|
Post by terroreign on Nov 4, 2011 1:53:21 GMT -5
dude 1914? that's old? you guys are bulgarians and serbs, face the realities
|
|
|
Post by uz on Nov 4, 2011 1:55:45 GMT -5
In time we will sit with the Bulgarians in peace and decide the Mac fate.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Nov 4, 2011 2:48:08 GMT -5
heh, we call all -ski's, the bulgos can have the -ev's and -ov's
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Nov 4, 2011 4:42:16 GMT -5
Vardarians are just Serbs, destroyed consciously by Bulgarian Exarchos. I might buy land somewhere from the Serbian derived toponyms in Vardar like Srbinovo from the Goshtivar region or maybe l should buy up around some serbian derived towns inside Bitola?.....nah, F em, i'll just go to western bulgaria and live in a town called srubsko selo ;D, even better, l'll go to my uncles sister town in southern albania called Borova ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Croatian Vanguard on Nov 4, 2011 8:34:17 GMT -5
What sarmatia? Land is land, it doesn't belong to anyone but the latest ones to win it. Then why have your sig?
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Nov 4, 2011 10:21:19 GMT -5
From a Bulgarian perspective, we're not looking for them to 'call themselves' Bulgarians.. obviously the ones that feel and identify as ethnic Bulgarians will be accepted as such. We simply want to have history presented as it actually happened, without it being obscured by politics.. and the reality is that in the early 1900's there were no ethnic Macedonians.
Back then, the term 'Macedonian' designated any person originating from the geographic region of Macedonia, be they ethnic Bulgarians, Greeks, Albanians, Serbs, Vlachs, Turks, Armenians, Jews, or whatever other ethnic group.. but there were no ethnic Macedonians.
UZ, I doubt Bulgaria or Serbia will be 'deciding' anyone's fate anytime soon. The job of decision making, even within our own borders (at least in regard to Bulgaria) isn't our own to make anymore.
Unfortunately in this day and age these decisions are made by external powers that are only looking for financial gains from the Balkans and could care less for the well being or the development of the local populations.
They've been sucking the whole region dry; instability and a poor economic situation is only to their benefit.
I read a news article a while back that was basically saying that Bulgaria was more independent and self sufficient within the Ottoman Empire, than it is today in the EU. The situation is bleak, and it seems the whole concept of the EU is a new form of 'slavery'.. with the down side that there is no clear enemy to rise against.
|
|
|
Post by srbobran on Nov 4, 2011 11:16:30 GMT -5
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if that was true (having more independence in the Ottoman empire). Its a sad reality. Honestly, this is probably the primary reason I still stand by the concept and idea of Yugoslavia, the fact that if in a perfect world it could be implemented and NOT fall apart the way it did, we would still have our independence like we did for a few brief decades.
|
|
|
Post by Croatian Vanguard on Nov 4, 2011 11:22:33 GMT -5
^ We were not free.
|
|
|
Post by srbobran on Nov 4, 2011 11:34:30 GMT -5
^Yeah not completely but certainly more than we are now at least, or ever really were.
|
|
|
Post by Croatian Vanguard on Nov 4, 2011 12:07:17 GMT -5
^^ Nah. I feel more free now than I ever did and it has nothing to do with politics or what leader is in charge. Tito was just another mafia don in a different uniform just like Tudjman , Milosevic or any other leader. In Croatia there is a saying ' isto sranje drugo pakovanje' if you get what is meant by that.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Nov 4, 2011 13:50:05 GMT -5
What sarmatia? Land is land, it doesn't belong to anyone but the latest ones to win it. Then why have your sig? bc of events which occurred in said place.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Nov 4, 2011 14:27:40 GMT -5
I am curious as to where did they find "ancient macedonian" ppl to take blood samples. Someone is inventing BS here. this study is flawed.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Nov 4, 2011 14:30:35 GMT -5
How are we different man? We're Slavicized Native Balkanians. So I guess were just northern Macedonians eh? So, the supposedly few and supposedly savage Slavs managed to slavicize all balkans (not to mention rest of europe. Yeah right. This is theory is so fundamentally flawed that i cannot see how everybody is buying it... Maybe the Slavs did not exist at all. They were just a few, savage, uncivilized .... spirits-ghosts LOL
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Nov 4, 2011 14:31:40 GMT -5
Slavicized Native Balkanians Indeed we are. i'd be interested in reading this. do you have a link? or pm me.. hvala i pozdrav that whole slavicized illyrians theory has been debunked long ago... Damn right, cause this theory is intuitively WRONG. Does not explain the real dynamics even present today.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Nov 4, 2011 14:34:16 GMT -5
Put another way, what would someone centuries from now be looking for to determine the survival of (for example) �Serbian� DNA? Of-course there is no such thing as a specific marker that describes all Serbs. Serbs today would carry a variation of markers (as would be the case with all identifiable ethnic group for that matter, whether ancient or modern). Yet despite this, all Serbs today would be counted as Serbs equally. I can do it. There about 1% in Epirus/Greece with - Serbian surnames (with ekavica) - from ex-Serbian-named villages - with exactly Serb looks/behaviour (except the height) I can even convince some to have some blood sample taken. *THEY* are ancient Serbs. If Serbs were not sleeping duties they would engage in heavy activity of recovering their past, but they are on hiatus.
|
|
|
Post by BigBlackBeast on Nov 4, 2011 18:02:41 GMT -5
Srbobran, on the one hand you debunk – rightly – terms such as ‘Illyrian’, ‘Thracian’, ‘Greek’ and so forth as genetic descriptors and on the other you promote the idea that the ancient Macedonians were some sort of ‘Hellenised Illyro-Thracians’ as if there was any real genetic difference or significance that could be ascribed specifically to the Illyrians or Thracians as whole. The fact is that ancient Macedonians were Greek-speakers from their inception. If they happened to have mopped up any Illyrian or (more likely) Thracian ‘blood’ during their expansion, this would be expected. However, to identify a specific ‘Macedonian DNA’ in order to then make the comparison one would have to have a very narrow geographic focus indeed. However, in all the studies I have seen, or rather in deductions drawn from such studies, this is something that is not done. Usually what happens is that the broad ‘Macedonian’ area is taken as a whole rather than specific attention being given to those areas known to have been inhabited compactly by the ancient Makedones. Invariably the problem stems from the lack of historic knowledge on the part of those making interpretations from the study results. When taken in the broader sense the ‘Macedonian’ geographic area (basically defined by Greek Macedonia, the FYROM, and Bulgarian Macedonia) was heavily Thracian and Illyrian, particularly in its northern, eastern and north-western regions and Greek with respect to the regions inhabited by the Macedonians and the Epirote ‘Upper Macedonians’. But all these are ethno-linguistic terms. As always it is modern labelling that is the problem when it comes to genetic studies (IGENEA being a classic example of this). A given haplogroup/marker is likely to have been circulating in a given region for generations upon generations but is likely to have been carried by assorted Illyrians, Thracians, Greeks, Phrygians, Albanians, Vlachs, Bulgarians (etc) over the ages. Put another way, what would someone centuries from now be looking for to determine the survival of (for example) ‘Serbian’ DNA? Of-course there is no such thing as a specific marker that describes all Serbs. Serbs today would carry a variation of markers (as would be the case with all identifiable ethnic group for that matter, whether ancient or modern). Yet despite this, all Serbs today would be counted as Serbs equally. Chento will just have to accept that if any antique DNA (irrespective of the specific haplogroup) has remained in the FYROM, it is far more likely to have been carried in the past by Thracians (Paeonians in particular), a good proportion by Illyrians and to a much lesser degree by Greeks - largely through the Epirote Upper Macedonians of Pelagonia rather than by the ‘actual’ Makedones of Lower Macedonia whose impact would have been very minimal. I understand Chento is from Pelagonia. As such he will simply have to be content with the fantasy that he may have Upper Macedonians (read ‘Epirote’) DNA. In any event Srbo, I would appreciate it if you were to point me to the study you refer to. If we use your logic then, the modern Greek province of Macedonia also does not correspond to the borders of the original ancient Macedon; That’s not my ‘logic’ you fool. That’s not what I’m saying. One more time for your thick Bulgarian head: the ancient Macedonians lived in an area encompassed almost entirely within Greek Macedonia. It is not a coincidence that the heart of their homeland, as well as that of most of the ‘Upper Macedonians’, was inhabited by Greek-speaking indigenous Macedonians at the beginning of the last century. With the Slavic invasions the Greek-speaking Macedonians had evidently contracted to their original core. The bastion of the Olympian foothills and the Emathian marshland lent them sufficient protection to endure. I have never said that modern Greek Macedonia corresponds exactly with their ancient kingdom … how could I say that when the extent of their domains changed considerably over the course of centuries particularly from the late sixth BC). But I have said that Greek Macedonia is logically where one would look now to find their descendants – their DNA - not amongst the Slavs of Paeonia and Pelagonia who until relatively recently counted themselves amongst the Bulgarians. And yes, the Makedones’s religious capital of Dion (the city of Zeus), and all three subsequent administrative capitals: Aegae, Pella, Thessalonica), are to be found in Greek Macedonia and not anywhere near the new theme park of the Balkans increasingly dotted with assorted statues of lions and misplaced warriors on horses.
|
|
|
Post by BigBlackBeast on Nov 4, 2011 18:24:48 GMT -5
srbobran is correct. Culturally/nationalistically speaking we can only claim what we hold. For Macedonians today to claim that is actually ancient Macedon is reaching the edge of blasphemy. They're more Slavic than anything, and this whole historical push to claim it is somewhat a recent phenomenon. Not sure what you mean by recent; Flag of independent Macedonia - March 2nd 1914 with Alexander's horse (Bucephalus), in the left top corner and sun in the right bottom corner over which is written "One Independent Macedonia". The infinitesimally small size of the new-born Macedonist intelligentsia – such as the St Petersburg colony – can at best be an exception proving the rule of the essentially Bulgarian character and ethnic affiliation of the Slavs of Macedonia. That the overwhelming majority of Macedonia’s Slavs saw themselves as Bulgarians, well into the interwar periods of the twentieth century and beyond, cannot be disputed. And in these Macedonists, who often had no clear view, and often a vacillating one, of their people’s ethnic identity (see Misirkov), we simply have misguided Slavs thinking they have something to do with Alexander, his people and his Thessalian horse! Incidentally, since when did Bucephalus have a horn? This, my dear Chento, is not Bucephalus. It is the mythical Unicorn … a creature as mythical as your connection with the ancient Macedonians. How ironic it is that the map of Macedonia promoted by the ‘St Petersburg colony’, the KARTA MAKEDONIJA which you seem to enjoy posting everywhere, omits Pieria - the triangular region between Olympus, the Pierian mountains to its north and the sea. This was typical of the Slav definition of Macedonia until very recently (consider Vasil Kanchov’s very influential definition of Macedonia). Slav ethnographers liked to keep it out of Macedonia because it was practically entirely populated by Greeks. It was even where 'Zorba the Greek' was born! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Karta_Makedonija_1913.jpgPieria happened to be one of the earliest cores of the ancient Macedonians ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pieria_(regional_unit) ). It was their original homeland and had remained Greek throughout the ages. This is one of the areas, my dear Chento, where one would expect to find ‘ancient Macedonian DNA’ in very heavy concentration. The Pierian mountains (also known as the ‘Macedonian Mountain’ in antiquity) was also believed to be the haunt of the nine muses (vying for this honour with the Helicon region in Boeotia). Now that your chicken-thief nation has discovered how central, how much of a heartland, Pieria was to the ancient Macedonians, it is now included in maps of your imaginary lost homeland www.historyofmacedonia.org/ConciseMacedonia/map.html . ROFL. It appears also that statues of the nine muses, presumably in view of this same connection, will feature as a new addition in Gruevski’s Skopje theme park! www.plusinfo.mk/vest/21381/Opshtina-Centar-kje-plati-500000-evra-za-kjerkite-na-Zevs-
|
|
|
Post by makednon on Nov 4, 2011 22:19:55 GMT -5
Not sure what you mean by recent; Flag of independent Macedonia - March 2nd 1914 with Alexander's horse (Bucephalus), in the left top corner and sun in the right bottom corner over which is written "One Independent Macedonia". The infinitesimally small size of the new-born Macedonist intelligentsia – such as the St Petersburg colony – can at best be an exception proving the rule of the essentially Bulgarian character and ethnic affiliation of the Slavs of Macedonia. That the overwhelming majority of Macedonia’s Slavs saw themselves as Bulgarians, well into the interwar periods of the twentieth century and beyond, cannot be disputed. Oh really? Here: www.jewishgen.org/databases/EIDB/engine/gold.php?uid=13183293085281318329765428&time=1318329765431&referrer=httpwww.jewishgen.orgdatabasesEIDBellisgold.html&mode=running&fail=0ÐS=446&FLD=name&FLD=yoa&FLD=age&FLD=passrec&FLD=town&FLD=tmanifest&FLD=smanifest&FLD=yob&FLD=image&FLD=annotations&pagesize=50&SRT=mdyoa&DIRECTION=asc&offset=201&totalNumber=12642 Choke on it. Wont even bother to provide you any more links or info on this subject since everything to you and others out there who dont even grasp the modern concept of anthropology, will be exception of the rule. If this aint proof how people, who didnt have their own country for like eternity and until after half a century later saw themselves, then honestly, you are beyond any help. There are tones of studies who mention that "problematic" fact, you just need to use that "intellect" of yours which you so dearly proclaim all over these boards, in order to find and read them. And in these Macedonists, who often had no clear view, and often a vacillating one, of their people’s ethnic identity (see Misirkov), we simply have misguided Slavs thinking they have something to do with Alexander, his people and his Thessalian horse! Here is one groundbreaking scientific interdisciplinary fact for you: Slavic Migrations did not happen, ever! First of all, the "Slavs" are archaeologically invisible. No traces what-so-ever have been found of those so called en masse migrations in almost the entire Balkans or anywhere for that matter (exception is Slovenia, but Mitija Gushtin thesis died soon after he proclaimed it). - Poulter "The Transition to Late Antiquity. The Danube region and Beyond" - F. Curta "The Making of the Slavs" - F. Curta (editor) - "Borders, barriers and ethnogenesis" - F. Curta (editor) - "East Central and Eastern Europe in the early middle ages" - F. Curta - Medieval Archaeology and Ethnicity: Where are We? - F. Curta - Etnicitet u ranosrednjovjekovnoj arheologiji: Primjer ranoslavenskih nalaza u jadranskoj regiji - F. Curta: - The early Slavs in Bohemia and Moravia: a response to my critics You can find F. Curta's articles on academia.edu and his books can easily be found in electronic forms on the net. His theories have been widely accepted by both western and eastern scholars. His editions and texts are published in almost every meaningful history/archaeology magazine and encyclopedia's on the subject of Early middle ages. Related bibliography is mentioned in his papers. His most recent book is "The Edinburgh History of the Greeks, ca. 500 to 1050. The Early Middle Ages" which i havent had the chance to read yet. In favor of this new revisionist theory of slavs and their so called migrations are also the genetic researches from various authors, which point out to the conclusion that the three most present hg's in the balkan slavic populations can be traced back to the paleolithic and neolithic on the very territories they live in. One way of interpreting the spread of slavic languages is presented by Mario Alinei: "Interdisciplinary and linguistic evidence for Palaeolithic continuity of Indo-European, Uralic and Altaic populations in Eurasia, with an excursus on Slavic ethnogenesis". More on the linguistic subject in Curta's books (he presents the thesis of Slavic being Lingua Franca of the Avar and Bulgar Qaganat's). Incidentally, since when did Bucephalus have a horn? This, my dear Chento, is not Bucephalus. It is the mythical Unicorn … a creature as mythical as your connection with the ancient Macedonians. How ironic it is that the map of Macedonia promoted by the ‘St Petersburg colony’, the KARTA MAKEDONIJA which you seem to enjoy posting everywhere, omits Pieria - the triangular region between Olympus, the Pierian mountains to its north and the sea. This was typical of the Slav definition of Macedonia until very recently (consider Vasil Kanchov’s very influential definition of Macedonia). Slav ethnographers liked to keep it out of Macedonia because it was practically entirely populated by Greeks. It was even where 'Zorba the Greek' was born! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Karta_Makedonija_1913.jpgPieria happened to be one of the earliest cores of the ancient Macedonians ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pieria_(regional_unit) ). It was their original homeland and had remained Greek throughout the ages. This is one of the areas, my dear Chento, where one would expect to find ‘ancient Macedonian DNA’ in very heavy concentration. The Pierian mountains (also known as the ‘Macedonian Mountain’ in antiquity) was also believed to be the haunt of the nine muses (vying for this honour with the Helicon region in Boeotia). Now that your chicken-thief nation has discovered how central, how much of a heartland, Pieria was to the ancient Macedonians, it is now included in maps of your imaginary lost homeland www.historyofmacedonia.org/ConciseMacedonia/map.html . ROFL. It appears also that statues of the nine muses, presumably in view of this same connection, will feature as a new addition in Gruevski’s Skopje theme park! Pieria was not one of Macedon's core regions. It was one of the earlieast regions aquired, yes, but Herodotus says that it was inhabited by thracians before the annexation, which were resettled at the vicinity of Amphipolis and the coast with Pydna and Methone was collonized by Hellenes. So by your logic, since Slavs are still newcomers to ancient macedonian lands (even though we live here for a millenia and a half ROFL if we really did came from behind the Carpathi), Macedons are newcomers too! Further more, Pelagonia was mentioned as being Paionian land in the Iliad along with lower Axios (which means Amphaxitis and Mygdonia), the Eordai and the Almops were enslaved and expelled, Krestonia, Bysaltia and Edonia were Thracian and therefor not Macedonian also! Which leaves Emathia as the core Macedonian region right, which was, until like 80 years ago, inhabited by Slavs! I mean Misirkov is from Pella/Postol, both the villages of Kutlesh and Palatica have clear slavic names and were inhabited by Slavs! So where should we look for ancient macedonian dna again? That logic my friend is flawed on so many levels that it really doesnt even require any attention. Its been proved times and times and times again, that language, especially the written version, and culture are almost always =/ ethnicity, and that the later is mainly political construction from various factors which led to its creation which almost always disregard stuff like common ancestry, common culture, language and similar factors. Those old theories died a long time ago. And i'm sick and tired of trolls who only talk gibberish on public forums without any sense what-so-ever and taking no consequences for their actions and often considerably contribute for hatred and antagonism between nations. The fact of the matter is that until old stereotypes exist, our countries, such as they are, will never prosper and live up to their potential. We are all kin. Slavs, Greeks, Bulgars, Romanians, u name it. We have been "sharing DNA" for milenia. And until we bloody realise that and start uniting this god forsaken piece of Europe, we will always be toyed by the real intruders, be that French, Germans, Americans, English, Arabs, you name it, who will profit by taking our companies, from our unemployment, from our bloodshed.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Nov 5, 2011 0:27:17 GMT -5
Makedon, you are entering deep waters now. I agree that the theory of those huge slavic migrations seem rather impossible. But OTOH Slavs had/still have such a vivid spirit that *IF* they were always here that would mean, that :
a) either the whole Greek story about antiquity is just a made up conspiracy that never existed (VERY HARD, since the legacy is just huge + there are still living leftovers from the ancient Greeks in Crete/Cyprus) (how could two such vivid civilizations co-exist ?? How didn't the Greeks mention Slavs at all?) b) or..........
this is MY theory !!!!!
SLAVS = ANCIENT GREEKS
the 2 Languages were MUCH MUCH MUCH closer back then....
It is a huge puzzle, this problem is one of the most difficult problems in history ....
and smth tells me, that certain "powers" (non-balkan, non-slav) made sure this puzzle is there to stay.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Nov 5, 2011 0:32:16 GMT -5
The fact of the matter is that until old stereotypes exist, our countries, such as they are, will never prosper and live up to their potential. We are all kin. Slavs, Greeks, Bulgars, Romanians, u name it. We have been "sharing DNA" for milenia. And until we bloody realise that and start uniting this god forsaken piece of Europe, we will always be toyed by the real intruders, be that French, Germans, Americans, English, Arabs, you name it, who will profit by taking our companies, from our unemployment, from our bloodshed. Fully agree. But i gotta comment here that the west has not only invested in greek pseudo-nationalism but also on bulgarian, slavomakedon, croatian, boslim, etc... But all in all, i salute you bro!
|
|