E-V13 Frequencies and New Data

[Johane Derite]

They keep reiterating that the proposed old theories are outdated, no scholar supports them and should not be posted in the meantime they keep sticking on the Illyrian theory without looking elsewhere even though as time has gone by the so called outdated theories start to make more sense with what independent linguists have been saying.
Not knowing how to evaluate claims yet sticking their nose everywhere. I don't get what their end goal is, editable websites have been edited so that it fits their claim. I don't have anything against the discussion of Illyrian theory or anything but if its a thread for the origins of Albanians every non fully attested paleo-balkanic possibilty should be considered and not just report spam a member because it opposes their claims.

I started this hobby 100% fully into the illyrian hypothesis, but mainly because that's all i'd ever been exposed to growing up.

But as years passed the thing which tipped me over into sharing more overlooked, even if sometimes not fully fleshed out, thracian/dacian/etc theories was seeing how flimsy and two tiered the standards for evidence for Illyrian vs Thracian were in the Albanian discourse. It's clear some sort of signal is there and yet they supress it like its the plague, meanwhile all sorts of unhinged pelasgian garbage is permitted to and encouraged to proliferate on tv, etc.

I.e. Albanian words like Burrë, which clearly find concordance in Thraco-Dacian Bur-, one of the most if not the most prevalent names among Thracians.

If just this were reversed and found among Illyrians, the exact same individuals would be heralding this as evidence of an Albanoid language. And this is just one of many words.

Seeing this pattern over and over again across countless domains made something clear to me, that for these people, for whatever reason, the Illyrian fantasy is worth more than the proto-Albanian reality. It has a quasi religious function for them, they are zealots, not interested in the truth.

I came to the realisation that if proto-Albanian texts were to be found for example, but somewhere in like a Bessi monastery instead of Illyria, I'm sure these types of people would rather destroy the texts to benefit the Illyrian fantasy rather than elucidate the proto-Albanian reality.

They are in a way anti-proto-Albanian terrorists and should be treated as such

 

[Southpaw]

Now back to this, if Chalcolithic Ukraine was abundant in E-L618(E-V13?) which apparently some upcoming study will reveal them, it is quite interesting how the North Pontic paper on Indo-Europeans highlighted that assumption. So, there was clearly a discussion inside the circles.

I always thought that Cris/Koros farmers were likely the ones responsible but reading carefully i think Stamov was right, these Cardium Pottery people were sailors and went straight to North Pontic area, an area which will be flooded and its people migrate somewhere else.

Romanian archaeologist Berciu first noted striking similarities between the Southern Bug River, Hamangia, and ultimately Varna cultures. Could Hamangia and Varna have emerged from E-L618 groups moving south from the Southern Bug during the Chalcolithic? I’d say it’s probable and quite surprising. Ukrainian archaeologists even suggest North Pontic Cardium influences predate the Mediterranean Cardium Culture.

So, could one group migrate further South and find Hamangia-Varna Culture and another group migrate inland and find shelter in Trypillica-Cucuteni and some Carpathian group? From which group E-V13 mutation arose then? That question will have an answer soon.

In the northern Pontic area, the same ‘cardial’
horizon can also be assumed, given the similari-
ties between the culture of the Southern Bug River
and that of Hamangia. Such a hypothesis can be
supported by the identification of a horizon ‘car-
dial’ in Mesopotamia and Iran, where a cultural
influx could have migrated to the Caucasus and
south-eastern shores of the Black Sea.” (Berciu
1966.292).

For all these reasons I have proposed a third hypo-
thetical scenario of Neolithisation in the Northern
Black Sea area in addition to the two available,
which proposes that Neolithisation in the region
began with a process of demic diffusion consisting
of the rapid spread of small Mediterranean seafaring
communities along its coastline in the first half or
the middle of the 7th millennium calBC. Their beach-
head colonies are probably submerged now. The pro-
cess of cultural diffusion, when some elements of the
‘Neolithic package’ were adopted by local Mesolithic
populations began afterwards. A possible conse-
quence of this is the occurrence of the first pottery
with decoration using pin-action and comb stamp
impression techniques, and also the polished stone
artefacts and livestock in inland territories. The evi-
dence of direct contacts of interior groups with their
coastal neighbours is the pottery found far from the
sea, but made of sand with the remains of brackish
water ostracods, and decorated by marine cockle-
shells prints. Simultaneously, the first farmers of the
Balkan region and the Carpathian-Danube basin,
who were of Anatolian origin, migrated overland
from the west to the Northern Black Sea area. As a
result, the Neolithic of the Dnister and South Buh ri-
ver basins became syncretic. It combines traits of the
early Danubian Neolithic and the Mediterranean Neo-
lithic with Impresso – Cardium pottery (Bug-Dnie-
ster culture). In the remaining territory of the North-
ern Black Sea area, traditions based on the cultural
complex of the Mediterranean maritime migrants
continued to develop



I again draw attention to the preliminary character
of this idea. Unfortunately, at present it is based on
isolated finds, radiocarbon dates which are often
questionable, and sites researched quite a few de-
cades ago. However, it should be emphasised that al-
ternative concepts of Neolitization in the Northern
Black Sea area have a probative base of the same
and even weaker nature. In doing so, this concept is
at a doubtless advantage, because it conforms re-
markably to the general tendency of historical deve-
lopment of the region, which although remote, is an
integral part of the Mediterranean. The existence of
settlements of Mediterranean civilizations spread
mainly by sea (ancient Greek colonies, Roman and
Byzantine towns, the fortresses and trading stations
of Genoa and the Republic of Venice) confirms it
here. Therefore, I consider the current publication
only as a first step in promising research into this
newly discovered phenomenon in the archaeology
of the Northern Black Sea area.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272651024_A_new_approach_to_the_problem_of_the_Neolithisation_of_the_North-Pontic_area_Is_there_a_north-eastern_kind_of_Mediterranean_Impresso_pottery

 

[Riverman]

Don't forget that we have E-L618 from around the Danube too, like Lengyel samples and from the area of Bodrogkeresztur-Tiszapolgar.
Therefore E-L618 was fairly widespread, as a minority element, in various Impresso-Cardial related groups.
But to reiterate what I have written before, Tripolye-Cucuteni has some continuity into the steppified horizon, plus features we later find in the Carpatho-Danubian zone and which seem to have influenced especially Cotofeni and Cernavoda.
Therefore an origin from TCC is by now my favourite, especially since we already know from steppified Usatovo-Gorodsk that at least some E-L618 lineages made into this transition, we have the sample.

 

[Southpaw]

Bosporan Kingdom, a Thraco-Greek kingdom from Crimea. Lots of Iron Age E-V13 samples there. Spartokid dynasty were the rulers.

Typical helmets used by Thracians were used over there as well, Chalcidian and Thraco-Phrygian.

 

[Johane Derite]

E-v13 seems to be higher among palestinian christians vs palestinian muslims where it seems to be negligible, this guys commentary is nonsense otherwise:

https://x.com/ByblianKing/status/1917556407680770513?t=ANXsU6cyWnsrLoSzuJX8cA&s=19

 

[Veriu]

I came to the realisation that if proto-Albanian texts were to be found for example, but somewhere in like a Bessi monastery instead of Illyria, I'm sure these types of people would rather destroy the texts to benefit the Illyrian fantasy rather than elucidate the proto-Albanian reality.

Why would Proto-Albanian texts be found in a monastery of the Bessi? The Bessi who some people here consider to be "Proto-Albanian" without any shred of evidence were a fully Greek-speaking group of Thracian ancestry by the end of the ancient world and the dawn of the medieval era.

 

[Veriu]

I used to think that the Illyrian theory was true but that was also mainly because it has a lot of coverage on media, social media etc. This thoery also goes unquestioned and just taken at face value and probably the interpretation of the name Illyria is what also helps it because people think that it means Ilir despite langauges undergoing phonetic changes and some words being just false friends. I would not be surprised if Paeonian might have been closer to Proto-Albanian than Messapian, scholars have argued Albanian to come from a language neighboring Macedonian. Its just a matter of time and process of elimination to where Proto-Albanophones lived, once Matzinger publishes the book of Albanian toponomy other places will have to be sought out.
Anyway these posts should be discussed in another thread.

The Illyrian theory is the closest one to reality because the closest extinct language to Albanian is Messapic and it was a language of the same west Balkan origin with Illyrian. Matzinger is the one who has reinforced the connection of Albanian to Messapic despite his old opinion about Illyrian-Messapic, so don't expect him to write Albanian was close to Paeonian, Thracian, Dacian. He has already written that Albanian is unrelated to Thracian/Dacian.

My personal research for the first Proto-Albanians ended when I realized that the closest Y-DNA brother lines to Messapic happen to be the ones with the highest diversity in Albanians. Some E-V13 lines appear a bit later after the "oldest" ones, and some appear much later but I don't get the fuss by some people here. It's just another old Balkan line which appears among Albanians and expanded with Albanians to other modern Balkan ethnic groups. It just couldn't be "Albanoid"(or whatever term works best) in the Bronze Age and why would it? It's not even of steppe origins.

 

[Southpaw]

The Illyrian theory is the closest one to reality because the closest extinct language to Albanian is Messapic and it was a language of the same west Balkan origin with Illyrian. Matzinger is the one who has reinforced the connection of Albanian to Messapic despite his old opinion about Illyrian-Messapic, so don't expect him to write Albanian was close to Paeonian, Thracian, Dacian. He has already written that Albanian is unrelated to Thracian/Dacian.

But he has already written that Albanian cannot be descended and is unrelated to Illyrian in his 2021 book Der Illyrer which u never mention.

 

[Veriu]

But he has already written that Albanian cannot be descended and is unrelated to Illyrian in his 2021 book Der Illyrer which u never mention.

There's probably an older post I've written here where I say exactly what you say that I haven't mentioned. When Matzinger says that Messapic or Albanian is unrelated to Illyrian it's in a strict sense because his definition of Illyrian is not that of language family but that of language spoken in a defined area. For Matzinger, this doesn't exclude that other languages were spoken in the same area aka Dimale being a toponym definitely linked to Proto-Albanian nor does it exclude a close relation with other such languages like Messapic and Albanian something which he wrote in 2019. In my very humble and insignificant opinion, very detailed linguistic arguments about languages with no real written records are worthless speculation and this includes all Paleo-Balkan languages except for Messapic, which is definitely related to Albanian.

For Matzinger, Delmato-Pannonian, Messapic, Illyrian are different west Balkan languages but from the POV genetics, they all come from the same earliest groups meaning that they couldn't have spoken different languages but different varieties of the same language group. Albanian is part of this group, but Thracian and Dacian aren't, but this doesn't have to be connected to E-V13. I don't see the point of the obsession by some people in this thread. Why would it matter if some E-V13 Albanian lines were nonindoeuropean, then part of some sort of Thracoid central Balkan group and then Proto-Albanian speaking because they joined Dardanians or any other group? Doesn't this happen with all haplogroups?

So, you know, get over it and I say this for all sides. If your hobby is learning more about your haplogroup, enjoy yourself but don't try to turn it into some very serious issue which it definitely isn't.

 

[Southpaw]

There's probably an older post I've written here where I say exactly what you say that I haven't mentioned. When Matzinger says that Messapic or Albanian is unrelated to Illyrian it's in a strict sense because his definition of Illyrian is not that of language family but that of language spoken in a defined area. For Matzinger, this doesn't exclude that other languages were spoken in the same area aka Dimale being a toponym definitely linked to Proto-Albanian nor does it exclude a close relation with other such languages like Messapic and Albanian something which he wrote in 2019. In my very humble and insignificant opinion, very detailed linguistic arguments about languages with no real written records are worthless speculation and this includes all Paleo-Balkan languages except for Messapic, which is definitely related to Albanian.

For Matzinger, Delmato-Pannonian, Messapic, Illyrian are different west Balkan languages but from the POV genetics, they all come from the same earliest groups meaning that they couldn't have spoken different languages but different varieties of the same language group. Albanian is part of this group, but Thracian and Dacian aren't, but this doesn't have to be connected to E-V13. I don't see the point of the obsession by some people in this thread. Why would it matter if some E-V13 Albanian lines were nonindoeuropean, then part of some sort of Thracoid central Balkan group and then Proto-Albanian speaking because they joined Dardanians or any other group? Doesn't this happen with all haplogroups?

So, you know, get over it on and I say this for all sides. If your hobby is learning more about your haplogroup, enjoy yourself but don't try to turn it into some very serious issue which it definitely isn't.

That's your cope mechanism dude, he was very clear on it. Doesn't make it clearer. Albanian comes from another group which was heavily exposed to Satemization. Get over it.

 

[Dahoi]

The uniform expansion of E-V13 among Albanophone area is not just a mere coincidence, linguists favor a migratory group into Albania not a native population that continued to thrive. Tosk Albanians have higher amounts of E-V13 compared to J2b one would think that a major Albanian subgroup especially that split from a common branch with ghegs would have carried those paternal lineages and therefore spread the language. Slavic paternal lineages don't have much to do with it either as they would have reduced both haplogroups not just E-V13, they didn't solely target out paternal lineages surely. Again its linguists who work independently of genetic research that leads to favoritism of the E-V13 argument not bias of E-V13 members here, the Illyrian theory at best holds water among the Dardanians at best, but one has to think if Proto-Albanians assimilated slavs why wouldn't they assimilate Romanized Illyrians. If the Proto-Albanians are an Illyric people from Dardania then they had even lower amounts of J2b since they must have encountered other Illyrians who lived in Albania and merged with them leading to an even greater increase of J2b. Continue this as you wish but in the Albanian thread.

On top of that, if there really was a Dardanian population that survived romanization then why it wasnt documented by anyone from ancient times, especially if the Dardanians neighboured the Bessi to the east.

 

[Southpaw]

That infant from Roman time burial apparently ~100-60 B.C should be ultimately E-V13 from the Argead tomb and not E-V22, anyway his calls seems to be mixing between E-L618 and E-V22, i think Ancient Macedonians were still burying their dead there, they were not exterminated by Romans. How much we can assure that this sample atelast is E-M35 is up to discussion because all samples seem to be of low quality.

Macedonian royal tombs are like a mix between Mycanean and Thracian royal tombs. E-V13 should be expected and not a surprise, Edonians used to live there as well.

The three other males in B.C times resulted to be under R1b-L51 which stirred controversy because of very low quality of samples and potentially contamination. All in all, we are left in dark.

 

[Southpaw]

That infant from Roman time burial apparently ~100-60 B.C should be ultimately E-V13 from the Argead tomb and not E-V22, anyway his calls seems to be mixing between E-L618 and E-V22, i think Ancient Macedonians were still burying their dead there, they were not exterminated by Romans. How much we can assure that this sample atelast is E-M35 is up to discussion because all samples seem to be of low quality.

Macedonian royal tombs are like a mix between Mycanean and Thracian royal tombs. E-V13 should be expected and not a surprise, Edonians used to live there as well.

The three other males in B.C times resulted to be under R1b-L51 which stirred controversy because of very low quality of samples and potentially contamination. All in all, we are left in dark.

Quite likely IMO, they shared quite a lot of material culture, so not a surprise if genetically they were similar as well. Or within the cline between Thracians and Greeks. Reasonable expected.

This is the distance of a female from the Argaeid tomb.

 

[Riverman]

She is obviously mixed, but closer to Daco-Thracians than to Mycenaeans:

Target: greekEM3237_rmdup
Distance: 2.8155% / 0.02815464

30.8 Bulgaria_EIA
27.6 Greece_Delphi_BA_Mycenaean
26.8 Slovakia_IA_Vekerzug_East
9.4 Greece_BA_Mycenaean
5.0 Bulgaria_MLBA
0.4 Ukraine_Danube_EIA_Cimmerian

Even among the Mycenaeans, she is closer to the Delphi sample, which in itself has increased Balkan admixture. In the basic components run, she gets some Central-East Asian, pretty similar to the Thracian Hallstatt samples, to which she is by far the closest, also on the PCA:

Therefore I think she is mostly Daco-Thracian, and the Thracian type of ancestry is closest related to the Thracian Hallstatt samples from the Lower Danube, rather. She seems to have Macedonian/Greek admixture, sure, but that appears to be not dominant and accounts for about 1/4 (maxmal 1/2) of her ancestry at first glance.

I used these coordinates:

greek:DEM3237_rmdup,0.133173,0.144205,0.016593,-0.046835,0.029852,-0.018686,0.005405,0.005077,-0.001636,0.033167,0.00341,0.007194,-0.021704,-0.006744,-0.012079,-0.000133,0.008736,-0.008108,0.006411,-0.011255,-0.015223,-0.0115,-0.008504,0.011447,-0.001796

 

[Dor9]

She is obviously mixed, but closer to Daco-Thracians than to Mycenaeans:



Even among the Mycenaeans, she is closer to the Delphi sample, which in itself has increased Balkan admixture. In the basic components run, she gets some Central-East Asian, pretty similar to the Thracian Hallstatt samples, to which she is by far the closest, also on the PCA:

Therefore I think she is mostly Daco-Thracian, and the Thracian type of ancestry is closest related to the Thracian Hallstatt samples from the Lower Danube, rather. She seems to have Macedonian/Greek admixture, sure, but that appears to be not dominant and accounts for about 1/4 (maxmal 1/2) of her ancestry at first glance.

I used these coordinates:

greek:DEM3237_rmdup,0.133173,0.144205,0.016593,-0.046835,0.029852,-0.018686,0.005405,0.005077,-0.001636,0.033167,0.00341,0.007194,-0.021704,-0.006744,-0.012079,-0.000133,0.008736,-0.008108,0.006411,-0.011255,-0.015223,-0.0115,-0.008504,0.011447,-0.001796

looks fine as a fully Greek person

 

[Southpaw]

She is obviously mixed, but closer to Daco-Thracians than to Mycenaeans:



Even among the Mycenaeans, she is closer to the Delphi sample, which in itself has increased Balkan admixture. In the basic components run, she gets some Central-East Asian, pretty similar to the Thracian Hallstatt samples, to which she is by far the closest, also on the PCA:

Therefore I think she is mostly Daco-Thracian, and the Thracian type of ancestry is closest related to the Thracian Hallstatt samples from the Lower Danube, rather. She seems to have Macedonian/Greek admixture, sure, but that appears to be not dominant and accounts for about 1/4 (maxmal 1/2) of her ancestry at first glance.

I used these coordinates:

greek:DEM3237_rmdup,0.133173,0.144205,0.016593,-0.046835,0.029852,-0.018686,0.005405,0.005077,-0.001636,0.033167,0.00341,0.007194,-0.021704,-0.006744,-0.012079,-0.000133,0.008736,-0.008108,0.006411,-0.011255,-0.015223,-0.0115,-0.008504,0.011447,-0.001796

I just think that she falls quite good in the North Aegean cline which apparently should include Thessalians southernmost, then Ancient Macedonians, Thracians, Phrygians (minus their Anatolian admixture, if we assume they were known as Brygi).

Also, on material culture there is some similarities, sun cult, Phrygian hat/helmet, tombs, horse-breeders and horsemanship, pottery, weapons. But it should be clinal similarities.

Check this:

The article is dedicated to the question of how the legend about the emergence of the Argead dynasty was formed. The paper studies written ancient sources, as well as numismatics, which are associated to the legend about the Macedonian royal house. The article raises the question of the emergence of an etymological connection between the Greek word goat (αἶξ) and the first Macedonian capital, Aigai. Attention is also drawn between the similarities of the images of a goat in the Scythian, Thracian and Macedonian cultures, as well as to the congeniality of evidence of written tradition in describing the founding of Macedonian and Scythian dynasties. Based on the studied material, the author comes to the conclusion about the possible Thracian and Scythian influence on the formation of the myth about the origin of the Argead dynasty.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370513595_POSSIBLE_THRACIAN_AND_SCYTHIAN_INFLUENCE_ON_THE_DEVELOPMENT_OF_THE_LEGEND_OF_THE_ARGEAD_DYNASTY'S_ORIGIN

I also stand that DEM3245 calls could on base be valid for E-M35, and in reality if full coverage for E-V13, same as for the Idomenae sample E-L618.

Food for thought. The region of Aegiae has been affected by flutted/stamped cultures during LBA-EIA, so having E-V13 there makes total sense, of course R1b-Z2103, J2a, G2a are other candidates on the mix.

 

[Southpaw]

Phyrgians, Macedonians, even Paeonians were all on the Hellenic linguistic cline, but genetically less Aegean. I doubt E-V13 has anything to do with their early development, as E-V13 was a non-IE group surviving somewhere in the Carpatho-Danube zone which was assimilated by steppe groups.
The relevant proto-lineages would be R1b-PF7562, maybe an odd i2a-L699 here n there

We all know deep down except R1b and R1a all lineages are non-IE. But contextually we do not know of any non-IE population to which E-V13 belonged to.

The Phrygian Valley sample had E-L618 from Anatolia, very likely E-V13 downstream. It is a recurring pattern IMO.

 

[Riverman]

Phyrgians, Macedonians, even Paeonians were all on the Hellenic linguistic cline, but genetically less Aegean. I doubt E-V13 has anything to do with their early development, as E-V13 was a non-IE group surviving somewhere in the Carpatho-Danube zone which was assimilated by steppe groups.
The relevant proto-lineages would be R1b-PF7562, maybe an odd i2a-L699 here n there

Timing is everything. Going both by archaeology, ancient DNA and modern phylogeny, we can pretty much say when E-V13 was likely becoming Indoeuropean:
- 3.200-3.100 BC (could be bit earlier or later)
When it practically for sure became the main branch of Proto-Thracian:
- 2.400-2.200 BC (could be earlier)
And when it spread Daco-Thracian idioms throughout the Carpatho-Balkan and into Eastern European regions, in an expansive movement of early Daco-Thracian people:
- 1.700-800 BC

E-V13 was therefore in all likelihood a carrier of Indoeuropean language since the earliest expansion of steppe people to the West, which is the context we have E-L618 from (Usatovo-Gorodsk).

The open question is just whether they spoke a generalised IE language which led to Pre-Thracian continuously, from their first encounter and "steppification", or whether they adopted it later (in any case before 2.400 BC).

Obviously the Pre-/Proto-Thracian E-V13 could have "bled" into its neighbourhood, most notably Eastern Illyrians, Eastern Celtic-related groups, Iranian steppe people and Southern Balkan people (Greeks, Macedonians, Paeonians, Brygi/Phrygians).

The appearance in Iron Age Phrygians would be kind of natural, since not just did the Phrygians migrate from the Balkans, while being Thracian neighbours, but Thracians followed them, settling in Bithynia and Troy for example, in Western Anatolia.

 

[Riverman]

looks fine as a fully Greek person

These are no proximate sources. The Greeks of that time were Mycenaean-like, and the Delphi cluster is already more Northern Balkan influenced (notice the Karrah samples with lots of non-Greek lineages, including E-L618). The other Mycenaeans are completely out of range.

 

[lockdownboredom]

These are no proximate sources. The Greeks of that time were Mycenaean-like, and the Delphi cluster is already more Northern Balkan influenced (notice the Karrah samples with lots of non-Greek lineages, including E-L618). The other Mycenaeans are completely out of range.

I'm guessing you meant the Greeks of the southern Greek mainland were Mycenaean like. Unless of course you know of other Northern Greek samples that are Mycenaean like and they form the majority.