Origins of Albanian language and ethnos

[Onur]

We don't use it much in modern Turkish anymore but "veli" means "close relative, guardian person" in Turkish. It`s probably Arabic/Persian word used in Ottoman era.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Just with regard to Maniaces, both Komnena and Psellus make mention of him, will post the relevant sections later.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Something further to the above. The Estonian and Finnish word for brother is "veli" - quite similar to the Albanian word for brother, which is "vella".

[Soldier of Macedon]

Just to throw another angle into this (posts from TM and Onur):

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1957

TM wrote: The family of the Arabian Emir Anemas in Crete was in the service of John Tzimisces, while George Maniaces, who reconquered Sicily (1038), bears a Turkish name.


Onur wrote: "Asil" is derived from Persian and probably used in Turkish after 13th century as earliest. Turkish originated words for "Noble" are "Koklu, Soylu" but i didn't hear or know anything similar with "Maniakes" which means "Noble" in Turkish. I just know an old Turkish word like "Mank, Manik" which means "Staid, Graceful". I don't think anyone still uses "Mank" today in Turkey. It`s just a question for crossword puzzles anymore.


I heard this Byzantine general tough. Byzantines calls these people as "Tourkopouloi". They are Christians Turks converted from shamanism. George was a famous one among them. When Byzantines converted these Turks to Christianity, they usually took Greek first name but most was using their Turkish names too. Like the names of medieval Bulgarian kings, for example "Ivan shisman", Ivan is a slavic name but shisman is Turkish. So, it`s highly possible that "Maniakes" is derived from a Turkish word.

[Soldier of Macedon]

I would like to suggest an alternative 'theory' as to the origin of the Albanian language. I will cite it in point form:

- By the 6th century, the Dacian region was populated by Balto-Slavic (and more specifically the Slavic component) peoples, in addition to Latin colonists and some Turkic and Iranian groups that were dominant (in terms of rule and not numbers) above the rest. Germanic by way of Gothic may have also had a presence. Most numerous was the Balto-Slavic group.

- By the 10th century, Hungarians had also moved near and into the area, adding another dimension to the already comsopolitan make-up and becoming the dominant force. A 'common tongue' probably began to take shape as a result of amalgamation between Balto-Slavic, Latin, Germanic and to a lesser degree Turkic, under the possible 'hegemony' of Iranian or Hungarian - but probably wasn't distinct enough and was used by too few a number, hence its absence from the Gesta Hungarorum.

- Groups from this region made several sporadic incursions into the Balkans. One of these groups may have settled in the western Balkans near the Adriatic coast and mingled with the local Slavic-speaking groups (who previously absorbed the related Illyrian populations and some of their characteristics, such as loanwords from ancient Greek). Aside from those speaking the 'common tongue', others spoke a predominantly Latin tongue (Vlachs), and this may be why there is often a lack of distinction between Albanians and Vlachs in the earlier centuries after they were first recorded.

- A group of Varangian and Norman warriors arrived in the western Balkans and fought under the leadership of George Maniaces, who reconquered parts of Sicily in 1038. A group of later Albanian clans known as the Maniakates were descended from these Norman warriors. The 'common tongue' may have been solidified during this period, which gave rise to Proto-Albanian.

Some of the above may loosely correlate with certain aspects of the explanation from Celebi:

When the blessed Omar conquered Jerusalem, Jabal could not remain any longer in that place, so they boarded ships and took refuge with the king of Spain. Jabal-i Alhama was given the mountains of Dukat, Progonat and Frengis in the Albanian regions of Avlona and Delvina to live in, which were then under Spanish rule. These lands were previously uninhabited and, within a short period of time, he settled them and, mingling with the Franks, they created the Albanian language from a mixture of Frankish and Arabic.

I guess the question would then be, how close are western Romance languages to Albanian? Is it more or less significant that the influence from Vulgar latin? Did Norman French have a similar effect in Albania as it did in England? Did Germanic languages play more of a role? Or was the Norman influence mainly restricted to creating conditions for a Proto-Albanian tongue to arise, rather than playing any significant part in terms of the language? The Italo-Celtic or Celto-Latin combination in languages makes for an interesting case, quite often the 'sound' of languages such as Portuguese appears similar to Albanian.

The above may be able to explain the various elements contributing the Albanian language and ethnos. Interested in any thoughts. To any Albanians answering, this is just an opinion which I have presented for criticism, so don't come here beating your chests, I want to see some logical suggestions and rebuttals.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Do you have any information on Michael Attaliates? He apparently wrote of a people called 'Arbanitai' who were transplanted as mercenaries from Sicily to Albania by a rebel military commander called George Maniakos in 1042. I have seen this repeated on the internet, but never confirmed with a source.

I wrote this earlier in the thread. The reason I bring it up again is because of what I read on an article relating to the Norman crusaders from wikipedia (although there is no source for it and the terminology relating to East Rome or Byzantium is somewhat bizzare):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normans

Several families of Byzantine Greece were of Norman mercenary origin during the period of the Comnenian Restoration, when Byzantine emperors were seeking out western European warriors. The Raoulii were descended from an Italo-Norman named Raoul, the Petraliphae were descended from a Pierre d'Aulps, and that group of Albanian clans known as the Maniakates were descended from Normans who served under George Maniaces in the Sicilian expedition of 1038.

And the below relating to George Maniaces:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Maniaces

George Maniakes (Greek: Γεώργιος Μανιάκης, transliterated as Georgios Maniaces, Maniakis, or Maniaches, Italian: Giorgio Maniace) (died 1043) was a prominent Byzantine Greek general during the 11th century, he was the catepan of Italy in 1042. He is known as Gyrgir in Scandinavian sagas.[1]

Maniakes first became prominent during a campaign in 1031, when the Byzantine Empire was defeated at Aleppo but went on to capture Edessa from the Seljuk Turks. His greatest achievement was the partial reconquest of Sicily from the Arabs beginning in 1038. Here, he was assisted by the Varangian Guard, which was at that time led by Harald Hardrada, who later became king of Norway. There were also Norman mercenaries with him, under William de Hauteville, who won his nickname Iron Arm by defeating the emir of Syracuse in single combat. However, he soon ostracised his admiral, Stephen, whose wife was the sister of John the Eunuch, the highest ranking man at court, and, by publicly humiliating the leader of the Lombard contingent, Arduin, he caused them to desert him, with the Normans and Norsemen. In response, he was recalled by the emperor Michael IV, also brother-in-law of Stephen. Although the Arabs soon took the island back, Maniakes' successes there later inspired the Normans to invade Sicily themselves.

Maniakes' accomplishments in Sicily were largely ignored by the Emperor, and he revolted against Constantine IX in 1042, though he had been appointed catepan of Italy. The individual particularly responsible for antagonizing Maniakes into revolt was one Romanus Sclerus. Sclerus, like Maniakes, was one of the immensely wealthy landowners who owned large areas of Anatolia - his estates neighboured those of Maniakes and the two were rumoured to have attacked each other during a squabble over land. Sclerus owed his influence over the emperor to his famously charming sister the Sclerina, who, in most areas was a highly positive influence on Constantine. Finding himself in a position of power, Sclerus used it to poison Constantine against Maniakes - ransacking the latter's house and even seducing his wife, using the charm his family were famed for. Maniakes response, when faced with Sclerus demanding that he hand command of the empires forces in Apulia over to him, was to brutally torture the latter to death, after sealing his eyes, ears, nose and mouth with excrement.[2] Maniakes was then proclaimed emperor by his troops (including the Varangians), and marched towards Constantinople, in 1043 his army clashed with troops loyal to Constantine near Thessalonika, and though initially successful, Maniakes was killed during the melee after receiving a fatal wound (according to Psellus' account). Constantine's extravagant punishment of the surviving rebels was to parade them in the Hippodrome, seated backwards on donkeys. With his death, the rebellion ceased. In Sicily, the town of Maniace and the Syracusan fortress of Castello Maniace are both named after him.

[Soldier of Macedon]

The PIE root *ank- which means 'bend', ie; 'angle', gave rise to Latin angulus, Greek ankylοs, etc. Here is how the Zazaki word would have likely evolved:

Middle Persian angust -> Persian angošt -> Zazaki -> gisht.

It appears that there may have been a stage during and after Indo-Iranian where the 'l' was still present in the word, hence, a hypothetical example for Proto-Iranian would perhaps be something like angulust. In this case, some similarities can be drawn when comparing the Iranian and Albanian word:

- Both eventually dropped the 'l' in the word
- Both eventually dropped the 'an' at the beginning of the word
- Both had an st ending which developed to a sht ending
- Both use the final product to describe a 'finger'

Coincidence or not, this is a very similar phonological development. And I am sure if one were to dig further there would be more examples.

[Soldier of Macedon]

To be honest, I simply do not know if 'Bardhyl' and 'Teuta were in use before XIXth century. But I've read that 'Agron' and 'Pirro' (Pyrrhus) were in use by Northern Albanians.

Epirot, I am almost certain of Bardyl and Teuta. With regard to Pirro and Agron, I don't know, at the moment I doubt it, but if you can provide something that proves this, then I have no issues accepting it.

[Epirot]

Maybe not on placenames, but on personal names, you absolutely have. How many Albanians were called Bardyl or Teuta prior to the 19th century?.

To be honest, I simply do not know if 'Bardhyl' and 'Teuta were in use before XIXth century. But I've read that 'Agron' and 'Pirro' (Pyrrhus) were in use by Northern Albanians.

I'm not sure about the distant past, but they certainly do now with the dreams of 'Dardania' in Kosovo and 'Ilirida' in Macedonia.

I assure you that Albanians of Kosova got their idendepence because their will was so and not because some politicans were inspired from the remote Dardanian past. When Albanians rose up against Serbian yoke, they did so because they wanted to be free. No Albanian was ever motivated from distant Illyrian past. It would be an absurd of its kind to struggle on behalf of antiquity past. But we have an exception here: for our southern assimilated brethern, it was that normal to struggle on behalf of the imaginary ancient Hellas...

[Soldier of Macedon]

Unlike Greece, Albania has never purified foreign cultural signs by reviving ancient Illyrian names.

Maybe not on placenames, but on personal names, you absolutely have. How many Albanians were called Bardyl or Teuta prior to the 19th century?

Albanians never emerged any expansionist platform on behalf of former Illyrian lands.

I'm not sure about the distant past, but they certainly do now with the dreams of 'Dardania' in Kosovo and 'Ilirida' in Macedonia.

Some Iranian tribe with the Albanians from Caucasus Albania migrated to current Albania from the north of Blacksea and they got mixed with the Frankish(Latin and Romance speakers) people in there.

The Iranian theories need to be looked at more closely, there is definetly something there worthy of further research.

[Epirot]

Epirot, you seem like a quite reasonable person but unfortunately you Albanians playing the same antiquity game like today`s noe-hellenes.
.

I do not think we have much in common with our assimilated southern brothers in regard with antiquity "games". It's only Albania that cannot be blamed for using selective parts of antiquity to legitimize its politic goals or something like that. I hope you get my point! Unlike Greece, Albania has never purified foreign cultural signs by reviving ancient Illyrian names. Greece when finished its invading campaigns in Epirus, Macedonia, Thessaly, Thrace and Aegean islands erased all "foreign names" by replacing with 'Hellenic' ones. That's why today, there are just a few 'foreign' names into Northern areas of Greece. Albanians never played with Illyrian cards to put forward territorial claims towards their neighbors. Albanians never emerged any expansionist platform on behalf of former Illyrian lands. This cannot be said for our 'Ellines'.

Btw tell us the names of fish types specific to your Adriatic coast and your maritime terminology. What is the etymology and roots of these words? The etymology of those words in your language would probably explain about who were living in current Albanian coasts when you came there and what language they were speaking..

E. Çabej, the renowned specialist in linguistics stresses out that there are some original Albanian terms relating with sea, fish types, etc. I'll try to find out his account and to post parts of it here.

It`s quite clear that Albanians was already muslim when Ottoman empire gone there in 1390s. Thats what Evliya Celebi learned from Albanian leaders in 17th century and wrote this

Your claim cannot sustain since there are incontestable evidences that Albanians were initially Christians before they passed as Muslims.

[Onur]

Epirot, you seem like a quite reasonable person but unfortunately you Albanians playing the same antiquity game like today`s noe-hellenes. I am quite sure that you have Illyrian heritage because you live in same place as they lived b4 but you gotta accept that no one in Balkans can relate their heritage with a single source and thats valid for Albanians too. So, you cant explain every cultural elements you have today with your Illyrian theory.

The Adriatic coast was not part of the primitive home of the Albanians, because the maritime terminology of Albanian is not their own, but is borrowed from different languages.

This is quite an important indication that you have migrated to the current Albanian lands. For example, in Turkish, nearly all the names of fish types special to Aegean sea are Greek words and all most of the maritime terminology are Greek too. This is an indication that Turkish speakers wasn't living by the sea, at least not by the Aegean sea and we learned that terminology from the local Greek speaking inhabitants when we came here.

Btw tell us the names of fish types specific to your Adriatic coast and your maritime terminology. What is the etymology and roots of these words? The etymology of those words in your language would probably explain about who were living in current Albanian coasts when you came there and what language they were speaking.

Don't be afraid about that and don't be fooled with the game of Greeks play. You Albanians are living there for centuries or millenia and you don't need to be the descendants of ancient Illyrians to have a legitimacy for current Albania. Thats bullshit and a stupid thing. Greeks play that antiquity game because they have to since they cant claim any legitimacy for neither medieval nor modern age but this is not the case with you Albanians, so you don't need to do that.

I really appreciate your national unity with catholics, muslims, orthodoxs, living together peacefully by all being Albanians and i think your motto should be an example for all other Balkan states. But like i told you, you don't need to create and pursuit antique Illyrian myths to continue with this.

The Iranian elements in Albanian? That's weird! I haven't read not a single account elaborating the Iranian component of Albanian, so far! you're more than welcomed to present any detailed account in regard with your claim. Thanks!

Check this msg;

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3389

You will see that Albanian language is kinda distinct from all other languages but it gets it`s position close by Romanian in terms of grammatical features but for vocabulary, it`s standing by Indo-Iranian languages, Persian being closest.


So, what Evliya Celebi said about Albanians?;
Some Iranian tribe with the Albanians from Caucasus Albania migrated to current Albania from the north of Blacksea and they got mixed with the Frankish(Latin and Romance speakers) people in there.

I think this claim shouldn't be cast away so easily. Also did you ever wonder why we dont have anything about your islamisation? For example, we know that Bosnians was bogomils before and we have documents, illustrations and testimonies about their conversion but we have nothing about Albanians. It`s quite clear that Albanians was already muslim when Ottoman empire gone there in 1390s. Thats what Evliya Celebi learned from Albanian leaders in 17th century and wrote this.

[Epirot]

I found an interesting article about Illyrians and Albanians written by a Russian linguist. Epirot, you may find this interesting since you were talking about the similarities between Albanian and Romanian languages;

Thanks for the article! Vladimir Georgiev is beyond any doubt, a great linguist. By the way, he is not Russian, but Bulgarian:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_I._Georgiev

Georgiev's article provides some interesting points, especially on Albanian-Rumanian connection. I agree at a certain degree with his conclusions that Dardania is the cradle of formation of Albanian people. But this doesn't mean that Albanians are not authochonous in Albania and Epirus as he suggests. The second error he made during his research on ethnogenesis of Albanians is that he ignore completely some Illyrian features of Albanian and other elements. Anyway, he admit that his hypothesis is not proper at all: "The above arguments are well known, but they have not been regarded as sufficient for a definitive solution of the problem".

I personally accept Georgiev's assertions as half-truth. He is right when he stresses out the Thracian component in Albanian, but he is dead wrong when he assumes that Albanians arrived in todays Albania. There is aboslutely no proof to witness any Albanian arrival in Albania.

Interesting article but it ignores the Iranian elements in Albanian language by totally focusing on Latin elements in it. Nevertheless, the author concludes it by saying that Albanians has been linguistically semi-assimilated by the Latins/Romans. Thats what i always thought about them too.

The Iranian elements in Albanian? That's weird! I haven't read not a single account elaborating the Iranian component of Albanian, so far! you're more than welcomed to present any detailed account in regard with your claim. Thanks!

So, i still believe that Evliya Celebi`s writings about Albanians is the most reasonable claim about their origins

What? You're suggesting to take in consideration a 17th century travaler?? His credibility is disputed...which is why his assertions have no echo at modern scholarship. He wrote in his account as following:

Accordingly, the Albanian people boast that they are descended from the Quraysh, the companions of the Prophet

I am pretty sure he was refering to a section of fanatic Islamic sects among Albanians who thought themselves as descendants of Prophet's companions. Albanians of Celebi's time had no idea who were 'Quraysh'. I heard no legend, no tradition about him...
For instance, Catholics all over the world may consider themselves as having descended from Jesus...Should we assume that they're remote descendants of Jesus's people!??

[Soldier of Macedon]

Some of the points he makes are very significant. If we entertain the notion of an Iranian origin for the Proto-Albanians, we could probably outline a possible scenario as follows:

1) The Proto-Albanians started as a westward-migrating tribe from the eastern parts of 'Scythia' (or maybe even beyond)

2) By the 6th century, they reached areas north of the Danube, within close proximity to Dacia where Proto-Romanian was spoken

3) The formation of the Albanian language (from the original Proto-Albanian mixed with Slavic, east Latin, and others) is probably almost complete by the 9th or 10th century.

4) Come the 10th century, Hungarian advancements contributed to the mixture of people in parts of Pannonia and adjacent territories, which at that time were peopled by Slavs, Bulgars and Vlachs - as recorded in the Gesta Hungarorum.

5) From that region in Dacia, pastoral peoples migrated southwards throughout the Balkans, among whom were both Vlachs and Albanians, although there is little distinction between them at the time. Many of them settled in what came to be known as Albania.


Of course, this is just one scenario. It would be good to get non-sentimental opinions about why this may or may not have happened.

[Onur]

I found an interesting article about Illyrians and Albanians written by a Russian linguist. Epirot, you may find this interesting since you were talking about the similarities between Albanian and Romanian languages;

The genesis of the Balkan Peoples

The formation of a people is the result of continuous and extremely complicated processes. In determining the ethnogenesis of the population of a region, the first question to be answered would seem to be: what is the origin of the tribes or peoples that dwelt in the region concerned in antiquity, that is to say, what were those peoples that represent the substratum of the contemporary ones? The first task to be solved is, therefore, the problem of the substratum, i.e. the problem of the protohistory of the region under examination.

The problem of the genesis of a people may be examined linguistically, historically, archaeologically and ethnologically. As a linguist, I shall try to put forward some linguistic considerations and data towards a solution of this problem in relation to the Balkan peoples.

For the periods for which there are no written documents archaeologists determine regions belonging to the same culture by means of the identification of excavated objects. Linguists use a similar method. The linguist's material consists of toponyms, especially those which present a fairly wide frequency. By specifying a region where a characteristic toponym often appears we are able to delimit a linguistic or ethnic unity. Thus on the basis of the very frequent place names of the type Brighton, Frinton, Honiton, Leamington, Luton, Northampton, Royston, Southampton, Taunton, etc. formed with -ton (= town) an English-speaking region can easily be determined. In the same way, on the basis of frequent toponyms of the type Neustadt, Bernstadt, Heiligenstadt, etc. it is possible to define a German-speaking region (German Stadt 'town', 'city'), and on the basis of the type Belgrad, Stargard, Vyšegrad, etc. a Slavonic-speaking region (Slavonic gard, grad 'town', 'city').

By means of this method, and also on the basis of various other considerations, linguistics in the last twenty years has achieved very important findings about the ancient population of the Balkan Peninsula.

VII. The Illyrian Region
A theory dominant for a long time was that the entire western part of the Balkan Peninsula was inhabited by Illyrians. But the ethnic situation in this part of the Peninsula is not so clear as in its other parts. Here toponyms with a large-scale frequency are not to be found. (in ) appears only four times, also four times and Ulc- (in Ulcisia, Ulcinium) three times.

After the recent studies of H. Kronasser, R. Katicic', Rendic'-Mioevic' and G. Alföldy, it can be regarded as very probable that Illyrian was spoken only in Illyria and some neighbouring regions. In middle Dalmatia another language was spoken, in Liburnia also another one (Liburnian), and the Venetic language was close to Latin, not to Illyrian. In the opinion of the present writer, Illyrian is an IE language intermediate between Venetic and Phrygian. This question still remains open.

Daco-Mysians, Thracians, Greeks, pre-Greeks, Macedonians, Phrygians and Illyrians formed, therefore, the main substratum that underlies the Balkan peoples of today. In the first half of the first millennium b.c. the Greek colonisation began, embracing the eastern and south-eastern shores of the Peninsula. In the first millennium a.d., ancient Thrace gradually became strongly Hellenised.

Towards the end of the first millennium b.c., the Roman conquest of the Balkan Peninsula began, gradually resulting in a partial Romanisation of the northern and north-western zones of the Peninsula. The so-called Jireek line that leads from northern Albania (Lesh) to Serdica (today Sofia) and north of the Balkan mountains as far as the Black Sea separates the two zones of Roman and Greek influence respectively. In the north-eastern part of the Balkan Peninsula, especially in the area of what is now Rumania, invasions of certain Iranian tribes occurred at different times from the 7th century b.c. After the 3rd century a.d. continuous invasions of Goths began, followed by various Turkic tribes as well as Slavs. Between the 6th and the 9th centuries a.d., Slavs occupied large parts of the northern central zone of the Peninsula, and penetrated also into some regions of its southern zone.

After the 14th century, the Peninsula was invaded by the Turks.

The mediaeval and modern history of the Balkan peoples is better known. Hence I would like to touch briefly only upon two very much disputed problems, namely, the origin of the Albanians and the Rumanians, and the invasion of the Slavs.

VIII. Albanians and Rumanians
Whether the Albanians are the successors of die Illyrians or the Thracians is a problem that has long been debated. Today the Albanians dwell in a region that was known in antiquity as Illyria. For that reason the Albanians have often been regarded as the heirs of the ancient Illyrians, although there are no other data supporting such a claim. In the same way, the Bulgarians might be considered as Thracians if the other Slavonic peoples and languages were not known.

But many linguists and historians, e.g. H. Hirt, V. Pârvan, Th. Capidan, A. Philippide, N. Jokl, G. Weigand, P. Skok, D. Detschew, H. Baric', I. Siadbei, etc. have put forward very important considerations indicating that the Albanians cannot be autochthonous in the Albania of today, that their original home was the eastern part of Mysia Superior or approximately Dardania and Dacia Mediterranea, i.e. the northern central zone of the Balkan Peninsula, and part of Dacia.

Now, however, when it is clear that Daco-Mysian and Thracian represent two different IE languages, the problem of the origin of the Albanian language and the Albanians themselves appears in quite a new light. The most important facts and considerations for determining the origin and original home of the Albanians are the following.

• The Illyrian toponyms known from antiquity, e.g. Shköder from the ancient Scodra (Livius), Tomor from Tomarus (Strabo, Pliny, etc.), have not been directly inherited in Albanian: the contemporary forms of these names do not correspond to the phonetic laws of Albanian. The same also applies to the ancient toponyms of Latin origin in this region.

• The most ancient loanwords from Latin in Albanian have the phonetic form of eastern Balkan Latin, i.e. of proto-Rumanian, and not of western Balkan Latin, i.e. of old Dalmatian Latin. Albanian, therefore, did not take its borrowings from Vulgar Latin as spoken in Illyria.

• The Adriatic coast was not part of the primitive home of the Albanians, because the maritime terminology of Albanian is not their own, but is borrowed from different languages.

• Another indication against local Albanian origin is the insignificant number of ancient Greek loanwords in Albanian. If the primitive home of the Albanians had been Albania itself, then the Albanian language would have to have many more ancient Greek loanwords.

• The Albanians are not mentioned before the 9th century a.d., although place names and personal names from the whole region of Albania are attested in numerous documents from the 4th century onwards.

• The old home of the Albanians must have been near to that of the proto-Rumanians. The oldest Latin elements in Albanian come from proto-Rumanian, i.e. eastern Balkan Latin, and not from Dalmatian, western Balkan Latin that was spoken in Illyria. Cf. the phonetic development of the following words:
  
  Vulgar Latin caballum 'horse' Rum. cal, Alb. kal
  Vulgar Latin cubitum 'elbow' Rum. cot. Alb. kut
  Vulgar Latin lucta 'struggle, fight' Rum. lupt, Arum. luft, Alb. luftë
  
  Therefore Albanian did not take shape in Illyria. The agreement in the treatment of Latin words in Rumanian and in Albanian shows that Albanian developed from the 4th till the 6th century in a region where proto-Rumanian was formed.

• Rumanian possesses about a hundred words which have their correspondences only in Albanian. The form of these Rumanian words is so peculiar (e.g. Rum. mazre = Alb. modhullë 'pea(s)') that they cannot be explained as borrowings from Albanian. This is the Dacian substratum in Rumanian, whereas the Albanian correspondences are inherited from Dacian.
  
  The above arguments are well known, but they have not been regarded as sufficient for a definitive solution of the problem. The most important fact to be revealed has been the separation of Daco-Mysian from Thracian. It has thus been established that the phonemic system of Albanian is descended directly from the Daco-Mysian.
  
  In this way it has been definitively proved that Albanian is descended from Daco-Mysian. Therefore the primitive home of Albanian is a Daco-Mysian region, probably Mysia Superior (Dardania, Dacia Mediterranea) or western Dacia. This fact enables us to explain the numerous typical agreements between Albanian and Rumanian.
  
  Rumanian and Albanian took shape in the Daco-Mysian region;
  Rumanian represents a completely Romanised Daco-Mysian and Albanian a semi-Romanised Daco-Mysian.

Vladimir Georgiev (The Slavonic and East European Review 44, no. 103, 1960, pp. 285-297)

http://groznijat.tripod.com/vg/vg.html

Interesting article but it ignores the Iranian elements in Albanian language by totally focusing on Latin elements in it. Nevertheless, the author concludes it by saying that Albanians has been linguistically semi-assimilated by the Latins/Romans. Thats what i always thought about them too.

So, i still believe that Evliya Celebi`s writings about Albanians is the most reasonable claim about their origins.