Where does the Albanian language come from? [VIDEO]

[Dahoi]

Couple of points:

1. The etymologies of both para and dava are not known, there are theories by linguists, some of which argue for Albanian related forms (weigand for example speculated dava relation to alb. Dhe (earth), some linguist s speculated thrac. Para is related to alb. Farë (seed, clan) or alb. Para (before, infront of)). But either way we dont actually know the etymologies of these toponyms. They could very well be perfectly "Albanoid" staring us in our faces.

2. Albanian has lost a lot of its inherited IE vocabulary. We dont have our native word for "sky", or "cheek" for example, so its perfectly possible we had a dava and para form we just lost also.

3. Cognate of vend appears among Celts also, as does it in Moesia in Ouendenis. So it could be pretty spread out through IE peoples. Its not a uniquely Albanoid development like sp-> f or sk->h or something to say for certain one way or the other.

4. On the grammar argument he mentions from Noel Malcolm "pjeterqytet" etc, Matzinger clarified why this was faulty reasoning back in 2016:

"Das von N. MALCOLM, Kosovo, S. 32f. in die Diskussion eingebrachte Argument der zwischen Albanisch und Thrakisch unterschiedlichen Kompositionsbildung hat zu entfallen.

Das Thrakische zeigt idg. Kompositionsbildung mit Determinans+Determinatum (Bsp. Bessa-para = ‘Bessensiedlung’), während das Albanische das Determinans dem Determinatum folgen lässt.

ABER, das Albanische ist eine idg. Sprache und hatte daher zu einem bestimmten Zeitpunkt seiner Sprachgeschichte ebenfalls diese Kompositionsanordnung!

Die Umkehrung von Determinans und Determinatum ist eine sekundäre Erscheinung, die (a) auch in anderen idg. Sprachen zu beobachten ist und (b) im Albanischen durchaus auch relativ spät erfolgt sein kann (auch ist in diesem Zusammenhang zu beachten, dass nach der Meinung von J. MATZINGER die nominale Komposition im Alban. letztlich eine erst wiederbelebte Kategorie darstellt, da die idg. Komposition in der Vorgeschichte des Albanischen aufgegeben wurde, s. dazu Verf., Die sekundären nominalen Wortbildungsmuster im Altalbanischen bei Gjon Buzuku. Ein Beitrag zur altalbanischen Lexikographie, Wiesbaden 2016, S. 283-326).

GOOGLE TRANSLATED:

The argument brought into the discussion by N. MALCOLM, Kosovo, p. 32f. that Albanian and Thracian have different compositional structures must be dropped.

Thracian shows Indo-European compositional structure with determinant+determinatum (e.g. Bessa-para = ‘Bessensiedlung’), while Albanian has the determinant follow the determinatum.

BUT, Albanian is an Indo-European language and therefore also had this compositional structure at a certain point in its linguistic history!

The inversion of determiner and determinate is a secondary phenomenon that (a) can also be observed in other Indo-European languages and (b) may well have occurred relatively late in Albanian (it should also be noted in this context that, according to J. MATZINGER, nominal composition in Albanian is ultimately a category that has only just been revived, since Indo-European composition was abandoned in the prehistory of Albanian, see author, Die Sekundären nominalen Wortbildungsmuster im Altalbanische bei Gjon Buzuku. Ein Beitrags zur altalbischen Lexikographie, Wiesbaden 2016, pp. 283-326)."

Thanks for clarification!

 

[Johane Derite]

The Albanian branches on the other hand are from the Northern E-V13 block ONLY! Vast majority of E-V13 in Albanians is E-Z5018 and E-Z5017 and effectively its nearly all E-S2979 and E-CTS9320. This is a very specific profile of branches practically no found in Illyrians or South Thracians, but coming from the Danubian zone and Northward.

And we know from the samples of the last year(s) that the bulk of these people was still purely Daco-Thracian at least around 0-200 AD, with remaining tribes and groups up at least to about 500-600 AD. This implies it is way more likely that there was a late, Roman era, massive pulse migration.

I might repeat the numbers I posted in the E-V13 thread:

E-Z5018 alone has:
5 major
5 minor
in total 10 founder branches at the minimum.

Keep in mind I didn't count singleton Albanian testers., e.g. Albanians from Vlach branches if recent/singleton were included.

If we add central-Northern E-Z5017:
2 major
6 minor
in total 8

Plus one founder lineage which is from another E-V13 branch.

Starting 0-100 AD this implies 19 lineages which survived into modernity. R-PH970 is one and J-L283:

By comparison (keep in mind that's all just a rough estimate based on YFull data - might be +/- 2) J-283 has:

2 major
3 minor
in total 5 (maximal 8 if counting younger ones)

This means we can say that if counting surviving clan lineages, its is 19 : less than 10 for J-L283 and R-PH970 combined.

This is a really great way to put it that makes the situation clear even for outsiders.

Something I would add is that you also touched upon something very important for the Proto-Albanian linguistic question by laying out the phylogenetic diversity differential for Albanian paternities.

Namely the stark contrast between R1b-Z2705 and E-V13 and what it points to.

Linguists like Matzinger divide Proto-Albanian into Early Proto-Albanian (~Late Bronze Age - Roman conquest of Balkans) and Late Proto-Albanian (Roman Conquest of Balkans - Tosk/Gheg split).

Some linguists have different naming systems (i.e. the DPEWA calls what Matzinger called "Early Proto-Albanian" Pre-Proto-Albanian, and what he calls "Late Proto-Albanian" simply Proto-Albanian), so it is very important to be mindful of which linguist you are referring to when using which term lest you get things muddled up (the wiki on proto-Albanian is extremely confused because they're mixing different linguists' works into one hodge podge when there isn't any sort of standardised term.

So anyway, back to what I believe Riverman's post gives us insight into.

Namely, that R1b-Z2705 would seem to have no relevance for Albanians for the Early Proto-Albanian stage of its language (or Pre-Proto-Albanian in the DPEWA naming system).

Z2705 seems to have had a very important role in the Late-Proto-Albanian -> Common Albanian stage of the Albanian language, but the evidence among Albanians suggests that before that it wasn't a relevant part of the Albanoid linguistic group at all. This means R1b-CTS1450 entirely can also potentially be disregarded ultimately as not having played any relevant role in Albanoid or Early-Proto-Albanian.

E-V13 is the only genuine contender to be the ancestor group from which the Early-Proto-Albanian language comes from.

The arguments about E-V13's later "patchiness" don't hold up because the diversity is too high.

Once a certain diversity threshold or critical mass is reached for a haplogroup, such "patchiness" can be disregarded, given that since they are all of the same haplogroup anyway, it actually points to a huge diversity and demographic reality that had lost branches in between them, and not multiple sporadic migrations of singleton branches. That is always a possibility to be fair, but the probability of that is very low when taking into account the total lacking in any other contenders to carry an entire language group, namely, Albanian.

There is a strange irony in that J2b-L283, R1b-Z2705, and R1b-PF7563 are treated as if they are one haplogroup, to spoof and pump up their lacking diversity, whereas E-V13 is treated as if it is 19 different haplogroups, to undermine the huge diversity that points to an even bigger diversity and demographic size in antiquity.

I cant find where you did some rough calculation about potential clan sizes or something and you had some numbers like 380 vs 80 vs 20 or something, I would appreciate if you could repost it here.

In any case, it is absolutely clear that E-V13 made up more than half of the early Roman period core lineages of Albanians which survived into modernity. Not all of them might have been Proto-Albanians, some might have been Vlach, Slavic or whatever, but the numbers are pretty impressive nevertheless.

And there is no way that by chance all more recent Medieval founders were E-V13 in Albanians, because there was no population which was as dominated by E-V13 in those later periods any more. Such a pattern is therefore highly unlikely to be just chance.

We therefore can, based on the currently available evidence, safely assume that there was a massive Daco-Thracian or Daco-Roman pulse migration into a territory which was either inhabited by Illyrians or Romanised Illyrians. And this moment, when these E-V13 clans arrived, is the defining moment for the Proto-Albanian ethnogenesis.

Therefore my proposal for the Proto-Albanian formation are by now two alternatives:
Scenario 1: Proto-Albanian is a primarily Dacian language introduced by a massive pulse migration of E-V13 males which assimilated local Romanised Illyrians.
Scenaro 2: Proto-Albanian is a primarily Illyrian language introduced by a surviving core group of J-L283 Illyrians which allied up and assimilated waves of incoming Dacian/Daco-Roman E-V13 clans.

At this point any other scenario became infinitely less likely.

In both cases I wouldn't speak of Proto-Albanian people proper before the fusion, because it was a fundamentally different people before. The fusion is likely to have happened somewhere between 0-400 AD, because that's when the Northern E-V13 clans seem to have spread massively in the Balkans. Like the Akbari archaeogenetic window shows us 0-200 AD - because 1800 BP the first were already mixed, but the majority still pure, implying they didn't arrive many generations before.

The 1800 BP sampels have the same largely unmixed profile as individuals from 1300-800 BC without significant foreign admixture. We can therefore say that the core of E-V13 had at the minimum an existence from 1400 BC to 500 AD, possibly extending to 3200 BC to 600 AD (from Cotofeni to last remnants of Daco-Carpic and Thracian groups being incorporated into other groups).

One thing I personally disagree with is that I think the Dardani are still possible as a source, but this is only in the scenario that the true Dardani were the Belegis-Gava II channelled ware that overtook Brnjica and made it into Albania even in LBA. This scenario might explain also the lack of IBD sharing that is observed between Albs and the Akbari set, despite having E-V13 branches that are very closely related. Dardani as one Belegis-Gava II offshoot in the LBA that was separate from the Dacians proper, but paternally/linguistically related in Late Bronze age.

 

[Riverman]

I made a new post about how the Northern branches of E-V13 are extremely likely to be from Dacians (late): https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...ity-in-transylvania.45010/page-35#post-693710

The timing is just ideal in every respect with this big surge of Northern E-V13 throughout the Empire and especially in the Balkans between 100-200 AD.

Another point which can be made about this is that we have throughout Europe founder branches which likely descend from this resettlement of the Dacians, but for many these branches we have no ancient DNA sample. At the same time even those autosomally nearly identical e.g. E-FGC11451 from Akbari sometimes don't share at all!

It is the same pattern as it is with Kapitan Andreevo samples, probably even more extreme. Many share rather indirectly, which points to them being related, deeply, but not coming from the same clan, likely not even the same tribe. Whenever discussing E-V13 and Albanian IBD matching, that is something we must always keep in mind: The Daco-Thracian population was both huge, old and seem to have practised exogamy and exchange between themselves.

This also means, unless you hit the DIRECT ancestral tribe and group, you don't get any high IBD matches. Even if they had the same PROVEN paternal ancestor say 800 BC. They just weren't endogamous in small groups, or most of them weren't, they can't be compared with Slavs at all.

At the same time we get those homogeneous pure Daco-Thracian profile for the Northern branches in particular over and over and over again. If not, its often wildly mixed, you just see they are a completely different people. Also, where are all the E-S2979 before the later Roman period, before this supposed resettlement program and migration period movements?
If they lived further South than the core of say E-CTS9320, I struggle with the absence in the South.

It really looks to me, at this point, like they all came down after the Dacian defeat. This would really explain, if the Romans did this massive population exchange, why there was this huge surge of E-V13 in many provinces and especially the Balkans.