To burn or not to burn: LBA/EIA Balkan case

[PaleoRevenge]

In the new forum genarchivist, someone posted links to videos. I took a screen shot of this map, one day we will have samples from Roman Dacia.

 

[Riverman]

The first ones should be those from the Gepids. However, the really important ones for the debate are the Bronze to Iron Age ones. Because all sides can argue either way for people being originally from this or that region. We need to find the Bronze Age core group and even though they cremated, at least indirectly it should be possible, because this population must have been fairly large and widespread by the LBA.

 

[PaleoRevenge]

Have you seen this Riverman, from the 1,200 BC project?

Taking the pulse of biomolecular and bioarchaeological insights into mobility and change ca. 1200 BC in southeastern Europe


Mobility is commonly linked to social change in archaeology, though in more recent years we have returned to discussions of mobility and population change. As the pendulum has swung back towards the movement of people as a catalyst for social change, fresh debates are emerging particularly around cases where there is a history of debate about migration in archaeology. The East Mediterranean and southeastern Europe is one of these important venues – from tales of Dorian Invaders to Sea Peoples, migration has been seen as a fundamental component of collapse since the early days of archaeology. While the debate remains simmering, it is due for a robust revival in the coming years as a number of projects currently analysing ancient human DNA are published.

This paper takes the pulse, so to speak, of where we are currently with respect to models of mobility and the current, quite limited, state of the art of palaeogenomics and stable isotope research for this specific period of crisis and change. Our intent is two-fold, to reflect on what kinds of questions archaeological-led enquiry may pose and in so doing, to consider the potential insights biomolecular research may contribute. We run a real risk as these data come online of invoking problematic stale old paradigms for migrations or at the very least, not adequately accommodating current theoretical models which are already breaking down inflexible culture-historical identities such as Minoan or Mycenaean. Moving beyond fixed models of (material) cultural identity, it is also obvious that people were not constrained by genetics or places of origin, but by lifeways, experiences and choice. Since these are things not accessible through biomolecular research, we will assess how they can be made relevant when evaluating if or how mobility played a role in crises and ultimately collapse around 1200 BC.


They outright admit, the raw data will bring back to life the natural view of history, of migrations and conquest. The raw data will not accommodate current theoretical models. LMAO


One has to wonder why so far we have hundreds of samples from southern Greece but only two from northern Greece(with no y-haplogroup), a critical road junction that linked Mycenae with the northern world, where one can take historical pulse of any migrations that drained from north to south. The giant sample void in the Daco-Thracian world, but hundreds from Hungary. It's looking like they simply do not like the result of the samples and find reasons to delay.

 

[Southpaw]

Have you seen this Riverman, from the 1,200 BC project?

Taking the pulse of biomolecular and bioarchaeological insights into mobility and change ca. 1200 BC in southeastern Europe


Mobility is commonly linked to social change in archaeology, though in more recent years we have returned to discussions of mobility and population change. As the pendulum has swung back towards the movement of people as a catalyst for social change, fresh debates are emerging particularly around cases where there is a history of debate about migration in archaeology. The East Mediterranean and southeastern Europe is one of these important venues – from tales of Dorian Invaders to Sea Peoples, migration has been seen as a fundamental component of collapse since the early days of archaeology. While the debate remains simmering, it is due for a robust revival in the coming years as a number of projects currently analysing ancient human DNA are published.

This paper takes the pulse, so to speak, of where we are currently with respect to models of mobility and the current, quite limited, state of the art of palaeogenomics and stable isotope research for this specific period of crisis and change. Our intent is two-fold, to reflect on what kinds of questions archaeological-led enquiry may pose and in so doing, to consider the potential insights biomolecular research may contribute. We run a real risk as these data come online of invoking problematic stale old paradigms for migrations or at the very least, not adequately accommodating current theoretical models which are already breaking down inflexible culture-historical identities such as Minoan or Mycenaean. Moving beyond fixed models of (material) cultural identity, it is also obvious that people were not constrained by genetics or places of origin, but by lifeways, experiences and choice. Since these are things not accessible through biomolecular research, we will assess how they can be made relevant when evaluating if or how mobility played a role in crises and ultimately collapse around 1200 BC.


They outright admit, the raw data will bring back to life the natural view of history, of migrations and conquest. The raw data will not accommodate current theoretical models. LMAO


One has to wonder why so far we have hundreds of samples from southern Greece but only two from northern Greece(with no y-haplogroup), a critical road junction that linked Mycenae with the northern world, where one can take historical pulse of any migrations that drained from north to south. The giant sample void in the Daco-Thracian world, but hundreds from Hungary. It's looking like they simply do not like the result of the samples and find reasons to delay.

Interesting to know, what changes where brought, i mean what Y-DNA, if there was any change.

 

[PaleoRevenge]

I don't have insider information. For me, what is being published is questionable, because they are clearly withholding data. The reasons for withholding are many, the Dacian region is pretty obvious, absolute discontinuity for Romanians, plus the E-V13 heavy dosage of modern populations in Albania and Greece, which was not the case in antiquity.

Link to the abstract.
https://submissions.e-a-a.org/eaa2021/repository/preview.php?Abstract=1125

The 1,200 BC project based on their Facebook page photos, has samples at least from all over Greece, northern Serbia, Belegis II(E-V13) and south-western Romania(also Belegis II). They might even have samples from Brnjica site near Nis, Humska Cuka. They were taking samples even from cremated bones. I suspect the main Y-DNA disruptions is E-V13, they alone ought to be culprit of change, everyone else has already been accounted for.

 

[Riverman]

I don't have insider information. For me, what is being published is questionable, because they are clearly withholding data. The reasons for withholding are many, the Dacian region is pretty obvious, absolute discontinuity for Romanians, plus the E-V13 heavy dosage of modern populations in Albania and Greece, which was not the case in antiquity.

Link to the abstract.
https://submissions.e-a-a.org/eaa2021/repository/preview.php?Abstract=1125

The 1,200 BC project based on their Facebook page photos, has samples at least from all over Greece, northern Serbia, Belegis II(E-V13) and south-western Romania(also Belegis II). The might even have samples from Brnjica site near Nis, Humska Cuka. They were taking samples even from cremated bones. I suspect the main Y-DNA disruptions is E-V13, they alone ought to be culprit of change, everyone else has already been accounted for.

E-V13 must be disruptive in the Balkans, because the modern and ancient data show us a massive, huge scale expansion of the Haplogroup in the LBA-EIA Transitional Period. This can only happen, there is no alternative, if they were expanding patrilinear clans which replaced other male populations and, at least to some degree, grabbed the females of those dead men, which led to an even faster demographic growth of the haplogroup, to put it that simple and straightforward.
The currently available modern data alone is sufficient to come to this conclusion. And that's just the crippled version, because I expect many E-V13 clans to have been eliminated both by internal and external, especially Celtic, Roman, Germanic and Slavic competition later. The LBA population can therefore be only bigger than what we can read from the modern data, never smaller.

Especially Greeks and Romanians are highly sensitive about the archaeological past. Its a big topic there, still. Therefore I wouldn't wonder if the authors try to immunise themselves against criticism, which they a) won't achieve anyway and which b) will just make the paper later and worse. The genetic data should be presented as a new evidence with a quality of its own. Like if a C14 result does contradict something an ideologcial archaeologists claimed 20 years ago, would they try the same? They should always double check the results and interpretation, but not bend facts to ideological needs. That's truly against the scientific ethos, more than anything else.

 

[PaleoRevenge]

E-V13 must be disruptive in the Balkans, because the modern and ancient data show us a massive, huge scale expansion of the Haplogroup in the LBA-EIA Transitional Period. This can only happen, there is no alternative, if they were expanding patrilinear clans which replaced other male populations and, at least to some degree, grabbed the females of those dead men, which led to an even faster demographic growth of the haplogroup, to put it that simple and straightforward.
The currently available modern data alone is sufficient to come to this conclusion. And that's just the crippled version, because I expect many E-V13 clans to have been eliminated both by internal and external, especially Celtic, Roman, Germanic and Slavic competition later. The LBA population can therefore be only bigger than what we can read from the modern data, never smaller.

Especially Greeks and Romanians are highly sensitive about the archaeological past. Its a big topic there, still. Therefore I wouldn't wonder if the authors try to immunise themselves against criticism, which they a) won't achieve anyway and which b) will just make the paper later and worse. The genetic data should be presented as a new evidence with a quality of its own. Like if a C14 result does contradict something an ideologcial archaeologists claimed 20 years ago, would they try the same? They should always double check the results and interpretation, but not bend facts to ideological needs. That's truly against the scientific ethos, more than anything else.

It's a new dark age. Data is withheld and the teams meet to discuss, how the raw data is problematic to current theories, not the other way, how did we go astray, why are our theories junk.


I do wonder how South Thracian Aegean shifted profile formed,
1) did it come about by raiding Anatolia(and local women) during BA collapse
2) or was southern Bulgaria Aegean shifted by LBA
3) or are they Belegis II raiders that penetrated Greece and were driven back (picking up Mycenaean mixture when they briefly ruled) and forced to retire in southern Bulgaria


Is there any archeological trail? G25 favors Minoan pull not Anatolian BA.

 

[Southpaw]

It's a new dark age. Data is withheld and the teams meet to discuss, how the raw data is problematic to current theories, not the other way, how did we go astray, why are our theories junk.


I do wonder how South Thracian Aegean shifted profile formed,
1) did it come about by raiding Anatolia(and local women) during BA collapse
2) or was southern Bulgaria Aegean shifted by LBA
3) or are they Belegis II raiders that penetrated Greece and were driven back (picking up Mycenaean mixture when they briefly ruled) and forced to retire in southern Bulgaria


Is there any archeological trail? G25 favors Minoan pull not Anatolian BA.

Shall make sense, there was an intrusion of Barbarian-Ware/Handmade Burnished Ware in Greece, usually this Barbarian-Ware had close ties to Knobbed-Ware of Troy and related Stamped-Ware horizon. Traces of them were as far as Cyprus were cremation burials were attested and were novice/alien to the region.

IDK, let's see.

 

[Riverman]

It's a new dark age. Data is withheld and the teams meet to discuss, how the raw data is problematic to current theories, not the other way, how did we go astray, why are our theories junk.


I do wonder how South Thracian Aegean shifted profile formed,
1) did it come about by raiding Anatolia(and local women) during BA collapse
2) or was southern Bulgaria Aegean shifted by LBA
3) or are they Belegis II raiders that penetrated Greece and were driven back (picking up Mycenaean mixture when they briefly ruled) and forced to retire in southern Bulgaria


Is there any archeological trail? G25 favors Minoan pull not Anatolian BA.

I think it was both. We should consider that the closest contacts of this South Thracians were the Anatolian tribes and Greeks. Their orientation, after settling down, was clearly more Southern-Eastern. Even the Dacians had a strong Greek influence in their ethnogenesis, when they formed the historically known people. Final verdict can always come with the data only, because like we said, hard data is king.

 

[PaleoRevenge]

Interesting conversation in this Facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1340824246505282&set=a.103315046922881

I'll quote the most interesting statement from the leader of rrenjet.

there are two cluster of origin that make up the current Albanian population today including Arvanitas and Arberesh. The largest one is from South Serbia/Kosova region (south Moesia +Dardania). This cluster is the back bone demografically today. The second cluster that expanded but smaller than the first is from Mat, Diber, Mirdite.

There are a few lines in south east albania that are Proto Illyriar but they did not experience any demographic expansion during middle ages. The same with some neolitic male lines in the south.

Over a year ago when I put forth here the very same proposal along with others, the entire rrenjet team was up in arms. What has changed, why is gjergj mimicking and adopting our proposals? Because he has insider information, the Kruja-Komani samples have been tested though not yet published and they are without a doubt J2b-L283 dominated, maybe a good chunk of R-PF7563 is part of this group too. He is copying and pasting the Bessian theory but painting it with a Illyrian dye to cover up the Daco-Mysian elephant within, as a natural bojaxhi that he is, it is a futile attempt.

There is no doubt Kruja-Komani = Latinized Illyrians and are J2b-L283 dominated, in gjergj own words, these are not the backbone of the Albanians corpus (Albanian, Arberesh, Arvanites). There is no reason for someone from his camp to make such a statement that E-V13 and R-Z2705/R-Y2337 to have it's origins outside of Albania and to the east of Albania given their fixation with continuity at all cost. He has without a doubt seen unpublished samples from Albania, from antiquity through the middle ages.

There is quite a lot of nonsense posted, like Paonnian cradle of E-V13, they are shifting the origin of the core Albanian haplogroups at the edge of the Illyrian world just short of free falling into a abyss.
Also let's pretend one does not notice strabio/brum i zi/excine/hasan-gejaj with his eternal sock accounts.

 

[Riverman]

Interesting conversation in this Facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1340824246505282&set=a.103315046922881

I'll quote the most interesting statement from the leader of rrenjet.




Over a year ago when I put forth here the very same proposal along with others, the entire rrenjet team was up in arms. What has changed, why is gjergj mimicking and adopting our proposals? Because he has insider information, the Kruja-Komani samples have been tested though not yet published and they are without a doubt J2b-L283 dominated, maybe a good chunk of R-PF7563 is part of this group too. He is copying and pasting the Bessian theory but painting it with a Illyrian dye to cover up the Daco-Mysian elephant within, as a good bojaxhi that he is, it is a futile attempt.

There is no doubt Kruja-Komani = Latinized Illyrians and are J2b-L283 dominated, in gjergj own words, these are not the backbone of the Albanians corpus (Albanian, Arberesh, Arvanites). There is no reason for someone from his camp to make such a statement that E-V13 and R-Z2705/R-Y2337 to have it's origins outside of Albania and to the east of Albania given their fixation with continuity at all cost. He has without a doubt seen unpublished samples from Albania, from antiquity through the middle ages.

There is quite a lot of nonsense posted, like Paonnian cradle of E-V13, they are shifting the origin of the core Albanian haplogroups at the edge of the Illyrian world just short of free falling into a abyss.
Also let's pretend one does not notice strabio/brum i zi/excine/hasan-gejaj in his eternal sock accounts.

I really think that E-V13 was in the described area earlier, but that a significant portion of important E-V13 lineages might have arrived as late as Late Antiquity with the Dacian resettlement. If those mixed with the local Dardanians and Daco-Thracian remnants, which might already have had some E-V13 lineages before, it would be, probably, a good fit in my opinion.

 

[Johane Derite]

Interesting conversation in this Facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1340824246505282&set=a.103315046922881

I'll quote the most interesting statement from the leader of rrenjet.




Over a year ago when I put forth here the very same proposal along with others, the entire rrenjet team was up in arms. What has changed, why is gjergj mimicking and adopting our proposals? Because he has insider information, the Kruja-Komani samples have been tested though not yet published and they are without a doubt J2b-L283 dominated, maybe a good chunk of R-PF7563 is part of this group too. He is copying and pasting the Bessian theory but painting it with a Illyrian dye to cover up the Daco-Mysian elephant within, as a good bojaxhi that he is, it is a futile attempt.

There is no doubt Kruja-Komani = Latinized Illyrians and are J2b-L283 dominated, in gjergj own words, these are not the backbone of the Albanians corpus (Albanian, Arberesh, Arvanites). There is no reason for someone from his camp to make such a statement that E-V13 and R-Z2705/R-Y2337 to have it's origins outside of Albania and to the east of Albania given their fixation with continuity at all cost. He has without a doubt seen unpublished samples from Albania, from antiquity through the middle ages.

There is quite a lot of nonsense posted, like Paonnian cradle of E-V13, they are shifting the origin of the core Albanian haplogroups at the edge of the Illyrian world just short of free falling into a abyss.
Also let's pretend one does not notice strabio/brum i zi/excine/hasan-gejaj in his eternal sock accounts.

Interesting, I'll copy paste some of Gjergji's other relevant comments here for those that don't have Fb:


Gjergj Bojaxhi:


"All, 99.9%, of the western part of montenegro and Albania from Shkodra to Vlora is populated today from hinterland.
We have zero results to point to a male line in this region that was there during or prior to Roman period.
And the serbian project has not been able to find any in west part of Montenegro either. It is as if prior male population has been wiped out."


"Also the mini region that has the largest % of male lines continously living in the same local area is in Dibra city and sorrounding villages. Its just accross the border with Macedonia. Town is also called Shehri."

Later on Mihalis responding to his scheme of "two" clusters in Albanians:



Mihalis Ntinopoulos:


"So we can assume that it's the first cluster (from Moesia-Dardania) that brought the Albanian language to what is today Albania, since the Paleo-Balkan language that was spoken in Mat-Mirditë-Dibër was Illyrian proper, while the one spoken in eastern Kosovo and southern Serbia was Daco-Mysian (which belonged to the Thracian group and which some scholars equate with Proto-Albanian) and according to Matzinger an unattested language was also spoken in this region besides Daco-Mysian, which was neither Illyrian nor Thracian (he identifies it with Proto-Albanian). It would thus seem that the second cluster had been Latinized (eventually speaking a Romance language close to now-extinct Dalmatian) and later adopted Albanian, from the first cluster originating in Dardania-Moesia. Because, from a linguistic perspective the Paleo-Balkan languages spoken in northern Albania and Dardania-Moesia could not have given rise to the same language."


To which Gjergji responds:
Gjergj Bojaxhi:


"I am no so sure about this part. Since Albanian derives from an indoeuropean branch that is a bit different it makes more sense that the original carriers of the language moved more directly to the west balkans from north of black see rather than to the areas of southern part of central europe. If this stands as an assumption than the original carriers of the language were R1b-PF7563, R1b-Z2103, some clades or J-L283 and some smaller lines. In this case Moesia is less likely the source of the langauge. I am not so sure as I am not a linguist but I suspect language wise its not that cluster.
The northern cluster its a southen trend of Pannonia, especially E-V13 and if that was the source of the language we would have been closer to one of the other main indoeuropean branches in Europe.
I know its not a direct argument but its all I have for now."



So his two cluster scheme for Albanians is the

1. Dardano-Moesian cluster (Kosova-South Serbia)
2. "Mat-Diber-Mirdite" cluster


When asked which cluster brought proto-Albanian he argues the Mat-Diber-Mirdite cluster, but he also qualifies this cluster as being a southern Pannonian "trend"? What does he mean by this?

 

[PaleoRevenge]

Gjergj is a incoherent individual, I've seen interviews where he calls E-V13 proto-Illyrian though based on earlier comments in the interview, he clearly did not mean to. He Fs up when he types or speaks.
He says E-V13 is Pannonian, and the argument that it cannot be the linguistic ancestor groups, is that it's way too northern and likely spoke a IE language related to the northern branches(Celtic, Germanic, etc...) which is just dumb excuses, he is basically whining. I do not know why he groups R-Z2705/R-Y2337 differently from E-V13, because they clearly came into Albania together, like I said he is not very coherent, because the Moesia group if confined to E-V13, is not the largest group as he presented it. The spread of E-V13 and R-Z2705/R-Y2337 are the only coherent lineages that are reliably present in every Albanian speaking region, they are the backbone.

 

[PaleoRevenge]

I really think that E-V13 was in the described area earlier, but that a significant portion of important E-V13 lineages might have arrived as late as Late Antiquity with the Dacian resettlement. If those mixed with the local Dardanians and Daco-Thracian remnants, which might already have had some E-V13 lineages before, it would be, probably, a good fit in my opinion.

He is not just saying E-V13 was in Pannonia, he is betting/hoping/dreaming that its urheimat was in Pannonia and from there it mushroomed everywhere during LBA.
E-V13 entered Pannonia through Bosut/Bassarabi expansion and is decisively non-Illyrian, even if by late Iron Age some dead-end lineages were adopted by gjergj's imagined forefathers living on the northern frontiers of Illyria.

 

[Riverman]

He is not just saying E-V13 was in Pannonia, he is betting/hoping/dreaming that its urheimat was in Pannonia and from there it mushroomed everywhere during LBA.
E-V13 entered Pannonia through Bosut/Bassarabi expansion and is decisively non-Illyrian, even if by late Iron Age some dead-end lineages were adopted by gjergj's imagined forefathers living on the northern frontiers of Illyria.

Well, as you know, I think E-V13 had its centre in the Eastern Carpathian basin, basically along and East of the Tisza river, down to the Danube from there, into Oltenia. If talking about Pannonia, E-V13 did expand into Pannonia in multiple waves and backflows, but mostly from beyond the Tisza river, where the centre was.
They did mix with Illyrians, starting with Urnfield expansions South, but they were not Illyrians in their core zone and can't be equated with those, very clearly not.

Critical is, that the centre was NOT:
- West of the Tisza river
- Much further South than the Danube
- Also unlikely North of the Carpathian mountains

While E-V13 did spread massively South and in all directions in the LBA-EIA. The bulk the centre was remaining in that zone, just a bit Southward shifted with Bosut-Basarabi.

 

[PaleoRevenge]

Interesting, I'll copy paste some of Gjergji's other relevant comments here for those that don't have Fb:


Gjergj Bojaxhi:


"All, 99.9%, of the western part of montenegro and Albania from Shkodra to Vlora is populated today from hinterland.
We have zero results to point to a male line in this region that was there during or prior to Roman period.
And the serbian project has not been able to find any in west part of Montenegro either. It is as if prior male population has been wiped out."


"Also the mini region that has the largest % of male lines continously living in the same local area is in Dibra city and sorrounding villages. Its just accross the border with Macedonia. Town is also called Shehri."

That was a interesting cut-off point. It looks like what was suspected, that Chaonians were J2a, is likely true after all. I think Bubanj-Hum had to have been R-PF7563, with some R-Z2103(that's a safe bet for central Balkans). The EBA samples from Kukes is dated around 2,550 BC and is about 2/3 steppe in autosomal DNA. He likely came to Albania through Kosovo which is Bubanj-Hum territory at the time(also the same timeline when this culture began). EBA Cinamak is likely is just branch of this overall migration that formed Bubanj-Hum. Armenchori which is seen as a derivative of Bubanj-Hum is likely J2a dominated along with G2 and minority R1b presence. I don't know if J2a was naturalized into IE identity locally in Macedonia or somewhere further north, I would suspect they adopted locally. It is hard to imagine Armenchori being R-PF7563 dominated and to have such a weak presence in Mycenean Greece, whoever occupied Armenchori would have supplied southern Greece with impulses of migrations. I can't see them being different from the leading Mycenean lineages.

 

[Johane Derite]

Gjergj is a incoherent individual, I've seen interviews where he calls E-V13 proto-Illyrian though based on earlier comments in the interview, he clearly did not mean to. He Fs up when he types or speaks.
He says E-V13 is Pannonian, and the argument that it cannot be the linguistic ancestor groups, is that it's way too northern and likely spoke a IE language related to the northern branches(Celtic, Germanic, etc...) which is just dumb excuses, he is basically whining. I do not know why he groups R-Z2705/R-Y2337 differently from E-V13, because they clearly came into Albania together, like I said he is not very coherent, because the Moesia group if confined to E-V13, is not the largest group as he presented it. The spread of E-V13 and R-Z2705/R-Y2337 are the only coherent lineages that are reliably present in every Albanian speaking region, they are the backbone.

Ok, i just now got it, i misunderstood his writing because it is a bit broken. He refers to the Dardano-Moesian as the "northern" cluster, whereas I misunderstood it at first as referring to the "north albanian". mat-diber-mirdite cluster. Yes you are correct, he is claiming that Moesia is a "southern" trend of Pannonia, when that is simply not the case linguistically or historically, as moesia was not Delmato-Pannonian linguistically or culturally.

 

[PaleoRevenge]

Well, as you know, I think E-V13 had its centre in the Eastern Carpathian basin, basically along and East of the Tisza river, down to the Danube from there, into Oltenia. If talking about Pannonia, E-V13 did expand into Pannonia in multiple waves and backflows, but mostly from beyond the Tisza river, where the centre was.
They did mix with Illyrians, starting with Urnfield expansions South, but they were not Illyrians in their core zone and can't be equated with those, very clearly not.

Critical is, that the centre was NOT:
- West of the Tisza river
- Much further South than the Danube
- Also unlikely North of the Carpathian mountains

While E-V13 did spread massively South and in all directions in the LBA-EIA. The bulk the centre was remaining in that zone, just a bit Southward shifted with Bosut-Basarabi.

I agree with your assessment, you were the first to propose this solution to the E-V13 diffusion. If you read gjergj's comments carefully, he is clearly claiming Pannonia was the umerheit of E-V13. This is not just a minor misunderstanding, he and his team do this consistently time and time again, if a haplogrooup is crucial to the formation of Albanians, but can't be linked to Illyrians, some nebulous borderland explanation is construed. Even for his Moesian group(which he purposely does not disclose what haplogroups it pertains), he pushes within the confine o Moesia as far west as he can, so he can call it Illyrian, proto-Illyrian, neo-illyrian, whatever decorations the painter fancies, that keeps the communist Illyiran dream going.

The 1,200 BCE team low key agrees with you. It would be nice to know the haplogroups of this Tizsa group, will they disclose it? Or is the raw data at odds with historical fiction of the last decades?
https://submissions.e-a-a.org/eaa2021/repository/preview.php?Abstract=2994

 

[PaleoRevenge]

Ok, i just now got it, i misunderstood his writing because it is a bit broken. He refers to the Dardano-Moesian as the "northern" cluster, whereas I misunderstood it at first as referring to the "north albanian". mat-diber-mirdite cluster. Yes you are correct, he is claiming that Moesia is a "southern" trend of Pannonia, when that is simply not the case linguistically or historically, as moesia was not Delmato-Pannonian linguistically or culturally.

He is bad at expressing his thoughts. But his overall construct is in bad faith. He want's E-V13 to start off in Pannonia so it can be dissociated from the Daco-Thracian block. Thus E-V13 belongs to no one, somehow it becomes the Thracian haplogroup, no one knows why it chose to do that but barely scrapped the Illyrians.

His construction of events can be summed into this; E-V13 dispersed from Pannonia in LBA and moved to Moesia where it got adopted by some Illyrian tribe, then came to Albania under Slavic pressure. And thus every paleo-Balkan haplogroup is a happy ancient Illyrian, same family. It's pretty much a children storybook narrative. Happy ending, rainbows in the sky.

One has to wonder why by Roman time E-V13 was not much present in Pannonia, in the Roman samples Jb2 and R-L151 are the consistent haplogroups of Pannonia. Did E-V13 leave Pannonia forever, or did the J2b proto-Illyrians kill the E-V13 neo-Illyrians before a harmonic blend of both Illyrians could be Illyrealized?

 

[Riverman]

I agree with your assessment, you were the first to propose this solution to the E-V13 diffusion. If you read gjergj's comments carefully, he is clearly claiming Pannonia was the umerheit of E-V13. This is not just a minor misunderstanding, he and his team do this consistently time and time again, if a haplogrooup is crucial to the formation of Albanians, but can't be linked to Illyrians, some nebulous borderland explanation is construed. Even for his Moesian group(which he purposely does not disclose what haplogroups it pertains), he pushes within the confine o Moesia as far west as he can, so he can call it Illyrian, proto-Illyrian, neo-illyrian, whatever decorations the painter fancies, that keeps the communist Illyiran dream going.

The 1,200 BCE team low key agrees with you. It would be nice to know the haplogroups of this Tizsa group, will they disclose it? Or is the raw data at odds with historical fiction of the last decades?
https://submissions.e-a-a.org/eaa2021/repository/preview.php?Abstract=2994

"Tisza Site Group (TSG)"...always new terms which might cause more confusion than clarification. One has to wonder if that's on purpose. Anyway, the Lower Tisza will be crucial for the Balkan expansion of the Eastern Urnfielders. As for E-V13 in Pannonia after the introduction of cremation: I really think that the E-V13 clans associated with the Northern Daco-Thracians are the most consistently cremating people in Central Europe on the long run. They started it, they kept it alive and only under special circumstances and massive foreign influence they used alternative forms of burial and inhumation (like in Basarabi).

E.g., the Sanislau/Eastern Vekerzug group surely sent a lot of people West, into the Western Vekerzug groups territory, where the locals at that time largely preferred inhumation. We got just one sample of E-V13 from that time, from Slovakia, but I'm pretty sure there were many, many more around, which however, unless they were assimilated into the foreign groups, always cremated. Like the whole Western territory being sprinkled with cremations, of which many are rather unusual for the locals. This is a minority, but the percentage of E-V13 among these was for sure higher than in those using inhumation. Therefore in the Iron Age, we deal with a massive testing bias in all areas to the West, in a mixed context. Because the E-V13 clans were for sure more likely to use cremation than most other groups.

With that I'm not saying that these were crucial for the Albanians. Because for sure these groups in Eastern Hallstatt/Western Vekerzug were highly mixed. If those would have been crucial for the Southward migrating E-V13 group, Albanians would have way more R-L2 in particular, which they don't.