SubgroupE-FT186965

So what do we get from this info, that thats particilar time in my ancestors life were illyrian, albanian, still vlach or somthing else?? Or just hard to say with the facts that we have today
What we can say with confidence as of now is that our upstream Z17107 was already a local in the Balkans during the Iron Age since it was found in the locals of Viminacium (near Kostolac, Serbia) and he was autosomally local Balkan, not a Roman citizen from elsewhere.

This local could have been anything like a Thracian, but even an Illyrian since they lived nearby and moved to the main Roman cities along the Danube, as well as the fact that the first legion that settled there and started the military camp (thus giving birth slowly to the larger city later on) was from Dalmatia.

After the arrival of the Slavs, it seems to me that many clades of our upstream clade gathered around the historically Albanian speaking areas and their vicinity, but I?m not sure how common it is in Bulgaria, so another more knowledgeable member can confirm if they spread equally in South Eastern Balkans as they did in the Southern and Western direction.

But all this is speculation covering the majority of the lines found today that happen to be tested, not your specific line. For that we need more information, more tested members, and more ancient and medieval results.
 
What we can say with confidence as of now is that our upstream Z17107 was already a local in the Balkans during the Iron Age since it was found in the locals of Viminacium (near Kostolac, Serbia) and he was autosomally local Balkan, not a Roman citizen from elsewhere.

This local could have been anything like a Thracian, but even an Illyrian since they lived nearby and moved to the main Roman cities along the Danube, as well as the fact that the first legion that settled there and started the military camp (thus giving birth slowly to the larger city later on) was from Dalmatia.

After the arrival of the Slavs, it seems to me that many clades of our upstream clade gathered around the historically Albanian speaking areas and their vicinity, but I�m not sure how common it is in Bulgaria, so another more knowledgeable member can confirm if they spread equally in South Eastern Balkans as they did in the Southern and Western direction.

But all this is speculation covering the majority of the lines found today that happen to be tested, not your specific line. For that we need more information, more tested members, and more ancient and medieval results.

So interesting, well hopefully we will se origin of the one who is closest to me the unkown, and when reich lab papper comes out we will get more info about people of the balkans and maby se things more clearly, thank you for taking the time with everything
 
Dushmans answer pretty much.
The images just show that the highest per capita frequency of your upstream SNP is around Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Kosovo. Likewise the highest diversity is around Albanian and surrounding neighbors, as well as Western Ukraine? (surprising).
The SNP tracker just shows the age of your SNP, meaning 200CE, so we can not say it is Albanian, since Albania did not exist at the time. It could be Illyrian/Thracian, some proto peoples, of BA/IA Balkans.
 
I love how Riverman just spams his nonsense "Daco-Thracian" history (everywhere) without even asking OP which part of Serbia his paternal line hails from.

Because it doesn't matter in this context, because they were all coming down with Channelled Ware/Belegis II-Gava or later from Psenichevo-Basarabi. If they became Illyrian later, like the Dardanians, E-V13 came with Daco-Thracian tribes and speakers originally. Even most very Southern Albanian and Greek subclades have a TMRCA around the transitional period, some somewhat earlier, but that doesn't mean they were present earlier, which they were not. They all came down in the LBA-EIA and were, originally, speaking Daco-Thracian idioms. All later people from these formations, which were not assimilated by other groups, like the Illyrians which helped to form Dardanians when fleeing from other Illyrian tribes which pushed them - which is all attested archaeologically - were later Daco-Thracian speakers or in the borderzone.

So what do we get from this info, that thats particilar time in my ancestors life were illyrian, albanian, still vlach or somthing else?? Or just hard to say with the facts that we have today

The date of your TMRCA, of around 0-500 AD, like I wrote before, with midpoint around 200-300 AD, means we're still talking about Roman times, when the Empire was still alive and the province not overrun by Germanics, Slavs, Avars etc. Many of your neighbouring subclades are clearly Albanian, but we also don't know how they became Albanian. For example, they could have been Illyrianised Thracians from the Iron Age, or they could have become Albanian speakers very late, when Vlach clans assimilated into the Albanian community. We don't know without more modern samples and ancient DNA.
What matters most is when your direct paternal lineage had the last common ancestor with others. If you match other Vlachs and Serbs, but no Albanians, post 500-1.000 AD, your paternal ancestors might always been Vlachs. If you get Albanian matches after 500 AD, probably even in Medieval times, then your lineage was once Albanian, but turned Vlach. Its even possible they were Vlach, turned Albanian, then back Vlach again. That's of course not very likely, but possible, like there are many possibilities. But the most decisive step forward for you is to identify more recent paternal matches, this is what will tell you the most. And this needs unfortunately a lot of patience. In your case its particularly bitter, because you have a closer match, but he doesn't provide information to you.

Going deeper its easier to answer, because regardless of the ethnicity and language they later had, in the Early Iron Age, they were all Daco-Thracians and part of the Channelled Ware/Fluted Ware horizon in the Carpatho-Balkan sphere.

Distribution-map-of-channelled-pottery-groups-with-the-most-important-sites-mentioned-in.png


https://www.researchgate.net/profil...ith-the-most-important-sites-mentioned-in.png

https://www.researchgate.net/public...te_Bronze_Age_and_Early_Iron_Age_Transylvania

The movement to Albania and Greece came from this core regions, especially Belegis II-Gava:
https://imgur.com/fogur6Ehttps://imgur.com/fogur6E

https://www.austriaca.at/0xc1aa5576 0x002debf3.pdf

Moesians, Triballi, the substratum of the Dardanians, they all were part of the the same paternal expansion and later formed the local Roman population of the Balkans, as well as Vlachs, Albanians, Bulgarians and Serbs - in part respectively.
https://imgur.com/fogur6E
 
Because it doesn't matter in this context, because they were all coming down with Channelled Ware/Belegis II-Gava or later from Psenichevo-Basarabi. If they became Illyrian later, like the Dardanians, E-V13 came with Daco-Thracian tribes and speakers originally. Even most very Southern Albanian and Greek subclades have a TMRCA around the transitional period, some somewhat earlier, but that doesn't mean they were present earlier, which they were not. They all came down in the LBA-EIA and were, originally, speaking Daco-Thracian idioms. All later people from these formations, which were not assimilated by other groups, like the Illyrians which helped to form Dardanians when fleeing from other Illyrian tribes which pushed them - which is all attested archaeologically - were later Daco-Thracian speakers or in the borderzone.



The date of your TMRCA, of around 0-500 AD, like I wrote before, with midpoint around 200-300 AD, means we're still talking about Roman times, when the Empire was still alive and the province not overrun by Germanics, Slavs, Avars etc. Many of your neighbouring subclades are clearly Albanian, but we also don't know how they became Albanian. For example, they could have been Illyrianised Thracians from the Iron Age, or they could have become Albanian speakers very late, when Vlach clans assimilated into the Albanian community. We don't know without more modern samples and ancient DNA.
What matters most is when your direct paternal lineage had the last common ancestor with others. If you match other Vlachs and Serbs, but no Albanians, post 500-1.000 AD, your paternal ancestors might always been Vlachs. If you get Albanian matches after 500 AD, probably even in Medieval times, then your lineage was once Albanian, but turned Vlach. Its even possible they were Vlach, turned Albanian, then back Vlach again. That's of course not very likely, but possible, like there are many possibilities. But the most decisive step forward for you is to identify more recent paternal matches, this is what will tell you the most. And this needs unfortunately a lot of patience. In your case its particularly bitter, because you have a closer match, but he doesn't provide information to you.

Going deeper its easier to answer, because regardless of the ethnicity and language they later had, in the Early Iron Age, they were all Daco-Thracians and part of the Channelled Ware/Fluted Ware horizon in the Carpatho-Balkan sphere.

Distribution-map-of-channelled-pottery-groups-with-the-most-important-sites-mentioned-in.png


https://www.researchgate.net/profil...ith-the-most-important-sites-mentioned-in.png

https://www.researchgate.net/public...te_Bronze_Age_and_Early_Iron_Age_Transylvania

The movement to Albania and Greece came from this core regions, especially Belegis II-Gava:
https://imgur.com/fogur6Ehttps://imgur.com/fogur6E

https://www.austriaca.at/0xc1aa5576 0x002debf3.pdf

Moesians, Triballi, the substratum of the Dardanians, they all were part of the the same paternal expansion and later formed the local Roman population of the Balkans, as well as Vlachs, Albanians, Bulgarians and Serbs - in part respectively.
https://imgur.com/fogur6E

Hmm... :unsure:

babH0Jx.png

Distribution-map-of-channelled-pottery-groups-with-the-most-important-sites-mentioned-in.png
 
Hmm... :unsure:
The diversity heatmap is unable to distinguish between locations with more than 25% diversity compared to others area (blue shade). E-Y97307 is classified into two clades. Both contain Albanians. The Ukrainian subclade evolved downstream of the Albanian subclade 1350 years ago. It is a Balkan migrant from the early medieval period, possibly as a Vlach.
I find the notion of "original Daco-Thracians" evolving into Illyrians quite problematic. To begin, nobody has written that Daco-Thracians "became" Illyrians during the Iron Age. Second, in classical times, if a people were called Illyrians, they were just Illyrians. Attempting to make Illyrians into something else appears to be an attempt to reconcile the numerous issues with the concept that E-V13 was present in Thracians and what appears to be a high level of variety in the western Balkans, but not in Bulgaria or Romania.
 
Hmm... :unsure:
The diversity heatmap is unable to distinguish between locations with more than 25% diversity compared to others area (blue shade). E-Y97307 is classified into two clades. Both contain Albanians. The Ukrainian subclade evolved downstream of the Albanian subclade 1350 years ago. It is a Balkan migrant from the early medieval period, possibly as a Vlach.
I find the notion of "original Daco-Thracians" evolving into Illyrians quite problematic. To begin, nobody has written that Daco-Thracians "became" Illyrians during the Iron Age. Second, in classical times, if a people were called Illyrians, they were just Illyrians. Attempting to make Illyrians into something else appears to be an attempt to reconcile the numerous issues with the concept that E-V13 was present in Thracians and what appears to be a high level of variety in the western Balkans, but not in Bulgaria or Romania.

Correct me if I am wrong, but no one was called illyrian? It was just the area they called illiricum? It was not one people there but many diffrent tribes on a big area?
 
I looked true all the haplogruop E grups then serbian project,bosniak,bulgarian,greek albanian and romanian and could not finde the unkown that has same subclade as me, only macedonia and croatia charts were closed, so I could not see does, its frustrading when you whant to know but cant do anything about it
 
The diversity heatmap is unable to distinguish between locations with more than 25% diversity compared to others area (blue shade). E-Y97307 is classified into two clades. Both contain Albanians. The Ukrainian subclade evolved downstream of the Albanian subclade 1350 years ago. It is a Balkan migrant from the early medieval period, possibly as a Vlach.
I find the notion of "original Daco-Thracians" evolving into Illyrians quite problematic. To begin, nobody has written that Daco-Thracians "became" Illyrians during the Iron Age. Second, in classical times, if a people were called Illyrians, they were just Illyrians. Attempting to make Illyrians into something else appears to be an attempt to reconcile the numerous issues with the concept that E-V13 was present in Thracians and what appears to be a high level of variety in the western Balkans, but not in Bulgaria or Romania.

Compare it with Germanics assimilating in some regions Celts. We know it from the archaeological record if there was La Tene before, and we see it in the archaeological record, if the La Tene element was assimilated - and we have the historical accounts for these people's existence in many instances. Same here. We have the record of Illyrian groups being pushed East, into a territory which was since the Late Bronze Age inhabited by Eastern Urnfielders of the Gava-related, Channelled Ware people. But they did not replace those, rather forming an adstrate in the case of Dardanians in particular. In the case of the Triballi, it might be Daco-Thracians rather assimilating Illyrians. Fact is, that is visible in the archaeological record, the Central Balkan regions especially what is now Bosnia-Kosovo-Macedonia, had a clearly borderline and transitional character between these two big Iron Age people of the Balkans. They conquered and pushed each other, or fused peacefully at times. That is very evident from archaeological records, historical accounts and now from ancient DNA. So Illyrian J-L283 became Daco-Thracian, Celtic and Greek and Daco-Thracian E-V13 became Illyrian-Pannonian, Celtic and Greek. That was the exchange over millenia. But who brought what originally, in the Late Bronze Age, there can be little doubt left at this point.

I looked true all the haplogruop E grups then serbian project,bosniak,bulgarian,greek albanian and romanian and could not finde the unkown that has same subclade as me, only macedonia and croatia charts were closed, so I could not see does, its frustrading when you whant to know but cant do anything about it

Yeah, its frustrating. Considering the age of your subclade, he could be from everywhere in and around Europe.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but no one was called illyrian? It was just the area they called illiricum? It was not one people there but many diffrent tribes on a big area?

During Hellenic Classical Times, Illyrian was an exonym applies to the barbarians living to the north, by the Hellenized peoples. The southern Illyrians according to Strabo (?) were Illyrians propri dicti (Proper Illyrians) as opposed to Nothern Illyrians who were Illyrians by name.
Later on during Roman times, Northern Illyrian land became a province, meaning it became simply a geographical term. Meanwhile southern Illyrians were placed in the province of Macedonia, which included large parts of Albania.

iu


@Exine
The diversity heatmap is unable to distinguish between locations with more than 25% diversity compared to others area (blue shade). E-Y97307 is classified into two clades. Both contain Albanians. The Ukrainian subclade evolved downstream of the Albanian subclade 1350 years ago. It is a Balkan migrant from the early medieval period, possibly as a Vlach.
I find the notion of "original Daco-Thracians" evolving into Illyrians quite problematic. To begin, nobody has written that Daco-Thracians "became" Illyrians during the Iron Age. Second, in classical times, if a people were called Illyrians, they were just Illyrians. Attempting to make Illyrians into something else appears to be an attempt to reconcile the numerous issues with the concept that E-V13 was present in Thracians and what appears to be a high level of variety in the western Balkans, but not in Bulgaria or Romania.


I understand, thanks for the clarification. So the Ukrainian subbranch is only 1300 yo and downstream the Albanian one. I was limited by SNP tracker, stopping at that SNP, so could not make statements downstream.


Me personally, I think there is a lot of animosity, maybe with reason, but sometimes probably misplaced when talking Balkan halpos, and especially V13 Thracian/Illyrian subtheories. We Albanians have grown weary of wolves in sheeps clothing being on fora the last decade, we have seen the most disgusting theories pushed around.
Nonetheless, I do not believe Rivermans Thracian origin for V13 is to undermine any Albanian position. For all that is worth the more debate, as well researched as Riverman provides the better.
Like L283, NW Balkans. I have not seen on L283 complain, and say nah, we were here since the Pelazgians.

With more samples everything will be clear, so what we are doing right now is purely entertainment.
I do believe V13 will be found in Albania at leas since LBA, I just hope cremation was not exclusively used for burials. Hence why I do not buy the IA V13 from Thracians coming to Albania, I believe it was already there at that point.

Alas, L283 according to 1-2 year old rumor, an Eneolithic sample was found in Moldova. This paper has not come out, and God knows if it will. But I have no reason to believe such a rumor is to subvert the NW Balkan location during EBA-MBA times, since Eneolithic is some 3000 years earlier.

I guess V13 is more sensitive, because it is more widely shared between populations that diverged in historical path since the middle ages, whereas L283 seems endemic to North Albania for the most part.
 
I do believe V13 will be found in Albania at leas since LBA

it did reach Greece, also from the Western Carpathian route, so I guess there is almost no way E-V13 wasn't at least close to Albania, say in Kosovo and at least Macedonia, in the LBA.

I just hope cremation was not exclusively used for burials. Hence why I do not buy the IA V13 from Thracians coming to Albania, I believe it was already there at that point.

I guess it will be easier to prove the presence of Illyrian J-L283, because the majority of those used inhumation, while the incoming Channelled Ware people which brought E-V13 used originally cremation only. Its only when they came into contact with the Cimmerians and Scythians, some change rather quickly to inhumation, but that's rather in the Eastern groups first. What we can do is primarily looking at the pre- and post situation and that's clear enough if comparing Mokrin with Viminacium, because its largely the same population, but pre- and post LBA-EIA transition, pre- and post Channelled Ware-Basarabi and the difference couldn't be more obvious between the local inhabitants in the EBA and those from the Balkan IA.
 
I already explained before that the E-V13 Z5018 will be explained not by Thracians but by other tribes which were already in Central Balkans prior to the transition of LBA/EIA, they probably formed during MBA, like Brnjica/Mediana/Paracin => Trebeniste Culture, new Greek tribes. The Gava-Channeled Ware were mostly E-V13 Z5017 it looks.

There is some clear influence on Glasinac-Mat as well coming from Middle Danube basin. Though they didn't fully interrupt the culture but influenced.
 
I already explained before that the E-V13 Z5018 will be explained not by Thracians but by other tribes which were already in Central Balkans prior to the transition of LBA/EIA, they probably formed during MBA, like Brnjica/Mediana/Paracin => Trebeniste Culture, new Greek tribes. The Gava-Channeled Ware were mostly E-V13 Z5017 it looks.

There is some clear influence on Glasinac-Mat as well coming from Middle Danube basin. Though they didn't fully interrupt the culture but heavily influenced.

Actually a lot of the E-Z5018 clades have even a later, Iron Age Basarabi-Hallstatt distribution and TMRCA. And they have no earlier branching events and distribution in the Balkans than the other main branches. The main branching events for E-Z5018 happened all around the transitional period, like expected for a Gava/Belegis II descendent. Even the clearly Southern, early groups, before Hallstatt, have that timing, like:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-FGC33614/

Note the clean split of an Albanian Central Balkan and a Bulgarian Eastern Balkan clade around 1.100 BC. Imo its a perfect example.

Next one, perfect split at 1.200 BC with many branches looking like having a Hallstatt dispersal:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-ZS1176/

Same here, clean split at 3.200 BC:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-Z16661/

I see no pattern for the majority of E-Z5018 to have been present in the Balkans before the transitional period (pre 1.300 BC) or pre-Gava splits (1.600-1.400 BC).

The Pannonian paper yielded no E-V13 in the Middle Danubian area, especially not South of the river as far as I know of. Any earlier dispersion should have caused such samples, which are not there.
 
Actually a lot of the E-Z5018 clades have even a later, Iron Age Basarabi-Hallstatt distribution and TMRCA. And they have no earlier branching events and distribution in the Balkans than the other main branches. The main branching events for E-Z5018 happened all around the transitional period, like expected for a Gava/Belegis II descendent. Even the clearly Southern, early groups, before Hallstatt, have that timing, like:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-FGC33614/

Note the clean split of an Albanian Central Balkan and a Bulgarian Eastern Balkan clade around 1.100 BC. Imo its a perfect example.

Next one, perfect split at 1.200 BC with many branches looking like having a Hallstatt dispersal:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-ZS1176/

Same here, clean split at 3.200 BC:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-Z16661/

I see no pattern for the majority of E-Z5018 to have been present in the Balkans before the transitional period (pre 1.300 BC) or pre-Gava splits (1.600-1.400 BC).

The Pannonian paper yielded no E-V13 in the Middle Danubian area, especially not South of the river as far as I know of. Any earlier dispersion should have caused such samples, which are not there.

But, FGC33621 diversity is far more in Central-Western Europe than in Balkans or Eastern Balkans. That contradicts Daco-Thracian. Don't get me wrong, i agree on most cases. But the mosaique is not complete.

Among Albanians it's only two families carrying that subclade, and it's a recent bottleneck which was sneakily represented by Dienekes (though i respect him for his knowledge) as the majority of Albanian E-V13. As for the Bulgarian, it's only one Bulgarian from Plovdiv, some Macedonian Greeks, one Cretan Greek.
 
@Riverman, what makes you think E-V13 was Daco-Thracian exclusively and J2b2 was Illyrian instead of Italic for instance, or another unrecorded non-Indo-European like Raetians or Etruscans?

Why so confident that it was J2b2 that spread specifically the Illyrian language?

What about the role of R1b? What language did it spread then?

Ironically enough in North Albania, J2b2 is dominant in the East while E-V13 is on the west.

On the other hand, we?re not even sure that Dacian and Thracian were dialects of the same language.

The fact that they seem so differentiated from each other as well as the similarities between Dacian and Illyrian and Dacian and Albanian, could make plausible even an Illyro-Daco-Thracian migration, replacing in Illyria previous Venetic, non-IE, Brygian/Phrygian, etc.
 
But, FGC33621 diversity is far more in Central-Western Europe than in Balkans or Eastern Balkans. That contradicts Daco-Thracian. Don't get me wrong, i agree on most cases. But the mosaique is not complete.

Among Albanians it's only two families carrying that subclade, and it's a recent bottleneck which was sneakily represented by Dienekes (though i respect him for his knowledge) as the majority of Albanian E-V13. As for the Bulgarian, it's only one Bulgarian from Plovdiv, some Macedonian Greeks, one Cretan Greek.

So far we have in the ancient DNA mainly E-Z5017 from Serbia. No E-Z5018 yet before the common era, isn't it right?

I also think that the Central-Western European diversity is no issue, because these were early lineages which dispersed, whereas those in the Balkan were going through numerous bottlenecks. I looked through the Psenichevo-Basarabi cultural developments, and it seems to me we're dealing with internal replacements, after the Channelled Ware people settled down. Pretty similar to what the Bohemian paper has shown us for Corded Ware: They were more diverse initially, but then the internal struggles resulted in patrilinear replacements. Basarabi for example looks itself, to me, like a major expansion from within the Channelled Ware people with Cimmerian-Scythian elements involved.

We simply need to wait for more ancient DNA, but so far I have no proof for E-Z5018 being more Balkan positioned, even on the contrary.

Also I resently saw that my initial idea of a systematic colonisation by splitting up clan members was right, because I found ethnological and historical parallels for it. There are ethnic groups which send to new colonies members of every major clan, so they being all connected and represented. Like a major tribe as lineage A, B, C, D, E, F. When they decide to send a party of warriors or settlers, usually every clan sends members of his group to join the enterprise.
This is indeed what the Channelled Ware people did, and which causes so much confusion for many observers. The splits are not regional before 1.300 BC, because this is when they sent their warbands and colonisers out! Most of the seemingly older splits or regionally absent lineages can be explained by some lineages not making it, they died out in the meantime.
But whereever a greater number of E-V13 formed a stable population since the Iron Age, you find members of all major clades from the starting point of the expansion event at the LBA-EIA transition. I am now very confident that this was the original mode of dispersal. But later indivduals and small groups moved beyond the tribal territorities, obviously, and in many core areas happened new founder and replacement events, with some of the local variation disappearing.
Its most likely futile to even try to connect the pre-1.300 BC clades to any regional distribution. I don't know where exactly the homeland was, since they might have just joined the Gava-/Channelled Ware expansion at some early point, to profit from it still, but surely not South of the Danube. Therefore at best you may find single individuals here and there South of the Danube before 1.400-1.300, but most of the modern clades, especially such major ones like E-Z5017 and E-Z5018 were all sitting together at or North of the Danube.
 
@Riverman, what makes you think E-V13 was Daco-Thracian exclusively and J2b2 was Illyrian instead of Italic for instance, or another unrecorded non-Indo-European like Raetians or Etruscans?

Why so confident that it was J2b2 that spread specifically the Illyrian language?

What about the role of R1b? What language did it spread then?

Ironically enough in North Albania, J2b2 is dominant in the East while E-V13 is on the west.

On the other hand, we?re not even sure that Dacian and Thracian were dialects of the same language.

The fact that they seem so differentiated from each other as well as the similarities between Dacian and Illyrian and Dacian and Albanian, could make plausible even an Illyro-Daco-Thracian migration, replacing in Illyria previous Venetic, non-IE, Brygian/Phrygian, etc.

Actually J-L283 is unlikely to have spread Illyrian at first, and could have participated in other people like Etruscans too, yes. But they mainly expanded, especially in the Balkans, with Illyrians, with Tumulus culture. They might have just jumped on the wagon while it was moving already, but they did profit form it and spread with it, became the dominant group in various Illyrian tribes along the Adriatic. One of the main distinctions especially in the Albanian zone is people with inhumation burials vs. people cremating their dead. The first comes in the region with Tumulus culture, which spread Illyrian, the second with Channelled Ware = Daco-Thracians primarily and only secondarily with Pannonian Middle Danube Urnfielders. Which by the way caused the domino effect, which pushed Illyrian people to the East, where they moved into Channelled Ware territory. This is how the mixed zone especially in Macedonia came up.
 
Excine



I understand, thanks for the clarification. So the Ukrainian subbranch is only 1300 yo and downstream the Albanian one. I was limited by SNP tracker, stopping at that SNP, so could not make statements downstream.


Me personally, I think there is a lot of animosity, maybe with reason, but sometimes probably misplaced when talking Balkan halpos, and especially V13 Thracian/Illyrian subtheories. We Albanians have grown weary of wolves in sheeps clothing being on fora the last decade, we have seen the most disgusting theories pushed around.
Nonetheless, I do not believe Rivermans Thracian origin for V13 is to undermine any Albanian position. For all that is worth the more debate, as well researched as Riverman provides the better.
Like L283, NW Balkans. I have not seen on L283 complain, and say nah, we were here since the Pelazgians.

With more samples everything will be clear, so what we are doing right now is purely entertainment.
I do believe V13 will be found in Albania at leas since LBA, I just hope cremation was not exclusively used for burials. Hence why I do not buy the IA V13 from Thracians coming to Albania, I believe it was already there at that point.

Alas, L283 according to 1-2 year old rumor, an Eneolithic sample was found in Moldova. This paper has not come out, and God knows if it will. But I have no reason to believe such a rumor is to subvert the NW Balkan location during EBA-MBA times, since Eneolithic is some 3000 years earlier.

I guess V13 is more sensitive, because it is more widely shared between populations that diverged in historical path since the middle ages, whereas L283 seems endemic to North Albania for the most part.

Illyrii proprie dicti is a term used for those Illyrians who lived in the region the Illyrian Kingdom. It's not that other Illyrians weren't "real Illyrians". There are several closely linked Illyrian regions

"Ancient Roman writers Pliny the Elder and Pomponius Mela used the term Illyrii proprie dicti ('properly called Illyrians') to designate a people that was located in the coast of modern Albania and Montenegro.[27] Many modern scholars view the 'properly called Illyrians' as a trace of the Illyrian kingdom known in the sources from the 4th century BC until 167 BC, which was ruled in Roman times by the Ardiaei and Labeatae when it was centered in the Bay of Kotor and Lake Skadar. According to other modern scholars, the term Illyrii may have originally referred only to a small ethnos in the area between Epidaurum and Lissus, and Pliny and Mela may have followed a literary tradition that dates back as early as Hecataeus of Miletus.[8][27] Placed in central Albania, the Illyrii proprie dicti also might have been Rome's first contact with lllyrian peoples. In that case, it did not indicate an original area from which the Illyrians expanded.[28] The area of the Illyrii proprie dicti is largely included in the southern Illyrian onomastic province in modern linguistics.[29]"

"Modern studies about Illyrian onomastics, the main field via which the Illyrians have been linguistically investigated as no written records have been found, began in the 1920s and sought to more accurately define Illyrian tribes, the commonalities, relations and differences between each other as they were conditioned by specific local cultural, ecological and economic factors, which further subdivided them into different groupings.[30][114] This approach has led in contemporary research in the definition of three main onomastic provinces in which Illyrian personal names appear near exclusively in the archaeological material of each province. The southern Illyrian or south-eastern Dalmatian province was the area of the proper Illyrians (the core of which was the territory of Illyrii proprie dicti of the classical authors, located in modern Albania) and includes most of Albania, Montenegro and their hinterlands. This area extended along the Adriatic coast from the Aous valley[29] in the south, up to and beyond the Neretva valley in the north.[29][115]"

"The second onomastic province, the central Illyrian or middle Dalmatian-Pannonian province began to its north and covered a larger area than the southern province. It extended along the Adriatic coast between the Krka and Cetina rivers, covered much of Bosnia (except for its northern regions), central Dalmatia (Lika) and its hinterland in the central Balkans included western Serbia and Sandžak. The third onomastic province further to the north defined as North Adriatic area includes Liburnia and the region of modern Ljubljana in Slovenia. It is part of a larger linguistic area different from Illyrian that also comprises Venetic and its Istrian variety. These areas are not strictly defined geographically as there was some overlap between them.[116][117][115] The region of the Dardani (modern Kosovo, parts of northern North Macedonia, parts of eastern Serbia) saw the overlap of the southern Illyrian and Dalmatian onomastic provinces. Local Illyrian anthroponymy is also found in the area.[118]"

All of them were Illyrians. The western Balkans have both high diversity and the highest frequency of E-V13. What follows is that groups with high E-V13 were Illyrians and not anything else.
 
All of them were Illyrians. The western Balkans have both high diversity and the highest frequency of E-V13. What follows is that groups with high E-V13 were Illyrians and not anything else.

Slovenia, which was also Illyrian in burial custom, with the Unterkrainer group of Hallstatt, has one of the lowest E-V13 numbers in the region. If you say the Central Balkan, I might agree. But the Central Balkan was only secondary Illyrian territory, with the exception of Albania itself, and not even that fully so. People moved around a lot, they weren't sitting where they are now necessarily.
It might be proven that people like the Ligurians and the Norics had more E-V13 than Illyrians proper in the Iron Age. Eastern Hallstatt had different provinces, heavily influenced by Basarabi/Thraco-Cimmerian burials are especially coming from the Fr?g group:
https://www.zobodat.at/pdf/Rudolfinum_2002_0035-0064.pdf

And compare with the map:
5cad6ed61f85a266a11f31803e40686d.png


If they could ever sample a larger group from Fr?g, which is almost impossible, since the largely cremated, they surely would find at least some E-V13.
 
So far we have in the ancient DNA mainly E-Z5017 from Serbia. No E-Z5018 yet before the common era, isn't it right?

I also think that the Central-Western European diversity is no issue, because these were early lineages which dispersed, whereas those in the Balkan were going through numerous bottlenecks. I looked through the Psenichevo-Basarabi cultural developments, and it seems to me we're dealing with internal replacements, after the Channelled Ware people settled down. Pretty similar to what the Bohemian paper has shown us for Corded Ware: They were more diverse initially, but then the internal struggles resulted in patrilinear replacements. Basarabi for example looks itself, to me, like a major expansion from within the Channelled Ware people with Cimmerian-Scythian elements involved.

We simply need to wait for more ancient DNA, but so far I have no proof for E-Z5018 being more Balkan positioned, even on the contrary.

Also I resently saw that my initial idea of a systematic colonisation by splitting up clan members was right, because I found ethnological and historical parallels for it. There are ethnic groups which send to new colonies members of every major clan, so they being all connected and represented. Like a major tribe as lineage A, B, C, D, E, F. When they decide to send a party of warriors or settlers, usually every clan sends members of his group to join the enterprise.
This is indeed what the Channelled Ware people did, and which causes so much confusion for many observers. The splits are not regional before 1.300 BC, because this is when they sent their warbands and colonisers out! Most of the seemingly older splits or regionally absent lineages can be explained by some lineages not making it, they died out in the meantime.
But whereever a greater number of E-V13 formed a stable population since the Iron Age, you find members of all major clades from the starting point of the expansion event at the LBA-EIA transition. I am now very confident that this was the original mode of dispersal. But later indivduals and small groups moved beyond the tribal territorities, obviously, and in many core areas happened new founder and replacement events, with some of the local variation disappearing.
Its most likely futile to even try to connect the pre-1.300 BC clades to any regional distribution. I don't know where exactly the homeland was, since they might have just joined the Gava-/Channelled Ware expansion at some early point, to profit from it still, but surely not South of the Danube. Therefore at best you may find single individuals here and there South of the Danube before 1.400-1.300, but most of the modern clades, especially such major ones like E-Z5017 and E-Z5018 were all sitting together at or North of the Danube.

The Gava-Belegi II looks like a clear and consistent candidate for E-V13 spread to me. That's right. But i also think Vatin Culture/related had E-V13 as well. Let's wait for further aDNA.

Slovenia, which was also Illyrian in burial custom, with the Unterkrainer group of Hallstatt, has one of the lowest E-V13 numbers in the region. If you say the Central Balkan, I might agree. But the Central Balkan was only secondary Illyrian territory, with the exception of Albania itself, and not even that fully so. People moved around a lot, they weren't sitting where they are now necessarily.
It might be proven that people like the Ligurians and the Norics had more E-V13 than Illyrians proper in the Iron Age. Eastern Hallstatt had different provinces, heavily influenced by Basarabi/Thraco-Cimmerian burials are especially coming from the Fr�g group:
https://www.zobodat.at/pdf/Rudolfinum_2002_0035-0064.pdf

And compare with the map:
5cad6ed61f85a266a11f31803e40686d.png


If they could ever sample a larger group from Fr�g, which is almost impossible, since the largely cremated, they surely would find at least some E-V13.


That's a double standard though, J2b2-L283 is not common as well, but that was not the case in ancient times. I think this region was severely depopulated because of the War of the Batos, Illyrian revolt of 6-9 A.D where most of the male population was enslaved and put to work in Italian mines.
 

This thread has been viewed 23949 times.

Back
Top