Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 16 of 31 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 376 to 400 of 754

Thread: Illyrian and Albanian - a linguistic approach

  1. #376
    Advisor LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,295

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by AMQ View Post
    Hello ... This is my first post, and I am not sure if I am even in the correct group. I live in Colorado (US), and I recently received my DNA results. Once of my mtDNA haplogroup values is U5b2a1a-T16311C!, and when I performed a search on it, this group came up. My Y-DNA haplogroup associated with it is J-Z1048. Does any one in this group know what this means?
    Welcome to Eupedia AMQ. Have a look here: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...-haplogroup-U5
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  2. #377
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    You and the Albanians need to understand the main order of assimilations of the illyrians

    first from the celts
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic...Eastern_Europe

    Therefore, early Celtic expeditions were concentrated against Illyrian tribes.[3] The first Balkan tribe to be defeated by the Celts was the IllyricAutariatae
    The northern Illyrian tribes where assimilated into celtic society starting from 700BC in the eastern alps, the first they warred against was the southern illyrian tribe the Autariatae


    then by the Romans

    then by the Goths

    and last by the slavs

    As I told people before ..........90% of illyrian tribes lived outside of the modern borders of Albania ............the epiCentre of illyrians is in modern northern Bosnia
    Excellent Sile. Reputation!

    I gave as irony, anyhow.

    What is important, Illyrian, what we know from scant sources, a lot of Illyrian names are very similar to South Slavic names.

    Some Slovenian and other South Slavic researchers according their studies suppose Illyrian is descedant of South Slavic languages.

    Someone can say that Illyrian, (and Thracian surely) is similar to Balto Slavic languages, but I think it is not correct that he or she says it is forerunner of Balto-Slavic, or Slavic, or South Slavic.

    Because it is natural that Indoeuropean languages Illyrian, Thracian and Balto-Slavic are similar, and roots are common.

    ...
    In 19th century there was Illyrian movement between Croats, Serbs and Bosniacs, scholars proclaimed that these peoples are one nation, Illyrian nation.

    It has all the logic, because Illyrians mostly lived in the territory of Croats, Western Serbs and Bosniacs.

    But the name of "Jugosloven" or "Jugoslaven" (meaning South Slav) has prevailed over the name of "Ilir".

    Even in Bulgaria there was Illyrian ideas.

    Slovenian researchers who proclaim that Illyrian is Slovenian have similar logic and they give a lot of arguments, they are serious, but I agree with you, their assumption is not correct.

    ...
    In 20th century Croatian, Serbian and Bosniac idea about Illyrians, took Enver Hoxha, Albanian communist chief.

    He pointed out that Illyrians are the ancestors of Albanians, not Croats, Serbs and Bosniacs.

    It is strange, if we can have facts what you say that Illyrians lived in the about 10% Albanian territory of the total Illyrian territory, and main part of Illyrian territory was in todays Dalmatia, Bosnia and Panonian plain.

    ...
    But there is big difference between Slovenian and other South Slavic researchers and Albanian researchers.

    Slovenian and other South Slavic researchers are independent, their thinking someone can accept someone will reject, but when Enver Hoxha proclaimed that Albanians are descedants of Illyrians it became state project, and nobody could think nothing otherwise, and it entered in school system as "absolute truth".

    Result we have, and it is one of reason why we must use irony, sometimes.
    ...

    Illyrians dissapeared as (political, cultural or some other entity.)

    Celts, Romans, Goths, Slavs etc. have made what they did.

    Romanian resarschers give us truth which is obvious.

    According Romanian scientists no Illyrian language area survived in the Balkans in time of Romans.

    No one of the chronicles in that time doesn't mention any such area.

    Enver Hoxha thought, and his researchers digged, and found nothing.

    No Illyrian inscriptions, only Latin or Greek, why, because Illyrian language (languages) disappeared.

    It is unreal and fictitious that someone can think about imagination that in Albanian mountains during more than the ten centuries (from disapperaing of Illyrians to written appearing of Albanian in 14 century) survived language of which none of chronicles has no notion.

    If we speak about facts than we can conclude as Romanian researchers, no Illyirian language area survived in Roman time and it is evidence, the sole the truth.

  3. #378
    Regular Member Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,115

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    this site shows the celtic graves in inland Albania

    https://balkancelts.wordpress.com/20...d-mercenaries/

    and other posts within the link ( balkancelts) above ...........shows bronzeage doric in coastal albania followed by ironage corinthian in coastal albania



    and later illyrian tribes joining celtic tribes on there attacks on Macedonia
    https://balkancelts.wordpress.com/20...engineering-2/
    có che un pòpoło no 'l defende pi ła só łéngua el xe prónto par èser s'ciavo

    when a people no longer dares to defend its language it is ripe for slavery.

  4. #379
    Regular Member Milan's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-11-15
    Posts
    358


    Country: Yugoslavia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    The problem with the so called Illyrians is that the given name is most probably just an exonym just like Thrace is,which is assumed to derive from the base of θράσσω ‎(thrássō, “to trouble, stir”).Thus the enemies of Greeks.
    So did the Thracian called themselves this name of course not,nor we know what is the language connection between various tribes from those dubbed as Illyrians later on living in the Roman created province Illyricum.
    Don't want to be mean but I can compare this in a pair with Ottoman "ethnographers" when for instance they used a term such is ‎(gāvur) (Turkish gâvur), from Persian گاور ‎(gâvor), a variant of گبر ‎(gabr, “infidel”) for the Christian population.
    Albanians from the Ottomans were called-Arnavut,from Slavs-Arbanasi,from Greek-Arvanites.
    They themselves call-Sqipthare,since creation of Albania they demand to be called Albanians the former forms they consider derogatory even if called by name they use for themselves.
    Every people choose their names we should respect this,but differences should be made between exonym and endonym.

  5. #380
    Regular Member Milan's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-11-15
    Posts
    358


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    Excellent Sile. Reputation!

    I gave as irony, anyhow.

    What is important, Illyrian, what we know from scant sources, a lot of Illyrian names are very similar to South Slavic names.

    Some Slovenian and other South Slavic researchers according their studies suppose Illyrian is descedant of South Slavic languages.

    Someone can say that Illyrian, (and Thracian surely) is similar to Balto Slavic languages, but I think it is not correct that he or she says it is forerunner of Balto-Slavic, or Slavic, or South Slavic.

    Because it is natural that Indoeuropean languages Illyrian, Thracian and Balto-Slavic are similar, and roots are common.

    ...
    In 19th century there was Illyrian movement between Croats, Serbs and Bosniacs, scholars proclaimed that these peoples are one nation, Illyrian nation.

    It has all the logic, because Illyrians mostly lived in the territory of Croats, Western Serbs and Bosniacs.

    But the name of "Jugosloven" or "Jugoslaven" (meaning South Slav) has prevailed over the name of "Ilir".

    Even in Bulgaria there was Illyrian ideas.

    Slovenian researchers who proclaim that Illyrian is Slovenian have similar logic and they give a lot of arguments, they are serious, but I agree with you, their assumption is not correct.

    ...
    In 20th century Croatian, Serbian and Bosniac idea about Illyrians, took Enver Hoxha, Albanian communist chief.

    He pointed out that Illyrians are the ancestors of Albanians, not Croats, Serbs and Bosniacs.

    It is strange, if we can have facts what you say that Illyrians lived in the about 10% Albanian territory of the total Illyrian territory, and main part of Illyrian territory was in todays Dalmatia, Bosnia and Panonian plain.

    ...
    But there is big difference between Slovenian and other South Slavic researchers and Albanian researchers.

    Slovenian and other South Slavic researchers are independent, their thinking someone can accept someone will reject, but when Enver Hoxha proclaimed that Albanians are descedants of Illyrians it became state project, and nobody could think nothing otherwise, and it entered in school system as "absolute truth".

    Result we have, and it is one of reason why we must use irony, sometimes.
    ...

    Illyrians dissapeared as (political, cultural or some other entity.)

    Celts, Romans, Goths, Slavs etc. have made what they did.

    Romanian resarschers give us truth which is obvious.

    According Romanian scientists no Illyrian language area survived in the Balkans in time of Romans.

    No one of the chronicles in that time doesn't mention any such area.

    Enver Hoxha thought, and his researchers digged, and found nothing.

    No Illyrian inscriptions, only Latin or Greek, why, because Illyrian language (languages) disappeared.

    It is unreal and fictitious that someone can think about imagination that in Albanian mountains during more than the ten centuries (from disapperaing of Illyrians to written appearing of Albanian in 14 century) survived language of which none of chronicles has no notion.

    If we speak about facts than we can conclude as Romanian researchers, no Illyirian language area survived in Roman time and it is evidence, the sole the truth.
    This "Illyrian" ideas among South Slavs survived and developed because they were firstly called by others as such,the romanticist writers and national awakers saw a unity in this name for the South-Slavs,later swap with Yugoslavism,they didn't cared much about names it is political unity-imagined community,if suit one's own agenda can be used with no problems.

  6. #381
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603


    Country: Serbia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Milan View Post
    This "Illyrian" ideas among South Slavs survived and developed because they were firstly called by others as such,the romanticist writers and national awakers saw a unity in this name for the South-Slavs,later swap with Yugoslavism,they didn't cared much about names it is political unity-imagined community,if suit one's own agenda can be used with no problems.
    It is all natural and understandably, and in certain period in history.

    Today there are researchers in Slovenia, and Bosnia, and someone in Croatia and Serbia who find link Illyrians with Slovenes and Bosniacs/Serbs/Croats.

    And there is nothing wrong in the facts that people in science investigate, everyone who reads can assess their papers, if they used scientific approach, how they set up problem, whether they articulated a clear goal, etc.

    No matter whether they prove or disprove hypothesis, everything is normal if the goal is to reach objective scientific proof.

    Problem is for example when any political chief proclaims that what he wants must be truth and whole state and scientific apparatus uses for that goal, and it enters in school system and all pupils and students think it is absolute truth, and so on from generation to generation.

    We can speak about propaganda but not about science, or proofs etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Milan View Post
    The problem with the so called Illyrians is that the given name is most probably just an exonym just like Thrace is,which is assumed to derive from the base of θράσσω ‎(thrássō, “to trouble, stir”).Thus the enemies of Greeks.
    So did the Thracian called themselves this name of course not,nor we know what is the language connection between various tribes from those dubbed as Illyrians later on living in the Roman created province Illyricum.
    Don't want to be mean but I can compare this in a pair with Ottoman "ethnographers" when for instance they used a term such is ‎(gāvur) (Turkish gâvur), from Persian گاور ‎(gâvor), a variant of گبر ‎(gabr, “infidel”) for the Christian population.
    Albanians from the Ottomans were called-Arnavut,from Slavs-Arbanasi,from Greek-Arvanites.
    They themselves call-Sqipthare,since creation of Albania they demand to be called Albanians the former forms they consider derogatory even if called by name they use for themselves.
    Every people choose their names we should respect this,but differences should be made between exonym and endonym.
    This is good point.

    Someone can think that members of all so-called Illyrian tribes are Illyrians as one nation and speak same language and have same culture, it is how he from 20 century perspective thinks about world two thousand years earlier.

    But it is wrongly, there are new scientific studies and these studies confirm what we're discussing now.

  7. #382
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-01-15
    Posts
    365

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J-L283

    Country: Albania



    2 members found this post helpful.
    @Garrick the Serb, I see you got decimated by Abeis on linguistical grounds regarding Illyrian-Albanian, just like you got decimated by me on the genetic threads.

    Now out of desperation you keep repeating yourself by hijacking this thread with the same old non-sense, just like you hijack every other Albanian thread.

    Garrick:
    Illyrians dissapeared
    Really? You're a genius. What is this then?
    Garrick:
    Today there are researchers in Slovenia, and Bosnia, and someone in Croatia and Serbia who find link Illyrians with Slovenes and Bosniacs/Serbs/Croats.

  8. #383
    Regular Member Abeis's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-11-15
    Posts
    34


    Country: UK - England



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Trojet bro, let him be. sometime I find myself wondering why we pay heed to a shallow rascal like Garrick-the-Ultimate-Serbian-Picko? It's painfully obvious that he learns nothing because despite of sheer ignorance on all relevant subjects, he has the audacity to take up some condescending attitudes on how 'everyone has been tainted by nationalism' and other incomprehensible rigmaroles. Garrick (and countless accounts of him) has gotten dumber and duller than ever. Actually I admire Taranis patience, he has proved to be a mild-mannered and courteous fella when it comes to handle with detestable teens popping out here and there. I'd like to give in length an article written by Alexander Stipcevic which tackles the problem back at its roots:

    The question of the ethnic and cultural continuity between the early Illyrians and the mediaeval Albanians, besides being one of the most attractive issues of Balkan history, has also acquired a political dimension in recent decades. This is not the first time such a thing has happened in history.
    It was the Croats who before anyone else put forward the claim of being descended from the glorious Illyrian people, to the point of identifying themselves with them and giving themselves the name of Illyrians. For centuries, the Croatian language was simply called Illyrian. It is thought that Vinko Pribojevic (Vincentius Priboevius) in the 16th century was the first to include the history of the Illyrians in what might be called a political program. Pribojevic idea; countering the ideology and threat of pan-Germanism, hi used the splendid history of the Illyrians in order to demonstrate a cultural and especially historical superiority to the GERMANS, Italians, and Hungarians. According to Pribojevic, both Queen Teuta and King Agron were Slavs, as were Alexander the Great, Diocletian, and even Aristotle and St. Jerom. (1)
    After him, Mauro Orbini, another Croat historian, relaunched the pan-Slavic idea in his well-known book, "Il Regno degli Slavi, hoggi corrottamente detti Schiavoni," published in Pesaro in 1601. The book met with great success and exerted a major influence on historians and politicians of subsequent centuries. Now nobody doubted that the Slavs, especially those of the western portion of the Balkan peninsula, were the direct descendants of the Illyrians. Illyrian was the tongue spoken on the east coast of the Adriatic, and the land inhabited by the southern Slavs, especially the Croats, was Illyria. The Croats adopted the name Illyrian for themselves, though more when abroad and in foreign-language publications than within Croatia itself. (2)
    In the first half of the 19th century, the title Illyrian acquired a clear political function among the Croats. The leaders of the Croatian national movement called themselves "Illyrians" (Ilirci). Moreover, the theory of the Illyrian origin of the Croats was at this time embodied in academic form by Ljudevit Gaj, the greatest ideologue of the national movement. It was hi who published a book entitled "Who Were the Old Illyrians?"(3) This treated the question from a historical angle, but which political aims. Gay knew full well that any theory of a direct descent of today’s Croats from the old Illyrians was somehow an exaggeration. However, he believed that the name Illyrian would be the cement binding together the South Slavs in a new cultural and economic entity and a powerful political alliance that could confront the age-old enemies of the South Slav peoples.
    The Illyrian ideology of the Croatian national movement was leavened with same doubtful ideas. It was not by chance that, after initial enthusiasm, critics of the idea grasped its weak points and easly refuted Gaj’s basic thesis of the South Slavs.
    The political and police authorities of Vienna and Budapest rightly saw the notion of the Illyrian origin of all the South Slavs as a dangerous idea, because it could become an acceptable basis to devise a political program for all the south Slavs. It is therefore no wonder that in 1843 the authorities banned the use of the name Illyrian to designate the Croat national movement.
    As time passed, the idea of a direct link between the Illyrians and the Croats was gradually abandoned. It was the writer and philologist Bogoslav Sulek who delivered the final blow to the theory of the Illyrian origin of the South Slavs. In 1844, he published a treatise on the idea that the South Slavs could not be considered the direct descendants of the ancient Illyrians, but that the Slavs living in the western part of the Balkan peninsula were the result of a long and complicated ethnogenetic process involving the Illyrians but also the Romans, Celts, Goths, and, finally, the Slavs.

    It was in the second half of the 19th century and especially in the 20th century that the Illyrian problem acquired a political meaning for another Balkan people, the Albanians.
    The problem of the direct descent of the Albanians from the ancient Illyrians was originally purely academic. Researchers attempted to solve this problem on the basis of data that were not always certain or complete, relying mainly on historical and especially linguistic evidence.

    The question has for years been obscured by political arguments that have frequently prevailed over academic ones. Of course, this is not the first such case in history. On the contrary, it is enough to recall the way in which Italian archaeologists at the time of fascism attempted to justify Mussolini’s conquests in the Mediterranean basin, how the Greeks today exploit data for the sake of their plans to annex Northern Epirus, and how the Serbs claim that any place where Serbian monuments or graves are found must belong to the Serbian state.
    There is no need to recall other similar cases, for those we have mentioned suffice to show how archaeologists have placed their skills at the behest of national politics and ideology. Serbian archaeology and historiography have subjected the Albanians in general to such treatment, especially in Kosova.
    After World War II, but especially after the serious events in Kosova in 1981, Serbian archaeologists set to work to refute the theory of the Illyrian ethnic of Albanians.
    They are indeed not the first to cast doubt over the historical continuity between the Illyrians and the Albanians. Some specialists, especially Germans, including C. Pauli, H. Hirt, G. Mayer, and F. Cordignano , raised the question of the origin of the Albanian language and the Albanians in general. On the basis of what they considered to be scientific data they drew conclusions that disagreed with the theory that the Albanians are an indigenous population. Even though we do not today agree with their conclusions, we must emphasise that their arguments had no political or still less anti-Albanian overtones, and that they must be taken into consideration with proper seriousness when the problem of the ethnogenesis of the Albanians is discussed.
    The politicisation of the problem that was later to become the hallmark of Serbian archaeology and historiography began with the Croat linguist Henrik Baric, who had close ties with Serbian academic and political circles. (6) Baric was a very capable linguist, but the motives impelling him to formulate his Thraco-Moesian theory of the origin of the Albanians remain dubious. His theory rests on linguistic data. The fact that the same linguistic material can be used in support of such diverse theories may alarm any student approaching this problem. Without denying linguists their right to formulate their conclusions on the basis of linguistic material, we must say that there also exist today a large quantity of archaeological, anthropological, ethnological, and ethnomusicological data. The large amount of research in recent decades has thus made it much easier today to tackle the problem of the ethnic origins of the Albanians than 50 or 100 years ago. The result achieved by workers in different disciplines in recent decades have reduced the importance of the work that relied on now obsolete linguistc evidence, and have made the autochthony of the Albanians, i.e. increasingly indisputable.

    This conflict between new scientific result and the defenders of now obsolete theories is a phenomenon that can be explained by the increasing politicisation of the issue of Albanian ethnogenesis. In fact, the theory of Albanian autochthony has never been disputed with such determination and savagery as today, precisely when so much scientific proof has been produced in its support. Nevertheless, the number of researchers still today refusing to take into consideration the many arguments supplied by different academic disciplines has shrunk, or, more accurately, absolutely the only researchers who deny the theory of Albanian autochthony are Serbian. (7) Serbian archaeologists and historians began long ago to dispute the autochthony theory, but this opposition increased especially after the great Albanian revolt in Kosova in 1981. It was therefore a consequence of a political event rather than of new scientific data.
    The Serbian archaeologist Milutin Garasanin represents a special case. In 1955, he wrote an article in the Prishtina periodical "Përparimi", in which he asserted that the Albanians are the direct descendants of the Illyrians. (8) In the years that followed, Garasanin increasingly fell into line with other Serbian researchers who denied any such descent. This shift became still more evident in connection with the problem of the ethnic allegiance of the Dardanians, who inhabited the Kosova region. This problem became one of the most disputed in archaeology and history, assuming apolitical character after 1981. The Serbs vigorously attacked the idea that the Dardanians were ethnically Illyrian. Not because they were led to this conclusion by scientific evidence, but purely because Kosova was "the cradle of Serbian history" and "holy soil" for the Serbs, and as such could not have been inhabited by a people that were of Illyrian stock and hence claimed by their descendants, the Albanians.

    In the past, Serbian researchers had not always been of one mind in allocating the Kosova region to the ancient Daco-Moesians. Milutin Garasanin himself, in his survey of prehistoric Serbia in 1973, openly admits that on the basis of their place names and personal names the Dardanians can be considered Illyrians, and that a Thracian and perhaps Dacian element is evident only in the eastern parts of their territories. (9)
    However, when the Serbian Academy of Arts and sciences in 1986 organized a series of conferences on the ties between the Illyrians and the Albanians, this same Garasanin announced that the Dardanians cannot be considered Illyrians because they were ethnically more closely connected with the Daco-Moesian substratum. (10)
    It is easy to explain this change in Garasanin’s stand. We are now in a period of history in which relations between the Albanians and Serbs of Kosova, and not only within this region, have dramatically deteriorated and no Serbian researcher can freely express his opinion over the Illyrian-Albanian question without exposing himself to the danger of changes of high treason.
    It would be impossible to trace here the progress of the press, television, and radio campaign waged by Serbian researchers against the idea of Albanian autochthony. It is enough to recall an entertaining incident in this campaign which took place in Zagreb in 1982. Two years previously, in 1980, the first volume of the Encyclopaedia of Yugoslavia (Secon Edition) had been published, in which there were two entries, one entitled "Albanci" (Albanians), and the other "Albansko-Jugoslavenski odnosi" (Albanian-Yugoslavian relations). On pages 75-79, the Albanian historian from Kosova, Ali Hadri, had written the part of the entry under "Albanci" that dealt with "the origin and development of the Albanian people," in which he stated that the Albanians are the descendants of the Illyrians. The linguist Idriz Ajeti said the same, considering the Albanian language a successor to the Illyrian tongue.
    When this volume had come off the press, the Albanian revolt in Kosova had broken out, and when the Serbian edition of this same book was under preparation, the Serbian representatives on the Encyclopaedia’s central editorial board rejected the text that had already been published in the Croat edition (which they themselves had approved), and insisted that the two entries should be reformulated according to the ideas of Serbian historians. A long and bitter debate then took place within the editorial board, and was soon reflected in the Zagreb and Belgrade newspapers.(11) Ten contributions from historians and archaeologist were commissioned in order to prepare new versions of these entries.
    At that time, the Serbian members of the editorial board could not impose their ideas on others. This meant that the new version that was printed in subsequent editions of the Encyclopaedia of Yugoslavia included textual changes in the sections dealing all mention of the continuity between the Illyrians and Albanians.(12)
    Although unable to change what had already been published in the Croat edition, the publisher of the Encyclopaedia of Yugoslavia printed the new versions of the two entries and sent them to subscribers, requesting them to insert them in the appropriate place.
    The debate within the Encyclopaedia’s editorial board was also echoed in political circles. At the ninth Congress of the Serbian Communist Party held in Belgrade on 27-29 May 1982, a bitter argument broke out over the ethnic origins of the Albanians. The congress of a political party was of course not the proper place to discuss an academic problem of this kind, but the question had apparently assumed a political character and could not be confined to academic circles.
    It was nothing less than the incident involving the two entries in the Encyclopaedia of Yugoslavia that became the spark setting off this unexpected debate at the Serbian Communist Party: Congress. The Albanian linguist Idriz Ajeti referred to this scandalous incident in his speech in order to show that many Serbian researchers and journalists were politicising the issue to the extent that only a political forum could settle it, by political means.
    Disgusted by the assaults of the newspapers, Professor Ajeti movingly defended at this congress the theory of the linguistic ties between the Illyrian and Albanian languages, and also the ethnic continuity between the Illyrians and the Albanians (13).
    His speech met with an immediate response in the congress hall.
    Pretending not to understand why a purely academic problem should become a discussion topic at a political congress, the Serbian historian Jovan Deretic asked in pathetic tones what point there was in politicising the question of the Albanians’ ethnic origin.
    Why should the Albanians be the descendants of the Illyrians and not of the Thracians ? There was no point in dragging this question out of its academic context – on condition that the Thracian theory was accepted. The Illyrian theory could not be correct, simply because it was an expression of Albanian imperialism, nationalism, etc. (14) According to Deretic, the Illyrian theory had "a slight whiff of racism" that reminded him of the theory of a pure Aryan race, "and we know very well who inspired that theory." (15) Immediately after Deretic, Petar Zivadinovic took the floor. Zivadinovic was elected a member of the Central Committee of the Serbian Communist Party at this congress. For him, science had still not solved the problem of the ethnic origins of the Albanians, but, although he had never dealt with such academic questions, he knew very well that the Albanians could not be descended from the Illyrians.
    The historian Sima Cirkovic also though that the Illyrian theory "stank of racism." (16)
    The newspapers at this time were full of articles about the speeches at the conference. "Politika," a Belgrade newspaper with little tolerance for the Albanians, published an article under the headline, "No Campaign, But Creative Criticism."
    This newspaper apparently did not stop to consider that this stream of articles written by people who did more to compromise these authors than the Illyrian theory of the ethnic origin of the Albanians.
    The book "The Albanians and Their Territories," published by the Albanian Academy of Sciences in Tirana in 1982, and in an English edition in 1985, caused considerable commotion. Albanian authors from Kosova were attacked especially harshly because their work demonstrated the autochthony of the Albanians in the province of Kosova. (17)

    These authors attempted in vain to explain that all the articles included in this volume had been previously published in Yugoslavia and were therefore common knowledge long before the book appeared. (18) The attacks persisted because this book discussed what was the most delicate political problem in Kosova.
    The campaign against the Illyrian theory intensified alongside the progressive deterioration of the political situation in Kosova. Serbia’s best-known historians appeared on the scene, including the linguist Pavle Ivic, who proceeded to ruin a large part of his own scientific work in order to prove that Serbian and Croatian are a single language. He had never tackled the problems of the Illyrians or Albanians, but it nevertheless emerged that the Albanians could only be of Thracian, not Illyrian origin.
    In an interview for the Belgrade weekly NIN, Professor Ivic listed the linguists who have considered the Albanian language a descendant of Thracian and then recalled the well-known but now obsolete argument that the Albanians could not have lived on the Adriatic and Ionian coast, because they possessed word for fish.
    According to Professor Ivic, the problem of the Illyrian origin of the Albanians is complicated, but there is nevertheless no question of any doubt that the Albanians are not descendants of the Illyrians and are therefore not indigenous to the province of Kosova. This is precisely what the journalist interviewing him and the magazine’s readers wanted to hear. (19)
    A controversy then sprang up in the pages of this magazine between Professor Ivic, Mehmet Hyseni, and Shkelzen Maliqi. (20)
    On one hand, all this controversy and debate encouraged the Albanians to study more deeply the problem of their ethnic origin from the archaeological and ethnographic point of view, while it drove Serbian researchers to the point of denying the results of their own work. In 1982, when this problem had become an inflammatory one in what was then Yugoslavia, the Academy of Sciences in Albania organised a national conference on the formation of the Albanian people, their language, and culture. At this conference, which was attended by many foreign historians, many specialists tried to present all the evidence that their different academic disciplines could offer to solve the problem of Illyrian-Albanian continuity. (21)
    As in reply to this conference, the Serbs had the idea of organising in Belgrade, under the auspices of the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences, a series of conferences that were to tackle problems also dealt with in Tirana. The conferences, that were attended solely by Serbian historians, took place in May and June 1986. Their papers were later published in a book, in Serbian and French editions. (22)
    A careful reading of the contributions of Ms. F. Papazoglu and Professor M. Garasanin reveals at least a kind of uncertainty in their arguments. These writers sometimes even imply that they do not favour an unconditional rejection of the Illyrian theory of the Albanians’ ethnic origin.
    Of course, writers of propaganda have paid no attention to the academic evidence, and have not grasped these authors’ doubts, but only the evidence that suit their anti-Albanian campaign. Aware of the simplification which the complicated problem of the Albanians’ ethnic origins had undergone, professor Garasanin was careful to point out that the Albanians are undoubtedly a palaeo-Balkan people and that the Illyrian element played a part, albeit a minor one, in their formation.
    Garasanin asserted that there can be no question of a direct continuity between the Illyrians and the Albanians, because the Illyrians disappeared from history during the five centuries of Roman occupation. The Albanians are therefore a people who were formed in the middle ages from small remnants of peoples, including the Illyrians, who inhabited the western Balkans in classical and mediaeval times.
    There is no need to continue. However, we would like to end by emphasising that the misrepresentations of the Serbian academic community in connection with the ethnic origin of the Albanians are part of a long and painful story of abuses of this kind, which have been nothing but political propaganda paving the way for military repression. This is the meaning of the way for military repression. This is the meaning of the campaign by Serbian historians and journalists against the autochthony of the Albanians in the lands they inhabit.
    Crystal clear! When Serbian nationalism reared its ugly head, not much credence was left on academic circles as many historians and linguists switched their views in order to cater political agenda which aimed at weakening the position of Albanians within Yugoslavia and subjugating them under Serbian yoke. I've already posted Sima Cirkovic, a level-headed medievalist who was mildly supportive to the view according to which Albanan ethnogenesis is inextricably linked with Illyrians. during 1980's, he was pressed to disparage Illyrian theory by feigning some agnosticism, yet he did not propound any satisfactorily alternative view.
    Last edited by Abeis; 03-04-16 at 00:20.

  9. #384
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603


    Country: Serbia



    2 members found this post helpful.
    In human societies there will always be differences of views and interests. But the reality today is that we are all interdependent and have to co-exist on this small planet. Therefore, the only sensible and intelligent way of resolving differences and clashes of interests, whether between individuals or nations, is through dialogue. The promotion of a culture of dialogue and non-violence for the future of mankind is thus an important task of the international community.
    His Holiness the Dalai Lama
    in a speech to the "Forum 2000" Conference,
    Prague, Czech Republic, 4 September 1997

  10. #385
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603


    Country: Serbia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Illyrians dissapeared as political and cultural entity, not physical.

    Illyrians Romanized and it is the sole the truth.

    There are Illyrian blood in Slovenes, Croats, Serbs, Bosniacs, Greeks, Albanians, even Hungarians, but wrong to say that any today's nation is descendant of Illyrians.

  11. #386
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603


    Country: Serbia



    When I say some Slovenian or Croatian or Bosnian etc. researchers, this is no accident.

    I gave the whole theme of researchers from Slovenia which state that the Slovenian language is Illyrian.

    Illyrian-Slovenian: Messapic/Illyrian descendants of Slovenian, studies of Slovenia



    http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...es-of-Slovenia

    ...
    Croatian scientist Domagoj Nikolic writes:

    (Start of quotation)

    "Relentless propaganda us constantly full head of how we in this country of ours came in the seventh century and how we do not have anything to do with the people who lived here before. It is, above all, wrong, after all, the key question of our freedom.

    If you do not know who we are or how we got to where we are, then we can draw from the state of servitude and fratricide that constantly urns our conquerors. So, since we have lost thousands of years to kill each other, shading and madness, we have no more time to waste. Things put into place which build the basis for libertarian action:

    1) Our genetics is a huge part of present in our area since before the famous seventh century. About 30% of our genetics is here for at least 12,000 years, then a similar part of the 3-5 century BC and so on. Fact has no genetic evidence of some kind of mass migration in the 7th century and there is no fundamental genetic difference between the so-called ethnic groups that are now rounded to the false way.

    2) There is no national tradition of our arrival, nor some sort of homeland from which we came. On the other hand, there are many folklore about ancient past, then the Illyrian King, Queen Teuta, the Roman emperors still.

    3) There is no anthropological ethnological no difference between the Illyrians and the Slavic population. Our folk costumes are identical Illyrian: caps, hats, jacerms, kumparans, footwear, dalmatics, all this is identical to the Illyrian way they dress. Build and stature, folk customs, beliefs, everything is also the same or very similar. There is such a difference between the so-called ethnic groups or peoples in the Balkans; there are mostly religious differences, but they are so manifest differences still running surface.

    4) There is no archaeological evidence of the massive arrival in the 7th century. There is no discontinuity in relation to the previous period. For example, medieval form of burial mounds in the same Illyrian - prehistoric.

    5) None of our sources and historians do not talk about our arrival before XIX. century, when the notion imposed. Dukljanin story of the arrival of the Goths and Bulgarians who speak the same language as we do. So Vinko Pribojević, Andrew Kacic Miosic, Mavro Orbin, Juraj Krizanic, Dukljanin and others agree that to the in this area and there is continuity. We are one people who own sources of yourself holding unreliable and that just because you disagree with the interpretations of our conquerors. It is a constant source of division and terror.

    6) Our neighbors, especially Italians, constantly calling us Illyrians or Slavs. See older Italian dictionaries, see at Enza Betizza, etc. It is particularly interesting that the Papal Institute of St. Jerome (who is also our, otherwise it CTAV thing absurd) was called Slavic, and Illyrian and then the Croatian name and when it had to be destroyed the truth about our Slavic continuity and national unity in the nineteenth century. Marmont establishes the Illyrian Provinces, Maria Teresa has an "Illyrian office" and so on.

    7) Pope John X recognized at the Second Split Parliament that Dalmatians accepted Christianity in apostolic times, entitling them to Mass in the vernacular, so a Slavic. Therefore, only the Slavs "allows" Mass in the vernacular, and it does not make sense if the mass was not genuine from the very beginning of Christianity.

    8) The vast majority, almost all place names are Slavic, and among those who are not, most of the language is misinterpreted because the origin of the word in our language misunderstood, again because of planted stories about our alleged arrival.

    9) Greek and Roman pantheon are explicable only over Slavic key. Slav between others means key (tap), as well as Sclavus, clavus - key. So use every key except the right one.

    10) There is a continuity of our culture of Vinca, over Ethruscans until today. Ethrurscian letter similar to the Vinča and language is our Slavic! So, we Slavs did not come to Europe, but we are out of it and forced out of the constantly-suppressed, such as from Germany, Austria, Hungary, Romania, Italy, Greece and so on.

    Only on the basis of the above, we can in a reasonable way interpret the history of this region and Europe as a whole. The story of the arrival of the Slavs, and this variety, our nation has broken the backbone, because, if we gourd without roots, then it does not belong to this country, we have no right to it, we are on someone else's and we have to serve the unknown. As soon as we agree to such a picture of yourself, every horror that befalls us is just a logical progression and pranks.

    The truth is quite different: we are one people, all Balkan Slavs are a single people, and this is our country on to which we have every right and odgornost. Here is origins of European and world culture. Without accepting yourself not own freedom and prosperity. From our unity depends stability, fate and correct the past and the future of Europe and the world."

    (End of quotation)
    Last edited by Garrick; 05-04-16 at 01:26.

  12. #387
    Regular Member Abeis's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-11-15
    Posts
    34


    Country: UK - England



    1 members found this post helpful.
    hahahaha the height of irony. A disgruntled Serbian chetnik cites Dalai Lama on how dialogue and non-violence is the only way to overcome clashes. Well you should ponder critically a little more when your compatriots obliterated once for all the most splendid medieval sites in Bosnia and ex-Yugoslav countries as well on behalf of 'Greater Serbia' project. Only in Serbia there was a general sense of apprehension fraught with insecurities and hamletian dilemma 'To be or not to be', and as long as there was nothing distinguishable as 'Serb' (beside a history replete with ethnic cleansing, wars and skirmishes), your whole energy was snapped in desperate efforts to usurp other's history and pass it as your own. This annoying pattern is repeated in every domain and in every medium by nationalist Serbs who want us to believe they have the true answers and that all conventional knowledge is the product of conspiracy, protected by a cabal from whom these people have made it their mission to liberate us. You brainwashed drones have invented the most ludicrous paranoid explanations entailing even Vatican and Pope in this plot against heavenly Serbia. Garrick-the-Ultimate-Serbian-Cyber-warrior threw his mask off the moment he clung to the obsolete idea on how Illyrians were sort of proto-Slavic...clutching at straws, you knuckle-head!

  13. #388
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Abeis View Post
    hahahaha the height of irony. A disgruntled Serbian chetnik cites Dalai Lama on how dialogue and non-violence is the only way to overcome clashes. Well you should ponder critically a little more when your compatriots obliterated once for all the most splendid medieval sites in Bosnia and ex-Yugoslav countries as well on behalf of 'Greater Serbia' project. Only in Serbia there was a general sense of apprehension fraught with insecurities and hamletian dilemma 'To be or not to be', and as long as there was nothing distinguishable as 'Serb' (beside a history replete with ethnic cleansing, wars and skirmishes), your whole energy was snapped in desperate efforts to usurp other's history and pass it as your own. This annoying pattern is repeated in every domain and in every medium by nationalist Serbs who want us to believe they have the true answers and that all conventional knowledge is the product of conspiracy, protected by a cabal from whom these people have made it their mission to liberate us. You brainwashed drones have invented the most ludicrous paranoid explanations entailing even Vatican and Pope in this plot against heavenly Serbia. Garrick-the-Ultimate-Serbian-Cyber-warrior threw his mask off the moment he clung to the obsolete idea on how Illyrians were sort of proto-Slavic...clutching at straws, you knuckle-head!
    I will not complain, although your words (for example chetnik and many others) are not by the rules of forum.

    What that someone call you Ballist, or Islamic radical, or similar, how would you feel.

    But you can write what you want.
    ...

    Do you know who is Tito?

    I’m Tito’s fan.

    Yes he was not support market economy, and system with more than one party, but he was creditable for some of achievements of civilization such as brotherhood and unity and Yugoslav form of self-management.



    ...
    Culture dialogue is important as Dalai Lama says, someone can disagree with different opinion but it does not mean that he or she can belittle or insult the interlocutor.

    ...
    Everyone understood that I quoted Domagoj Nikolic researcher from Croatia, all his words, I have not added a coma.

    I have only gave opinion of this researcher due to different view.

    There is a topic about Slovenian researchers who argue that Slovenian is descendant of Illyrian.

    What if someone put words of some Bosnian scientists?

    In Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia (both Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republic of Srpska) there are scientists who think that their nations are desedants of Illyrians, and what, whether it is prohibited.

    ...
    Link Albanian and Illyrian is only untestable hypothesis, as American linguist Dr Fortson says. And that there are competing hypothesis which link Albanian with Thracian, Dacian etc.

    I am repeating opinion of Romanian scientists that Illyrian language disappeared in the time of Roman Empire, Illyrians didn’t disappeared physically, they are Romanized.

    No today’s nation in the Balkans can be successor of Illyrians although in Bosniacs, Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Greeks, Albanians, Armanji (Aromunians) even Hungarians can be Illyrian blood.

  14. #389
    Regular Member Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,115

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Abeis View Post
    hahahaha the height of irony. A disgruntled Serbian chetnik cites Dalai Lama on how dialogue and non-violence is the only way to overcome clashes. Well you should ponder critically a little more when your compatriots obliterated once for all the most splendid medieval sites in Bosnia and ex-Yugoslav countries as well on behalf of 'Greater Serbia' project. Only in Serbia there was a general sense of apprehension fraught with insecurities and hamletian dilemma 'To be or not to be', and as long as there was nothing distinguishable as 'Serb' (beside a history replete with ethnic cleansing, wars and skirmishes), your whole energy was snapped in desperate efforts to usurp other's history and pass it as your own. This annoying pattern is repeated in every domain and in every medium by nationalist Serbs who want us to believe they have the true answers and that all conventional knowledge is the product of conspiracy, protected by a cabal from whom these people have made it their mission to liberate us. You brainwashed drones have invented the most ludicrous paranoid explanations entailing even Vatican and Pope in this plot against heavenly Serbia. Garrick-the-Ultimate-Serbian-Cyber-warrior threw his mask off the moment he clung to the obsolete idea on how Illyrians were sort of proto-Slavic...clutching at straws, you knuckle-head!
    Albanians are doing the same thing..............claiming illyrian ethnicity when less than 10% of Illyrian tribes are in modern Albania ..............basically anybody who currently lives where illyrian tribes once lived might have some ethnic illyrian ancestry ...................but you will never find the answer

  15. #390
    Banned
    Join Date
    05-09-15
    Posts
    1,984


    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    Albanians are doing the same thing..............claiming illyrian ethnicity when less than 10% of Illyrian tribes are in modern Albania ..............basically anybody who currently lives where illyrian tribes once lived might have some ethnic illyrian ancestry ...................but you will never find the answer
    If this is your personal opinion, why are you spending your time in this thread?

  16. #391
    Regular Member Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,115

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by LABERIA View Post
    If this is your personal opinion, why are you spending your time in this thread?
    Not my personnel opinion...........historical fact

    The Illyrians disappeared finally after the Illyrian revolts ......................yes, there was some later Dalmatian men that became Emperors of Rome, but the illyrians as an identity died away by 50AD

    Besides , the illyrians where already mixed into Celtic society 2 centuries before the Romans attacked them

  17. #392
    Banned
    Join Date
    05-09-15
    Posts
    1,984


    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    Not my personnel opinion...........historical fact

    The Illyrians disappeared finally after the Illyrian revolts ......................yes, there was some later Dalmatian men that became Emperors of Rome, but the illyrians as an identity died away by 50AD

    Besides , the illyrians where already mixed into Celtic society 2 centuries before the Romans attacked them
    Some dalmat men? Are you serious? There was three wars between illyrians and Rome. There was many uprisings, the most dangerous for Rome was the uprising of two Bato. Because if this Illyrians had decided to collaborate with germanic tribes and their leader Arminius, this was the end of the Rome. At one point romans said, ok we crushed this uprising, but next spring this guys will start another one. So the Romans accepted the illyrians and from this moment illyrians became the backbone of Rome, giving the best soldiers and some of the most important Emperors. The pretorian guard was full illyrians. There was even an order, the Illyrian equestri. This Emperors were not just some men from Dalmaces. Was necessary a larg support especially from the army to be an Emperor.

    P. S.
    Sile, we have one member here who is making our day. No need for a second.

  18. #393
    Regular Member Milan's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-11-15
    Posts
    358


    Country: Yugoslavia



    Once Rome crashed Cartage and Macedonia the others were simple no match to them,should be noted that many supported Roman power and empire from indegenous tribes,some Thracians,Dardanians,Greeks etc
    Dardanians allied with Romans against Macedonians as well some Greeks and so on.
    The succesor kingdom of Attalus in Anatolia even bequeathed the kingdom to Rome cause had no heir,Thracians with Rhoemetalces provided 100 000 man for Rome in the Illyrian revolt.

    Yes the Illyrian revolt was described by Suotonius like one of the most difficult conflict faced by Rome since the Punic wars.
    Simple Roman hegenomy came and for some centuries all will live with one goal as Romans,but did not had it bad since many of them become emperors from each whether Thracians,Illyrians etc

  19. #394
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603


    Country: Serbia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by LABERIA View Post
    Some dalmat men? Are you serious? There was three wars between illyrians and Rome. There was many uprisings, the most dangerous for Rome was the uprising of two Bato. Because if this Illyrians had decided to collaborate with germanic tribes and their leader Arminius, this was the end of the Rome. At one point romans said, ok we crushed this uprising, but next spring this guys will start another one. So the Romans accepted the illyrians and from this moment illyrians became the backbone of Rome, giving the best soldiers and some of the most important Emperors. The pretorian guard was full illyrians. There was even an order, the Illyrian equestri. This Emperors were not just some men from Dalmaces. Was necessary a larg support especially from the army to be an Emperor.

    P. S.
    Sile, we have one member here who is making our day. No need for a second.
    It is boring (not offense).

    We have 16 pages and nothing, without any proof or evidence about link Illlyrians with Albanians.

    But new studies about Illyrians mostly saying the same as Syle, Illyirians are heterogeneous, and it is not for this thread it is for new topic.
    Last edited by Garrick; 06-04-16 at 05:47.

  20. #395
    Regular Member Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,115

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by LABERIA View Post
    Some dalmat men? Are you serious? There was three wars between illyrians and Rome. There was many uprisings, the most dangerous for Rome was the uprising of two Bato. Because if this Illyrians had decided to collaborate with germanic tribes and their leader Arminius, this was the end of the Rome. At one point romans said, ok we crushed this uprising, but next spring this guys will start another one. So the Romans accepted the illyrians and from this moment illyrians became the backbone of Rome, giving the best soldiers and some of the most important Emperors. The pretorian guard was full illyrians. There was even an order, the Illyrian equestri. This Emperors were not just some men from Dalmaces. Was necessary a larg support especially from the army to be an Emperor.

    P. S.
    Sile, we have one member here who is making our day. No need for a second.
    you are becoming an annoying person ....................best to read history and not read Albanian propaganda

    Bato was from modern Bosnia................see link below and all link inside of this link
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_Batonianum

  21. #396
    Banned
    Join Date
    05-09-15
    Posts
    1,984


    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    you are becoming an annoying person ....................best to read history and not read Albanian propaganda

    Bato was from modern Bosnia................see link below and all link inside of this link
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_Batonianum
    I don't know what Albanian propaganda are you referring. I have not quoted any Albanian scholar here. And we have good scholars, you have to be sure. I know who was Bato, so no need for copy paste. I explained very well my point, so i am not going to repeat my post. If you have difficulty to understand it, than you have an big problem but i can not help you.

  22. #397
    Regular Member Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,115

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by LABERIA View Post
    I don't know what Albanian propaganda are you referring. I have not quoted any Albanian scholar here. And we have good scholars, you have to be sure. I know who was Bato, so no need for copy paste. I explained very well my point, so i am not going to repeat my post. If you have difficulty to understand it, than you have an big problem but i can not help you.
    I do not know what you are trying to say..............all I see is that you are making a statement of Bato as an Albanian-illyrian, when he clearly is a Bosnian-Illyrian. The Great Illyrian revolt was also never near modern Albania , it was in modern Bosnia, Croatia and Hungaria ( pannonia ).

    Besides at the time of the Great Illyrian revolt, all of modern Albania was already under Roman rule for a long time.

  23. #398
    Banned
    Join Date
    05-09-15
    Posts
    1,984


    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Sile, can you explain this:
    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    Not my personnel opinion...........historical fact

    The Illyrians disappeared finally after the Illyrian revolts ...................... but the illyrians as an identity died away by 50AD

  24. #399
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    26-10-11
    Location
    Prishtinë, Kosovo
    Posts
    408

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b1a2*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c3

    Ethnic group
    Kosovar-Albanian
    Country: Kosovo



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Just quoting an Italian (not Albanian) from another forum

    Quote:
    "I have been in Albania this March as part of a team of 5 students and 3 professors for 4 weeks and I can say that the country is beautiful, people are very friendly and the food is absolutely the best and remember I am an Italian saying so!
    I am doing my PHD on the Albanian history and Archaeology and found that the Roman and Hellenic civilizations are based on Pelasgian - Etruscian civilization. Albania is possibly the greatest repository of the history of the Balkans and Europe and I am happy to have found Albanian people very helpful.

    So far we have been in northern Greece studying Dodona and Butrint in Albania and we can say with 100% assurance that both places belong to the same culture and they both speak Pelasgian - Illyrian - Albanian language!
    The Pelasgian language is older than hellenic and we refer to Homer! Homer under no circumstances mentions greeks and we consider the term "greek" as an artificial term like saying "hgafdfddb"!
    Hellens must have come to the Pelasgian peninsula very late, finding a semi-empty space and we think it was due to the fall of Troy which war was between the Pelasgian-Illyrian tribes and not between hellenes and Illyrians. But we are more convinced that hellenes arrived after the fall of Alexander the great.
    It is very well known that hellenes build their homes of wood around the big walls of Troy and other pelasgian-Illyrian cities. We think, referring to Luigi Cavalli Sforza, that Albanians of today are the only descendants of the pelasgian - etruscian tribes which for us is a fantastic source of information.
    On the other hand the greek language is a balto-slavic language which leads to believe that they must have come from somewhere north Iran. Greek language have no connection to pelasgian thus makes it non related to the population lived around there. Herodotus said that the Hellenes didnt speak pelasgian, suffered from several diseases because they used to live in difficult environment and learned from the pelasgians how to honor the Gods!
    On the other hand it is absolutely true that Alexander the great is of 100% a non greek, a pelasgian man, son of the Albanian Philip II and everything ties him with what is today Albania. The other name of macedonia is "emathia" or "e madhia" which in Albanian means " the great".
    end of quote

  25. #400
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    536


    Country: Greece



    2 members found this post helpful.
    I won't bother arguing about the origins of Albanians. I am not interested.

    About the term "Graeci" Aristotle says that it was a term first used by Illyrians to describe the Dorians of Epirus. It could have been a tribe name also. During historical times they used the term "Hellenes" which was possibly also a tribe name originally.

    If we accept the steppes theory of Indo-European origins the proto-Greeks must have come to Northwestern or Central Greece through the Balkans. They didn't call themselves "Greeks" or "Hellenes" then but they spoke the language which later evolved into classic Greek.

    I believe pre-proto-Greek-speaking tribes left the Steppes around 2800 BC and settled in Greece around 2000 BC so that's relatively late but not as late as you propose. That's speculative, though and there are studies that propose an earlier arrival than what I say. That means that other, possibly non-Indo-european or Anatolian IE cultures existed in Greece, especially in the islands. For example Early Cycladic and Early Minoan civilazations must have been non-Greek; And they may have been non-Indoeuropean also.

    The Greek language isn't Balto-Slavic. Most place it somewhere in the middle between other European "centum" branches on one hand and Indo-Iranian and Armenian on the other.

    You can believe whatever you wish. Most of the things the "Italian" guy says are funny but I won't bother arguing more about that.

Page 16 of 31 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •