-
Don't want to see ads? Install an adblocker like uBlock Origin or use a Europe-based privacy-friendly browser like Vivaldi or Mullvad.
Where does the Albanian language come from? [VIDEO]
- Thread starter Johane Derite
- Start date
Johane Derite
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,959
- Reaction score
- 1,057
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Albanian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U1a1a
Wrong. Plasari deserves to be trash talked for misleading people and totally forcing disjointed unconnected things together to force a conclusion which doesnt exist.
He tries to place arbon from polybius in Albania when its clearly not in Albania going from polybius' account alone. He knows that for Arbon to be in Albania then Issa and Pharos also have to be close by since they are mentioned as being in contact, but his suggestion that Issa and Pharos are Ishëm and Rodon are beyond impossible and absurd.
From even a basic reading of Polybius we know that Demetrius of Pharos could not be Demetrius of Rodon.
We know the Romans took "several illyrian cities" and took losses at "Nutria" as they sailed along the coast on their way to Issa.
Plasari's model would suggest there were "several Illyrian cities", one being Nutria, in between Durrës & Rodon. This is just one of the countless facts that don't match.
The romans at this time had already subdued the Ardiaeans, who were a way more northern Illyrian group.
Furthermore, Polybius tells us later, that the people of Issa complained to Rome about the Dalmatians raiding them, and that Issa was in league with Trogir (Croatian town), etc.
Plasari's hypothesis that Issa was Ishem either suggests he didn't even read any other parts of Polybius or he counts on his dumb zombie followers to just take his word for it. Either way its very poor scholarship.
Reposting this again since that troll with multiple fake accounts repeated a wrong statistical percentage (tHeRe Is 60% non-J2b-L283 
…), and actually manages to get upvotes for that, regarding Southern Arc samples from Albania.
…), and actually manages to get upvotes for that, regarding Southern Arc samples from Albania.We have samples from two tested sites from Albania, one is from the North West Shkodra where we got that Proto-Illyrian I8471 Cetina/Dinaric guy from and the very east Albanian Cinamak, Kukes samples, of which one is EBA Balkan Yamnayan with similar auDNA to other early Yamnayan dispersals as in Bulgaria and co.In regards to Southern Arc aDNA records of Albania:
ID I8471 1880-1695 calBCE J2b-L283>>Z615>Z597 (Z609+, Z628+, FT92472-, Z40053-, CTS12554-) Shkrel (Shkodër), Albania (Cetina/Dinaric)
ID I17633 700-400 BCE J2b-L283>? (Z589+, Z622+, Y3781Çinamak (Kukës), Albania
ID I16253 658-403 calBCE J2b-L283>>Z615>Z597>Z638>Z1297>Z1295>Y21878>CTS11100>Y37121 (Z1298+, Y37818+, Y106264+, FT29003-, FT34408-, Y110968-, F3754-) Çinamak (Kukës), Albania
ID I16254 600-400 BCE J2b-L283>? (coverage too low: Z2512/CTS5382+, S23613/Z2521+, FT92472-, CTS12554-) Çinamak (Kukës), Albania
ID I14690 1700-400 BCE R1b-Z2103>CTS1450 Çinamak (Kukës), Albania
ID I16251 500-50 BCE R1b-Z2103? Çinamak (Kukës), Albania
ID I14689 2663-2472 calBCE R1b-PF7562? (low coverage: L23-) Çinamak (Kukës), Albania (Balkan Yamnayan)
ID I14688 600-400 BCE R1b-PF7562 Çinamak (Kukës), Albania
Whilst I am certain to agree based on aDNA records that very early Proto-Albanians are highly likely descendants of some Central Balkan MBA nest spanning from the North to the South (likely similar to ancient Greeks, we got those Mycenean PF7562 samples too didn't we?), it is very much wrong to equate them with their Western actual core Illyrian neighbors. THESE ULANCI OFFSHOOTS HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH PROTO-ILLYRIAN CETINA/DINARIC.
Look at the BA/IA North Macedonian results from largely Paeonian cemetries and what the archeology suggests about these sites, esp. the MBA/LBA Ulanci group and their of shoots rich in R1b-Z2103 (likely a PF7562 minority too).
Cinamak is to the very east of Albania bordering these clearly distinct archeological complexes and R1b-Z2103 starts to appear (in only two samples, and PF7562 in solely one IA sample). Is this a coincidence? Clearly not.
Look at the BA/IA North Macedonian results from largely Paeonian cemetries and what the archeology suggests about these sites, esp. the MBA/LBA Ulanci group and their of shoots rich in R1b-Z2103 (likely a PF7562 minority too).
Cinamak is to the very east of Albania bordering these clearly distinct archeological complexes and R1b-Z2103 starts to appear (in only two samples, and PF7562 in solely one IA sample). Is this a coincidence? Clearly not.
Already mentioned by Oroku Saki:
PaleoRevenge
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,522
- Reaction score
- 1,339
- Points
- 113
PaleoRevenge
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,522
- Reaction score
- 1,339
- Points
- 113
I've been playing around with the G25 coordinates. Once I was able to find the Roman Danubian Frontier data, doors began to open. Initially I was trying things out with the Southern Arc data only, but once I combined these two, things started to come in together nicely.
I would appreciate if any of you could forward more Albanian samples, I would appreciate that because the regional ones posted by Brumi seem tempered, I really think he added a HR_IA pull to the averages, they have a suspicious avoidance of Thracian IA and an attraction to HR IA, even though the random Albanian samples do not behave this way(the opposite actually), even when I average them out. So I would appreciate any Albanian G25 coordinates. I started learning this calculator this week, so I have missed out on modern data and where it's stashed.
My analysis, none of the Albanian_Mdv are Albanian, the Kenete(I14622) sample is not even related all, this persons lineage might live on, but his autosomal is alien. The Korca I13834 is really an ancient sample mislabeled as Mdv, see my previous post.
The Shtike(I13839) sample is not Albanian, but it does play a role in the modern gene pool. She appears to be a local Byzantine citizen, living in a area full of Slavic toponyms, but only slightly mixed with them. It does appear that Balkan Slavs segregated themselves from the natives until late middle ages. The Shtike sample is a good proxy for a Roman-Greek speaking substrate throughout Albania(even north), Macedonia, Northern Greece.
I pretty much ran all ancient samples against individual Albanians and looked for consistent patterns, and slowly eliminated low matches and inconsistent matches.
1) From all ancient samples, Croatia_Novo_selo_Bunje:R3547___AD_571 and Croatia_Zadar_Hypo_banka:R3745___AD_72 seem like a good proxy for a Romanized Illyrians, it works well for all western Balkans(even portions of Greece. So I averaged those two, as the Illyrian remnant substrate.
2) From the central and east Balkans,I combined BGR_KapitanAndreevo_IA:I20186, MKD_Skopje_Anc:I10379 and Serbia_Viminacium:R9674___AD_134 as one average, as a proxy for the Dardanian-Thracian population. This mixture works super well for Romanians, central Balkans and us(Albanians). I suspect the Viminacium represents a Moesian proxy, so mixing all these three points together does seem to give a good proxy for a population living south-east of Nish.
3) I selected Croatia_Trogir_Policij as a proxy for middle eastern source, otherwise you need ancient Armenian and IA Levant to make it smooth. It works very well for western Balkans, Greek Marathon works well for modern Greeks.
4) Alb Mdv I13839 is a mixture of 30% Levant IA, 50% Romanized Illyrian, 8-10% Slavic, the rest other. It works well as substrate from Albania to Bulgaria and lowers the Levant IA average. However it does muddy up the patterns a bit, so I excluded it. The model I am using right now is super smooth and demonstrates the basics quite well.
5) Levant IA is needed because the Trogir Policij does not capture all of it, some other source, yet to be discovered brought some additional ME mixture.
So, I would love to have more Albanian samples, because Brumi's regional averages seem a little tempered. You can see modern Balkan Slavs and Romanians work super well with this model. It's a a very good fit. It's a keeper.
Last edited:
PaleoRevenge
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,522
- Reaction score
- 1,339
- Points
- 113
Albanians only, the Alb average is made of the Albanian samples I was able to find online(G25 modern individuals in autosomal subforum https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/40653-Dodecad-Globe-13-Ancient-Modern), one from a link ihype had posted and two Kosovo individuals I saw posted on Anthro (Toplica).
BTW, notice how the Alb average I made(Alb;Average and Kukes post mdv Average) do not move at all(no change) when I introduce Bell Beaker, while all Brumi's averages move, that's just sleazy.
BTW, notice how the Alb average I made(Alb;Average and Kukes post mdv Average) do not move at all(no change) when I introduce Bell Beaker, while all Brumi's averages move, that's just sleazy.
Last edited:
PaleoRevenge
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,522
- Reaction score
- 1,339
- Points
- 113
I forgot to add my IA Levant average is made of two samples: ASH067 and ASH068. The Kukes post-mdv show there is some Levant heavy admixture, this mixture covers Kukes, Mirdite and Dibra. It's less pronounced in these regions because Brumi and co have dressed their averages with a Beaker-Illyrian component.
I suspect this mysterious Levant heavy mixture may actually represent the Komani layer(some type of ME and Illyrian remnant hybrid), however, none of the Roman Balkan samples match it's profile, I will check tomorrow if I can find the parent source in other parts of Rome and figure out it's composure. It overlaps with ALB_Mdv:I13839, but ALB_Mdv:I13839 also overlaps with my Croatia Illyrian-Roman proxy. It is for that reason I prefer not to use ALB_Mdv:I13839, because it has it's foot in two different clusters.
I suspect this mysterious Levant heavy mixture may actually represent the Komani layer(some type of ME and Illyrian remnant hybrid), however, none of the Roman Balkan samples match it's profile, I will check tomorrow if I can find the parent source in other parts of Rome and figure out it's composure. It overlaps with ALB_Mdv:I13839, but ALB_Mdv:I13839 also overlaps with my Croatia Illyrian-Roman proxy. It is for that reason I prefer not to use ALB_Mdv:I13839, because it has it's foot in two different clusters.
Cinamak is to the very east of Albania bordering these clearly distinct archeological complexes and R1b-Z2103 starts to appear (in only two samples, and PF7562 in solely one IA sample). Is this a coincidence? Clearly not.
They are southern Illyrians and there's R-M269 among Daunians too as there is R-Z2103 in Vucedol from where Cetina began. You should expect that when we get more Daunian or generally Iapygian samples we will find R-CTS1450 or R-PF7563. You guys all have to accept reality and stop making up new theories every week. It's becoming an obsession to deny reality.
You went from "Albanians have nothing to do with Illyrians" to "Illyrians in Albania aren't Illyrians but Proto-Albanians".
What's the point in all of this? These theories have hit rock bottom and now you're just arguing semantics.
I13834 from Korca is also a LBA or IA, I'm 100% confident, and he is R-PF7563.
Setting aside the fact of how ludicrous Paleo-Revenge is when he says that Albanians can only be related to Illyrians if their G25 aren't correct or his combination of utterly irrelevant samples to create utterly ridiculous models, he can't even get basic facts correct. I13834 is not an ancient sample. It's a medieval Albanian and the sample has been radiocarbon dated!
I13834/1235; Tumulus 2 , grave 1? (petrous bone), genetically male, adult. His age is estimated to be over 40 years old. The skeleton is well presented. The skeleton most likely derives from Tumulus 2, grave 1. The grave was oriented NE-SW, with the inhumation in a supine extended position. The radiocarbon date obtained from this individual was **1402-1439 calCE** (515±20 BP, PSUAMS-5942)
I13839 is not a ... Greek. This isn't a Greek profile:
Target: ALB_Mdv:I13839
Distance: 2.5834% / 0.02583367
67.2 TUR_Barcin_N
26.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
2.4 SRB_Iron_Gates_HG
2.0 GEO_CHG
2.0 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
0.4 Han
For the models of Paleo-Revenge, not much can be said. As usual, they're utter garbage. He has removed all Cinamak samples from his models and is trying to say that the "Romanized Illyrians" which Albanians have origins from... Croatia_Novo_selo_Bunje:R3547___AD_571 and Croatia_Zadar_Hypo_banka:R3745___AD_72 from Croatia. This is not just pointless but utterly wrong both geographically and autosomally.
R9674 is a Germanic-Sarmatian individual:
Distance to: Serbia_Viminacium:R9674___AD_134___Coverage_66.67%
0.03546936 HUN_Sarmatian_Late_Danube-Tisza
0.03716625 DEU_MA_ACD_Baiuvaric
0.04121185 HUN_Sarmatian_Early_Transtisza
0.04227176 Yamnaya_BGR
0.04339486 HUN_Sarmatian_Late_Transtisza
0.04423965 MKD_Mdv
0.04499989 HUN_early_Arpadian_commoner
0.04514539 DEU_MA_ACD_Ostrogothic
0.04561611 HUN_Conqueror_commoner
0.04625156 HRV_Pop_RomanP
0.04689144 HUN_Avar_Late_Visonta
0.04717776 HUN_MA_Szolad
0.04777004 Bell_Beaker_HUN_EBA
0.04782367 ITA_Rome_Renaissance
0.04783583 ITA_Collegno_MA
0.04814350 SVK_LIA
0.04852458 HUN_Avar_Period
0.04860968 BGR_Ryahovets_Mdv
0.04922825 Levant_LBN_MA_o2
0.05036396 ITA_Etruscan_Campiglia_CEU_o
0.05045672 England_LBA_highEEF
0.05095014 Bell_Beaker_POL
0.05095032 DEU_MA_ACD_Nordic
0.05101476 Iberia_Northeast_c.6CE_PL
0.05148686 Bell_Beaker_CHE
I10379 is closer to Illyrians:
Distance to: MKD_Anc:I10379
0.02516637 HUN_IA_La_Tene_oEast
0.02865403 HRV_Pop_CA
0.02985803 UKR_Cimmerian_o
0.03156462 ALB_PostMdv
0.03403740 MKD_Anc
0.03527507 MKD_BA
0.03909775 HRV_Trogir_Byz
0.03922096 ALB_Cinamak_Anc
0.04000686 MNE_LBA
0.04019286 HUN_IA_Syrmian_SremGroup
0.04213706 ALB_Mdv
0.04382121 ITA_Daunian
0.04447318 BGR_TellKran_EBA
0.04511930 BGR_IA
0.04541610 HRV_BA
0.04559259 HUN_Avar_Early_Kövegy
0.04604187 ITA_Rome_Late_Antiquity
0.04621314 ITA_Prenestini_tribe_IA_o
0.04691844 ITA_Tivoli_Renaissance
0.04850954 ITA_Rome_MA
0.04900229 ALB_MBA
0.04936660 HRV_Cetina_BA
0.04950543 HRV_Anc
0.04966051 SRB_Mokrin_EBA_Maros_oAegean
0.05003443 MDA_Trypillia_Late
"Paleo-Revenge" removed all Cinamak samples and substituted them in an utterly dubious model which makes no sense in any way with random and irrelevant ones.
This model is so ludicrous that he models Albanians from Kukes in 1400-1700 as having 34.4% (!!!!!) ancestry from this source:
Target: Levant_Ashkelon_IA1
Distance: 2.3603% / 0.02360259
61.6 TUR_Barcin_N
15.8 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
10.2 GEO_CHG
10.0 Israel_Natufian
2.4 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
Distance to: Levant_Ashkelon_IA1
0.03171042 Cypriot
0.03562276 Romaniote_Jew
0.03754930 Greek_Dodecanese
0.04054672 Greek_Kos
0.04160220 Sephardic_Jew
0.04166903 Italian_Jew
0.04772942 Syrian_Jew
0.04778887 Ashkenazi_Germany
0.04804370 Lebanese_Christian
0.04865640 Greek_Central_Anatolia
0.04877912 Italian_Calabria
0.04882472 Greek_Deep_Mani
0.04982082 Druze
0.04991396 Greek_Crete
0.05015766 Italian_Campania
0.05149104 Tunisian_Jew
0.05152629 Greek_Cappadocia
0.05203109 Lebanese_Druze
0.05292855 Libyan_Jew
0.05394642 Sicilian_East
0.05501649 Karaite_Egypt
0.05517839 Italian_Basilicata
0.05535166 Sephardic_Jew_o
0.05609609 Italian_Apulia
0.05615824 Maltese
Whoever doesn't yet understand the obvious motives of this person and his extremely false methods should wake up and see the writing on the wall. He is creating fake models on purpose in order to promote an agenda which we've seen too often.
What is disjointed is your attempt to place it along the Liburnian coastline where it isn't. It being in Albania is much more likely than it being that close to pro-Roman territory and there are real sources which exclude the northern island.
T. J. Winnifrith, Nobody's Kingdom: A History of Northern Albania:
You are utterly wrong. R9674 is a Germanic-Sarmatian sample from Viminacium and it has nothing at all to do with Naissus.
Naissus vs. Viminacium (Germanic-Sarmatian) vs. Cinamak comparison:
Just stop posting such models and comments about radiocarbon dating being wrong (do you even know what radiocarbon dating is?)
PaleoRevenge
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,522
- Reaction score
- 1,339
- Points
- 113
You are utterly wrong. R9674 is a Germanic-Sarmatian sample from Viminacium and it has nothing at all to do with Naissus.
Naissus vs. Viminacium (Germanic-Sarmatian) vs. Cinamak comparison:
Just stop posting such models and comments about radiocarbon dating being wrong (do you even know what radiocarbon dating is?)
At the time, I did not know what R9674 was, it has a Celt like component, but it's matches are always around Hungary, even EIA samples show more affinity over any ancient Balkan sample, it probably carries some Dacian as well. In the end, I did not chose it out of the blue, it was consistently picked up as a signal from my individual Albanian samples, it's a component of early Albanians. My model works extremely well, it captures the Romanian pre-Slavic substrate well too, it's pretty much a pan-Balkan model. The fit is mighty good as well. And I'm using IA and Roman individuals, not broad mega averages, the fit is extremely tight.
No moron, I did not. Cinamak are not the top picks, I only kept consistent picks because the Alb individual samples were not attracted to Cinamak, you want to "force" your model, I let the matches do the picking.
This is how the Alb samples were responding, I already posted this. If a certain Cinamak is not showing, it is because based on all options available, it had zero takes. Cope with it.
There is also IA Montenegrin samples that are magically Slavic. You speak like you can vouch for certain someone did not F up. If you want to believe there were people 600 years ago carrying BA genetics intact and not related to you at all, that's your problem. BTW, who gets buried in a Timulus in 1400 AD?
I did not say Greek, as in ancient or modern Greek. I meant it in linguistic aspect. This individual is a hodge podge of MKD, Thracian, Illyrian, Slavic and Levant IA, it is ethnically nothing. This individual is like the the Byzantine Croat samples, it represents the non-Slavic component. It is however a substrate/layer population in Albanian and Macedonia.
You're dumb. I did not do anything, it is what the models read. If you can make a better model, do so. The Kukes mdv samples are a anamoly. One individual in particular is extremely heavy MENA. That's not my fault, they have MENA ancestery. The pattern shows up in some extent in Mirdita and Dibra. There is some MENA heavy mixture in these adjacent regions. Why point a finger at me.
This is as close as I got to mapping them. Note that the Macedonian Vardasko maps like a Thracian, and likely carries MENA ancestery as well. Croatia Dragutin is MENA too. The Kukes samples are heavy with this mixture. This is pointing to Kruja-Komani being a Illyrian-MENA hybrid, the chance of Illyrian language suriving is zero. These are people speaking a broken form of Latin.
We don't have better data yet, those are the proxy's that work for Illyrian. Why don't you make a better model. Oh wait you can't.
Roman Croatia.
Last edited:
PaleoRevenge
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,522
- Reaction score
- 1,339
- Points
- 113
I want to point out. I do not believe the early Albanians were heavy in MENA admixture. I think this mixture was picked up in Albania. The non-Slavic population in Albania was like that of Byzantine Croatia, Rome imperial like, MENA heavy. Another reason why Illyrian continuity can't work. Genetically the region nuked. Look at I14622 and I3839.
PaleoRevenge
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,522
- Reaction score
- 1,339
- Points
- 113
This is my model for all the Balkans, very good fit for all, you will note that the fit loosens at the peripheries like Laconia, Croatia, Bosnia for obvious reasons. Kukes mdv is a anomaly. I leave it up to the Greeks to figure out what their pre-Slavic population was like, because I am certain there has to be an ancient Greek component as well. My approach was Albanian centric, so for Greeks, it is only an answer for Illyrian and Thracian components.
GRC_Marathon works well for Greek regions for a proxy of MENA heavy ancestry. I13839 works well as a substrate for Albania, Macedonia and Greek Macedonia, representing the Byzantine population south of Jirek line for this side of the Balkans. Roman Croatia Illyrians, work well for all western Balkans, I do not know the implications for Thessaly and Greek Macedonia. It's hard to map an entire region, because overlapping components increase. I prefer more simple models as long as the fit is super tight.
GRC_Marathon works well for Greek regions for a proxy of MENA heavy ancestry. I13839 works well as a substrate for Albania, Macedonia and Greek Macedonia, representing the Byzantine population south of Jirek line for this side of the Balkans. Roman Croatia Illyrians, work well for all western Balkans, I do not know the implications for Thessaly and Greek Macedonia. It's hard to map an entire region, because overlapping components increase. I prefer more simple models as long as the fit is super tight.
Southpaw
Regular Member
- Messages
- 2,618
- Reaction score
- 1,424
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Albanian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E-V13
Perhaps, it's wiser to further split the Dardano-Thracian, into something more like Central Balkans and Eastern Balkans.
I think from some Croatian G25 results i have seen, they require more Illyrian-like input than Thracian-like. But for certain, Croatians and Bosnians have quite a lot of Slavic autosomal.
I think from some Croatian G25 results i have seen, they require more Illyrian-like input than Thracian-like. But for certain, Croatians and Bosnians have quite a lot of Slavic autosomal.
Albanians...because all these tumuli were reused during the medieval period. Do the reading, before you comment on stuff that you know nothing about.
https://archeorient.hypotheses.org/8247
Tumuli have been equally characteristic of the Epirote highlands already since the Bronze Age, and their use continues deep into the Iron Age, not to mention the Medieval graves found in some of the mounds, as in Albania just across the border.
Yes, a part Albanians can have intact profiles since the LBA/EIA which is exactly what Lazaridis and Reich showed.
I know that you really don't like it, but radiocarbon dating isn't wrong. You certainly are wrong, so stop creating such arguments. Radiocarbon dating can't post-date samples by thousands of years because just because you don't like that medieval Albanians don't have high Slavic or East Med admixture.
It's not a "hodge podge" of anything and it's not Slavic or Levantine. You arbitrarily deciding that someone from medieval Albania is definitely Greek-speaking just shows your extreme bias and propaganda motive. Nobody with this profile was Greek in the early medieval era and she definitely didn't have Slavic origins:
Target: ALB_Mdv:I13839
Distance: 2.5834% / 0.02583367
67.2 TUR_Barcin_N
26.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
2.4 SRB_Iron_Gates_HG
2.0 GEO_CHG
2.0 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
0.4 Han
There are no Slavs with 65%+ Anatolian Farmer ancestry.
Paleo-Revenge is simply lying to everyone in this thread. I13834 isn't from the LBA but from medieval Albania just like the radiocarbon dating shows and Alb_PostMdv samples from Kukes don't have ... 34% MENA admixture or any other significant such admixture.
Compare Albanian early medieval and post-medieval averages with Levant_IA1 which supposedly gives 30% ancestry to ... Kukes!
Target: ALB_Mdv
Distance: 2.2292% / 0.02229232
63.6 TUR_Barcin_N
31.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
2.0 GEO_CHG
2.0 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
1.4 SRB_Iron_Gates_HG
Target: ALB_PostMdv
Distance: 2.2301% / 0.02230064
62.8 TUR_Barcin_N
33.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
2.0 SRB_Iron_Gates_HG
1.8 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
0.2 GEO_CHG
Target: Levant_Ashkelon_IA1
Distance: 2.3590% / 0.02359021
61.4 TUR_Barcin_N
15.4 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
11.4 GEO_CHG
10.2 Israel_Natufian
1.6 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
Nobody in medieval or post-medieval Albania had any statistically significant, let 20-30% ancestry ... from MENA sources.
This sample is Germanic-Sarmatian, it's not Moesian and it's not even remotely close to Naissus as you claimed.
The model doesn't work, all samples overlap each other so it creates overfitting. Your supposed "Dardano-Thracian" covers countless ethnic groups from all over Europe because it literally spans much of Europe. That's what produces the supposed "fit" and nothing more than that. If a model covers all of Europe, it's going to cover Albanians too.
All models with fits below 2% can be seen as largely equivalent and many of us here have posted plenty of them. Then you have to compare them with base components and see if they make sense. Your model with Kukes as 34% MENA makes 0 sense and it's absolutely false. You think that I can't post a model with around 1% distance/fit?
It's much more elegant model which is rooted in reality and the fact that ALB_Cinamak (used in the model) has yielded more than 1/3 of the haplogroups of all Albanian males. There's no room for propaganda and straight up lying like you're trying to do. It really won't work and in your case I would just stop because it's only going to get worse for you in newer studies.
PaleoRevenge
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,522
- Reaction score
- 1,339
- Points
- 113
Boy you talk a lot of smack, I missed this part.
This is before I got a proper working model.
Brumis averages just happen to pick up zero Thracian, and all in on Croatian IA.
What do you think, does Himara have Bell Beaker ancestry while Macedonian Slavs and the real Alb averages do not?
This is before I got a proper working model.
Brumis averages just happen to pick up zero Thracian, and all in on Croatian IA.
What do you think, does Himara have Bell Beaker ancestry while Macedonian Slavs and the real Alb averages do not?