I trust more other historians than DAI,that is not a conspiracy.Now it realy looks like some conspiracy theory: we don’t know what they changed, when they did it, what motives did they have. We don't even know who they realy were...!
But we are pretty much confident that they did it, and still use it against us!
etrified:
I2a-Din came to the Balkans and Dinaric Alps with the Thracians, Dacians & Illyrians
- Thread starter Maciamo
- Start date
Right, if we consider we can speak about process not quick event.
When Slavs came to Dalmatia and surrounding there were natives who spoke some variant of Italo-Dalmatian language including Venetian (Italic people, descendants of Liburnians, and Romanized Illyrians).
It wasn't a quick process where one population has replaced another, on the contrary, the process was slow. Some people who spoke Italo-Dalmatian languages during the centuries migrated mostly to Italy, some people assimilated in Slavs, later Croats, but a part of these people lived for centuries and nurtured their languages.
Dalmatian language has long existed, during centuries, meaning that there were residents who spoke it. Dalmatian had several dialects, two most important were: Ragusian (Southern dialect) and Vegliot (Northern dialect). A lot of medieval texts of Dalmatia were written in Dalmatian.
Dalmatian existed very long, the last speaker Tuone Udaina lived 1821-1898.
Venetian was spoken in Istria, and some towns of Dalmatia and parts of Slovenia. Till late 18th century Istrian residents were linked with Italian culture via Venetian language.
Italy united 1861 and after that Italian language became dominant, speakers of Italo-Dalmatian languages during time adopted Italian.
Wonomyro
Enfant Terrible
- Messages
- 482
- Reaction score
- 59
- Points
- 0
This is how you reacted when I cited a historian just few hours ago:
Have you changed your mind? Or you just cant find more arguments, like Garrick who mentioned Dr. Borry at least 20 times but in a meantime said nothing new. Just like Dr Borry in his text...
What do you want say with this map?
I was refering there not to a new era historians,but medieval sources and historians.
What kind of arguments,i am not here to argue and waste my time for that.I said my opinion and that's it.
Wonomyro
Enfant Terrible
- Messages
- 482
- Reaction score
- 59
- Points
- 0
This map speaks for itself more convincingly then anything I found in that political pamphlet...
Wonomyro
Enfant Terrible
- Messages
- 482
- Reaction score
- 59
- Points
- 0
Fair enough, Milan, it was pleasure to discuss with you.
Unfortunately it is not good example.
Do not get me wrong, I have nothing against your logic.
A lot of people here and in other forums do same, all of them see today's situation.
But today's situation is different then yesterday's situation and day before yesterday, things are changing, it is reason why scientists say that only research of haplogroups in different epochas in any area can say what's happened and how haplogroups changed.
Italians once lived in Dalmatia and Istria in larger numbers, sources mention 230,000-350,000 Italians escaped between 1943-1960:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istrian-Dalmatian_exodus
If they remained, today Maciamo's picture about Italian admixture would be different.
Wonomyro
Enfant Terrible
- Messages
- 482
- Reaction score
- 59
- Points
- 0
@Garrick, with all respect to your person, I must notice that you either don't understand data you are presenting or you are trying to manipulate with them. The numbers that you are presenting are mainly from Istria, the province which is the part of Croatia (and Slovenia) only after the WWII. That has nothing to do with the medieval Croatia. Many of these people were Italians from the southern Italy who were settled there only during Mussolini times. However there were also many locals of Venetian origin. In the other parts of Croatia the Italians were living in some coastal cities, many of them were only Italicised locals, as the Italian was a prestige identity for some of them. Remnants of the old Dalmatians lived in some islands and cities but they were absorbed by the Croatian majority over time. We are happy and proud that we do not have only Slavic roots but also partly Mediterranean. I am especially happy about that. However the truth is that, except near the coastal line, the genetic impact of the indigenous population were never significant. And that is all in accordance with the chapter 30th of DAI and Histora Salonitana.
Take a look into the autosomal diagrams and ask yourself why present day Croats are located in the cluster with Hungarians, not with Italians, Albanians and Bulgarians, not even Serbs from Serbia.
Also, this is the map of Istria from the article that you linked (Istra Census 1910):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Istria_census_1910.PNG (Percentages represent the Italian minority.)
Last edited:
Sile
Banned
- Messages
- 5,110
- Reaction score
- 582
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Australia
- Ethnic group
- North Alpine Italian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H95a1 ..Pannoni
read
Venice and the Slavs: The Discovery of Dalmatia in the Age of Enlightenment
By Larry Wolff
Venetian archives state these people from the area from the time Dalmatian went under Venice ( time of Pietro Orseolo ) to 1760
Dalmatians = only original illyrians
Croati = croatians
Istri = istrians
malocchi = Serbs
Narentani = from Neretva , ( I suspect Bosnians but I am unsure )
Filip Grabovac in 1747 was the first slav to mention the word Narod to describe one people, he used it to mix the croatians and illyrians ( dalmatians ) into one nation under the slav term even though they where different people.
https://www.omniglot.com/writing/dalmatian.htm
Malocchi lol
That's the Albanian word for 'mountain dweller" used nowadays as a derogatory term referring to a Gheg (North Albanian). Similarly, Serbs of Sumadija used to call the mountain dwellers Gega (Albanian name as well as meaning North Albanian).
Now you can carry on with your discussion.
The actual word is Morlacchi in Italian, Morlaci in Croatian and Serbian, Morlachs in English. Although initially it did, later including the source, has nothing to do with ethnogenesis as with political misinterpretation of the factual reality on the field. Do not open the pandora's box.
1) You consider those scientist, working in reliable institute, consideration as the ultimate authority and truth, which is wrong and not true. Stop spreading lies that Croatian scholars avoid contradicting this consideration. Stop constantly citing their name because such viewpoint does not get any kind of legitimacy doing so, and it became repetitive and boring to read. No wonder that you from Serbia, who previously emphasized that I-PH908 is of Serbian origin, suddenly, as if never heard about this theory was stuck by thunder light with final solution to oppose other's opinion like that of Hrvat22, and propagate viewpoint according to which is negated Slavic or even ethnic origin in general to Croats. This nationalistic i.e. chauvinistic jealousy in the Balkan with which you try to exploit as much as possible for your own benefit at the expense of another ethnic group, i.e. practically speaking transforming Croatian population to one of mostly Serbian ethnic origin - it's ridiculous and sick.
2) The origin of the Croatian ethnonym became more or less clear - it is of Iranian etymological origin. A theory initially considered by many foreign and respectable scientists.
3) Kronsteiner considerations were generally wrong and dismissed:
"The theory was initially developed by Otto Kronsteiner in 1978.[23][40] He tried to prove that early Croats were an upper caste of Avar origin, which blended with Slavic nobility during the 7th and 8th century and abandoned their Avar language.[41] As arguments for his thesis he considered the Tatar-Bashkir derivation of Croatian ethnonym;[41] that Croats and Avars are almost always mentioned together;[41] distribution of Avarian type of settlements where the Croatian ethnonym was as toponym, pagus Crouuati in Carinthia and Kraubath in Styria;[41] this settlements had Avarian names with suffix *-iki (-itji);[41] the commander of those settlements was Avarian Ban which name is located in the center of those settlements, Faning/Baniče < Baniki in Carinthia, and Fahnsdorf < Bansdorf in Styria;[41] the Avarian officers titles, besides Mong.-Turk. Khagan, the Kosezes/Kasazes, Ban and Župan.[41] Previously, by some Yugoslavian historians the toponym Obrov(ac) was also considered of Avar origin,[42] and according to Kronsteiner's claims, which many Nada Klaić accepted, Klaić moved the ancient homeland of White Croats to Carantania.[41]
However, according to Peter Štih and modern scholars, Kronsteiner arguments were plain assumptions which historians can not objectively accept as evidence.[43] Actually, the etymology derivation is one of many, and is not generally accepted;[44][45] the Croats are mentioned along the Avars only in the Constantine VII's work, but always as enemies of the Avars, who destroyed and expelled their authority from Dalmatia;[46] those settlements had widespread Slavic suffix ići, the settlements do not have the semicircular Avar type arrangement, and the Ban's settlements could not be his seat as are very small and are not found on any important crossroad or geographical location;[47] the titles origin and derivation are unsolved, and they are not found among Avars and Avar language;[47][48] toponyms with root Obrov derive from South Slavic verb "obrovati" (to dig a trench) and are mostly of later date (from the 14th century).[42]"
4) You consider that Serbian historian Tibor Živković, among many others, are demagogues while interpreting DAI, and that only these few scientists like Pohl and Borri who recycle one and the same interpretation propagated within Austrian institute are not? If DAI is not such a "sacred book", you're really making a stupid comparison, then are you willing to accept that what's written in it about Serbs is also an illusion? Or is it only illusion regarding to Croats? You know your kind of writing thought has an intense hypocrisy.
Wonomyro
Enfant Terrible
- Messages
- 482
- Reaction score
- 59
- Points
- 0
Are there Orthodox Christian Ghegs?
It is very interesting, but one mistake what doesn't matter.
Dalmatians = Romanized Illyrians (language Dalmatian, belongs to Italo-Dalmatian)
Istrians = Italic people (language Venetian, belongs to...? thoughts are divided Gallo-Italic, Italo-Dalmatian or solo group)
Where are descendants of Liburnians?
...
Croati = Croats (Hrvati)
No Malocchi, but Morlachus or Murlacus what is from Greek Μαυροβλάχοι, Morlacus = Vlachs (Aromunians), nothing to do neither Serbian nor Albanian (Gjuha Sqipe), maybe Malocchi is mistake or too distorded Greek word.
But I know what you wanted to say, later someone abusively Serbs called Morlachus (Morlaci).
Narentines were unbaptized Serbs (Srbi), Greeks called them Poganoi (pagans).
Objectively we cannot say that continuity existed because arrival of Slavs but it was not completly discontinuity because change of population was not fast, it was very slow process.
Therefore we can say about partial continuity.
By the way what happened with Liburnians, were they speak Dalmatian, Venetian or some other Italo-Romance language.
Do you know what is hepo dice?
Wonomyro
Enfant Terrible
- Messages
- 482
- Reaction score
- 59
- Points
- 0
The information on Serbs in Pagania exists only in DAI. (However, in the chapter 30th they are just Slavs).
What would Dr. Borry say to hear this? :useless:
Yes. Spread mostly around Durres, Elbasan, Dibra, Montenegro, Macedonia, and even Kosovo. There are also Orthodox Arberesh in Calabaria called Ghegi by the locals.
Relax, I wasn't claiming anything besides the Gega in Sumadija of course. Too many interesting coincidences.
Never emphasized that I-PH908 is of Serbian origin nor thought about it. What I wrote that I-CTS10228 can be possible Bastarnae origin. And I remember that we had polemics that it could be Thracian, but there are reasons why Bastarnae can be strong candidate.
I don't know where you could see my nationalism, you should read what I wrote in thread of Balkan bickering, once was Yugoslav (but never Pan-Slavist) now I am European. I opened 0 threads about Serbs.
And you can search that in a lot of threads I wrote good things about all ex Yugoslav people, including Croats. For me bickering between Croats and Serbs today is absurd. Yes I criticized Macedonians some short time, long time ago, but with reason, because Greek history is not their history.
Never said it is not Iranian, or it is, only gave more possibilities including Iranian what it is in public bases and books, my opinion it is not solved, as think same for Serbian ethnonim.
Citated Kronsteirn in context. Not spoke that his words are ultimate truth. But it is true that he is scientist, it is not disputable.
Never mention. Honestly I don't know about what you say or maybe you mix me with someone else.
It is true what I say, you can check, but please, you should apologize to me. You are member for respect, but you agree that you made mistake, what it is normal, everyone in the world can make mistake. And I sometimes inadvertenly make mistake, because of my English.
Please don't do what some other members do. One of them for example speaks that I wrote something what never wrote. After that several other members speak what he wrote as my words. But I explained them that it is illusion.
This is true, I cited Dr Borri and wrote about Dr Pohl. I am not much interested what is written about Serbs unless if it some thread which is interesting to me.
What people don't understand, Dr Francesco Borri is not a lonely rider. He is scientist of Institute of Medieval Research, Vienna, a department of Austrian Academy of Science. He was participant in scientific project of this Institute and his scientific paper is product of this project. All under the leadership of director this Institute Dr Pohl. And his paper is published in world renomated scientific journal. All this gives a great deal of weight to his work, and Institute continued to deal with the topic of early and middle ages in Dalmatia and surrounding, and published several titles.
I'm sorry for all those ex Yugoslav people who don't like what scientists this respectable of Institute research and write, but they are highly respected and cannot be ignored. Even Russian authors cite Dr Borri today. Institute broke some old misconceptions, and it is essentially remarkable, through discoveries and new knowledge continues human progress. There will always be people who do not accept new knowledge but science is moving forward.
My opinion is that the advancement of science can not be hypocrisy. About thinkings that science has bad side too, not only good, another time.
This thread has been viewed 571977 times.