J2b2-L283 (proto-illyrian)

Fustan

Banned
Messages
297
Reaction score
111
Points
43
Ethnic group
Albanian
Y-DNA haplogroup
J-L283
mtDNA haplogroup
H12
This haplogroup is mostly found among Albanians, and seems to be most diverse there.
J2b2-L283 was also found in Bronze Age croatia (and it's funny Macaiamo doesn't mention Albanians on the J2b2 page on Eupedia, there seems to be a strong bias on his part for some strange reason).

Wondering if any non-albanians have this haplogroup and if so, where you're from.
 
(and it's funny Macaiamo doesn't mention Albanians on the J2b2 page on Eupedia, there seems to be a strong bias on his part for some strange reason).

Or perhaps you can't read. This is what I wrote on the J2 page:

As a result, both the Illyrians and the Mycenaeans (and possibly the Albanians) would be descended from Middle to Late Bronze Age Steppe migrants to the Southeast Europe, in a migration that was particularly rich in J2b lineages from the Middle Volga region.

The Albanian (and Kosovar) population is one of the most homogeneous in Europe in term of shared recent ancestry according to Ralph & Coop 2013. This means that the Albanians expanded from a very small population relatively recently, which explains why strong founder effects completely reshaped the Y-DNA frequencies. That is how E-V13 and J2b became to dominant among Albanians and Kosovars. That expansion probably took place during the Middle Ages, so based on the current data it is impossible to know whether E-V13 and J2b entered the Albanian gene pool during the Bronze Age, the Iron Age, the Classical Antiquity, or even the Middle Ages. Hence my reserve on the subject.
 
I heard an Albanian Archaeologist saying that Mycenaean pottery constantly pops up in Albanian Sites. this shows that they traded with people who lived in Albania at that time
 
This haplogroup is mostly found among Albanians, and seems to be most diverse there.
J2b2-L283 was also found in Bronze Age croatia (and it's funny Macaiamo doesn't mention Albanians on the J2b2 page on Eupedia, there seems to be a strong bias on his part for some strange reason).

Wondering if any non-albanians have this haplogroup and if so, where you're from.

I am proud to carry this haplotype aswell.
 
Or perhaps you can't read. This is what I wrote on the J2 page:

As a result, both the Illyrians and the Mycenaeans (and possibly the Albanians) would be descended from Middle to Late Bronze Age Steppe migrants to the Southeast Europe, in a migration that was particularly rich in J2b lineages from the Middle Volga region.
It obviously implies that Albanians descend from the Ancient populations carrying these haplotypes no matter how "recently" they descend. R1b-L23, EV13 & J2b2 with a minority of I1 is the overwhelming majority of the Gheg Albanian haplotypes, especially the ones from the Northern Highlands.
 
It obviously implies that Albanians descend from the Ancient populations carrying these haplotypes no matter how "recently" they descend. R1b-L23, EV13 & J2b2 with a minority of I1 is the overwhelming majority of the Gheg Albanian haplotypes, especially the ones from the Northern Highlands.

Obviously, but I can't say that J2b came straight from the Steppe to Albania in the Bronze Age. We just don't know. The J2b2 sample from Croatia at least is evidence of a recent migration from the Steppe.
 
Obviously, but I can't say that J2b came straight from the Steppe to Albania in the Bronze Age. We just don't know. The J2b2 sample from Croatia at least is evidence of a recent migration from the Steppe.

It does not necessarily have to mean that. It could as well mean that there was a much earlier migration from the steppe. It could have been there since early Bronze age. Or even earlier for that matter.

Only thing we know for sure is that these J2b2-L283 men were on the Illyrian lands a couple of centuries before we hear of Illyrians for the first time.

And that when we suddenly stop hearing about the Illyrians, the Albanians pop up on the Illyrian lands (with the same haplogroup as the ancestors of Illyrians)

We do not know how and when it arrived there.

I know people use the 30% steppe ancestry to argue that he had recently arrived from the steppes. But some of his the steppe ancestry would almost certainly have come from his mother(who had steppe mtDNA). And that means that his father(also J2b2-L283) had even lower steppe ancestry than himself. Maybe only 15-25% steppe ancestry.
And this statement holds true, as long as you don't claim that his mother(steppe mtDNA) did not pass on any steppe genes to him?

I think this 30% steppe percentage is an indicator that his paternal line had been in the balkans at least for some generations, and maybe even a couple of hundreds/thousands of years. Or else where did he get all that farmer ancestry(from his steppe mother?), if his family hadn't been in the balkans for at least a couple of hundreds of years?

I am J2b2-L283 too, and i have 20% steppe ancestry. Does this now mean that i have just recently arrived from the steppe? :grin:

See the point? 30% steppe ancestry is not much. After 4000 years in the balkans i still have around the same steppe ancestry as the ancient skeletons father would have had. That means that in theory his paternal line could have been in the balkans for 4000 years before he was buried in that kurgan.

I am not saying that J2b2 have been in the balkans for 8000 years(because i don't believe that either), but i am just pointing out that i can be dangerous and an extreme waste of time to jump to conclusion so quickly, only based on one skeleton and 30% steppe ancestry. Waste of time i say, because you'll have to rewrite everything, every time a new paper comes out. These kinds of genetics are very young indeed, so it is easy to manipulate data now. But eventually everything will fall in its place, and then all these biased theories will be exposed and laughed at.
Therefore you should base you theories on what you really believe happened, not what you want to have happened, based on your own haplogroup.
Because being temporarily right, will never get you name in the history books for anything good. You will be remembered as that guy who singlehandedly tried to distort history, but was squashed like a fly, when the big Harvard and Cambridge guys came to the scene and saved the day.

You write entertaining texts and theories, but you have to be a little more objective. There are a lot of ignorants out there who read every word you write as it had descended from heaven in the form of pure truth. You should not misuse those ignorant peoples trust. Give them facts. And keep bias of off the picture. Who knows how many people think albanians aren't illyrians because of your sentence regarding Illyrians/albanians? Who knows how many people think R1a is some super-race or god-race which can enslave entire planets and rape aliens with their wagons, because of your bias.

In matters like these(where interests differ hugely), some sort of truth will eventually come out, because the research will be brought out at different locations(depending on which ancient DNA samples are being analyzed), and by different people. Maybe some Iberian and Italian will bend truth to fit own interests, while germans will do the same but in other interests. In the beginning, a lot of totally differing theories will arise, each with their own agenda. Then from these totally different theories, there will arise other theories, which take the best from each, and compile those points into other theories(which resembles the truth more and more). Eventually some kind of truth will arise from these theories.

Point is, the first theories in a subject are almost always remembered, and they are mostly ridiculed and seen as conservative and outdated(unlesss they are objective enough). Do you want researchers looking in some sort of electronic google archives, 50 years in the future, and say "This Maciamo guy, he really had some crazy theories. The bias and hidden agendas are pouring out like i have never seen anything pour before"
And yea you can probably just delete some articles now, and they will be forgotten forever. But if you ever publish anything serious, like an academic article, and you have as much bias as you have now, i can assure you, that people will laugh at you even long after your death.
Like those who said the earth was flat; that is how you'll be remembered if you ever take this kind of biased writing to the academic stage.
 
Obviously, but I can't say that J2b came straight from the Steppe to Albania in the Bronze Age. We just don't know. The J2b2 sample from Croatia at least is evidence of a recent migration from the Steppe.
J2b2-L283 is obviously from the Illyrians or other paleo-Balkan groups, this is where it comes from in Albania/Kosova
 
Obviously, but I can't say that J2b came straight from the Steppe to Albania in the Bronze Age. We just don't know. The J2b2 sample from Croatia at least is evidence of a recent migration from the Steppe.

It does not necessarily have to mean that. It could as well mean that there was a much earlier migration from the steppe. It could have been there since early Bronze age. Or even earlier for that matter.

Only thing we know for sure is that these J2b2-L283 men were on the Illyrian lands a couple of centuries before we hear of Illyrians for the first time.

And that when we suddenly stop hearing about the Illyrians, the Albanians pop up on the Illyrian lands (with the same haplogroup as the ancestors of Illyrians)

We do not know how and when it arrived there.

I know people use the 30% steppe ancestry to argue that he had recently arrived from the steppes. But some of his the steppe ancestry would almost certainly have come from his mother(who had steppe mtDNA). And that means that his father(also J2b2-L283) had even lower steppe ancestry than himself. Maybe only 15-25% steppe ancestry.
And this statement holds true, as long as you don't claim that his mother(steppe mtDNA) did not pass on any steppe genes to him?

I think this 30% steppe percentage is an indicator that his paternal line had been in the balkans at least for some generations, and maybe even a couple of hundreds/thousands of years. Or else where did he get all that farmer ancestry(from his steppe mother?), if his family hadn't been in the balkans for at least a couple of hundreds of years?

I am J2b2-L283 too, and i have 20% steppe ancestry. Does this now mean that i have just recently arrived from the steppe? :grin:

See the point? 30% steppe ancestry is not much. After 4000 years in the balkans i still have around the same steppe ancestry as the ancient skeletons father would have had. That means that in theory his paternal line could have been in the balkans for 4000 years before he was buried in that kurgan.

I am not saying that J2b2 have been in the balkans for 8000 years(because i don't believe that either), but i am just pointing out that i can be dangerous and an extreme waste of time to jump to conclusion so quickly, only based on one skeleton and 30% steppe ancestry. Waste of time i say, because you'll have to rewrite everything, every time a new paper comes out. These kinds of genetics are very young indeed, so it is easy to manipulate data now. But eventually everything will fall in its place, and then all these biased theories will be exposed and laughed at.
Therefore you should base you theories on what you really believe happened, not what you want to have happened, based on your own haplogroup.
Because being temporarily right, will never get you name in the history books for anything good. You will be remembered as that guy who singlehandedly tried to distort history, but was squashed like a fly, when the big Harvard and Cambridge guys came to the scene and saved the day.

You write entertaining texts and theories, but you have to be a little more objective. There are a lot of ignorants out there who read every word you write as it had descended from heaven in the form of pure truth. You should not misuse those ignorant peoples trust. Give them facts. And keep bias of off the picture. Who knows how many people think albanians aren't illyrians because of your sentence regarding Illyrians/albanians? Who knows how many people think R1a is some super-race or god-race which can enslave entire planets and rape aliens with their wagons, because of your bias.

In matters like these(where interests differ hugely), some sort of truth will eventually come out, because the research will be brought out at different locations(depending on which ancient DNA samples are being analyzed), and by different people. Maybe some Iberian and Italian will bend truth to fit own interests, while germans will do the same but in other interests. In the beginning, a lot of totally differing theories will arise, each with their own agenda. Then from these totally different theories, there will arise other theories, which take the best from each, and compile those points into other theories(which resembles the truth more and more). Eventually some kind of truth will arise from these theories.

Point is, the first theories in a subject are almost always remembered, and they are mostly ridiculed and seen as conservative and outdated(unlesss they are objective enough). Do you want researchers looking in some sort of electronic google archives, 50 years in the future, and say "This Maciamo guy, he really had some crazy theories. The bias and hidden agendas are pouring out like i have never seen anything pour before"
And yea you can probably just delete some articles now, and they will be forgotten forever. But if you ever publish anything serious, like an academic article, and you have as much bias as you have now, i can assure you, that people will laugh at you even long after your death.
Like those who said the earth was flat; that is how you'll be remembered if you ever take this kind of biased writing to the academic stage.
 
Obviously, but I can't say that J2b came straight from the Steppe to Albania in the Bronze Age. We just don't know. The J2b2 sample from Croatia at least is evidence of a recent migration from the Steppe.
How can you be so sure that J2b2 was directly from the Steppe based on less than a third Steppe admix?
Yamnaya R1b-L23 spanned from the Steppe to South-Central Europe and it had steppe admix too, what makes J2b2 any different except being a more minor lineage?
 
@Fatherland and Fustan,

Insults and ******** against other ethnic groups are not permitted here. I guess you didn't get the memo.

They weren't tolerated when they were directed against Albanians and they're not tolerated now when Albanians are making them against Greeks.

CHIARO????

This time it was just infractions. Keep it up and you're out of here.

The thread is an academic one, and once again it is becoming intolerable for serious posters to discuss the topic because you persist in dragging your anti-Greek war into everything.

There is a Balkanian disagreements thread. It was created for precisely this purpose. TAKE ANY SUCH DISCUSSIONS THERE. I will happily delete any further such comments here.

Oh, and even there, civility and no insults.

I'm sick and tired of this nonsense.
 
@Fatherland and Fustan,

I am going to say this once and once only. Insults and ******** against other ethnic groups are not permitted here.

They weren't tolerated when they were directed against Albanians and they're not tolerated now when Albanians are making them against Greeks.

CHIARO????

This time it was just infractions. Keep it up and you're out of here.

The thread is an academic one and you are once again making it intolerable for serious posters to discuss the topic because you persist in dragging your anti-Greek war into everything.

There is a Balkanian disagreements thread. It was created for precisely this purpose. TAKE ANY SUCH DISCUSSIONS THERE. I will happily delete any further such comments here.

Oh, and even there, civility and no insults.

I'm sick and tired of this nonsense.

There is no insults in this thread, but I agree I went abit hard in the other one.

I now am wise to follow your advice.
 
@Fatherland and Fustan,

Insults and ******** against other ethnic groups are not permitted here. I guess you didn't get the memo.

They weren't tolerated when they were directed against Albanians and they're not tolerated now when Albanians are making them against Greeks.

CHIARO????

This time it was just infractions. Keep it up and you're out of here.

The thread is an academic one, and once again it is becoming intolerable for serious posters to discuss the topic because you persist in dragging your anti-Greek war into everything.

There is a Balkanian disagreements thread. It was created for precisely this purpose. TAKE ANY SUCH DISCUSSIONS THERE. I will happily delete any further such comments here.

Oh, and even there, civility and no insults.

I'm sick and tired of this nonsense.

Understood. I shall adhere to your request.
 
Balkanite, your post was moderated by the forum. I have just approved it.

It does not necessarily have to mean that. It could as well mean that there was a much earlier migration from the steppe. It could have been there since early Bronze age. Or even earlier for that matter.

Only thing we know for sure is that these J2b2-L283 men were on the Illyrian lands a couple of centuries before we hear of Illyrians for the first time.

And that when we suddenly stop hearing about the Illyrians, the Albanians pop up on the Illyrian lands (with the same haplogroup as the ancestors of Illyrians)

We do not know how and when it arrived there.

I know people use the 30% steppe ancestry to argue that he had recently arrived from the steppes. But some of his the steppe ancestry would almost certainly have come from his mother(who had steppe mtDNA). And that means that his father(also J2b2-L283) had even lower steppe ancestry than himself. Maybe only 15-25% steppe ancestry.
And this statement holds true, as long as you don't claim that his mother(steppe mtDNA) did not pass on any steppe genes to him?

I think this 30% steppe percentage is an indicator that his paternal line had been in the balkans at least for some generations, and maybe even a couple of hundreds/thousands of years. Or else where did he get all that farmer ancestry(from his steppe mother?), if his family hadn't been in the balkans for at least a couple of hundreds of years?

I am J2b2-L283 too, and i have 20% steppe ancestry. Does this now mean that i have just recently arrived from the steppe? :grin:

See the point? 30% steppe ancestry is not much. After 4000 years in the balkans i still have around the same steppe ancestry as the ancient skeletons father would have had. That means that in theory his paternal line could have been in the balkans for 4000 years before he was buried in that kurgan.

I understand what you mean. But there was no steppe ancestry in individuals from the Late Chalcolithic cultures around Croatia like Baden ou Vučedol. And J2b2 was also never found anywhere in Neolithic or Chalcolithic Europe. Additionally we have enough data from the age and geographic dispersal of J2b2 to think it did come with the IE migrations. I have been saying it for years. This new sample just confirmed a long held hypothesis.

As for the 30% steppe, who is to say that is wasn't similar in both parents? It was 1700 BCE. EEF admixture was already present in the Steppe by then. It doesn't have to be local nor very recent.

Another possibility is that Steppe people mixed with a Chalcolithic European population between the Steppe and Croatia (e.g. Romania, Hungary). Given enough generations the Steppe and EEF admixtures would have been relatively evenly spread out in most individuals, whatever their Y-DNA or mtDNA haplogroup. This is exactly what we see with Early Bronze Age Britons and Irish. Autosomally they were hybrid Steppe-Central European Chalcolithic, almost indistinguishable from Unetice genomes. Yet, some had Steppe mtDNA, while other had Mesolithic or Neolithic European mtDNA, just like modern Britons and Irish. And the most interesting is that the British and especially Irish gene pool hasn't changed much in over 4000 years since these Proto-Celtic R1b-L21 tribes arrived from Central Europe. The main difference is the Germanic DNA, especially in eastern Britain.

In other words, it seems that the Proto-IE didn't always mix with locals, or at least not as systematically. There were a few events of major blending. With R1b-L51 it happened some time between 3500 and 2500 BCE between the Steppe and Germany. It could have happened in just a few centuries, or progressively. We don't know yet. But after 2500 BCE, when R1b pushed west to France and the British Isles, they mostly replaced the local populations. Similarly, R1a-Z93 tribes blended extensively with locals in southern Central Asia (around the BMAC), then invaded South Asia, but established the caste system that prevented them from blending with local populations (most of the times) to this day. Tow similar scenarios both east and west. A first period of slow advance with heavy intermingling followed by a fast conquest with little intermingling. In the Dinaric Alps, I would bet that the Illyrian conquest from 1600 BCE was the second, quick conquest phase, and that the long blending had already happened (in Hungary, Romania or even in the Steppe) before. This is why we see a J2b2 individual who is as EEF admixed as the Unetice and EBA Britons/Irish. It's to be expected since that was in 1700 BCE, 500 years after R1b reached Britain and 100 years after the start of the Indo-Aryan migrations.


I am not saying that J2b2 have been in the balkans for 8000 years(because i don't believe that either), but i am just pointing out that i can be dangerous and an extreme waste of time to jump to conclusion so quickly, only based on one skeleton and 30% steppe ancestry. Waste of time i say, because you'll have to rewrite everything, every time a new paper comes out. These kinds of genetics are very young indeed, so it is easy to manipulate data now. But eventually everything will fall in its place, and then all these biased theories will be exposed and laughed at.
Therefore you should base you theories on what you really believe happened, not what you want to have happened, based on your own haplogroup.
Because being temporarily right, will never get you name in the history books for anything good. You will be remembered as that guy who singlehandedly tried to distort history, but was squashed like a fly, when the big Harvard and Cambridge guys came to the scene and saved the day.

You write entertaining texts and theories, but you have to be a little more objective. There are a lot of ignorants out there who read every word you write as it had descended from heaven in the form of pure truth. You should not misuse those ignorant peoples trust. Give them facts. And keep bias of off the picture. Who knows how many people think albanians aren't illyrians because of your sentence regarding Illyrians/albanians? Who knows how many people think R1a is some super-race or god-race which can enslave entire planets and rape aliens with their wagons, because of your bias.

In matters like these(where interests differ hugely), some sort of truth will eventually come out, because the research will be brought out at different locations(depending on which ancient DNA samples are being analyzed), and by different people. Maybe some Iberian and Italian will bend truth to fit own interests, while germans will do the same but in other interests. In the beginning, a lot of totally differing theories will arise, each with their own agenda. Then from these totally different theories, there will arise other theories, which take the best from each, and compile those points into other theories(which resembles the truth more and more). Eventually some kind of truth will arise from these theories.

Point is, the first theories in a subject are almost always remembered, and they are mostly ridiculed and seen as conservative and outdated(unlesss they are objective enough). Do you want researchers looking in some sort of electronic google archives, 50 years in the future, and say "This Maciamo guy, he really had some crazy theories. The bias and hidden agendas are pouring out like i have never seen anything pour before"
And yea you can probably just delete some articles now, and they will be forgotten forever. But if you ever publish anything serious, like an academic article, and you have as much bias as you have now, i can assure you, that people will laugh at you even long after your death.
Like those who said the earth was flat; that is how you'll be remembered if you ever take this kind of biased writing to the academic stage.

It's interesting to see how you think. I am sorry to inform you that I have no agenda. I never quite understand what people mean by "agenda". It's something I hear a lot from people from the Balkans. Just so you know, I do not favour any haplogroup. Just read what I posted over the years. The Proto-Indo-Europeans were a mix of many haplogroups like G2a-L13, I2a2a-L701, J2a-Z435, J2b2-L283, R1a-M417, R1b-L23, and maybe even others, dependending on whether you consider only Yamna and Maykop, or also later BA cultures like Corded Ware, Unetice, Andronovo, etc.

Out of curiosity, what agenda do you think I hold and why (how would it benefit me)?
 
Or perhaps you can't read. This is what I wrote on the J2 page:

As a result, both the Illyrians and the Mycenaeans (and possibly the Albanians) would be descended from Middle to Late Bronze Age Steppe migrants to the Southeast Europe, in a migration that was particularly rich in J2b lineages from the Middle Volga region.

The Albanian (and Kosovar) population is one of the most homogeneous in Europe in term of shared recent ancestry according to Ralph & Coop 2013. This means that the Albanians expanded from a very small population relatively recently, which explains why strong founder effects completely reshaped the Y-DNA frequencies. That is how E-V13 and J2b became to dominant among Albanians and Kosovars. That expansion probably took place during the Middle Ages, so based on the current data it is impossible to know whether E-V13 and J2b entered the Albanian gene pool during the Bronze Age, the Iron Age, the Classical Antiquity, or even the Middle Ages. Hence my reserve on the subject.

It's interesting to note how has changed your opinion in this years:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...tic-similarity?p=363334&viewfull=1#post363334
From my experience, when i have reserve on a subject, i prefer to stay aside.
 
It's interesting to note how has changed your opinion in this years:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...tic-similarity?p=363334&viewfull=1#post363334
From my experience, when i have reserve on a subject, i prefer to stay aside.

I didn't change my opinion about this. I still think that Albanian language is a hybrid of IE and non-IE from Neolithic farmers. I have mentioned before that elements of Afroasiatic languages are also present in Celtic languages. In all regions where heavy intermingling between IE and non-IE populations occurred, some linguistic merger also took place. That's what we could call creolisation process. One of the most heavily hybridised IE language family in Europe (besides Albanian) is the Germanic family. I have always supported the Germanic substrate hypothesis. I even wrote a page with examples of non-IE Germanic words. In fact it is very hard to understand why people would suddenly stop using perfectly good words and trade them for other completely different ones if it weren't for the blending of two linguistic distinct populations. I believe that population mergers have been the driving force in the evolution of languages and the differentiation of various branches within a single language family.
 
I didn't change my opinion about this. I still think that Albanian language is a hybrid of IE and non-IE from Neolithic farmers. I have mentioned before that elements of Afroasiatic languages are also present in Celtic languages. In all regions where heavy intermingling between IE and non-IE populations occurred, some linguistic merger also took place. That's what we could call creolisation process. One of the most heavily hybridised IE language family in Europe (besides Albanian) is the Germanic family. I have always supported the Germanic substrate hypothesis. I even wrote a page with examples of non-IE Germanic words. In fact it is very hard to understand why people would suddenly stop using perfectly good words and trade them for other completely different ones if it weren't for the blending of two linguistic distinct populations. I believe that population mergers have been the driving force in the evolution of languages and the differentiation of various branches within a single language family.
The theory of the migration of IE people and their intermingling with the local populations is the most accredited theory, nothing new here. But this happened before the middle ages.
Will be very interesting if you elaborate this your theory of this afroasiatic elements in Albanian language, this Egyptian and Berber influences.
 
Last edited:
Balkanite, your post was moderated by the forum. I have just approved it.



I understand what you mean. But there was no steppe ancestry in individuals from the Late Chalcolithic cultures around Croatia like Baden ou Vučedol. And J2b2 was also never found anywhere in Neolithic or Chalcolithic Europe. Additionally we have enough data from the age and geographic dispersal of J2b2 to think it did come with the IE migrations. I have been saying it for years. This new sample just confirmed a long held hypothesis.

As for the 30% steppe, who is to say that is wasn't similar in both parents? It was 1700 BCE. EEF admixture was already present in the Steppe by then. It doesn't have to be local nor very recent.

Another possibility is that Steppe people mixed with a Chalcolithic European population between the Steppe and Croatia (e.g. Romania, Hungary). Given enough generations the Steppe and EEF admixtures would have been relatively evenly spread out in most individuals, whatever their Y-DNA or mtDNA haplogroup. This is exactly what we see with Early Bronze Age Britons and Irish. Autosomally they were hybrid Steppe-Central European Chalcolithic, almost indistinguishable from Unetice genomes. Yet, some had Steppe mtDNA, while other had Mesolithic or Neolithic European mtDNA, just like modern Britons and Irish. And the most interesting is that the British and especially Irish gene pool hasn't changed much in over 4000 years since these Proto-Celtic R1b-L21 tribes arrived from Central Europe. The main difference is the Germanic DNA, especially in eastern Britain.

In other words, it seems that the Proto-IE didn't always mix with locals, or at least not as systematically. There were a few events of major blending. With R1b-L51 it happened some time between 3500 and 2500 BCE between the Steppe and Germany. It could have happened in just a few centuries, or progressively. We don't know yet. But after 2500 BCE, when R1b pushed west to France and the British Isles, they mostly replaced the local populations. Similarly, R1a-Z93 tribes blended extensively with locals in southern Central Asia (around the BMAC), then invaded South Asia, but established the caste system that prevented them from blending with local populations (most of the times) to this day. Tow similar scenarios both east and west. A first period of slow advance with heavy intermingling followed by a fast conquest with little intermingling. In the Dinaric Alps, I would bet that the Illyrian conquest from 1600 BCE was the second, quick conquest phase, and that the long blending had already happened (in Hungary, Romania or even in the Steppe) before. This is why we see a J2b2 individual who is as EEF admixed as the Unetice and EBA Britons/Irish. It's to be expected since that was in 1700 BCE, 500 years after R1b reached Britain and 100 years after the start of the Indo-Aryan migrations.




It's interesting to see how you think. I am sorry to inform you that I have no agenda. I never quite understand what people mean by "agenda". It's something I hear a lot from people from the Balkans. Just so you know, I do not favour any haplogroup. Just read what I posted over the years. The Proto-Indo-Europeans were a mix of many haplogroups like G2a-L13, I2a2a-L701, J2a-Z435, J2b2-L283, R1a-M417, R1b-L23, and maybe even others, dependending on whether you consider only Yamna and Maykop, or also later BA cultures like Corded Ware, Unetice, Andronovo, etc.

Out of curiosity, what agenda do you think I hold and why (how would it benefit me)?

I just went to the genetics section here on Eupedia(where i haven't been for a while), and i noticed that you actually have edited a lot of stuff. It looks much better now.
You should not think as my posts as pointless critisism. The only reason that i waste my time writing these things, is because i really want dissemination of these matters(genetics). And honestly, eupedia is one of the only(the only one i know) sites which actually break down these things in a language that commoners(non-genetisists like myself) can understand.
But then it frustrates me how even the most legit site won't take consideration of us Albanians.
An example:

"As a result, both the Illyrians and the Mycenaeans (and possibly the Albanians) would be descended from Middle to Late Bronze Age Steppe migrants to the Southeast Europe, in a migration that was particularly rich in J2b lineages from the Middle Volga region. That would explain why it has been so hard to identify R1a or R1b lineages that could be of Illyrian or Mycenaean origin"
- Why write "possibly the albanians"? If you really believe that the modern balkanic J2b2 people(including albanians) originated from those north-balkan indo-european, why not reformulate it like this:

"As a result, both the Illyrians and the Myceneans would be descended from Middle to Late Bronze Age Steppe migrants to the Southeast Europe, in a migration that was particularly rich in J2b lineages from the Middle Volga region. This is also relfected in the fact that modern Albanians (who are the only linguistic candidates for being the descendants of the Illyrians), have such high percentage of J2b2-L283 and R1b-Z2103 , while it has been so hard to identify any R1a lineages in their gene pool that could be of Illyrian or Mycenaean origin."

The difference between the two ways of writing is that in the first one, you give the anti-albanian powers the benefit of the doubt: That the Albanians only "maybe" came to the Balkans at this time. And that it may still be possible for us to be some newcomers in the Ottoman empire or something. That is what an anti-albanian person will see when he reads the first one.
The second version(which i edited) puts the Albanians in the Balkans for at least since the middle/late bronze age.

Now if we forget genetics for a moment.
Linguisticly we would expect the illyrians to be some kind of balkanic indo-europeans branch, with a lot of roman influence, right?
Geographically we would expect them to be located in the western balkans, right?

Now the albanians:
Linguistically we are some sort of balkanic indo-european branch, with a lot of roman influence, right?
Geographically we are located at the western balkans, right?

So Albanians must be of pre-slav balkan origin, maybe illyrian, maybe something related to illyrian.
But however we bend the facts, can we agree that both geography, linguistics and genetics point in the direction that there is a MUCH greater chance that Albanians are descendants of some kind of Illyrian-like culture, than being descendant of some later middle age turkic/anatolian expansion?
I think that you will agree with me on the last sentence.
And that is where the problem arises; why would you write the text in a manner like that, which actually gives the benefit of the doubt for those people who claim Albanians came with the turks. When you actually believe that we came in the Bronze age?

That is what i see as an agenda. The fact that you believe something, but you put it in a way which can be HUGELY misread and misunderstood, and eventually imply the opposite of what you believe.

I don't know if this i just some attempt not be caught in the Albanian-serb crossfire, and be as abstract as possible. But we cannot keep altering history to satisfy the 6th century newcomers.

I know sometimes it seems like we albanians are fanatics in these matters, but if you know how politics work in the Balkans, you'll understand. Altered history can be used to start wars and genocides in the Balkans. How do you think all the wars break out? Because both sides think that they were there first, and both sides see the other side as invading inferiors.

I and think it is wrong that we Albanians have to keep seeing our european brothers neglect us, and keep giving our enemies the benefit of the doubt. Everyone knows albanians were there before the slavs, but still everyone keeps silent.

History is not just history in the balkans. History is what politician controlled media tell the people when they want them to kill their neighbours.

And i know it can seem a lot to write all these things because you worte "possibly the albanians". But that word means everything. Because as long as the serbs and greeks think that we are invading turks, we will never feel safe in our own territory. And as long as historians don't support us, our neighbours will keep seeing us as invaders and inferiors.

 
I heard an Albanian Archaeologist saying that Mycenaean pottery constantly pops up in Albanian Sites. this shows that they traded with people who lived in Albania at that time

For sure. Mycenaean pottery pops up anywhere in southern Europe, also in Italy, France, Spain.
 
I just went to the genetics section here on Eupedia(where i haven't been for a while), and i noticed that you actually have edited a lot of stuff. It looks much better now.
You should not think as my posts as pointless critisism. The only reason that i waste my time writing these things, is because i really want dissemination of these matters(genetics). And honestly, eupedia is one of the only(the only one i know) sites which actually break down these things in a language that commoners(non-genetisists like myself) can understand.
But then it frustrates me how even the most legit site won't take consideration of us Albanians.
An example:

"As a result, both the Illyrians and the Mycenaeans (and possibly the Albanians) would be descended from Middle to Late Bronze Age Steppe migrants to the Southeast Europe, in a migration that was particularly rich in J2b lineages from the Middle Volga region. That would explain why it has been so hard to identify R1a or R1b lineages that could be of Illyrian or Mycenaean origin"
- Why write "possibly the albanians"? If you really believe that the modern balkanic J2b2 people(including albanians) originated from those north-balkan indo-european, why not reformulate it like this:

"As a result, both the Illyrians and the Myceneans would be descended from Middle to Late Bronze Age Steppe migrants to the Southeast Europe, in a migration that was particularly rich in J2b lineages from the Middle Volga region. This is also relfected in the fact that modern Albanians (who are the only linguistic candidates for being the descendants of the Illyrians), have such high percentage of J2b2-L283 and R1b-Z2103 , while it has been so hard to identify any R1a lineages in their gene pool that could be of Illyrian or Mycenaean origin."

The difference between the two ways of writing is that in the first one, you give the anti-albanian powers the benefit of the doubt: That the Albanians only "maybe" came to the Balkans at this time. And that it may still be possible for us to be some newcomers in the Ottoman empire or something. That is what an anti-albanian person will see when he reads the first one.
The second version(which i edited) puts the Albanians in the Balkans for at least since the middle/late bronze age.

I agree with your edit. Please understand that I usually write from work when I have some time to spare, and I often have to hurry to write replies on the forum. I cannot always word things in the best possible way.

Now if we forget genetics for a moment.
Linguisticly we would expect the illyrians to be some kind of balkanic indo-europeans branch, with a lot of roman influence, right?
Geographically we would expect them to be located in the western balkans, right?

Now the albanians:
Linguistically we are some sort of balkanic indo-european branch, with a lot of roman influence, right?
Geographically we are located at the western balkans, right?

So Albanians must be of pre-slav balkan origin, maybe illyrian, maybe something related to illyrian.
But however we bend the facts, can we agree that both geography, linguistics and genetics point in the direction that there is a MUCH greater chance that Albanians are descendants of some kind of Illyrian-like culture, than being descendant of some later middle age turkic/anatolian expansion?
I think that you will agree with me on the last sentence.

Of course I agree with all this. I don't know why you mention the possibility that Albanians descend from a medieval Ottoman expansion. That never crossed my mind once. Albanians have hardly any Turkic/Mongoloid admixture, and their main Y-DNA lineages (E-V13, J2b2) are rare in most of Turkey. Likewise typical Turkish lineages (G2a-M406, R1a-Z93, Q1a, N1c, E-M84, J1, many subclades of J2a1) are virtually absent from Albania.


And that is where the problem arises; why would you write the text in a manner like that, which actually gives the benefit of the doubt for those people who claim Albanians came with the turks. When you actually believe that we came in the Bronze age?

That is what i see as an agenda. The fact that you believe something, but you put it in a way which can be HUGELY misread and misunderstood, and eventually imply the opposite of what you believe.

It's hard to consider a point a view that never crossed your mind because there is no data to support it. So I didn't think it was necessary to disprove that the Albanians aren't Turks. It's just so obvious.



I don't know if this i just some attempt not be caught in the Albanian-serb crossfire, and be as abstract as possible. But we cannot keep altering history to satisfy the 6th century newcomers.

I know sometimes it seems like we albanians are fanatics in these matters, but if you know how politics work in the Balkans, you'll understand. Altered history can be used to start wars and genocides in the Balkans. How do you think all the wars break out? Because both sides think that they were there first, and both sides see the other side as invading inferiors.

I and think it is wrong that we Albanians have to keep seeing our european brothers neglect us, and keep giving our enemies the benefit of the doubt. Everyone knows albanians were there before the slavs, but still everyone keeps silent.

History is not just history in the balkans. History is what politician controlled media tell the people when they want them to kill their neighbours.

And i know it can seem a lot to write all these things because you worte "possibly the albanians". But that word means everything. Because as long as the serbs and greeks think that we are invading turks, we will never feel safe in our own territory. And as long as historians don't support us, our neighbours will keep seeing us as invaders and inferiors.

I admit that I don't really understand why there is so much disagreement and conflicts between Balkanic countries. Genetics show that, autosomally at least, you are all pretty close to one another. The division is more cultural and linguistic. Of course Macedonians and Serbs have more Slavic DNA, but it's still a minority of their genome compared to the local Balkanic admxiture. Just look at the Greeks. You don't see North Greeks arguing or fighting with Cretans/Aegeans or vice versa because the former have Slavic and Germanic DNA that the latter lack. Same in France. An ethnically German Alsatians can live perfectly well in peace with a ethnically Basque Gascon, an ethnically Welsh Breton or an ethnically Ligurian Niçois. Why can't you do the same in the Balkans?
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 482195 times.

Back
Top