Illyrians/Albanians

t. Dardan Shqiptur

His idea of a book suggestion is a Wikipedia article, did you really think his only other comment wouldn't be pseudo-intellectual (not counting starting with "I mean" like most idiots do)

>it's bad because wiki is bad hurr
Yeah, recommending somebody obviously new to academia a decent and well-sourced Wiki-article totally proves what again?
If he knew how to search methodically he wouldn't have asked.
> pseudo-intellectual
Yeah, shots fired. I got a PhD in history though and I don't really care whether you like wiki or not. I know for a fact that retired professors write articles there and that literally everyone under the age of 70 uses wikipedia for first information. If there is an article on a fairly obscure subject like the Origin of Albania with 123 citations it's a good jumping of point and this is what OP asked for.

Here have some mega beginner friendly stuff:
The Medieval Albanians. National Hellenic Research Foundation, Institute for Byzantine Research, International Symposium 5
- Athens (1998)
Grad i župa u Zetskom primorju i severnoj Albaniji u XIV i XV veku
Antonovic, Miloš. - Beograd (2003)
Skanderbeg als neuer Alexander. Antikerezeption im spätmittelalterlichen Albanien.
Schmitt, Oliver Jens. (2005) - In: Osmanische Expansion und europäischer Humanismus p. 123-144
The Ottoman Invasion of Italy and the Albania Rebellion, 1480-1481
>Robert Elsie.
Yeah, I forgot about that one. He has a nice style too.
Treptow, Kurt William. (1991) - In: The Ukrainian quarterly Bd. 47 (1991) p. 54-72
Les Albanais du XIe au XIIIe siècle: Nomades ou sédentaires?
Ducellier, Alain. (1979) - In: Byzantinische Forschungen vol. 7 (1979) p. 23-36

>ad hominem spam

ethnos is mostly language and self identity, which most certainly exists as a constant in many cases, but sometimes not, like in the case of greeks who identified as "roman" until their enlightenment and rediscovery of their ancient pre roman past

either way it's subjective and you can twist it and spin it around to make it seem like a modern greek is no way related to a medieval greek for example but you would be wrong

They are not Illyrian. That theory is crackpot and simply relies on "what else could they be" bullshit.
In any case genetically speaking everyone else in Balkans is mostly native so Albanians are no more "native" than anyone else.
I mean, Illyrian language was dead by 2nd or 4th century, and first mention of Albanian is in 13th century, what kind of a fucked up logic is that to claim they are direct descendanta of Illyrians simply because no one knows where they came from?

>sometimes not, like in the case of greeks who identified as "roman" until their enlightenment and rediscovery of their ancient pre roman past

Roman meant Greek Orthodox.

It meant greek speaking orthodox christian, i.e. it meant greek

>They are not Illyrian

That is just as political as claiming they definetely are. Albanians definetely have ancient heritage in the western Balkans, and since the Illyrians seemingly died out, it is somewhat plausible that Illyrians became Albanians. From a scale to 0 to 10 with 0 being they definetely arent, and 10 being they definetely are you will have to put albanians = illyrians somewhere between 1 and 9. 0 and 10 are political statements.

>it's plausible so it's true
Nope.
And furthermore it's not even plausible. I already told you Illyrian language(s) died out long before first mention of Albanian language.
By logic of things they should be speaking some bastardized Latin or Greek.
To claim modern Albanians are DIRECTLY connected to Illyrians of old is preposterous and POLITICAL, as you said.
It's literally Albanian nationalist mythology, which from that point goes to "reee Slavs go back to Siberia".
They are not Illyrian, and they are not more Balkanite than any other Balkanite.

If you can get that degree you can learn to read. I didn't say anything about Wikipedia being bad. The OP asked for a book. You admit that you know of them but pretended a link that you say literally everyone under 70 can get helps the OP, when he didn't ask for a Wikipedia link. So do you assume OP is retarded? You chump. He also stated that the Albanians were popping in and out of the books, showing he does know what academia is. I find your presumption that people don't ask questions unless they don't know simple methods often among Internet historians who don't notice they're talking on forum boards devoted to history and not Yahoo or reddit for that matter.

And although I wasn't criticizing Wikipedia per se you clearly overestimate it.

Albanian is definetely spoken in the western Balkans since at least 1000BC. No serious linguist disputes this. So the question "Where did they come from" can be answered with certainty: They are living in the Balkans since at least 1000BC. Now another question is if those ancient albanians are the same people that the greeks and romans called illyrians. This is something that can not be answered, because there is too little known about the Illyrians. However it is plausible, because otherweise it would mean that the Albanians have lived in that area for millenias without being detected by greeks and romans, which is very unplausible.

Also note that most peoples have unclear, not very well traced back roots. For most peoples the most plausible explanation is the scientific consensus. For the albanians it is only disputed so heavily because they are a balkan people and history and heritage is so heavily politicized there.

Illyria was the Romanians
And Thracia was the Bulgarians
Geopgroahical postion of course

>since 1000 B.C.
>no serious linguist
Then you'll have no problem producing sources for such an outrageous claim.
Or naming any fucking work in Albanian before 15th century.

Literally every single western Albanologist or Linguist that has studied albanian. Coming to my head are Robert Elsie, gottfried Leibniz, Joachim Metzinger, and Franz Bopp.

Albanians could be descended from tribe of Illyrians, but they are not the same people, the Illyrian civilization, culture, identity, language, etc. has completely died out, the albanians of today have no connection to antiquity, their identity goes as far back as skanderbeg and maybe even further back to the empire of Dushan, but that's it

Man who do so many people throw a tantrum when you suggest some populations of the balkans like the vlachs or Albanians have genetic continuity to the same populations that were there since antiquity?

I don't think people care about Vlachs as much but linguistically they are not locals.

Balkanoids are just a really mean bunch so Serbs and such will prefer to deny that their Albanian friends have been in the Balkans longer than them.

>some populations of the balkans like the vlachs or Albanians have genetic continuity to the same populations that were there since antiquity
all populations of the balkans have the same genetic continuity

What did he mean by this?

South Slavs have Slavic culture and meaningful Slavic heritage.

exactly what i wrote

then why bring up genetics?

No, provide direct quotes. I have no idea how could someone say Albanian was spoken in 1000 B.C. when earliest mention of language is 13th century, which should tell you a lot about how attested that language was.
How did those researchers come to that conclussion?

What should I do here? Pull up haplogroup distributions? It's clearly false, explain yourself.

You implied that South Slavs are genetically native to the same extent while it's only to a partial extent. Language is also important since it's the foundation of their ethnic identity.
Serbs would freak out about being called Illyrians or even worse, North Albanians. Croats might have a more positive reaction.

yes

prove to me that albanians are genetically descended from illyrians and at the same time prove to me that serbs, croats and bosnians are not

prove to me that romanians and vlachs are descended from thracians and bulgarians are not

>genetic continuity
So do the Balkan "Slavs". I cannot stress this enough, there are no real Slavs in the Balkans, they're all just culturally slavicized Balkan shitskins who have lived in that area for thousands of years and the fact they now speak a different language than their ancestors doesn't change a thing. I'm saying that as an actual (West) Slav, when some fucking Bulgarian or Montenegrin swarthoid acts like he's my "Slavic brother" I feel like I need to vomit, get a genetic test and stop LARPing.

1. language is in no way related to genetics
2. no, south slavs realize they are not genetically the same as north slavs, they wouldn't "freak out" to hearing the obvious

I don't understand what this post is getting at. The disparate balkan groups have some underlying genetic cohesion but to suggest it is completely uniform is...idk where you're even going with this. Are you trolling?

It's related to their ethnic identity which is non-local to the Balkans.
Genetically South Slavs are about halfway between Albanians and Ukrainians.

Google those names dipshit im not here to wipe your bum. Also google Norbert Jokl.

Genetically south slavs are descended from proto-europeans, while albanians from africans, genetically speaking south slavs are the natives and albanians are the late comers

when it comes to ethnic identity, the albanian one is from around the time of skanderbeg, and it has no connection to ancient illyria

Why is it always some Czech who met some dark skinned mountain vlachs or ksoovars that haven't left their mountain village in 10 centuries claiming that the balkans are completely devoid of Slavs? Why do I as a balkanoid slav always get mistaken as a pole or as a Ukrainian when I go abroad?

Stop making pretend there isn't a significant Slavic strain to the balkans it's quite tiresome.

>Haplogroups
>extremely poor grasp of what they mean

Yeah, no. Haplogroup frequencies mean absolutely nothing for massively inbred groups anyway, it's RNG to the highest degree which clan chief had the most offspring who had the most offspring until a large fraction of men are descended from him.

Their autosomal genetic structure which can be verified from any legit genetic plot shows them intermediate between Albanians/Greeks and other Slavs.

There's more likelyhood that Albians are Illyrians than just about any other WEWUZ claim. Their language is not closely related to Slavic and has no other obvious origin than the Balkans. Granted, they might be Thracians or from some other part of the Balkans than Albania or Illyria, but the geography matches : Albania is exactly the kind of mountainous shithole where ancient languages and cultures tend to linger, and exactly not the kind of place incoming groups tend to settle.

>like in the case of greeks who identified as "roman" until their enlightenment and rediscovery of their ancient pre roman past

I don;t disagree with your post but this is a poor example, the Greeks always saw themselves as Greek and continued speaking Greek, it was the STATE that called itself "Rome", because of issues of political legitimacy.

>I mean, Illyrian language was dead by 2nd or 4th century

Assumed dead*. It was dead in the coastal heartlands of Illyria and in their cities, but it probably survived out in the wilds, and especially in the poor, backwards,mountainous regions like modern Kosovo or inland Albania.

If you had visited Roman Britain in the 4th century, you would have assumed that Brithonic Celtic was extinct, too. Latin was the sole language across most of what is now England, and in all the cities and towns even in rural areas. But Celtic lingered in the mountainous, backward parts of the far west, and it was Celtic that emerged as the sole language of those remnants of Roman Britain that resisted the English invasions the longest.

Romania was Dacia

I've heard a theory that the Albanian language is descended from Dacian instead.

quit making things up

So what you mean is, you don't have a clue what you're talking about? You're a special kind of retarded, aren't you? You could have just googled any of the terms user used and spared making a fool of yourself, but you just couldn't wait to tell us how little you knew, could you?

Dopey cunt.

See biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/07/07/022160

It does not make ANY difference what haplogroups some population has if the question is their origin. You can find an African tribe with 100% R1b and sure it might tell us about an ancient migration from Eurasia to Africa but it tells us nothing about the autosomal extent of it, it could easily be 0.01%.

Retard.

Dacian has more in common with Baltic and Slavic languages than it does with Albanian.

>first mention in 11th century
>claim to be there from 10,000bc
>The Illyrian languages were likely extinct between the 2nd and 6th centuries
>Albanian is as much similar to Illyrian languages as to Dacian or Thracian
>but hurr durr our geographical position makes us clear we are Illiryians
>claims that today south slavs has no genetical similarities to pre slavic nations on balkan.

I wonder which shiqpshanone is under this posts.

Explain.

So the Iberians came all the way from the Caucasus? Damn.

>being unironically this retarded

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albania_(placename)#Albania_.28Caucasus.29

You absolute idiot. Albania is a Latin term coined for Shqiperia later on. Albanians have always called themselves Shqiptar. Native Americans (Indians) are from the Asiatic India too, then?

The first part of your statement is true. Albania is a Latin term. But albanians only started calling themselves "shqiptar" after skanderbeg. Prior to that they were known as the arberesh or arvanites.

>this thread is purely for a historical understanding.
Then you're going to need to understand politics and religion.

Illyrian isn't exactly a synonym for Albanians. Albanians are probably related to Illyrians, but it's ridiculous to claim that they're the same people. The knowledge we have on Illyrian language is extremely scarce and it's most likely that Illyrians weren't a single people/ethnic group, but Greeks/Romans were simply too lazy to attempt classifying them. I mean, if you look at Liburnians and Dalmatae, you'll already see significant cultural differences between the two.

you should read the fucking link you brainlet it says there the albania in caucasus has nothing to do with albania in the balkans god damn balkan brainlet piece of shit kys.