personally, Thracian seems to be more of a fusional language like Greek, and seems to be more relative to Greek; or tends to show a very Greek-like influence. It is unconfirmed, but Thracian to me seems very similar to Greek and Slavic, in terms of sound and grammar, and may be relative to both of these language groups. Both Greek and Slavic are fusional languages; not agglutinative. Which suggests that they may be more recent forms of Indo-European and are more relative.

Agglutinative forms of Indo-European languages are very old and ancient in origin; and most of them of this IE specimen are extinct now. The only thriving agglutinative languages today besides Albanian, are the Armenian and Persian languages, which seem to originate from the Caucuses.

Agglutinative languages are extremely old forms of Indo-European languages, and usually make evolutions into fusional languages. This may suggest Albanian is the oldest language group of the Balkans, and even far older than Greek.

 

[Gorgonzola]

My theory of Albanians with a Black Sea or Anatolian origin, seems more likely genetically, than the traditional Illyrian theory.

I believe Albanians may actually be a people originating from near the Black Sea (which is now either Ukraine or Turkey) or the Caucuses. I'm not sure if they are an Illyrian people, and this theory (my hypothesis) seems to be the only alternative. I was having a debate on that earlier.

You are making a big mistake here.We don't know who was exactly the haplogroups of the illyrians or any other people of the balkans, we can only presume.
So in fact illyrians could've had only one or maybe even 2 or 3 haplogroups, which can't be a surprise because they lived in a very large geographycal territory.
ev-13, i2a, j2b you name it. If this is true then maybe they were genetically more like todays albanians who have 2 typical haplogroups. So when you say geneticaly, its really hard to relate how the genetical component of ancient people was.

If Albanians are indeed Illyrians, how did J2b and E-V13 become their two most distinctive haplogroups? Were they actually spread there by the invading Ottoman Turks and their Empire? This means the original Albanian "Illyrians", have become admixed by a foreign culture.

How do you know that illyrian did not have EV-13 and J2b haplogroups?There have been people who maintain that actually these 2 were the original illyrian haplogroups and people who maintain a different thing.
The albanians did not become admixed because the EV-13 and J2b have actually been in the balkans for 8500 years, so they couldnt get this genes from the outsiders.I'm tired of repeating this thing, its the third time now,only to you. Read better the time and expansion of ev-13 and the other haplogropus.

 

[Gorgonzola]

You didn't understand it, or maybe I wasn't clear enough. Originally theory from XIX century considered that Albanians were exclusively Caucasus people.

No you didnt understand me, i said that its impossible because there was not only this specifik theory at the time.There were also different theories including the illyrian one, which was the first one, as i stated in the 18 century.

We know today that Albanians have more E-V13 and J2 carriers (originate probably from Middle East/Egypt) than R1b ht35 carriers (originate probably from Caucasus).

This is exactly why i didnt believe in your earlier theory, you cant say that they were originaly r1b when the most haplogroup that albanians have today is EV-13.You actually have to relate a group of people with the genes they have the most and not with the ones they have the least.
And the albanians have got the same % of R1b that the greeks have, so i believe this haplogroups is irrelevant in both this ethnicities, because if even greeks have it we should mention them.
And reading at wikipedia they say EV-13 originated in the balkans, so i wouldn't put the exact location of this haplogroup that easy, there are different opinions.

 

[Gorgonzola]

Maybe you're right for movement of E1b1b carriers. Maybe they moved across Caucasus. In that way Albanians mostly originate from Caucasus. But today there is a belief that Albanians are from Romania/Moldavia and it is very close Black Sea. Yes it is that area, it can covers Ukraine too. Unlike Illyrian theory which has not be proven, this theory gives possible explanation. Yes, haplogroups help us to come to this theory. But event this theory is not easy to prove.

The theory which has not been proven and is unlikely to be proven is the one you are stating romanian/moldavian/caucasus/ukraine.The illyrian theory is the one who gives the possible explanation of the origins of albanians, (im just saying what the majority of the studies say) you just need to read the arguments and counter arguments by the poster of this thread.
There are not any records of migrations of the albanian population by Roman and Byzantine writers.If this theory you are saying is the most probable then it would have been mentioned as the most probable.But today as far as i've read from various reliable sources albanian is considered one of the three main pretenders: Illyrian, Thracian, Dacian.
Let me make another example here. Norbert Jokl (one of the most famous Albanologists) came into the conclusion that albanian language is half illyrian and half thracian.

 

[albanopolis]

Continue with sources not empty talk (spam). Accept and continue.
Doubt that you know what source means or what is relevant information.

To me source means anything written by smart people.
Doubt if Serbs make that category!
Your postings remind me dogs barking!
Bark as loud as you can but nobody listens

 

[Ike]

We already know how they called themselfs in the middle ages : Arbër , Arbëreshë and in Gheg dialect Arban, Arbëneshë. The root is the same as the foreign ethnonym for albanians. Its just the albanian version of "albani".We are talking about the period before the 16-17 century, when they started using the name "shqiptar".
Here are some examples of those people who use these words to self identify today:

Arbëreshë http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbëreshë_people
Arbëneshë http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbanasi_people

In latin maybe they don't mispell the name, but they might pronounce it different in a brief period of time.For example they used the word arbanensis in the beggining: "In 1166, prior Arbanensis Andrea and episcopis Arbanensis Lazarus participated in a ceremony held in Kotor".

But we have it also in a different form later: "albanenses" So yes arb- can also replace alb-.

Why would it replace? It's very familiar syllable in Latin, and there should be no replacement, yet there almost always was. It's not like they had to adapt their pronunciation for something non existent in their language.

 

[albanopolis]

You are making a big mistake here.We don't know who was exactly the haplogroups of the illyrians or any other people of the balkans, we can only presume.
So in fact illyrians could've had only one or maybe even 2 or 3 haplogroups, which can't be a surprise because they lived in a very large geographycal territory.
ev-13, i2a, j2b you name it. If this is true then maybe they were genetically more like todays albanians who have 2 typical haplogroups. So when you say geneticaly, its really hard to relate how the genetical component of ancient people was.



How do you know that illyrian did not have EV-13 and J2b haplogroups?There have been people who maintain that actually these 2 were the original illyrian haplogroups and people who maintain a different thing.
The albanians did not become admixed because the EV-13 and J2b have actually been in the balkans for 8500 years, so they couldnt get this genes from the outsiders.I'm tired of repeating this thing, its the third time now,only to you. Read better the time and expansion of ev-13 and the other haplogropus.

My admiration for your patience.

 

[Ike]

This forum was civilized until you got in.
Most of non Albanians were opposing the Illyrian argument of Albanians, and that was fine with me, but they showed they were aware of the work of scholars in this topic. I am not a scholar and no need to mention you, so our discussion is conducted on the basis of what scholars have said about it. You choose your scholars but you can't enter the argument with total lack of understanding. And you think I am jealous of your arguments.
I am annoyed by your total nonsense!
So, take a break, go to other forums and start spamming!

It's funny how you make it look like Problem is that there was no arguments, and that is what people object here the most.

 

[Ike]

Actually that theory is mostly rejected by the scholars and historians, and it doesn't have any great support today, exept from some neighbours of the albanians with irredentist claims. Maybe in the 19 century, it had support.

"The Caucasian theory was first proposed by Renaissance humanists who were familiar with the works of classical geographers, and later developed by early 19th-century French consul and writer François Pouqueville. It was rendered obsolete in the 19th century when linguists proved that Albanian is an Indo-European, rather than Caucasian language."

Exactly. But the fact that Albanian language is IE, doesn't mean that they didn't come from Caucasus. That's the problem. It's not a black and white thing so that belonging to one must exclude the other.

 

[Melancon]

To me source means anything written by smart people.
Doubt if Serbs make that category!
Your postings remind me dogs barking!
Bark as loud as you can but nobody listens

What are you talking about, as an Albanian you have been the only person here bashing everyone else who has given reasonable, credible and legitimate perspectives. You have a bias about the cultural origins of Albanians quite clearly; and a fantasy. The sad thing is, you're not willing to accept you are wrong.

You are envious and jealous of all other people who contradict your fantasies; or hold contrary perspectives. I am neither Serbian or Albanian; or even Balkanic or European, and I have always taken in everyone's perspectives. I find the most logical to be the theories that I have written out, almost as an essay. But still you continue to ignore everyone else's differing perspectives and call them out; clearly you are biased and have an agenda. You're trying to shut me up and call me ignorant because you are someone fixated on fantasies of your origins and who does not want to be proven that they are wrong; or learn the truth. From what you have shown me here, you prefer fantasy over truth.

 

[Gorgonzola]

Why would it replace? It's very familiar syllable in Latin, and there should be no replacement, yet there almost always was. It's not like they had to adapt their pronunciation for something non existent in their language.

Look i gave you the links how the albanians, were called by the latins, both with the roots Alb- and Arb-. Thats how it is and thats how they wrote their in the books. Its a fact both this names were used in medieval for albanians. (Albanenses; Arbanensis)
Here's another book just for you : Illyricum sacrum

 

[Gorgonzola]

Exactly. But the fact that Albanian language is IE, doesn't mean that they didn't come from Caucasus. That's the problem. It's not a black and white thing so that belonging to one must exclude the other.

If you are a indo-european speaker most probably you are not from there, this has been said countles of times even in this forum.The languages spoken there were in the North-Caucasian family group.
You can believe what you want, i just gave my own opinion which is the same as the other reliable scholars, who reject this theory.

 

[Melancon]

You are making a big mistake here.We don't know who was exactly the haplogroups of the illyrians or any other people of the balkans, we can only presume.

Uh, yeah. PRESUME. It's called "theory".

You have yet to explain why Albanians and certain Yugoslavs like Bosnians, Croats and Slovenians share a very different genetic composition; even though both are speculated to have an original Illyrian background. Either the populations have been mixed, or there is absolutely no relation between both groups. I believe that I2 is Illyrian and Thracian in origin and it is more abundant in Yugoslavs than it is in actual Albanian people; who are claiming Illyrian origin. So in reality, if Albanians truly are Illyro-Thracians, and I2 is an Illyro-Thracian Y-DNA haplogroup; then why are J2b and E-V13 the two most dominant haplogroups in their culture? I2 is actually a lot more rare. The only explanations for this is:

1. that the Bosnian/Croat/Slovenian Yugoslavs may have never been Illyrians in the first place

2. the Albanians are an Illyrian tribe, but their men are foreign in origin and have been taken over by foreign non-Albanian people. (most likely Ottoman Turks)

3. the Albanians are not an Illyrian tribe whatsoever; but an ancient Balkanic tribe; that possibly migrated into the Balkans, from an area near the Black Sea (maybe Anatolia/Turkey, or Ukraine) or the Caucasus. Where the founder effects of J2b and E-V13 seem to be the most abundant; and may have originated in this area.

 

[Garrick]

No you didnt understand me, i said that its impossible because there was not only this specifik theory at the time.There were also different theories including the illyrian one, which was the first one, as i stated in the 18 century.

I know for earlier theories, but it was not relevant for what specifically I wrote.

All is right, we did not understand each other, but it doesn't matter.

This is exactly why i didnt believe in your earlier theory, you cant say that they were originaly r1b when the most haplogroup that albanians have today is EV-13.You actually have to relate a group of people with the genes they have the most and not with the ones they have the least.
And the albanians have got the same % of R1b that the greeks have, so i believe this haplogroups is irrelevant in both this ethnicities, because if even greeks have it we should mention them.
And reading at wikipedia they say EV-13 originated in the balkans, so i wouldn't put the exact location of this haplogroup that easy, there are different opinions.

You say that R1b ht35 haplotype (so-called Armenian haplotype) came in Albanian population from Greeks.

Some another Albanians think opposite, but all right, that we focus of what you say.

What arguments you give to us that we think about that.

The theory which has not been proven and is unlikely to be proven is the one you are stating romanian/moldavian/caucasus/ukraine.The illyrian theory is the one who gives the possible explanation of the origins of albanians, (im just saying what the majority of the studies say) you just need to read the arguments and counter arguments by the poster of this thread.
There are not any records of migrations of the albanian population by Roman and Byzantine writers.If this theory you are saying is the most probable then it would have been mentioned as the most probable.But today as far as i've read from various reliable sources albanian is considered one of the three main pretenders: Illyrian, Thracian, Dacian.

If you carefully read what I wrote, theory is not easy to prove. It is possible (you can see different members of forum write about it). Yes, I have in mind that not any records of migration Albanian population, and therefore (inter alia) it is difficult to prove.

Let me make another example here. Norbbert Jokl came into the conclusion that albanian language is half illyrian and half thracian.

But if first theory is difficult, this theory is unproved. Illyrian is Centum, Albanian is Satem. Jokl is one luinguist. There are a lot of luingists who think contrary.

Problem of Illyrian theory is what no records, no facts, no evidence. If you show something like Pella tablet, it will be another situation.

For now, Bosnian academics have more aces in his sleeve. Bosniacs can be (partly) one of descendants of Illyrians, but not some Bosniacs think. Some of them write fantasy that I2a is exclusively Illyrian-Bosniac haplogroup, and thus only spoiled possible theory that Bosniacs related to Illyrians.

Sorry, but Bosniacs have more arguments, if they at least in right, theory about Albanian connection with Illyrian must be rejected.

Because Bosniacs have 56% I2a, and Albanians only 12%, and this percent due to Tosk Albanians (30%), Kosovo Albanians (they are Gegs) have less 3%!

 

[Melancon]

If you are a indo-european speaker most probably you are not from there, this has been said countles of times even in this forum.The languages spoken there were in the North-Caucasian family group.
You can believe what you want, i just gave my own opinion which is the same as the other reliable scholars, who reject this theory.

You are wrong again on this matter. By the way, the Urheimat for the original pre-Indo-European language is speculated to have been born near the Black Sea. Once again you show your ignorance on this matter. Many top anthropologists and linguistics theorize that the first Indo-European language may have come from the Anatolia, Southern Russia and Caucasus area.

Which explains why Armenia in the Caucasus is IE. And Iran, Pakistan and India have an abundance of Indo-European languages.

Armenians and Persians are believed to be far older than Greek civilization, too. And they share IE languages. Ironically, both of these Indo-European languages are extremely old, and are agglutinative in grammatical syntax, just like Albanian.

 

[Garrick]

Uh, yeah. PRESUME. It's called "theory".

You have yet to explain why Albanians and certain Yugoslavs like Bosnians, Croats and Slovenians share a very different genetic composition; even though both are speculated to have an original Illyrian background. Either the populations have been mixed, or there is absolutely no relation between both groups. I believe that I2 is Illyrian and Thracian in origin and it is more abundant in Yugoslavs than it is in actual Albanian people; who are claiming Illyrian origin. So in reality, if Albanians truly are Illyro-Thracians, and I2 is an Illyro-Thracian Y-DNA haplogroup; then why are J2b and E-V13 the two most dominant haplogroups in their culture? I2 is actually a lot more rare. The only explanations for this is:

1. that the Albanians may have never been Illyrians in the first place

2. the Albanians are an Illyrian tribe, but their men are foreign in origin and have been taken over by foreign non-Albanian people. (most likely Ottoman Turks)

3. the Albanians are not an Illyrian tribe whatsoever; but an ancient Balkanic tribe; that possibly migrated into the Balkans, from an area near the Black Sea (maybe Anatolia/Turkey, or Ukraine) or the Caucasus. Where the founder effects of J2b and E-V13 seem to be the most abundant; and may have originated in this area.

I think that 3. is logical possible explanation. First (several years ago) I thought about movement across Marmara sea. But some Greeks and Romanians pointed to me Ukraine/Bessarabia/Romania path. They explained to me that Albanians originate from Romania/Bessarabia. And it is logical.

I thought carriers of R1b ht35 could come with Caucasus but E-V13 (and possible J2) came across Marmara sea. It is possible connection of these two population in Romania/Bessarabia.

But I see that E-V13 (and possible J2) could go to Caucasus and across Caucasus come to Black sea, Bessarabia and Romania. Thank you very much for this opportunity, it seems logical.

The harder part of this theory if why there are no written sources about moving Albanians from Romania/Bessarabia/Ukraine across Bulgaria to Adriatic and hinterland. But theory is possible and logical, maybe some sources will be find in future.

 

[Melancon]

I think that 3. is logical possible explanation. First (several years ago) I thought about movement across Marmara sea. But some Greeks and Romanians pointed to me Ukraine/Bessarabia/Romania path. They explained to me that Albanians originate from Romania/Bessarabia. And it is logical.

I thought carriers of R1b ht35 could come with Caucasus but E-V13 (and possible J2) came across Marmara sea. It is possible connection of these two population in Romania/Bessarabia.

But I see that E-V13 (and possible J2) could go to Caucasus and across Caucasus come to Black sea, Bessarabia and Romania. Thank you very much for this opportunity, it seems logical.

The harder part of this theory if why there are no written sources about moving Albanians from Romania/Bessarabia/Ukraine across Bulgaria to Adriatic and hinterland. But theory is possible and logical, maybe some sources will be find in future.

I'm sorry, I screwed up theory number 1. What I meant to say is that the Bosnians/Croats/Slovenes may have never had an Illyrian origin. (Which I believe is the least likely)

I went back and re-edited. If you notice on both theories, I claimed that Albanians weren't Illyrian at all. Which is only exclusive to my third theory. But you stated that you believe theory number 3 is the most likely of all 3; as do I.

 

[Ike]

Look i gave you the links how the albanians, were called by the latins, both with the roots Alb- and Arb-. Thats how it is and thats how they wrote their in the books. Its a fact both this names were used in medieval for albanians. (Albanenses; Arbanensis)
Here's another book just for you : Illyricum sacrum

I'm not talking about renaissance Arbanians, which Latins have heard from Arbanians themselves. I'm talking about ancient Albanians. If they were Arbanians for real, ancient Latins would spell it like that.

If you are a indo-european speaker most probably you are not from there, this has been said countles of times even in this forum.The languages spoken there were in the North-Caucasian family group.
You can believe what you want, i just gave my own opinion which is the same as the other reliable scholars, who reject this theory.

Yes they did, but the rejection was premature. The fact that the language Albanians speak today is IE, doesn't mean that they were not speaking a different language 1000 years ago. To be frank, if Albanians are autochthonous people of Balkans, that would mean they were here before Illyrians and Dorians came, and they probably spoke indigenous European non-IE language. So, how would you explain that Albanian language today is IE? You have to choose now:

1. Either you accept that Albanian was always IE and that they came to Balkans just like Dorians, Slavs or Bulgarians did.
2. You accept the possibility of Albanians being autochthonous Balkan population, which would mean that they transcended from non-IE to an IE language, but which also dismisses all the argument of Albanians not being any other non-IE speaking group, which may as well be from Caucasus...