Where does the Albanian language come from? [VIDEO]

Point is that one sample proved you wrong about J2b-L283 ;)

What's funny is it got published within hours after your post at the other forum doubting it has anything to do with Steppe..

Nah, it didn't point me wrong at all. If you have ever read me in full serious mode i have never put any strong opinion, more or less i even read myself Davidski about the leak. I was being sarcastic because our thread was flooded with sock-puppet accounts and you already know that.

It's funny as well because we got the Neolithic location of E-V13 which is more north than even Riverman imagined. More to come..
 
Last edited:
They pick and choose what to focus from the Bulgarian leaks. The poster clearly said autosomaly there is a night and day difference with Penschievo vs BA layer, it can't more clear cut than that.

Looks like there will be huge data dumps this year.
That paper about Hungary might be the one that everyone posted slides from youtube a while back, with two E-V13s in the graph.

That fellow in the Bulgarian forum, engaging the insider, claiming to be Macedonian is probably Huban.

Most definitely, bad faith engagement because he cleans the "terrain of arguments".
 
Classical sources where the Dardani are referred to as either Illyrians, Thracian, Trojan, or as just themselves, i.e. Independent.

We have considerably more sources calling them something distinct from Illyrian
GLxYtQ5WwAAFUZu
 
strabo thought everyone was Illyrian see people under 2.1 and 2.2 on map ....these he thought where Illyrians
 

Attachments

  • strabo illyria.PNG
    strabo illyria.PNG
    223.4 KB · Views: 218
They pick and choose what to focus from the Bulgarian leaks. The poster clearly said autosomaly there is a night and day difference with Penschievo vs BA layer, it can't more clear cut than that.

Looks like there will be huge data dumps this year.
That paper about Hungary might be the one that everyone posted slides from youtube a while back, with two E-V13s in the graph.

That fellow in the Bulgarian forum, engaging the insider, claiming to be Macedonian is probably Huban.
There's a Bulgarian genetics forum?

Do you think you can link me? thanks in advance
 
There's a Bulgarian genetics forum?

Do you think you can link me? thanks in advance


There is a second thread where he discloses more about BA Bulgaria and Thracians.
 
How do you guys interpret this?
Ev-13 does not necessarily seem to be related to the Thracians, but to other Paleo-Balkan ethnicities with little-known names today. But the Balkans (specifically Bulgaria) is without a doubt a hub for eu-13, in all eras, although in my opinion the group first appeared in the Balkans *from the northeast*, in very early, prehistoric times, within a herding economy, of which she was a carrier, practiced in winter pastures in the lowlands and summer in the high mountains of the Balkans (my speculation) and proved surprisingly resistant to all possible vicissitudes of fate and changes over the millennia,

Is this guy trustworthy?
 
The Albanian Genetics project Rrënjët updated their page about E-V13.

Here are their claims, googls translated for non-Albanian speakers:

Panonia1.png

Possible area of spread 4000-5000 years ago, according to today's results


Slide4.png

Ancient E-V13 results:
>2500 years – red;
2000-2500 years – orange.

Slide1.png

Possible spread area of E-V13 according to modern and ancient results (Pannonia, Dardania & surroundings, Thrace).

E-V13 is the most frequent haplogroup among Albanians, with about 28% of paternal lines in the project. It has a more or less uniform distribution and concentration in all Albanian territories, therefore it is important to research the general origin of the haplogroup. On the other hand, specific branches have different distributions and frequencies from each other and must be considered each according to its own history of propagation.

Origin of E-V13
All carriers of E-V13 have a common ancestor who lived around 4900-5100 years ago, i.e. during the Bronze Age. Before this period, as part of the macrohaplogroup E, the ancestors of E-V13 must have settled in Europe with the successive waves of Neolithic cultures spreading from Anatolia and the Levant. Discoveries of ancient or closely related branches of E-V13 include E-L618 from the Neolithic in Croatia, Hungary, Ukraine, etc., while the closest present-day branches are in Europe and northern Africa. It is likely that different lineages of macrohaplogroup E were part of different cultures from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age. However, the trunk of the main branches of E-V13 began to take shape thousands of years after the spread of agriculture, in the Bronze Age, at the same time as the Indo-European influx from the Steppes. Even the main distribution of E-V13 in the Balkans occurred in the Bronze and Iron Ages, when the historically known peoples of the Balkans (Illyrians, Thracians, etc.) were already Indo-European in language and culture.

Using the genetic results of today's populations, the ancestry of a paternal line can be traced by assessing the diversity of its branches and sub-branches. In this regard, the greatest weight is given to the oldest branches that also contain old sub-branches with a concentration in a certain area, as these suggest an ancient presence in that area. Today, E-V13 has several branches of pre-Roman age in various parts of Europe, but most have Balkan and non-Balkan sub-branches that are connected about 2400-3100 years apart. A large proportion of the western sub-branches were probably established there in the Roman period, but a large number of branches must have spread earlier. As these usually have an age matching the Iron Age and are found today on both sides of the Danube, it can be speculated that Pannonia was an important source of E-V13 proliferation in this period. This includes the northern/central part of the Balkans and the neighboring area in central Europe, a region we have mentioned for years as a possible starting point for the distribution of E-V13. It should be emphasized that up to this point we have examined only the modern results, which give an important orientation, but which must be combined with the data of ancient bones.

In studies published in the last 3-4 years, E-V13 findings in ancient bones have a more eastern distribution. Finds from the beginning of the Iron Age are a large number from Bulgaria and a single result from Slovakia, while from the later pre-Roman period there are other results from Sicily, Prague, Croatia, Moldavia, Ukraine and again from Bulgaria , the country where E-V13 has been found continuously since the beginning of the Iron Age. So by now, E-V13 has significantly higher pre-Roman concentration and diversity in the central/eastern Balkans, and was likely densely found among the Thracians and less frequently in NW Illyria. There are still no pre-Roman results from Dardania and the surrounding area, but later results suggest that it was found among the Dardanians, possibly in high percentages (remains to be verified). It should be noted that these results appear a full 2000 years after the initial spread of E-V13, so the conclusions are again relatively preliminary. New ancient results, especially from the Bronze Age, can bring key innovations.

From the diversity of modern results and from ancient results, it seems that the most likely area of the first spread of E-V13 was somewhere between the Pannonian basin (Vojvodina/Hungary & western Romania) and present-day Bulgaria, including the entire central Balkans . Perhaps it was precisely this intermediate zone that initiated the spread in several directions, but details of this level require even more complete data. Regardless of which specific part of it was the starting point, this entire area must have been an essential part of the early spread of E-V13, also serving as a source for branches of E-V13 in other regions. More modern quality results and especially more results from Bronze Age bones will be needed to determine with greater precision and certainty the geographic origin of E-V13. In any case, looking at the rather scattered findings, it seems that all the main peoples of the Balkans had in their composition at least some branches of the E-V13 haplogroup since the pre-Roman period.

E-V13 among Albanians
Today, haplogroup E-V13 has the highest density in the world in Albanian lands. The highest percentage is found in Kosovo, Malësi, Labëri, Tirana/Durrës. Most of the main branches, such as: E-BY4459, E-Y146085, E-PH2180, etc., have started to spread since the period of Albanian ethnogenesis, in late antiquity and the early Middle Ages. Since the origin of E-V13 in general has not yet been precisely determined, even the placement of most branches of E-V13 in Albanian lands remains controversial. However, between Pannonia and Bulgaria, from whichever region the spread of E-V13 started, the closest connection to the Albanian lands is the former ancient territory of Dardania. Most likely, many present-day E-V13 lines among Albanians either have their origins around the Dardania area, or were first established in Dardania (from the north or east) and then spread more widely to other lands.

It must be said that the time and the path of spread may differ from one branch to another, but the main periods were probably the Iron Age and the period between Antiquity and the Middle Ages. As we mentioned above, since the pre-Roman period, E-V13 must have been present in the paleo-Balkan peoples from the Adriatic to the Black Sea. Concretely in Dardani, the strongest evidence for an ancient presence are the 3rd-5th century results from Nishi and from Timacum Minus.

At branch level, there are quite big differences in today's distribution in the Albanian lands. A large number of branches of E-V13 can be found in different provinces, which suggests presence in the arboreal/Albanian population since the period of ethnogenesis. Among these are E-Y173822, E-Y146085, E-BY4459, E-PH2180, E-FT17132, E-Y159601, etc. Today's diversity suggests that most of these lineages must have spread from the northeast about 1400-1800 years ago.

It is very likely that a large number of other branches were also part of the arboreal/Albanian ethnogenesis despite the later or more geographically limited distribution. For each of the main branches of E-V13 among Albanians, we have published separate articles where each is examined in more detail: E-BY4459, E-Y173822, E-Y146085, E-Y93102, E-PH2180, E-BY168279. Articles will be constantly updated as data is added. Meanwhile, we emphasize that E-V13 is the Albanian haplogroup with the highest number of results of insufficient quality for sub-branch determination, with about 80 such results. We invite the members of the E-V13 haplogroup to improve the quality of the analysis, so that the diversity and distribution of the E-V13 branches among Albanians is more deeply understood.

Link: https://rrenjet.com/e-v13/?fbclid=I...p0uWIcDtmVAmawK5Iw_aem_Oa88vfVjlgroaa8WWopdlQ
 
The update is overall good, but the map is still wrong when they don't include Apuseni mountains and Transylvania even in the expansion map. Like its possible that Northern Transylvania and Transcarpathia was only secondarily settled by Daco-Thracians from Basarabi and Babadag, from areas like Banat-Oltenia moving up, but still all of Oltenia and more of Transylvania has to be included with 100 % certainty.

I wonder whether project members know something of the upcoming results I spoke about, which will be game changers for the E-V13 story:
- Transylvanian EBA-LBA results (Cotofeni, Livezile, Wietenberg etc.)
- Gomolava mass burial site (Kalakacza horizon in the LBA-EIA transition)
- Scythian and Celtic burials from Transylvania which include a significant fraction of local Balkan-like samples (presumably Dacians which descend from Gáva, Basarabi and Vekerzug-Sanislau group)
- Dacia Roman province samples

Its possible that the results available don't cover the North of the Gáva zone as well, because there were less contacts to foreign people there and therefore less sampling due to cremation.

Nevertheless, this distribution map is a great leap forward, since it makes the Tisza river the centre of E-V13, down to the confluence of Tisza-Danube. But then again, there is no way, not the slightest, that areas like Oltenia weren't E-V13 heartlands. That to me is completely out of question. We might have no samples from there, but it was an area which was inhabited in the LBA-LIA nearly continuously by core Carpathian groups which are extremely likely to have had E-V13 (Verbicoara, Fundeni-Govora, Gáva-Vartop, Basarabi, historical Dacians).

Even if E-V13 was at home in say Belegis I, instead of Upper Tisza Gáva, or just in Verbicoara, instead of Upper Tisza Gáva, by the Iron Age regions like Southern Transylvania and Oltenia must have been heartlands of E-V13, because of how these groups being connected.
The only open question really is, whether Suciu de Sus into Lapus into Gáva was the main E-V13 group or not. But even if not, even if more Southern groups like Verbicoara would have been the exclusive core (unlikely), still those areas, especially and in particular Oltenia, would have been E-V13 by the Iron Age.

Oltenia is 100 % an Early Iron Age core zone for E-V13. That's even way more safe than Northern Transylvania-Transcarpathia, which are still highly likely though. Surely more safe than the Central Balkans in the LBA-EIA.

I probably should add another aspect: The area of E-V13 was clearly more East of the Tisza (Transtisza) than West of it, which means the whole zone of origin can be simply moved East. If doing so, msot of Transylvania and Oltenia would be completely covered, which is how it should be. The areas West of the Tisza were at times settled by E-V13 dominated people, but their core zone was always East of this river.
 
Last edited:
The update is overall good, but the map is still wrong when they don't include Apuseni mountains and Transylvania even in the expansion map. Like its possible that Northern Transylvania and Transcarpathia was only secondarily settled by Daco-Thracians from Basarabi and Babadag, from areas like Banat-Oltenia moving up, but still all of Oltenia and more of Transylvania has to be included with 100 % certainty.

I wonder whether project members know something of the upcoming results I spoke about, which will be game changers for the E-V13 story:
- Transylvanian EBA-LBA results (Cotofeni, Livezile, Wietenberg etc.)
- Gomolava mass burial site (Kalakacza horizon in the LBA-EIA transition)
- Scythian and Celtic burials from Transylvania which include a significant fraction of local Balkan-like samples (presumably Dacians which descend from Gáva, Basarabi and Vekerzug-Sanislau group)
- Dacia Roman province samples

Its possible that the results available don't cover the North of the Gáva zone as well, because there were less contacts to foreign people there and therefore less sampling due to cremation.

Nevertheless, this distribution map is a great leap forward, since it makes the Tisza river the centre of E-V13, down to the confluence of Tisza-Danube. But then again, there is no way, not the slightest, that areas like Oltenia weren't E-V13 heartlands. That to me is completely out of question. We might have no samples from there, but it was an area which was inhabited in the LBA-LIA nearly continuously by core Carpathian groups which are extremely likely to have had E-V13 (Verbicoara, Fundeni-Govora, Gáva-Vartop, Basarabi, historical Dacians).
I agree that its a leap forward. There are still some issues there that we understand, but credit to them for at least pushing some things forward. I'm sure a lot of the usual suspects will be seething right now.
 
They have shifted their BA homeland to Rivermans, little brumi is getting ostracized by his peers.

The map is not fully accurate, I get it that some Es did not have full coverage, but why omit Ukranian samples for example?
oZvJdGK.png


They claim Pannonia was the hub for Roman E-V13s. Was it though? We have as of now 13 male samples from Roman Pannonia(Northern Croatia, north-western Serbia).

K0GOABg.png


Celtic lineages dominate with Illyrian being 2nd.

But as soon as one crosses into the province of Moesia, ratios drastically change. Sample size = 44

73HgAn1.png


E-V13 is 31.82% overall, but 50.91% when one removes the non-local lineages. Also J2b is over-represented from Illyrian(Dardanian) auxiliaries in Timacum. The pattern is pretty obvious.

And the Nish samples is not Illyrian. It is an obvious Daco-Thracian profile. There was not much blending between Illyrians and Daco-Thracians. The symbiotic zone was pretty thin, with Nish being inside a clear Daco-Thracian environment.

C6Vf6vH.png
 
Like stressed above, the whole map is a bit too Western, that's the main problem. Because E-V13 cultures, nearly all candidate groups since the Late Neolithic/Copper Age had their epicentre East of the Tisza river. That's true for the Lažňany group, Cotofeni, Livezile, Wietenberg, Suciu de Sus, Lapus, Gáva, Sanislau group of Vekerzug, Basarabi and even later historical Dacians.

The Tisza river was crossed by E-V13 groups, but this was always when they were dominant and expanded in nearly all directions. Their core zone was always to the East of the river.

If one follows the regional cremation rite, then too, with the same groups in the centre, we get an Transtisza distribution for the groups which had a low burials : settlement ratio, which means a lot of the dead were disposed in a way which can't be traced by archaeology (scattered remains, left to decay, scattered ashes etc.). And this kind of disposal of the dead, with a high ratio of cremation and non-visibility at all, is typical for the Daco-Thracians throughout the ages.

It can be traced back to the Lažňany group and Tripolye-Cucuteni in the Copper Age, which, in my opinion, points to the source of E-V13 in the Late Neolithic-Copper Age, most likely in Tripolye-Cucuteni.

In any case, we always to keep the cremation/visible burial bias in mind. This factor clearly skews all results in the Carpathian basin. But we also know which cultures lived were and the LBA, West of the Tisza river was Tumulus culture zone, which is clearly not the E-V13 source population.
 
I wonder whether project members know something of the upcoming results I spoke about, which will be game changers for the E-V13 story:
- Transylvanian EBA-LBA results (Cotofeni, Livezile, Wietenberg etc.)
- Gomolava mass burial site (Kalakacza horizon in the LBA-EIA transition)
- Scythian and Celtic burials from Transylvania which include a significant fraction of local Balkan-like samples (presumably Dacians which descend from Gáva, Basarabi and Vekerzug-Sanislau group)
- Dacia Roman province samples

They might, the usual instigator has toned it down about there is no such thing as Gava, has gone silent.

Like stressed above, the whole map is a bit too Western, that's the main problem.

Yes, being centered around Tisza while being surrounded by allegedly rival groups is a very vulnerable position and not a stable homeland for growth. It does not change the fact, that they themselves have capitulated and recognized Tisza as a heartland even if they grudgingly omit Transylvania. Deep down they know what's coming, they have after all capitulated.:)
 
I don't have the insights, but I wonder if really all of the authors were that hostile initially? I mean chances are some of them are a bit more rational than others? But then again, I have no insights in any infights and ideas floating around in the Albanian project.
 
I don't have the insights, but I wonder if really all of the authors were that hostile initially? I mean chances are some of them are a bit more rational than others? But then again, I have no insights in any infights and ideas floating around in the Albanian project.

I did not click on the link to see who wrote it. I know gjergj agreed with you in the past despite being straight forward that he hopes it turns out different. The other members who are hillbillies are fanatical and full r-tard on Illyrianism.
So that does beg the question, did they get insight to any of the upcoming papers that are imminent?
 
I did not click on the link to see who wrote it. I know gjergj agreed with you in the past despite being straight forward that he hopes it turns out different. The other members who are hillbillies are fanatical and full r-tard on Illyrianism.
So that does beg the question, did they get insight to any of the upcoming papers that are imminent?

I guess so, because why else would they have posted a non-beloved theory? To delete it in some weeks or months, when presumably the first relevant results will appear, from the papers I mentioned? Honestly I myself would be more careful and not risking my reputation if I'm not pretty sure about the outcome. Now the modern samples are nice, for the orientation, we have scaledinnovation and FTDNA Discovery, but its clear to me that's not solid enough, because the modern data can be so misleading.
And that the change happened shortly after the EAA, where we can assume Albanian scientists/visitors participated, might be no coincidence.
I guess they heard exactly from one of the research results I always mentioned and they got a couple of E-V13 finds in at least one, probably all of them (which is my expectation, honestly). That would swing things very much in favour of the Tisza origin, obviously.
 
All I can say is I agree. The majority of the board members of that organization are extremely hostile to E-V13 having a Daco-Thracian ethnogenesis. To capitulate, the steps it takes to overcome the embarrassment of their past behavior, why now and why so sudden? EAA?
 
Well, I recently (last days) posted the branches of E-V13 I consider Proto-Albanian or possibly so, based on their TMRCA and exclusive or nearly exclusive Albanian provenance. Since those branches being mentioned in the text, I guess someone did contemplate about the issue, probably after reading my post.
The number of Albanian E-V13 lineages which can be considered Proto-Albanian is definitely higher than for say J-L283. I want to stress that this doesn't tell us who spoke the idiom originally, but in refutes any idea of E-V13 being a later Medieval and unimportant addition to the Albanian people, which is something a couple of people claimed.
And it gives weight to the importance of E-V13 during the Albanian ethnogenesis, which being even more noticeable since it seems to have been, by and large, a pulse migration. Like a huge chunk of E-V13 broke off, from the main population (Dardanians? Daco-Romans? Dacian tribals?) and fused with the other main lineages of Albanians (J-L283, R-Z2103 etc.).
How exactly that pans out for the language transmission is unknown, but this process started during the ethnogenesis, not at the end of or after it.
 
In Timacum Minus initially it was the Dalmatian Cohort which was stationed, i posted the original study here around, then the Numeri Dardani.
 
There were two E-V13s in Timacum that showed affinity to Illyrian, even on a single distance basis, which is a more accurate way of measuring specimens from the same time frame(especially if distance is 2.5 and below). The true local profile should be more akin to the Naissus sample, which there were none. I don;t think any of the Timacum samples were local not even the south Thracian profiles.

The two E-V13s might be actually Dardani(Illyrianized E-V13s), and they do not stand out as for modeling Albanian post-mdv samples, nor are their clades special to the discussion. The hopes and dreams of rrenjet is just hope and cope.

From the same area as Timacum, we know from Bulgarian leaks there was a Thracian population that one of the Bulgarian team members thinks were involved in the ethnogenesis of Albanians.
 
Back
Top