|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Aug 13, 2009 20:19:49 GMT -5
Interesting, but that wouldn't explain why there are Dinarics in the Kuban because while the Serboi were on the Kuban, they were a purely Iranic Sarmatian people with little Slavic admixture. Also, the similarity between parts of Ukraine and Serbia can in part be attributed to the large migration of Serbs (other Balkan peoples who eventually formed the majority) to the Russian Empire during the Ottoman era (Slavo Serbia, New Serbia, etc.) Srbobran, please tell me how many Serbs settled in New Serbia? Also tell me about these other Balkanites that settled as well. According to you there would had to have been more migration from the Balkans to Ukraine rather than the other way around. You are dribbling crap.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Aug 13, 2009 20:55:33 GMT -5
The Atlanto-Mediterrean race is common in serbia like the pontid. Maybe Aadmin can give you more details regarding the Pontids of south-eastern serbia!.
With your racial map above, it shows serbia not overly strongly Dinarid, l agree this race is the most prominent race, but the western balkan nations like Bosnia, Croatia or even Slovenia are more strongly Adriatic!.
Pyrro's discription was spot on!.
|
|
|
Post by srbobran on Aug 13, 2009 21:43:59 GMT -5
Hehe. What's the matter, b***h, did I strike a nerve? Aren't you gonna reply to the rest of my post or are you silently admitting you're wrong and you don't know what the **** you're talking about?
In 1757, in New Serbia, there were 5,482 people. In 1763, there were 3,992 (males only). Whats there to tell about these other Balkanites, the Russian Tzar offered land to any peoples living within the Ottoman Empire, it attracted so many Romanians for example, that they eventually outnumbered the Serbs after which the province was named.
I'm a Serb and nothing but a Serb. You can be proud that you're a Slav, European, Human or whatever the **** you wanna be proud of, but I am a Serb and I don't owe allegiance to any other group, ****face.
|
|
|
Post by insomniac on Aug 13, 2009 21:50:03 GMT -5
You can be proud that you're a Slav, European, Human
A serb = slav = european = human. They are not mutually exclusive. LOL.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Aug 13, 2009 22:12:52 GMT -5
"IllyroBulgarobran, please tell me how many Serbs settled in New Serbia? Also tell me about these other Balkanites that settled as well. According to you there would had to have been more migration from the Balkans to Ukraine rather than the other way around. You are dribbling crap."
Arsenije, l don't understand why your labelling Srbobran and other south serbs as Bulgars?. Believe me brate, one day when you see the light, you will regret that you've labelled us south serbs as Bulgars.
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Aug 13, 2009 23:01:10 GMT -5
You just proved your self you are wrong. Only a few thousand Serbs went there - exactly. Now you're saying that Romanians had an influence also which created this tall Dinaric stock noted in Ukraine lol. You're explanation for Ukrainian Dinarics as Balkan immigrants is BS.
Novi, Srbobran is really here nor there. He doesn't know really what he is but he prettty much has a communist Yugoslav mentality with a dislike for religion & tries to create an Illyrian connection with Serbs through a few pissy examples. I wouldn't be the least surprised if he's a Partizan supporter.
Also Novi I don't think south east Torlak Serbs are Bulgarians. I think they are slavs that are more similar to Bulgarians but who identified for the most part as Serbs.
|
|
|
Post by srbobran on Aug 13, 2009 23:33:12 GMT -5
Yeah, about ten thousand 350 years ago. If those people bred and reproduced (which they did), then a few centuries later, they would indeed be a significant number today so it makes sense. I'm certainly not saying that it accounts for all Dinarics but a good number, yes. And, correct be if I'm wrong, but the Dinaric zones in Slovakia could (and were by your own source Coon) be attributed to high Romanian presence in the regions of Slovakia that were Dinaric. So, prove me wrong buddy.
I don't know what I really am? I am a Serb. Period, nothing else. You on the other hand are "Slavic", "European" or God knows what else. I am one thing and one thing only, Serbian and you can't say the same for yourself. Whose confused?
I am no communist, I'm sure that if we were to compare views yours would be far more statist and communist than I. I like elements of libertarianism which is a polar opposite of communism although I really don't fall completely into a category. As for Yugoslavs, seriously, only a stubborn idiot wouldn't say that we basically aren't the same peoples with different religions and a few minor cultural differences. Certainly no reason to shed blood and kill each other over. Why aren't the "subhuman, inferior" Albanians murdering each other because of their different faiths?
Pissy examples? Where the fvck are your examples? You don't even have pissy ones, you're just repeating the s**t your parents told you. I have historical references dating from the early middle ages right up to the 19th century. You wanna see them? (although i've posted them before).
And no, I'm not a Partizan supporter. My ancestors were all Chetniks and I support the Chetniks.
And no, we aren't more similar to Bulgarians (although all Serbs in general are similar to them). I have never set foot in Bulgaria, I speak Serbian. I have attended Serbian Orthodox Churches and I learn about Serbian history.
You know whats really retarded? You'll accept some freakinGerman as fvcking Serbs but you won't accept an actual Serb from Kosovo as a Serbia? You disgust me. Kosovo was the first place settled by Serbs upon our arrival so I'm probably "more" of a Serb than you are (my family has roots in Kosovo dating back seven hundred years when my family name was mentioned in a chronicle listing them as being present in Brankovic's army at Kosovo) People with your divisive attitude are the reason Serbs were never united, the reason they never will be united, and the reason why our fvcking national motto is utterly meaningless to us.
Also, as for your little theory, you fvcked yourself with that too. If there is a concentration of Dinarics in the Kurgan and in White Serbia/ other places we settled then that would mean we never got ethnically Slavicized and that they ethnically remained Iranian Sarmatians.
|
|
gavrilo
Amicus
Vi ste svi banane
Posts: 840
|
Post by gavrilo on Aug 14, 2009 0:53:53 GMT -5
ej, mi smo svi SRBI, nema veze da li se ponasamo kao bugari ili turci (bosna) ili madari (vojvodina) ili hrvati (krajina), etc.
just so you guys can help my stupid ass understand your persepctives...arsenje, you believe that we are more dinaric, while srbobran doesnt?
also,
Posted by Novi Pazar on Today at 3:55 The Atlanto-Mediterrean race is common in serbia like the pontid. Maybe Aadmin can give you more details regarding the Pontids of south-eastern serbia!.
With your racial map above, it shows serbia not overly strongly Dinarid, l agree this race is the most prominent race, but the western balkan nations like Bosnia, Croatia or even Slovenia are more strongly Adriatic!.
what exactly do you mean by that? i am confused as to the difference in dinaric and adriatic? help me out here i am obviously far behind all guys in balkan knowledge.
|
|
gavrilo
Amicus
Vi ste svi banane
Posts: 840
|
Post by gavrilo on Aug 14, 2009 1:06:18 GMT -5
i looked up pontids and found nothing concrete. should i pm aadmin? does he answer q's like that?
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Aug 14, 2009 1:53:25 GMT -5
Arsenije common everyday nišlici i nišlike use cases.
Today my bosanka mom inlaw mistakenly said "u kuhinju" instead of "u kuhinji", you know what i mean? Under 40 years under bulgarian priests and schools i pretty much can suppose this case (lokative) would be lost.
guys relax, what matters is the brains, the mentality, kindness and from Vranje to Subotica, from Negotin to Banja Luka SERBS ARE THE NICEST PPL I HAVE COME ACROSS in my entire life.
Guys, i think Gavrilo's post explains many things. ex-yu is mixed from all slavs in the physical boundaries of yugoslavia.
That said i like that my kids will easily learn Russian/Slovak/etc... Its nice that serbs are very close to the west, yet with an eye on the cultural things on the slavic eeastern part of europe.
MIR!!
|
|
gavrilo
Amicus
Vi ste svi banane
Posts: 840
|
Post by gavrilo on Aug 14, 2009 1:57:29 GMT -5
Lol pyrros is right, MIR! Molim vas.
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Aug 14, 2009 2:28:52 GMT -5
Gavrilo, Srbobran thinks that Serbs are pretty much entirely Illyrians & Thracians who decided to adopt the slavic language from who knows how. Nobody has offered an explanation as to how a group of slavs in miniscule numbers would be able to impose their language on a newly settled teritory on whom the inhabitants were a mighty race of Dinarics well familiar with the terrain. I think of the Bulgars and how it was possible for a minority to impose themselves and their name on a more populous group, however their language was not imposed. I see no advantage that could have been gained from speaking slavic as trading ties where further south with the Greeks and Romans and we can basically say that all existing people (the Illyrians) except for the Albanians spoke a Romance language as they were within the Roman Empire for centuries & referred to as Vlachs. The south slavs were also physically cut off from the rest of slavic Europe which further decreases the value of speaking a slavic language. Now genetics is really not helping us either way. Haplogroups are thousands of years old. Older than any ethnic group. The simple fact that our Balkan genetics overlap so much will Albanians and that Albanians are Dinaric also does not necessarily mean that we are just native. Our genes also largely overlap with other areas more than what we would think & with whom we have no shared history. Pick any haplogroup and you will see how vastly distributed it is. There are further things to be considered. Which haplogroup dominates with breeding? What physical traits dominate? Also the subclades are hardly ever considered. We might say I is the Illyrian gene but will an Albanian I look like a Hercegovinan I? And why is I also high in the Caucuses near were Serbs might have came from & along the way in slavic countries? As it is genetic anthropology fails to explain known historical movements. I'm not sure, I could be completely wrong but I'm suspecting that the migratory patterns of south slavs are far underestimated by genetic research & I'm using a bit of physical anthropology to explore the idea here. Srbobran the wannabe Illyrian has spun utter BS in the ideas I've put forth here. His response to me saying Balkan dinaric (Serb) migration to Ukraine was small... is that 10000ppl 350 years ago was big enough to leave a slav Dinaric trace & yet the slavs which are actually considered to have migrated in large numbers the other way apparently left no genetic trace here. He's actually saying the exact opposite that we left a Dinaric trace in Ukraine but slavs didn't here, that's how ridiculous his opposition to slavic migration is. Some other sh!t he's talking about like accepting Germans I don't even know what he's talking about. I'm also putting forth that Illyrian Dinarics are different to slavic Dinarics. Though Illyrians were still a bunch of different tribes so that could also explain our differences. I'm no expert in physical anthropology yet, but I have some observations like Serbs & Croats being long headed with straighter leptorrhine & concave or bulbous noses compared to the upside down pyramid head & concave nose of Albanians. I'm not convinced of anything yet. Just exploring some ideas out loud.
|
|
|
Post by chalkedon on Aug 14, 2009 3:08:14 GMT -5
Is there a way to determine what an illyrian gene is ? I still cant figure that out. I mean how do companies like Igenea claim that ? They do the same for thracian as well.. I dont get it...Dont you need a mummy or something to extract that gene to be able to compare ? Does anybody have knowledge on this ? By the way, i was thinking on doing that sampler from National Geographic. But I think I will just piss away the money. Like its been said...it will only show genes thousands of years old which would really be a general result. Since im half polish i would expect to see R1A right ? But then again so would half of europe. I still think this genetics business needs a lot of work to be done... But interesting nonetheless.. btw...poles are not all short. LOL ! We are taller than krauts are..thats for sure Everybody in my family is at least 5'11 ft tall. Not too mention diet had a major role to play, during communism kids didnt have the same diet they did today. Nonetheless polish kids are taller now than they were in the past. That is a factor that i think should be mentioned.
|
|
Nikola
Senior Moderator
Posts: 1,835
|
Post by Nikola on Aug 14, 2009 3:51:32 GMT -5
guys, having just spend a day in Nis, a week in NS and now a week in RS, (Brcko,Bijeljina) i can tell with certainty from what i have watched : a) The bosnians look 100% like tall Ukranians or like swedish villagers (more narrow heads in the cities). Their height is easily comparable to dutch or swedish. You can find one >= 2m tall man every 10 men or so. b) Srbianci from Nis are shorter and darker but still tall. You can find one man 2m tall every 20 men or so. Big chances you meet blond ppl here as well. c) In NS i am surprised to say that ppl on average are even a little bit shorter and darker. You can find the classical ex-yu towers, but the average guy is about 175 cm. You can find many blonde nice women but the majority is dark. just like greeks. Maybe its my impression, or i missed smth... but from Brcko to NS i noticed a huge gap. havn't been to rural Vojvodina tho.... Just a little bit in Sabac/Bogatic where ppl looked like NS ppl. Pyrros, I was wanting to ask you; since you travelled from Greece all the way up to the north Balkans, where elseo did you notice racial changes in people? Explain some more the people and their physical attributes in the different countries/regions. I (unfortunately) took a bus from Skopje to Ljubjana and didn't get to see people's looks progress into the Slovenians but to me, Slovenians look Germanic. But short Germanics. Some Croats also looked Germanic but some Balkan. Also, where did Greece end and Yugoslavs begin? (and no, this is not a loaded question)
|
|
|
Post by insomniac on Aug 14, 2009 4:40:49 GMT -5
Gavrilo, Srbobran thinks that Serbs are pretty much entirely Illyrians & Thracians who decided to adopt the slavic language from who knows how. Nobody has offered an explanation as to how a group of slavs in miniscule numbers would be able to impose their language on a newly settled teritory on whom the inhabitants were a mighty race of Dinarics well familiar with the terrain. I think of the Bulgars and how it was possible for a minority to impose themselves and their name on a more populous group, however their language was not imposed. I see no advantage that could have been gained from speaking slavic as trading ties where further south with the Greeks and Romans and we can basically say that all existing people (the Illyrians) except for the Albanians spoke a Romance language as they were within the Roman Empire for centuries & referred to as Vlachs. The south slavs were also physically cut off from the rest of slavic Europe which further decreases the value of speaking a slavic language. Now genetics is really not helping us either way. Haplogroups are thousands of years old. Older than any ethnic group. The simple fact that our Balkan genetics overlap so much will Albanians and that Albanians are Dinaric also does not necessarily mean that we are just native. Our genes also largely overlap with other areas more than what we would think & with whom we have no shared history. Pick any haplogroup and you will see how vastly distributed it is. There are further things to be considered. Which haplogroup dominates with breeding? What physical traits dominate? Also the subclades are hardly ever considered. We might say I is the Illyrian gene but will an Albanian I look like a Hercegovinan I? And why is I also high in the Caucuses near were Serbs might have came from & along the way in slavic countries? As it is genetic anthropology fails to explain known historical movements. I'm not sure, I could be completely wrong but I'm suspecting that the migratory patterns of south slavs are far underestimated by genetic research & I'm using a bit of physical anthropology to explore the idea here. Srbobran the wannabe Illyrian has spun utter BS in the ideas I've put forth here. His response to me saying Balkan dinaric (Serb) migration to Ukraine was small... is that 10000ppl 350 years ago was big enough to leave a slav Dinaric trace & yet the slavs which are actually considered to have migrated in large numbers the other way apparently left no genetic trace here. He's actually saying the exact opposite that we left a Dinaric trace in Ukraine but slavs didn't here, that's how ridiculous his opposition to slavic migration is. Some other sh!t he's talking about like accepting Germans I don't even know what he's talking about. I'm also putting forth that Illyrian Dinarics are different to slavic Dinarics. Though Illyrians were still a bunch of different tribes so that could also explain our differences. I'm no expert in physical anthropology yet, but I have some observations like Serbs & Croats being long headed with straighter leptorrhine & concave or bulbous noses compared to the upside down pyramid head & concave nose of Albanians. I'm not convinced of anything yet. Just exploring some ideas out loud. Arsenije, this is a very reasonable arguement. I don't know much about the last sentences but the rest of the arguement, you nailed it. Srbobran can bang his chest as much as he wants. There is only one scientific and logical conclusion. There is no way that a small group of "Slavic" people could've assimilated such a large group of people and impose their language upon them. That is just wishful thinking. It's obvious his pride got hurt. We Albs too have people who believe in fairytales similar to srbobran. Claiming all illyrians when most likely they are descendants from dacians and thracians and at most probably some eastern illyrian groups. Another flaw is claiming continuity based primarily on genetics. On what basis can you make claims when a "country's" genes overlap with those of others. When a people are so diverse? When we can only speculate as we dont have samples on what Illyrian actually were. Assuming they were l1b, this is distributed among many Balkans countries. Southern Albanians has around 17% of this gene. Vojvodina. mainland Croatia and northern Bosnia have a good chunk of R1a which is popular among the northern Slavs. What you gonna do about these people? Shun away three quarters of Serbia who is Slavic? Basically, srbobran is using genetics for all the wrong things. It makes no sense. If anything language and movement records can explain this part of history better.
|
|
|
Post by chalkedon on Aug 14, 2009 5:33:05 GMT -5
Tell me about it. We have a northern neighbor that swears their identity on genetics... ;D
|
|
|
Post by fazlinho on Aug 14, 2009 5:36:52 GMT -5
Are you kidding me people???
Adopting the languages of your master has been a process seen 100000 of times in history, there is nothing absurd at all about that fact what's absurd is denying it.
How do you think people living in Marocco adopted the language of some tribes in the Arab peninsula? How do you think Brazil speaks Portuguese? Do you think they got 200 millions of Portuguese immigrants? How do african countries like Mozambique speaks Portuguese too? Why do people speak Russian on the streets in Kazakstan nowadays?
So what exactly is so incredible in thinking that the indigenous Balkan tribes adopted the language of the Slavs that came to rule here??
|
|
|
Post by chalkedon on Aug 14, 2009 5:43:33 GMT -5
why adopt the language of the slavs ? I dont get it...what made the slavs more superiour to the indeginous balkan tribes ? Were the indeginous ppl completely overwhelmed by the numbers ?
|
|
|
Post by fazlinho on Aug 14, 2009 5:52:31 GMT -5
They came to rule and imposed themselves. Again, what made Portuguese superior in Brazil? People could have continued to use their native tongue... there are a lot of psychological factors involved, as perceiving the language of the ruler as "superior" "better" and so on.
|
|
|
Post by chalkedon on Aug 14, 2009 5:56:25 GMT -5
understood...^^^
the portugese and spaniards were light years ahead both in warfare and in technology. You are referring to amazon tribes in south america against the conquistadors. It wasnt a fair fight...in spite of this though, there are still areas in mexico and south america that STILL SPEAK their native tongue.
|
|