|
Post by uz on May 6, 2012 18:37:39 GMT -5
Relying on ancients for identity-purposes is weakness. at least serbs have a strong foundation of identity and belonging like the myth about millosh obilic and the battle of kosova? look you momo, albanians identify themselves with the origins of the rule of Arber, the League of Lezha and Gjergj Kastrioti...that's the foundation of the modern albanian conciousness, we do not claim we are illyrians, we are their desdendands but we do not go around telling people we're illyrian, its serbs who have this irrational peeve about albanians being synonymous with illyrian, how about you people mind your own f**king business instead of channelling so much energy to disprove that historical fact....and coming up short every time! It becomes our business when you use these quasi-ideologies to justify land-grabbing and expansionism. Aside from that, I don't give a fuck what you think of yourselves, I'm sure others would agree. ps, for me the story of Milos Obilic is border-line insignificant when it comes to Serbs as an entirety.
|
|
|
Post by uz on May 6, 2012 18:43:31 GMT -5
adt, as the idiot you are; I don't think you understand what I'm saying, you're taking what I'm saying as an insult? I am telling you to be proud of being Albanian, something that you are, not something that "you" were probably during sometime a thousand or two or so years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Shqipni13 on May 6, 2012 19:29:02 GMT -5
^He just did clarify that he is proud of who he is, an Albanian.
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on May 7, 2012 4:13:21 GMT -5
It becomes our business when you use these quasi-ideologies to justify land-grabbing and expansionism. Aside from that, I don't give a f**k what you think of yourselves, I'm sure others would agree. what quasi-ideologies moron? it is a historical fact that albanians decend from the early dwellers of the balcans, not you or any other delusional slav can change that fact. slavs are the ones that snatched up land when they spread into the region like a plague, what the fuck are you talking about? didin't you announce the project of greater serbs just before the break up of the federation?
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on May 7, 2012 4:30:08 GMT -5
"Our arguments are playing out as if on a loop. As soon as I admit to some uncertainty or wobble in the Illyrian theory you guys jump and say “aha, you see, I told you so, Albanians are not Illyrians, they couldn’t be, therefore they are Chechens (or some such other filler substitute).” Then I have to mop up your Caucasian claims and the Illyrians stick up their head in the conversation as if by reflex, the line turns full circle and the loop is closed." RD, l never said Chechens, l said East Asia Minor. Again, the Illyrian theory isn't DEFINITE, like theFACTUAL evidence we have for Serbian origins."Albanians are considered Illyrians by default. Since we appear to be neither GrecoRomans nor Slavs, the default position becomes the Illyrians by virtue of geography and language. In other words, we live in an area where Illyrians are known to have lived, and speak a language somewhat related but not conclusively proven to be "Illyrian". There are arguments for and against this. To selectively believe in only the arguments against is to half-ass the topic and shows an attitude of insincere treatment of history and knowledge. The same could be said if one only selectively believes just the pro argument." No, that isn't right. Language is taken out of the picture because Albanian (Shqiptar) is part of the SATEM division of IE languages while Illyrian is known as CENTUM. Its mainly just due to GEOGRAPHY, the Austrians learnt that the ancient Illyrian Albanoi tribe (extinct) lived in todays modern Albania (an Exonym given to Albanian-Shqiptars by outsiders), and secondly, this modern Albania was developed by the Austrians to keep Serbia away from the Adriatic, it was to serve as a buffer. "However, the real point of contention is whether Albanians are autochton in Balkan or later invaders. Those are the two poles between which the argument swings: Natives or Outsiders. Considering that there were no historic outside migrations into Balkan after the Slavs moved in; considering that the Alb language clearly shows a deep Balkan ancestry with Doric Greek and pre-Roman contacts; considering that the Alb language shows no traces of development or contact outside the Balkan area (besides the 15th century Turkish loanwords); considering that Albanians have no other counterparts or ethnic, cultural, historical, archaeological, or linguistic affinity with any other groups or place outside Balkan; (please don’t show me the Caucasian Albania map, or I will backhand you): all of this leads historians to conclude that the Albanian ethnicity is not an outside group but something that emerged in the 11th century as a fusion around a central core or a synthesis of multiple roots of people already in Balkan (this in Wilkes’ opinion)." I have shown you some quotes from Wilkes, you forgot?
The Byzantine commanders says something quite interesting because l've known for a long time some almost matching (Albanian-Shqiptar) toponyms in Albania to the ones from the EAST OF ASIA MINOR. Yes, the modern (Albanian-Shqiptars) are a combination of many peoples, but for not been RECORDED by Slavs or Byzantines prior to the 11th century is HUGE, there is no way in hell Albanians lived in this terrority UNDETECTED, its impossible. The mountain theory is plain stupid, we have an Albanologist saying Albanians use SLAVIC loans for mountain vegetation and Romance for lowland areas, this in itself defeats the theory because Albanian-Shqiptars and her Slavs did INTERMINGLE.
I can add more, but l want to say the following, if Albanians were present in the modern Albania (Shqiptaria) prior to the 11th century, then why isn't there original Albanian-Shqiptar toponyms that have been Slavicised, as many of the previously known Greek or Roman ones?
Maritime words also are STRONGLY SLAVIC in Albanian language, why arn't they Doric Greek, Romance but Slavic? As l hypothesize, the Albanians arrive to the (Albanian-Shqiptar) lands after Slavs, it demonstrates that Albanian-Shqiptars didn't ORIGINATE near a coast
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on May 7, 2012 4:34:08 GMT -5
"It becomes our business when you use these quasi-ideologies to justify land-grabbing and expansionism. Aside from that, I don't give a f**k what you think of yourselves, I'm sure others would agree."
UZ, this is their argument also when they have their eyes set on Epirus (Northern Greece).
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on May 7, 2012 4:40:36 GMT -5
Albanians DESCENDANT from Illyrians (for sake of argument even). Big difference boys. wrong. you cannot justify equality based on non existence.
|
|
|
Post by uz on May 7, 2012 13:59:34 GMT -5
It becomes our business when you use these quasi-ideologies to justify land-grabbing and expansionism. Aside from that, I don't give a f**k what you think of yourselves, I'm sure others would agree. what quasi-ideologies moron? it is a historical fact that albanians decend from the early dwellers of the balcans, not you or any other delusional slav can change that fact. For the sake of argument say this is so. You are not them anymore and by trying to connect yourself to them you are disgracing them. You lost your ties to the ancients a long time go, you know nothing of their culture/home, language, legends, and spirituality only stuff the Greeks have told you. This is no one elses' fault but your own, somehow national-amnesia hit you all at once and all of a sudden POOF!!! ---1000+ years missing...... We're here, in the Balkans to stay. Face this reality already it'll do you good. Show me or stfu.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on May 7, 2012 18:21:45 GMT -5
"You lost your ties to the ancients a long time go, you know nothing of their culture/home, language, legends, and spirituality only stuff the Greeks have told you. This is no one elses' fault but your own, somehow national-amnesia hit you all at once and all of a sudden POOF!!! ---1000+ years missing......"
Spot on UZ.
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on May 7, 2012 19:13:32 GMT -5
modern day italians have lost touch with the romans, present day greeks have nothing in common with ancient greeks, the irish are far from celts, the french have no traces of gauls, sweds are no longer vikings.....what is your fucking point exactly douchebag? are you green with envy that you are the product of a race that used to bathe in their own piss no longer than a few centuries ago and albanians are natives to the balcans?
|
|
|
Post by uz on May 7, 2012 19:18:58 GMT -5
modern day italians have lost touch with the romans, present day greeks have nothing in common with ancient greeks, the irish are far from celts, the french have no traces of gauls, sweds are no longer vikings.....what is your f**king point exactly douchebag? ^ My point exactly, is as you stated. Irish are proud of being Irish, Italians have much to be pround of their Italian heritage, same with the Swedes, now you guys.... well... can't say much about yourselves can you... when it falls back on the ancients. Italians don't go around with ancient-arguments (Roman) meant for present-day intentions. You can claim all you want that you're the descendants of the illyrians, but when you use their ancient-pespective for your present-day motives, that's when we have to step in and set you straight. Is this clear enough for you?
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on May 7, 2012 19:31:28 GMT -5
we don't claim, we are the descendands of illyrians, its irrefutable and we do not need nor rely on serbs take on the matter
|
|
|
Post by Shqipni13 on May 7, 2012 23:01:27 GMT -5
modern day italians have lost touch with the romans, present day greeks have nothing in common with ancient greeks, the irish are far from celts, the french have no traces of gauls, sweds are no longer vikings.....what is your f**king point exactly douchebag? ^ My point exactly, is as you stated. Irish are proud of being Irish, Italians have much to be pround of their Italian heritage, same with the Swedes, now you guys.... well... can't say much about yourselves can you... when it falls back on the ancients. Italians don't go around with ancient-arguments (Roman) meant for present-day intentions. You can claim all you want that you're the descendants of the illyrians, but when you use their ancient-pespective for your present-day motives, that's when we have to step in and set you straight. Is this clear enough for you? How is it not going to be used dum dum?. When you have Macedonian encyclopedias specially made to state that we are newcomers. When you have Serbs (probably a majority) claim we come from Chechnya or Azerbaijan. It's a valid argument to counter your bullshit. We were there before you, not that I personally give a fuck. Serbs have a long and established history in the balkans and obviously belong where they are today.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on May 7, 2012 23:30:03 GMT -5
" we are the descendands of illyrians" Why arn't Croatians and Slovenians Illyrians, they were claiming an Illyrian origin 200 to 300 years before the Austrians told you ARE now Illyrians? The Croat and Slovene Illyrian movement was in full swing during their time in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, this Empire sort to eradicate this movement by fining and emprisioning people who supported it, especially in the final stages of that Empire, in this final stage, the Austrians found the Albanians as the adherants to the lost Illyrian civilisation PS What a bodgy and sloppy conduct by the Austro-Hungarians at that time, tisk, tisk, tisk.......
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on May 8, 2012 5:28:49 GMT -5
" we are the descendands of illyrians" Why arn't Croatians and Slovenians Illyrians, they were claiming an Illyrian origin 200 to 300 years before the Austrians told you ARE now Illyrians? what a retarded thing to say, that's why it is impossible to debate with you, just because they claimed they descend from illyrians before us it doesn't necessarily mean that they do, who claimed what first has nothing to do with it halfwit, its not a fucking sale mate, historical lineage is not up for grabs, whoever gets to it first becomes the owner, what kind of a way to reason is that are you seriously reducing the entire plethora of work done by hundreds of scholars to a wild stab in dark claim made by austrians? what is their motive though, why are they so eager to tag someone as illyrians? why are they so obssessed with it? they just woke up one day and fabricated a quirky theory of illyrians? you sir are a moron
|
|
|
Post by Croatian Vanguard on May 8, 2012 5:38:13 GMT -5
^^^ The Illyrian movement or Croatian national revival wasn't about claiming origins among the Illyrians although there were a handful of advocates of that theory. *That* "Illyrian" movement was actually about Croatian and , in a broader sense , South Slavic national recognition with the ultimate goal of creating a third leg of the Austro-Hungarian Empire based in Zagreb.
It was called 'Illyrian' for two reasons. One , Napolean renamed the land he conquered in Croatia-Dalmatia into 'Illyria.' Napoleans ideas also spawned a national awakening in Croats and other South Slavs in the Empire. Most nationalists at the time saw Napolean's toppling of Venice as a good thing.
Second reason it was called 'Illyrian' and not Croatian in particular , even though it was mostly a Croatian nationalist movement , is because other South Slavs were welcome to stand united with Croats such as the Slovenes and the large Serb minority within the Empire. It was an inclusive and not exclusive primarily Croatian Slavic movement.
|
|
|
Post by Croatian Vanguard on May 8, 2012 5:47:53 GMT -5
Most of us South Slavs are Illyrian descendents especially those that hail from southern Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. We still preserve some customs and were are rather distinguishable from our cousins in the broader Slav family. There's no reason to deny this.
Albanians are probably cultural descendents of the Illyrians but so what? Albanians didn't even become a unified group until the 12th century as to where Croats and Bulgars were recognized by their national name in the same area centuries before that and the Serbs were there too. 'Who was there first' a thousand years ago should have no bearing on modern politics and that goes for all of us. We Croats have no right to claim all of Bosnia for example even though it was clearly apart of the medieval Croatian kingdom. Serbs do not have exclusivity to Kosovo because they were a majority once a few hundred years ago and Albanians don't get to claim everything because they believe they are the only legitimate 'Illyrians.' It's rather pathetic to use these 'historical arguments' and leads to nothing but circular reasoning and unresolvable conflict.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on May 8, 2012 5:55:39 GMT -5
Most of us South Slavs are Illyrian descendents especially those that hail from southern Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. We still preserve some customs and were are rather distinguishable from our cousins in the broader Slav family. There's no reason to deny this. Illyrians were only recorded as a name. No explicit language, custom, religion, civilization ever was identified that could be connected to illyrians. In fact, very few things are known about them, so trying to use modern customs (like the ones you claim about Herz/HR) to connect with Illyrians is not a valid method. Which customs are that any way, that Herz/Croats have but e.g. Serbians do not have?
|
|
|
Post by Croatian Vanguard on May 8, 2012 6:04:35 GMT -5
^^ That's a good point Pyrros. I do not disagree with you. Unfortunately there isn't much evidence to tell us what the Illyrians were exactly like. It's more from deductive reasoning that we arrive to some conclusions.
We have customs such as ganga ( kenge in Albanian) which has no real explanation of its origin and its seen mostly throughout Western Herzegovina and inland Dalmatia as well as among some of the Albanian highlanders. It's not a Slav custom because its not shared among the larger Slav community nor is it a Turkish or Muslim custom because we don't see it in those parts of the world either. It's pretty region specific so it's reasonable ( but not 100% factual) to assume its origin is in the area.
A 12th century historical record in Dubrovnik cites that people heard ganga in the Albanian language around its mountainous countryside for example.
And I didn't claim that such customs were ETHNIC specific but REGIONAL specific which can obviously include Croats and Serbs as well as others.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on May 8, 2012 6:09:43 GMT -5
^^ Aha, insightful thanx.
|
|