|
|
Post by tripwire on Nov 7, 2007 0:30:01 GMT -5
Good for you. Natives of the western hemisphere didn't leave a written history of their people, too. But everyone recognizes them as the original people of the Western continents. Where these facts go depend on the descendants of these northern barbarian tribes. They will have the privilege to determine the destiny of these facts authenticated by ancient historians. Pithy? Reread your own comments to understand its meaning.
|
|
Kanaris
Amicus
This just in>>>> Nobody gives a crap!
Posts: 9,589
|
Post by Kanaris on Nov 7, 2007 6:36:55 GMT -5
Natives peoples in N.A. are recognized as drunks and thieves .... living on reserves. Have you ever visited a reserve? No one gives a chit about them..
|
|
|
|
Post by Arxileas on Nov 7, 2007 7:43:58 GMT -5
Pithy comments cannot hide what is fact. Even ancient Hellenic historians acknowledge these facts. Seems like only Greece cannot accept what everyone has, from Greek sources. Depends where this source is based on ? an Albanian biased source perhaps ? I have seen articles based on distorted lies. Care to provide where you got your sources. You know there isn't even a shred of any evidence of Albanians being around before the 900 let alone any real connection with the Illyrians. Not a shred of any evidence. And around 900 AD and onwards till recently they were known to be nomads as not a very orginised group of peoples. Now I shrug my shoulders trying to figure out what the hell is this gonna prove for them ? I mean there is no evidence of them even being around 700 AD. I don't know, maybe one day all will be revealed ? By the real historians and not by ultra nationalists  |
|
|
|
Post by Teuta1975 on Nov 7, 2007 12:00:10 GMT -5
Dear Arxhileas, Epir was Epir...always inhabitated by Albanians WITH a few Greek Minority....There is nothing written in ALbanian since neighbors didn't allow that (recmember what the cause of the Second Balkanic War was??? Serbia, Montenegro, Greece, and Bulgaria did not wanted to allow Albanian state)...but there is plenty written BY YOUR historians: Herodotes, Strabo, Tuqiditi, when speak for Epir called the area and the people Barbar, and also call Apolonia and Durres Colonies. Can you tell me where is Epirus (actually its tribes) in PanHelenic League of that time?  ? I don't remember very well... In the 14th Century, in the document "Elegy for Manuel Paleologu" is written that "once upon a time, in this area used to live the Illirian tribes of Chaons, Molosis, Thespriots...etc. and today continue to live the descendants of those tribes, Albanians, who are "genos Illiricon"... As of this, the term Epir was almost forgotten in Medievalism by Greeks, but it would reappear in the beginning of 1913 from the Greek Ministry the term Vorio-Epir, since was the time when Cameria was taken. (we notice here political concern) The Despotat of Epir has had a few dinasties; the first one was Serbian and the last one was Albanian - Gjin Bue Shpata. So, when we speak of Despotat of Epir and Byzant, we shouldn't make any mistake by identifying those with Greeks. We call it Despotat of Epir (which is a modern term), but it was the First Despotat of Arta. Now, in the 1210, in the Document called "Venedicas" (the document this time is in Latin) we find: "all the population which inhabits the area in front of Corfu is Albanian." Also, in the 14th Century, the Archobishop of Corfu, Jorgos Vardanis, in the correspondence with the Archobishop of Athens, said more or less that: "this area is inhabitated by barbarophone" Also, in the same book, 1820, Athanasos Ksalida (which you are very proud, and me too), wrote the "Geography of Albania" and is quoted: "Epir, or South Albania, is inhabitated by Albanians but there are a few Greek colonies in Epir" In Greek sounds more beautiful: "Epir diladi Alvanos) Now I like this for two reasons: first, he doesn't divide the Vorio Epir but mentions and includes ALL Epir part Second: he proves that Albania and Albanians existed by that time (not as a State) but as an Etnity, as Etnos, Country, Language, Geographic and Political Notion. In the Peace Conference of 1919, in Paris, the French and England wanted to annex Vorio Epir to Greece, but USA opposed and sent observers in that area. The outcome was that all POPULATION of that area spoke Albanian!!! So, when Sir. (Qirie) Venizelo, the Rep. of Greece, was brought in front of the Council of the 10th, and was asked what language is spoken in that area (read Dionisis for more info) he answered: "in Northen Epir is spoken Albanian, but is not relevant, because I have 4 Ministers in my Government who speak Albanian (happened them to be Arvanits), but important is that they feel Helens!!!!!!  And of course, because of all these facts, North Epir was annexed to Albania. Not that political interests of big powers weren't included, but they since there existed this prove as this one....that the population is not Greek, France, England, and Greece lost the "trade" So, in the course of History, you'll find many documents (especially in Vatican and Byzaqntin Chronicles) where Epir is Albanian WITH some Greek minorities in it. Also in Antiquity. Before coming out with proclamations such as : Epir was Greek" please try to comprehend what was Epir. |
|
|
|
Post by leandros nikon on Nov 7, 2007 13:56:09 GMT -5
Epirus was never great according to the greeks of the south...it was primitive,poor and isolated instead...it's people were dressed in skins...there were almost no theaters and stadiums,what did you expect? there is a duality as it concerns the meaning of the term barbarian...it means the one who speaks a foreign language and also the primitive...we do know now the language of epirotes,dont we? why dont you have a look here... illyria.proboards19.com/index.cgi?board=hellasgreece&action=display&thread=1192934048&page=1 |
|
|
|
Post by leandros nikon on Nov 7, 2007 14:10:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Nov 7, 2007 14:12:03 GMT -5
The term "barbaroi" was not implicative of just backwards. Its mainly reserved for non-Greek speakers. similarly you had the Aetolians, who were considered to be "just-barely Greeks" along with the Thessalians. A barbarian was not necessarily backwards, for instance the Greeks did not consider the Persians to be backwards, yet they still called them barbarians and Greeks considered Egyptians to be older then them, yet they still called the Gypo's "barbarians". The term even applied to the Romans during early contacts.
By the second century AD, at the time when most of our sources are from, all of these outlying regions were hellenized, but Thucydides comments may give us of an impression of a culture that while increasingly hellenized, still spoke a language that differentiated enough for them to be regarded as non-Greek. Or, perhaps, the region was more ethnically mixed then most Greeks would like to admit.
|
|
|
|
Post by leandros nikon on Nov 7, 2007 14:14:49 GMT -5
i do know that the greek aetolians and thessalians were also called barbarians by some...this supports my thesis about the duality of the term barbarian...they were also much less advanced in relation to the hellenic south...
By talking about hellenised people in epirus,we might forget the fact that this region was the birthplace of dorian greeks and probably the greek nation in general...dorians were always there,and the south greek culture was imported in this isolated area by some of their leaders during the hellenistic period...theaters were build,philosophers were invited and so on... in Epirus AND Macedonia...it is not that these people were fcoreigners,they were greeks o.k but culturally backwards...allthough some thracoillyrian minority possibly existed...
|
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Nov 7, 2007 14:51:42 GMT -5
Aetolians and Thessalians were backwards, but they were never referred to as barbarian. No matter how barbaric their habits were, even as "barely Greek", they were Greek nonetheless. The term "barbarian" seems to be applied consistently on the Chaonians, the most northern ones.
With respect to the Chaonians, I personally think that they were heavily influenced by people to the north of them and were in effect closer to them then their neighbors more to the south.
|
|
|
|
Post by kartadolofonos on Nov 7, 2007 16:16:58 GMT -5
tripwire stop to spread false propaganda information
to their north were the Illyrians
dont forget the GrEEk colonies of the Dorian who have intermingled with the Celtic Illyrians in Illyria and influenced them with HELLENIC culture and greek language
to ther south were the Epirotes Molossians (Greek: Ìïëïóóïß Molossoi) were an ancient Greek[1] tribe that settled Epirus during Mycenaean times. On their northeast frontier they had the Chaonians and to their southern frontier the kingdom of the Thesprotians,
Plutarch [3] tells us that the Thesprotians, the Chaonians and the Molossians were the three principal clusters of Greek-speaking[4] most powerful tribes of Epirus
|
|
|
|
Post by leandros nikon on Nov 7, 2007 16:25:48 GMT -5
ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2002/2002-08-12.htmlBryn Mawr Classical Review 2002.08.12 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Irad Malkin (ed.), Ancient Perceptions of Greek Ethnicity. Center for Hellenic Studies Colloquia, 5. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote:Irad Malkin examines the role of the outsider's view on Epirus in his "Greek Ambiguities: Between 'Ancient Hellas' and 'Barbarian Epirus'" (187-212). Epirus provides an interesting parallel to Macedon in that the ancient sources reflect the full spectrum of attitudes about its ethnicity: it is Greek (having good genealogical links through the Nostoi), it is primitive Greek (how "we" used to be); it is barbaros (customs alien to those of the Corcyran and Corinthian colonists on the coast). Malkin argues that despite many features that would normally allow a region to be deemed Greek (notably language and mythology), the outsiders' impression of the colonisers and then historiographers (of the south) left an indelible stamp on later perception of the region. This reiterates the importance of the viewer's perspective and the relativity of the question.
|
|
|
|
Post by Teuta1975 on Nov 8, 2007 1:21:35 GMT -5
Barbar Bar-bar has a linguistic meaning, which is been changed lately and is used as "backward" which is not accurate. As Toskaliku said, Greeks did call Egyptians and Persians "Barbar", but they did called Illirians "bar-bar" as well, same as Epiriots and Macedonians!!! Did Greeks call Spartans "bar-bar" ?? The term itself Bar-bar means exactly the difference in language, so a language uncomprehensible that sounds like : bar-bar-bar-bar...when listening. Tukiditi clearly differes the Helens and the MAIN Epiriot tribes. He differes the Main tribes, and those were not that backward. Especially in the second book, during the military composition of 429 BC he states: "From Helens there are Ambraks, Anaktorias, Lukadas, and 1000 Hipolits from Peloponesis. From the Barabars there were 1000 Chaons, and together with them were the Thespriots, the Molosis, the Atinats, the Pervej, and the Orests". As you see, in this expedition, he doesn't call the Ambraks, the Anaktorias and Lukadas Barbarians. In another pasage, Tuqiditi calls Barbar Persians, Taulants, Illirians, Thraks, Epiriots and Macedonians. The same term has used Strabo, Skym, Polib, Liv, Plini, etj. The difference of language is affermed by Tuqidit himself when wrote: "The inhabitants of the Anfilok City learned the Greek language from the Ambrakas when they arrived, the rest of Anfilioks are Barbars". Simple logic: If Anfilok were Greek, why should they learn their "own" language??? Also we have the note of Stefan Byzantin, who called Athamans "Illirians" Also in the Wars against Pers, exept one Chorinth CLOLONY, no Epir tribe participated. Also, when Perikle invited the delegats of Greeks in the Pan-Helenic Conference of Athens, exept (again) the Colony of Chorinth, Ambraki, none other of Epir Tribes were addmited. Strabo justifies this by saying: "the population of this area has had a familiarity with the population of Macedonia and Illiria pertinent to LANGUAGE, customs, and moral"... ARCHEOLOGY: In the hills of Dropull there are some Tumbs, which are similar to those descovered in North Albania. The amphors are identical with those discovered in Vajze (Albania) and Mat (Albania). So they were very simmilar to Illirian amphors. Another discovery of Main importance are the archeological materials found in the places inhabited by Illirians of Chaonia. Also in the same area, were discovered the cups which are very simmilar with those discovered in places inhabited by Illirians of Gajtan and those of Rosunj. Also there are some very interesting needles (worked in double) which are discovered in Finiq of Butrint and identical needles are found in other areas inhabited by Illirians. The same needles are discovered in tombs of Mat and Gajtan, in Durrahum and Apolonia. All these belong to the neolitic period. Those needles were produced in Illiria and were considered as the local handicraft. ONOMASTIC In the scripts discovered in Dodona, according to Nilson, there are almost 50 names of Illirian Origin. As in Butrint, the number is 40. The same names are found in Illiria and Epir. Typical name is the name Adamat, which is found 4 times in Butrint scripts and also on the COINS of Scutari, (North Albania). On th Coins of the II century BC as well as Coins found in a tomb in Dyrrahym. The same name is to be found in the Eastern Epir, Thesali and Macedonia. The name Annia is found in Albania in different forms such as: Annai, Annaius (as a male name in Dyrrah), Anna in the scripts of Dodona and Anna in Dalmatia. Mr. H. Krahe and other scholars considered this name as Illir. Another name is the name Genth, found in the scripts of Butrint. This name is similar to the Illrian King of Adrians, Genth, which is found in the Coin created by Genth himself. The same name is found in the tombs and coins of Dyrrahym. The other 2 names. Falakr and Falakrion, which were to be found 10 times in the scripts of Butrint, according to H. Krahe, are Illir "without doubts"/ Also many Illirian names are found in antiquity quoted by Tuqidit, regarding the Kings of Chaons, Thespriots, Atiutans and Parauej, where four of them are Illirians. If Epir Tribes were Helens, why on earth their Kings would hold Illirian names??? Also there is nothing helenic in the names of Epiriot areas such Adania (according to Hesyhit thus was called Molosia area once upon a time!), Prosabia, Thesproti, the inhabitans of which (according to Stefan Bizantin) were called Aigest. The same character possess the names of rivers Aou, Aheron, Ahelo and Thyamis, from which Cameria is called today and also the names of mountains such: Tomar, Asnau, Aeropus etc... (To be fair, I personally see it as exageration becasue Aheron sounds very Greek to me. T). But, is a fact that in their Coins, Illirians used Greek and Latin Letters. That clearly means that Illirians were Helenized and Romanized and not the other way around.
IF Epiriots were Helens, Strabo couldn't treat them as Bilingual (people who speak two languages) Also the Danish Geographer, Malte Brun, sai that: Etolia and Akarnania were considered by Greeks HALF barbar.... This time. Strabo and Plutark, affirm that Epiriots speak a different language, which is the same with Macedonian! Also Pukvili when speaks for Akarnani and Etoli, quotes: "these areas, (in his time) were called Albania and the inhabitants Albanians/ Also the Historian Teodor Momsen in his work: "The Story of Antique Rome" quotes "... the brave Epiriots, Albanians of Antiquity"... Also should I remind you Lajbnic, the greatest philosoph of his time? Same as Erik Hemp, based in the comparartive linguistic called Albanian language as successor of Illirian language.
His contribution consists in three lettes he sent to the Royal library of Berlin, known in history as "The Albanians letters of Lajbnic", where in the first letter of January 24, 1705, he writes: "... the language of antique Illirians may have existed somewhere in Epir"...
The same idea of Illirian language of Epiriots, exept Lajbnic, we find it at J. G. F. Herder and J. E. Tunman, who said: "In Epir used to live non-Helenic population, whom spoke Macedonian and which is the same with Illirian language". Same idea have: F. Bop, J. R. F. Ksilander, J. G. F. Han, J. F. Falmerajer, T. Mommsen and P. Kreçmerku, who said: "For the whole North Group of these tribes, from the borders of Epir area, since in the beginning, at least since the time of Herodotus, is being used the common name the Illirians, or in more ancient times, Hilirians. This name is likely to have originated from the South, from Illyrii (proprie dicti Plin. III-144), Male II-3) and was spread later on from Greeks and was applied to all the tribes similar to them (Illirians), during the migration through North"!!!! (I am a little scepticist for this theory. T) While Hansjërg Frëmmer, in his book "the Illirians" published in 1988, said: "the division in parts of Illiria after the dominium of Romans over Gent King, was reflected on the division of provices of Dioklecian Konstantin, Hinterland of Dyrrahym and Apolonia, respectivelly as: Epirus nova (New Epir) part of Macedonia's diocese, whilst the area of Scutari as the Province of Prevalitana, in the Diocese of Dakia. Both of these antique Illirian territory, in the time of August, were included in the provicnces of Senat and later were separated from the Empire, were included in the Greek part and in that of Pyrro". |
|
|
|
Post by Arxileas on Nov 8, 2007 3:10:38 GMT -5
teuta we've been through this before; www.network54.com/Forum/65399/thread/1184307514/last-1184624373/Phocians+and+Thebans+not+Greek--Should we continue over there ? Or should we tell Nikilianos along with the other Greeks that he Nikilianos wasted his time ? Or that we should follow his example of trying to explain things to you were a waste of time ? I think so, you seem to have a bad habit of this. You cannot be taken seriously as your actions are that of propagandist...I mean noone and I do mean none, continues this unless they have an insecurity problem trying to fill in the missing gaps to their own history. ;D This is not meant to be directed as an insult but the way you go on about it, makes it so laughable. Contrary to the widely false perception that the term "Barbarian" means "non-Greek" there are mainly, literary sources revealing "Barbarian" was used by Greeks also against other Greek tribes mostly as an insult, nothing more. |
|
|
|
Post by leandros nikon on Nov 8, 2007 6:31:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by leandros nikon on Nov 8, 2007 11:51:09 GMT -5
also,i supose that teutas is using sites like these...: tesh.albemigrant.com/tet2003_5.htmi dislike propaganda sites,that's why i always try to find the original text,from independent and serious sites...tufts,univesity of chicago and so on... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... now,smthing u might agree that is interesting... penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Procopius/Buildings/4B*.html |
|
|
|
Post by tripwire on Nov 8, 2007 21:50:16 GMT -5
And around 900 AD and onwards till recently they were known to be nomads as not a very orginised group of peoples. Since you refer to evidence, what is your evidence of this? Cite sources please. |
|
|
|
Post by Teuta1975 on Nov 9, 2007 0:24:55 GMT -5
Arxhileas,
We have discussed already the "Barbarian" issue, but since is not clear yet, I think there is nothing wrong to re-discuss it.
In discussions we have had, many questions remained with unclear answers. Because if you offer me a text where the ancient historians wrote that they used the term "barbar" for purposis of distiguishing those with "inferior culture" and "those who spoke another language" I would appriciate it.
Also I think the FIRST thing an historian MUST clarify is WHY one is using the term. If there is any of this evidence, please show it to me. If not, then the historians used the term as a notion well known and accpeted by all the others so no need to explain it.
And don't worry because I don't take your words as insults, even though you "accuse" me of being "nationalist", when I never made statements such: "Epir was Greek" or "Epir was Albanian". I simply have said: Epir was Epir". But we must see also what the others have said or writen, and if those claims are nationalistic, we must find historical arguments to present. Since the historians have used the term Barbarian, some people tend to abuse it, either by saying was used as population which spoke a foreign language, or by saying it was because of Culture Inferiority. Now, who is abusing here?!!!!!
Leandros,
If you told me that your historians NEVER used to say anything about people who spoke another language in Epir, (and quote), I wouldn't care that much for the site.
|
|
|
|
Post by leandros nikon on Nov 9, 2007 14:25:57 GMT -5
There were trully some historians who called epirotes barbarians...but,if epirotes were illyrians indeed,why doesnt any ancient historian say so? have you ever found any phrase such as "illyrian molossi"? |
|
|
|
Post by kartadolofonos on Nov 9, 2007 15:18:55 GMT -5
[glow=blue,2,300]Epirotes , Macedonians were barbarians, although their ancestry was Dorian GrEEks !!![/glow] Albanians want to become next like Fyromanians in the Balkan falsified and copied Greek history |
|
|
|
Post by Teuta1975 on Nov 9, 2007 16:59:07 GMT -5
There is the book "Elegy for Manuel Paleologu", but I don't recall the writer.
Also Stefan Byzantin called Athamans Illirians. You can find it in his correspondence letters, just that I don't recall very well what was the book called!
Sorry for my poor memory on providing you with the exact page and paragraph, but if you are really interested, you could find the first book in the library and the second one searching by the name. It would be a great help for me too.
But who called Greek Molosis?
|
|
? I don't remember very well... 
