A theory about the origin of E-V13

[vasil]

Weren't the Doric Greek colonies on the coast anyway? Corcyra, Epidamnos, Apollonia and maybe Lissos were Doric AFAIK.

Maybe let's approach the question differently, how much Koine Greek influence is there in Albanian compared to both Doric and Latin influence? The less there is the more likely Albania was north of the Jirecek line.

From the Pella curse tablet we know that Macedonian Greeks probably also spoke a Doric dialect so the influence is most likely from them.

[Granary]

From the Pella curse tablet we know that Macedonian Greeks probably also spoke a Doric dialect so the influence is most likely from them.

I'd rather think it's from Epirus given that imagine Paeonians were not the ancestor of Albanians but rather Dardanians and neighboring smaller tribes were.

[Johane Derite]

No, I want it on this particular topic. A very controversial claim from Bruzmi that an archeological culture, identified, and written on by multiple authors does not exist.. Besides his claim goes against your own ideas on E-V13 so theoretically you should oppose him, but don't because you identify with your fellow co-ethnic. How touching of you..

.

I openly disagreed with him on many matters a month or two ago. I am not fully convinced either of his arguments against Brnjica as Brnjica seems to at least have a unique pottery style, but I also understand some of his critiques.

But I agree fully with the paper by Pedergast that he shared, since it is something that not just one linguist, but many others have already more or less stated.

[Bruzmi]

I openly disagreed with him on many matters a month or two ago. I am not fully convinced either of his arguments against Brnjica as Brnjica seems to at least have a unique pottery style, but I also understand some of his critiques.

But I agree fully with the paper by Pedergast that he shared, since it is something that not just one linguist, but many others have already more or less stated.

What Huban doesn't seem to understand is that a Brnjica culture was never identified, it was hypothesized and then introduced for decades in Yugoslav archaeology in various schemes which counted Hisar sites as "Brnjica" sites and that eventually ended up being pseudo-scientific nonsense. "Brnjica culture" ended up being a construction in Serbian archaeology for various outlandish ideas. But there's no Brnjica culture because an identified material culture requires excavations and cataloguing, not vague surveys and weird theories about pottery classification.

The fact is that this 2006 paper published in Serbia would never - ever - be published anywhere else outside of Serbia. And because times change, such papers are avoided in Serbian academia as well in our times.

Do the ethnonyms, Dorians and Dardanians,which sound quite similar, designate one and the same people? Do the toponyms in Troada, the town at the foot of Ida on the Hellespont (between Ilion and Abid), the former name of the island of Samotraki, and the name of the straits between the Sea of Marmora and the Aegean, reflect the recollection of a powerful people whose roots most probably lay in the Morava basin? The most recent results of archaeological research confirm the opinion given by M. Garasanin on »Dako-–Moesian elements« in the ethnicity of the Brnjica cultural group, but exclude any Illyrian component.


It's an even larger absurdity when one thinks that Garasanin's "Daco-Moesian elements" theory was based on just one single (5 cm) pin!

When I read that someone actually wrote in a paper which a journal actually accepted the sentence "Do the ethnonyms, Dorians and Dardanians,which sound quite similar, designate one and the same people?" I think two things: 1)that Balkan academia has progressed and such things rarely get published now 2) that the person who wrote that sentence really had no knowledge of ancient Greek, let alone ancient Greek literature, epigraphy or archaeological anthropology.

And that really amazes me. People who don't know ancient Greek or Latin in the past used to write down expansive theories because somehow two completely foreign to each other words sounded to them "quite similar".

[Aspar]

@Bruzmi

Ok, if what you say is true and Brnjica Culture never really existed as a separate entity, what culture does the pottery identified as of the Brnjica type and found in South Serbia and Kosovo belong to?

[Johane Derite]

What Huban doesn't seem to understand is that a Brnjica culture was never identified, it was hypothesized and then introduced for decades in Yugoslav archaeology in various schemes which counted Hisar sites as "Brnjica" sites and that eventually ended up being pseudo-scientific nonsense. "Brnjica culture" ended up being a construction in Serbian archaeology for various outlandish ideas. But there's no Brnjica culture because an identified material culture requires excavations and cataloguing, not vague surveys and weird theories about pottery classification.

The fact is that this 2006 paper published in Serbia would never - ever - be published anywhere else outside of Serbia. And because times change, such papers are avoided in Serbian academia as well in our times.

Do the ethnonyms, Dorians and Dardanians,which sound quite similar, designate one and the same people? Do the toponyms in Troada, the town at the foot of Ida on the Hellespont (between Ilion and Abid), the former name of the island of Samotraki, and the name of the straits between the Sea of Marmora and the Aegean, reflect the recollection of a powerful people whose roots most probably lay in the Morava basin? The most recent results of archaeological research confirm the opinion given by M. Garasanin on »Dako-–Moesian elements« in the ethnicity of the Brnjica cultural group, but exclude any Illyrian component.

.

But this is published by the Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, and the argument seems to be built more on a uniform pottey style than a pin. I am aware of the general serbian academic position when it comes to the "daco-moesian" theory, and generally take it with the appropriate grain of salt.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv8d...o_tab_contents

[Johane Derite]

This guy argues for example that Brnjica ended due to chanelled ware and that Dardani are actually somehow migrants from Anatolia that came to kosovo in 8th century BC

https://www.academia.edu/4104746/%D0...re_the_Dardani


In this paper the same dude then argues, that brnjica cultures earliest burials are inhumations because of "contact" with the illyrian groups, but this is not convincing. The inhumations also seem quite interesting in themselves.

https://www.academia.edu/39499733/%D...rnjica_Culture

[Bruzmi]

But this is published by the Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, and the argument seems to be built more on a uniform pottey style than a pin. I am aware of the general serbian academic position when it comes to the "daco-moesian" theory, and generally take it with the appropriate grain of salt.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv8d...o_tab_contents

The 2013 article was written by a different author than the 2006 article. But it's interesting to compare them. One published in 2006 in Serbia, the other in 2013 in Austria (with access to more or less the same data as yearly excavations campaigns started after 2010)

STOJIC (2006):

The archaeological excavations in Leskovac gave the key to identification of the Brnjica finds in other museums in the Morava basin; through classification of material and intensive identification, trial and protective excavations, fifty-four Brnjica cultural group sites have been designated, of which ten are in the Vranje region (...)

See how he mixes up surveys, classification and "protective excavations" (rudimentary excavations before industrial activities on endangered sites. They aren't considered to be actual excavation campaigns) to "designate" 54 sites!

VASIC (2013):

The Brnjica group, which to some opinions also contains a Vatin component, was spread mainly in South Serbia and Kosovo. The main sites are necropolises Donja Brnjica, which gave the name to the group and Grastica near Pristina, Donja Toponica and Gornja Strazava near Prokuplje, Vrpce near Leskovac, as well as the settlement Hisar in Leskovac.


As we've said by 2020, even the main sites after further excavations can't be grouped together as a separate material culture. Contacts with Hisar are of course well documented and require a wider discussion. Such a thing isn't something unusual. Proposed material culture groups come and go every 10 years as excavations progress. Vasic (2013) about the "Vatin culture" (also thrown around as a concept in various fora):

Generally, it is considered that cremation was in use in the Vatin culture, but in fact we do not know much about Vatin necropolises. Some 25 years ago N. Tasić listed that what was believed to belong to the Vatin cemeteries, and came to the conclusion that just a few graves can really be considered as Vatin. The situation has not improved in the meantime. There are many graves which contain Vatin pottery, particularly characteristic goblets with two handles (Fig. 1), but none of them can be marked as Vatin in the strict sense of the word. All of them contain other features which are not Vatin and which, in many cases, differ among them (Fig. 2). Thus, one gets the impression that Vatin pottery, spread everywhere in that period, became part of the material culture of various groups, which did not belong to the same cultural entity. In other words, the term Vatin should only designate a pottery phenomenon, which was present at a certain time over a large territory, embracing several different groups.

I think that Brnjica pottery will likely be considered in the same way as Vatin in the near future. (To be continued with Aspar's interesting question)

[Johane Derite]

modern Albanian is the result of proto-Albanian speakers undergoing partial shift into Latin, while Balkan Romance is the outcome of a full shift of Albanian speakers into the Roman, Late Latin-speaking settlement community, resulting in a form of Balkan Latin that shared many grammatical and some lexical properties with Albanian."

I wonder. What would an equivalent situation of Albanoid speakers fully shifting into Greek, (in a time before latin presence in balkans) look like?

[Riverman]

I have no strong and barely any decisive opinion on the issue as such, but I noted some comment of yours:

See how he mixes up surveys, classification and "protective excavations" (rudimentary excavations before industrial activities on endangered sites. They aren't considered to be actual excavation campaigns) to "designate" 54 sites!

And what's the problem with that? Real excavation campaigns, what do you mean by that? Those are pretty rare overall and the vast majority of excavations are trial & protective, bringing up no less valid data and material. They constitute a huge portion of all the European excavations and brought up a huge portion of the available archaeological material. Even many Bell Beaker finds of significance, to just name one example, came up that way. There is nothing wrong with excavations of this category. The question is rather whether he classified the sites correctly and what arguments you or others have to question their status.
That's a valid debate, but saying only material coming from big excavation campagins is significant is wrong. Usually protective excavations being done carefully with all scientific considerations, unless there is a true pressure on the archaeologists to hurry. Nothing wrong with those.