Ok "Arnavut Damari", here we are today.

One thing that you must learn when you post your pages is to present the author. For example, by quoting isolating paragraphs from John Wilkes (where he presents various linguist hypotheses, which he does not accept or deny, because he's no linguist), you must also present his main thesis in his book that he finds your nationalist ideology as "highly improbable" and that he does not even accept that you were the native population of Arbanon of the Kruja-Mati region, where you first emerge in the 11th century.

If you consider yourself a honest person and not a rustler you should at least quote that.

Your basic nationalist obsession with Illyrian continuity is articulated in your thesis that the 6th-9th Kruja-Komani culture (or Arber/Arben culture as you call it) represents a surviving local Illyrian element, from where the later historical Albanians have emerged.

Non Albanian archaeologists of course have a very different opinion as does the albanian archaeologist Etleva Nallbani (who currently works on the site which was her PhD subject in France) who has recently rejected the idea of the Kruja-Komani culture as a proto-albanian culture.

I will provide you the opinions on the matter by William Bowden (an expert in Late Antiquity archaeology of Epirus), John Wilkes from his "Illyrians", Florin Curta, Alexandru Madgearu and, of course, of Etleva Nallbani.

The objections in the albanian thesis are multiple:

1) The archaeological evidence seems to indicate that the inhabitans of the Kruja-Komani culture were not native in this region, but rather a recent arrival from the north (possibly romanized Illyrians).

2) The interpretation of the inhabitants of Kruja-Komani as proto-Albanians is also disputed, with Wilkes and Popović opting for latin speakers (because of the large number of latin toponyms that are associated with the areas of this culture).

3) Both Madgearu and Nalbani have rejected the connection of the Kruja-Komani people with Albanians, because the former show certain urban material elements, that it would be preposterous to attribute to the mountain pastoral Albanians.

Let's see them one by one:

A) William Bowden:


B) John Wilkes:


C) Florin Curta:


D) Magdearu and Nallbani:

Alexandru Madgearu gives his own assessment of the "Kruje-Komani" culture along with those of the Serbian Archaeologist Vladislav Popović, the Albanian archaeologist Etleva Nallbani and the British archaeologist William Bowden in pages 148-149 of his book "the Wars of the Balkan Peninsula: their medieval origins" (Scarecrow,2008):

As concerns the Komani-Kruje culture, the situation is more complicated than Albanian historians believe. Serbian archaeologist Vladislav Popović supposed that this culture was created by a Roman and urban population, which cannot be identified with the Proto-Albanians. According to him, this culture belonged to the Roman population living along the Via Egnatia. This area remained until the seventh century-eighth centuries under a strong Byzantine influence. The area of this culture is nearly the same as that where Latin was spoken in antiquity (defined on the basis of inscriptions). The region was Romanized. On the other hand, in the same area many present place-names of Latin origin of known. It is therefore possible that the Komani-Kruje culture was the archaeological expression of a Roman, not Proto-Albanian, population.

This theory was of course rejected by the official Albanian archaeologists, but their arguments are not convincing. They cannot explain the large amount of Byzantine and Christian objects in the environment of this culture. A pastoral population like the Albanians was not able to create a culture of Byzantine urban fashion. The assertion that Albanians developed an urban civilization in the early Middle Ages and that they peopled the late Roman fortified settlements is fanciful.
  In 2002, the young Albanian archaeologist Etleva Nallbani received from the Sorbonne her PhD for a dissertation entitled "La civilization de Komani de l'antiquitè tardive au haut Moyen Age: etude du mobilier mètallique" (not yet published). The main ideas were summarized in two short studies (one of them published in a Croatian scientific journal). She has abandoned the traditional theory put forward by Albanian archaeology, that the Komani-Kruje culture is Proto-Albanian. Instead, she emphasizes the integration in the Byzantine civilization and the urban roots of this civilization. This new approach is shared by British archaeologist William Bowden, who concludes that the archaeological evidence does not support a single ethnic identification.