|
Post by Pyrros on Sept 2, 2018 1:12:16 GMT -5
60% in rest of Slavs, when the peak is in Ukraine with 54%
what about I2a of Poland? Did they come from the south? or what? (ok in my theory that's what happened but anyways).
|
|
|
Post by branislavnusic on Sept 2, 2018 1:19:09 GMT -5
Dr Wizard Pyrros a few questions :
(since you have all the sticky notes on serbdom more than serbs themselves do )
1)When was the word "serb" first used in history as a unit of people ? 2) and where are the serbs during the Great Schism ...1000's ad ??
3) the first serbian books /manuscripts ?
The first books/manuscripts were in church slavonic because that was the language of the liturgy/elite EVEN romanians used it until the 17th century
|
|
|
Post by branislavnusic on Sept 2, 2018 1:23:56 GMT -5
ahahahah you know that Alb, Arv etc was not used that early on bcs we were known and called ourselves Illyrian
maybe not in that book
Euphremius 1313
LOL point is? Albanians were NEVER mentioned in DAI, so you can't speak about anything it says that chapter has been disproven thousands of times. Let's not forget which other slavic tribe has the ethonym "Serb"
|
|
|
Post by Pyrros on Sept 2, 2018 1:26:15 GMT -5
But ULF, you didn;t answer the "which is older" question.
In order for object O to migrate from A to B, you have to (at least) prove :
- The earliest presence of O in A is Da - The earliest presence of O in B is Db
Da << Db
and even then, still its only an indication, NOT A PROOF.
As you understand with todays means this is impossible to prove.
I stand by my theory that the Balkans/EURASIA are the homeland of all Slavs.....
Slavs occupied half of the earth. So half of the earth is their homeland.
The rest was Indians.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2018 2:11:53 GMT -5
60% in rest of Slavs, when the peak is in Ukraine with 54%
what about I2a of Poland? Did they come from the south? or what? (ok in my theory that's what happened but anyways).
It was a rough estimate. Poland has 57% of R1a and 5% of I2a. Ukraine has 44% of R1a and 20% of I2a, Russia 46% R1a and 10% I2a. These countries account for most of Slavic people so you get the picture. If the oldest Slavic haplogroup was I2a it would be most spread out. If two group formed Slavic ethnogenesis they would be equally roughly spread out. However R1a is more than twice present among Slavs which suggest I2a "joined" Slavs later on. When? I got no clue. Who was I2a? Except the fact some Paleolithic Europeans carried it we got no data.
|
|
|
Post by Pyrros on Sept 2, 2018 9:27:27 GMT -5
60% in rest of Slavs, when the peak is in Ukraine with 54%
what about I2a of Poland? Did they come from the south? or what? (ok in my theory that's what happened but anyways).
It was a rough estimate. Poland has 57% of R1a and 5% of I2a. Ukraine has 44% of R1a and 20% of I2a, Russia 46% R1a and 10% I2a. These countries account for most of Slavic people so you get the picture. If the oldest Slavic haplogroup was I2a it would be most spread out. If two group formed Slavic ethnogenesis they would be equally roughly spread out. However R1a is more than twice present among Slavs which suggest I2a "joined" Slavs later on. When? I got no clue. Who was I2a? Except the fact some Paleolithic Europeans carried it we got no data. lots of problems : - why do we have to deal with only I2a or R1a? - why does the one must be older than the other, and not consider them contemporary to each other/parallel (in .... entanglement if you wish)?
(also all the above logic assumes to fall in the trap of a small initial slavic stock (of only one haplogroup).... which is clearly a hugely dangerous assumption)
- if two groups formed Slavs, no, they would not necessarily spread out equally, it would change easily as the time goes, and professions change. Imagine R1a were the farmers and I2a the soldiers, one group would increase or decrease its volume as the economic factors change. Absolutely normal. In fact the astonishing similarity between the modern day slavic countries is a miracle by itself.
google up some Florin Curta or Peter Charanis to see what real history (science) looks like. What I mean, is that they can spot problems like the above very easily, and the problems they deal with are much more delicate and harder.
but anyways, all of the above questions are meaningless if we imagine Slavici homeland to be :
western europe/south europe/central/eastern europe + Eurasia.
That would make all those questions not so important ...
|
|
|
Post by Pyrros on Sept 2, 2018 9:28:18 GMT -5
Ulf bro, In the meantime I didn't read any comment on the Slavic toponyms (at least 160-200) on the southest place of mainland Greece, or even Crete.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2018 12:06:58 GMT -5
It was a rough estimate. Poland has 57% of R1a and 5% of I2a. Ukraine has 44% of R1a and 20% of I2a, Russia 46% R1a and 10% I2a. These countries account for most of Slavic people so you get the picture. If the oldest Slavic haplogroup was I2a it would be most spread out. If two group formed Slavic ethnogenesis they would be equally roughly spread out. However R1a is more than twice present among Slavs which suggest I2a "joined" Slavs later on. When? I got no clue. Who was I2a? Except the fact some Paleolithic Europeans carried it we got no data. lots of problems : - why do we have to deal with only I2a or R1a? If you take for example N1c, you'll see it almost doesn't occur among West or South Slavs, but occurs among East. Same thing goes for R1b - it is present among Czechs but not others. Those people joined Slavs. Because of all that, only significant for Slavic people are those two, namely I2a and R1a. In other words one was main group, or if their frequency is about the same it would mean the both started off Slavic culture (and not only the same frequency but the same frequencies for majority of Slavic population). We know their frequencies aren't equal among Slavs today.
This is a twofold question. One is older than other because haplogroups are mutation on Y chromosome so they've split from their ancestral haplogroups at different period. R1a formed Slavic ethnogenesis because its much more prevailing among Slavs than I2a (you ask why? more on this below). I2a exist only in isolated sockets in really really high frequencies (among Slavs) at the places where there aren't a lot of people living. In fact scientists found out I2a has an older mutation than R1a, but that doesn't mean they made the Slavic culture because they would be the prevailing haplogroup. No tribe would join the smaller tribe than their own.
Its the right kind of logic.
Average homo sapiens is a primate with a larger brain - a hominid. 99.99999999% of homo sapiens didn't care for science but to have as many children and to continue their heirdom. That's because expansion of science starts with the humanism and renessaice. Science became important just recently. When it happened terms such as tolerance started to occur. Before that people trusted "only to those that are similar to themselves".
I'll answer this part in reverse. Of course, all modern Slavs are similar because they have similar culture. Back then people didn't knew their haplogroups to choose a class. So all were fighters and all were agricultaralists, depending on the circumstances. Growth of the people among the same culture is the same for all parts of a culture regardless of their haplogroup. That's why I2a wasn't older Slavic tribe, and they weren't fighter. I2a people simply joined. Don't forget Romanians, Moldovans and Sardinians all have high amount of I2a and they are not even Slavs.
Heh, you're telling me about Florin Curta but it was me actually who first mentioned him here a couple of years ago.
Western Europe wasn't Slavic homeland. Not even larger part of Eastern Europe until the early Middle Ages. I've already explained.
|
|
|
Post by Pyrros on Sept 2, 2018 15:01:55 GMT -5
tracking my orders bro, got Florin Curta in 2010, exactly how did you mention him *first*, when and where?
about the homo sapiens story, i'll tell you the exact opposite : people started to become fascist and trust only their similar after eugenics and other such SAXAN NAZI practices became popular in anti-Slav west.
Like little children, who cares if one is blond or brown, only thing they want is to mate (how do you think all those gypsies made it into Serbia?? because of some evil Kalergi back in 500 AD?).... fascism comes later when selection goes under the filtering of personal interest and max of benefit. Fascism comes with specialization and maximization of outcome.
I see lots of other arbitrary assumptions that you make : "So all were fighters and all were agricultaralists, depending on the circumstances" , we know that old Slavs had classes, not in the western sense, but in a practical one. And a relation between profession and DNA was formed as a consequence. HECK if DNA is so funking irrelevant with the real aspects of life, why losing so much time with it?
What if the initial SLAVIC stock was RICHER than what we see today? ever thought of that?
I repeat, all your studies, take as given that : SLAVS WERE A SMALL TRIBE. You didn't answer with a satisfactory manner in any of the questions... and I am STUNNED that you talk in downgrading words about Novi's books ....
imho the way this genetic thingy is used to solve great historical problems is more than pseudo-science ... it is dangerous for the truth ... the damage done to Slavs by "Noel Malcolms" is nothing to what is coming from ..... genetic pseudo-studies.
they make smth incredible minimal, stupid and anti-scientificm "work" using the most unbelievable unacceptable assumptions and legalize it as "the only true science".... gimme a funking break....
ulf bro, there are MUCH more to modern genetics...
I won't get into details, it is my last post on that matter. I am definite : modern DNA is here to bury the truth rather than the opposite.
PS
I guess you wont object that Germany was a Slavic land. And of course ITALY (VENICE) was a slavic land.... and this is WESTERN europe.
PS2
I am puzzled with your silence on the southern greece toponyms. I dont know why. Should I assume the same "persistence" over the rest of your assumptions ? Cause I think its time for you to re-consider.
Friendly,
Pyrros
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2018 16:13:12 GMT -5
tracking my orders bro, got Florin Curta in 2010, exactly how did you mention him *first*, when and where?
about the homo sapiens story, i'll tell you the exact opposite : people started to become fascist and trust only their similar after eugenics and other such SAXAN NAZI practices became popular in anti-Slav west.
Like little children, who cares if one is blond or brown, only thing they want is to mate (how do you think all those gypsies made it into Serbia?? because of some evil Kalergi back in 500 AD?).... fascism comes later when selection goes under the filtering of personal interest and max of benefit. Fascism comes with specialization and maximization of outcome.
I see lots of other arbitrary assumptions that you make : "So all were fighters and all were agricultaralists, depending on the circumstances" , we know that old Slavs had classes, not in the western sense, but in a practical one. And a relation between profession and DNA was formed as a consequence. HECK if DNA is so funking irrelevant with the real aspects of life, why losing so much time with it?
What if the initial SLAVIC stock was RICHER than what we see today? ever thought of that?
I repeat, all your studies, take as given that : SLAVS WERE A SMALL TRIBE. You didn't answer with a satisfactory manner in any of the questions... and I am STUNNED that you talk in downgrading words about Novi's books ....
imho the way this genetic thingy is used to solve great historical problems is more than pseudo-science ... it is dangerous for the truth ... the damage done to Slavs by "Noel Malcolms" is nothing to what is coming from ..... genetic pseudo-studies.
they make smth incredible minimal, stupid and anti-scientificm "work" using the most unbelievable unacceptable assumptions and legalize it as "the only true science".... gimme a funking break....
ulf bro, there are MUCH more to modern genetics...
I won't get into details, it is my last post on that matter. I am definite : modern DNA is here to bury the truth rather than the opposite.
PS
I guess you wont object that Germany was a Slavic land. And of course ITALY (VENICE) was a slavic land.... and this is WESTERN europe.
PS2
I am puzzled with your silence on the southern greece toponyms. I dont know why. Should I assume the same "persistence" over the rest of your assumptions ? Cause I think its time for you to re-consider.
Friendly,
Pyrros
About Florin: Once or twice actually. Can't pinpoint the exact thread because I can't track it from my older deleted account.
Gypsies were brought to Macedonia and Bulgaria by the Ottomans. They were doing the dirtiest jobs for Ottomans. In fact most gypsies in Serbia are from Kosovo and Macedonia. Late 90's and early 2000's cosmopolitanism of Serbia is costing us a lot right this moment, because we accepted all those nationalities that nobody wanted (NOTE: naturally I'm not talking about Serb refugees from Bosnia or Croatia, but other nationalities).
I don't believe in eugenics as its coined by the Nazi's, but sadly eugenics is now considered evil and connected to ultra-fascism and ultra-nazism. Funny thing is not even neo-nazi's mention it, but I know they are too stupid to understand the benefit of positive eugenics anyway. Unsurprising, as in general Europeans today are too brainwashed to realize its their only way for salvation. They will disappear. That's why I believe strong ethics and morals among smaller groups is the right way in the future. That way those better, smarter and more capable will survive while other will disappear. In any case if the Europe and Mongoloid Asia becomes melting pot mankind will disappear rapidly, within 3-4 centuries.
The standing (professional) army was minimal. Its impractical. Auxiliary troops (conscripts) were common people. Of course, I'm not saying people were either agriculturalists or warriors. There were many professions. DNA is relevant as to keep the good genes in the gene poll of a nation, but don't get fooled bad genes can prevail too, and create backward societies. Also, old people weren't stupid. They knew if they would recruit all the best men in army they would destroy themselves. See whats happened to Serbia (or other Yugoslav republics)? Luckily there is still enough time to reverse the process of decadence. Anyway, I was talking about all this many times here and its tiring to repeat. And no, Slavs were not small tribe (at least not in 7th century). I didn't answer the questions that can't be answered. I had only presented one theory of mine, and I stressed out its my theory. All what I said here is either a factual or highly probable thing.
I'm not interested in Southern Greece. I consider it irrelevant for modern Slavs, also I consider Central Greece irrelevant for Slavs. The only region of Greece that has more relevancy for me is Greek Macedonia. I don't care for Venice too. I don't know or care who is Noel Malcolm, he's unknown in Slavic countries.
I only care for those areas where people identify as Slavs. I also care for the friends of Slavs. Later is the only reason why I try to explain my views so much and reply to you. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by Pyrros on Sept 3, 2018 1:56:33 GMT -5
As long as you care for Slavs, you are my bro. Period. The rest are technicalities and we'll solve them all! We are engineers and scientists after all!
PS
I truly think (cant explain why) that the key for Slavic survival is in the south. Because the killing of Slavs in the last 1500 years followed this pattern. From south-north. In Kosovo this is still happening today. Kosovo is just a phase of this ancient pattern.
That's why I think that Slavs must strike down against this very same pattern. Claim anything southern. Because it 1000% used to be Slavic. If SAXANs fight for the south they will lose the North, and then SLAVS will have it all. Like its supposed to be. This will exhaust SAXAN.
The south is major tool in the Slavic arsenal and should not be wasted at any cost!
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Sept 4, 2018 15:54:48 GMT -5
for Pyrros's fantasy play ...."ancient serbs "
According to Hofmann, Johann Jacob (1635-1706): Universal Lexicon, Historiam Sacram Et Profanam Omnis aevi, Omniumque Gentium;
The slaves (slaves, , robbers, serfs) are a Skythas people and in Europe they have come
serbs are apparently called slavons because they are still missing (seventh century) and all the settlements inhabited by slavons were ruled by the Bulgarians....
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Sept 4, 2018 16:04:17 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2018 16:44:40 GMT -5
See that's the thing with history books, or rather history in general. They can be easily forged, made up or just written in accordances to someones need. That's why they should not be taken seriously. I mean, if Albanians are so old and ancient they should be as good as Italy by now. That's why science work very simple. Genetics say the modern Serbs are very old in this part of Europe, older than certain other nation
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Sept 4, 2018 16:52:53 GMT -5
See that's the thing with history books, or rather history in general. They can be easily forged, made up or just written in accordances to someones need. That's why they should not be taken seriously. I mean, if Albanians are so old and ancient they should be as good as Italy by now. That's why science work very simple. Genetics say the modern Serbs are very old in this part of Europe, older than certain other nation
Albanians or Illyrians ?
bcs Pyrros also read this book .......15th century /Albanians identified as Illyrian
Balkan Studies Volume 20. Page193 -1415-
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2018 17:04:16 GMT -5
Illyrians according to all chronicles are Bronze Age culture. So it doesn't matter if Albanians or Illyrians. Because when ancestors of roughly 60% of Serbs (regardless if they were Serbs, something else and whether or not they had national identity) arrived to Balkans only other human beings they met here were Neanderthals
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2018 17:07:20 GMT -5
In other words, they are pretty damn old in Balkans. At least 30-35k years old
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Sept 4, 2018 18:16:41 GMT -5
maybe pyrros is right ......
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Sept 4, 2018 18:25:19 GMT -5
I was just wondering if pyrros read this book as well .....
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Sept 4, 2018 18:32:02 GMT -5
oh and the page before is kind of unique as well
Laonikos Chalkokondyles ( Λαόνικος Χαλκοκονδύλης; 1423 – 1490)
|
|