Yetos
Active member
- Messages
- 5,960
- Reaction score
- 519
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Makedonia
- Ethnic group
- Makedonian original
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- G2a3a
- mtDNA haplogroup
- X2b
Now I would like to tell you about my views on history. The biggest problem in finding the truth is that most of us blindly believe that all we were taught at school is true, that once a common opinion of some historians was approved by Academy of History is true. How much of you asked itself who were the people that established the chronology of history, the chronology of events, that an event took place earlier or later than other one? These were Scaliger and Petavius at the beginning of 17th century. There were a lot of scholars who didn't agree with the works of those two but powerful Vatican supported the version of Petavius who was a jesuit (maybe he was charged to falsify the history). Since then the chronology of historical facts never was revised. You should understand that initially historians were not supposed to establish the truth but to make a beautiful story about a certain country.
I have my version of history. I have to recognize that I have been inspired by Anatoly Fomenko (his work in english "History: fiction or sience"). But I can't agree at all with him, anyway his works astonished me and turned my imagination about the past at 180º. Most curious is that he's not a ******* historian he's mathematician and he used some mathematical methods invented by himself.
Now... what about Vlachs? What's the biggest difference between east european languages and west european languages? Eastern languages don't have articles in front of nouns, some languages don't have article at all (like russian) and some have the article but as the end part of a noun (like romanian). As you know Latin also doesn't have article in front of nouns, that means Latin is an east european language. Article in Latin is the ending of a word like in Romanian: caine (dog) cainele (the dog), but not in front like: Le maison, La casa, Das Haus, The house and so on.
If Latin is an east european language then what people from eastern part of Europe spoke it? Of course Vlaaaachs(romanians, aromuns, moldovans and so on) because they are the single eastearn people who speak a romance language. You should know that term Byzantium is a conventional term for Eastern Roman Empire invented by western historians to make a difference between two Roman Empires, but actually the true purpose was to make people forget about the first and only true Roman Empire where the Latin spread over Europe from. Maybe because at that time all this ragion was ruled by Ottomans. People living in Bizantine Empire never called themselves bizantines they called themselves Romanians because Bizantium was called Romania. The word Romania comes from the word ROME wich is the same romanian word LUME wich means people and world. Also the word LATIN is the same word LYDIA and means people (german-LEUTE; russian-LYUDI).
The Vlachs are the same Pelasgians and Lydians people who lived before the greeks arrived in Balkan and Anatolia. Even nowadays Greeks don't call themselves Greeks but Helleni who are living in Hellas and not Greece.
The word GREEK or GREECE comes frome GEORGE, GREGORY, JURGEN, ERIC, YURI, YORIK, YORK and so on. That mean that originally a greek was a soldier of the army of George, that's why in Christian world George is one of most important figures and a saint. This George is the same Chingiz Khan wich comes to us from chinese sources. This George (with his greeks) destroyd the first Roman Empire with the capital city in Troy, and brought the slavs and turks with him and maybe the helleni people (I'm not sure about this, I don't exclude helleni were living there before George's arriving).
So... a lot of Vlachs(Lydians, Pelasgians, Troyans) flew westwards were they had colonies and local people were partly romanized(don't forget at that time there weren't living so much people as nowadays do). Historians called this era Dark Age because they were germans, frenchmen, italians(I mean from West) and they knew that this part of Europe didn't have much importance at that time. The center of civilization at that time was in East where Dark Age come much later and is still persisting nowadays. Some time George Khan ruled over all Europe, but later Vatican church tried to hide this fact excluding anything that reminds us the word KHAN. I've found a lot of traces of word Khan especially in the West like Canada = Khanate or like Vatican = Father Khan (Papa de la roma, Patriarch = Father), Canute or Knut (danish king). Western romanized people tried to oppose new ruling calling the germanic peoples to join them. It lead to the emerging of the Frankish Empire and Catholic Church, coz in that time two states couldn't have the same worship.
Do you know that frankish kings considered themselvs Troyans? Historians (stupid historians) consider this aberations because between Troyans and Franks there is an almost 2000 yars. Well these kings weren't historians so they could'nt know much about themselves. How could someone believe that a blind Homer (blind means he couldn't write) so perfectly told his stories about Troy to people that after 400 years someone who knew his stories could put his words on paper. In Moldova, especially in countryside, people conserved carols sung at Christmas having the main theme "Troyan Wars" and this people have no idea who was Homer, because these carols passed on from generation to generation and Homer had nothing to do with these. That means that Troyan Wars took place not so long time ago. But of course Vatican did all the possible to forget about this nightmare sending that back as far as possible (13th century B.C.) and naming George in chinese way Chingiz whose army had never reached the Atlantic.
Why Vatican was so afraid of these events with Troy? Because Troyan Wars mean the collapse of first Rome and a new one was created in nowadays capital city of Italy, this way pretending that there was no other Rome and Vatican Church is the only legitimate power. The new catholic empire was named Francia coz of the term FRANC wich meant FREE, coz they got freedom from the George's army (greeks). Nowadays FRANC can be found as an economic term meaning tax free. This empire was also called Leon(Spain) Lyon(France) Livonia(Baltic countries) from LION that was the symbol of Catholicism. For the Slavs the main symbol was the BEAR, for others in Balkan, Anatolia, Caucasus is the WOLF. The kingdom of Leon in Spain or kingdom of Livonia in Baltic region never existed, these are a reflexion of The Empire of Lion, the same Galic Empire, the same Frankish Empire, the same Roman Empire of German Nation. This empire fell down after a civil war called peacefully Protestant Reformation.
This is a concise presentation of my views on history.
hmm it is atheory, but don't fit,
1)Latin and Celtic is a linguistic family which population I don't know how much fit with Romania and Aromani,
2) There is big difference among Romanians and Aromanians (Villachians)
the only connection is the linguistic and that with enough differences
I even heard Romania are Romania and Aromani are after Romylia-Rumelia but is still a theory
3) the term Greek is after γραιοι and not Saint George warriors it is an exonym and not an endonym
4) the case of Troyans is favorite after Virgil epic poetry, and not before,
ON THE OTHER HAND WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT ETRUSCANS CAME FROM MINOR ASIA, WHERE TROY EXIST
THYRRENIANS IDENTIFIED BY ANCIENT AS THE LANGUAGE OF PELASGIANS (Thoukidides)
Well opinion is that Albanians are tribe people so the tribe that went to Italy was not rich on J2, another possibility is that J2 in Albanians is from assimilated people(Greeks, Bulgarians), but I do think they have it E-V13, R1b-HT 35 and J2b2 are together. Also Albanians in Italy are Tosk so maybe J2 is bigger in Gheg.