|
Post by Novi Pazar on Nov 26, 2008 19:51:27 GMT -5
"Novi stop dreaming the fyroms were ever Serbs."
Ioan, don't take it personally, l admire your contributions here, but l'm posting evidence from various historians. As l have said above, l too before finding all the information, was very critical to believe that these people are of serbian origin. Most Serbs don't know the history of vardar at all because:
1. There parents were never taught about in schools 2. Most Serbs don't give a crap 3. Communism prevented serbs from ever knowing 4. Communism encouraged a separte 'Macedonian' identity
|
|
|
Post by serban on Nov 27, 2008 4:08:38 GMT -5
Cvijic talks about slavophone populations in Macedonia as well as those in what is now western Bulgaria and southeast Serbia as one without clearly defined ethnicity (neither Bulgarian or Serbian one) and one that viewed itself as simply being Slav (with clearly Byzantine culture) up to 19th-20th century. Cvijic o Makedoniji: Najveca mesavina naroda u Evropi (Cvijic on Macedonia: Biggest Mix of people in Europe) linkUse bellow tool is you do not understand Serbian (but click on Croatian as it is written in Latin characters) translate.google.com/That's the opinion of a Serbian "scientist". It has zero value. The same "scientists" that claim the Romanians (the so-called Vlachs) in Timocka Krajina are Romanianized Serbs and not Romanians. According to your "scientists" "logic" the few Serbs of Timocka Krajina that have not been Romanianized are in fact Slavicized Thracians and not Serbs, because when the Slavs arrived in present-day Timocka Krajina they found the Triballi, a Thracian tribe and perhaps many Romans (Romanized Thracians). Torlaks, "Macedonians" and Gorans are Bulgarians.
|
|
|
Post by serban on Nov 27, 2008 4:09:45 GMT -5
You haven't proved anything, again l ask, show me evidence. The wikipedia link is the one l used and it describes the dialect as a serbian dialect. Torlak dialects are almost identical to Shop dialects with a little bit more Serbian influence. The grammar is almost identical to the Shop grammar but the vocabulary has many Serbian words, many of whom are probably used by Shop speakers in the Western Outlands too. Torlak dialects are Bulgarian dialects, not what your "linguists" say. The presence of definite article and the lack of most case ending like in Shop dialects of Bulgarian are major Bulgarian features. This is from wikipedia page about Torlak dialects: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torlak_dialect"One of the earliest literary monuments influenced by Torlakian dialects is Manuscript from Temska from 1762 in which its author Kiril Zhivkovich from Pirot considered his language "Simple Bulgarian"." and "The recent screening of the film Zona Zamfirova by director Zdravko Šotra attracted huge popularity in Serbia and Montenegro. However, many spectators, especially from northern Serbia, commented that "the film was good but it really needs subtitles"." Why would you need subtitles when you claim to understand "Macedonian" "lanugage" without a translator? So you can understand a foreign "language" but not "Serbian dialects". Again "Macedonians", Torlaks and Gorans are Bulgarian just like Shops are Bulgarian.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Nov 27, 2008 7:38:48 GMT -5
^ Search in your library for Joseph Dobrovsky, he considered Bulgarian to be a dialect of serbian. Again, in that wikipedia link it states that Torlakian is a serbian dialect, its a sub-dialect of Shtokavian. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ShopiLook in the link above under Vocabulary, there is a table.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Nov 27, 2008 7:47:11 GMT -5
"That's the opinion of a Serbian "scientist". It has zero value. The same "scientists" that claim the Romanians (the so-called Vlachs) in Timocka Krajina are Romanianized Serbs and not Romanians. According to your "scientists" "logic" the few Serbs of Timocka Krajina that have not been Romanianized are in fact Slavicized Thracians and not Serbs, because when the Slavs arrived in present-day Timocka Krajina they found the Triballi, a Thracian tribe and perhaps many Romans (Romanized Thracians). " "some Vlach-speakers were formerly Slavs (such as in the village of Šljivar near Zaječar and the village of Slatina near Bor, where Serbs had been assimilated as Vlachs for centuries) or even Roma (such as in Lukovo)." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlachs_of_SerbiaI don't understand your stance towards the serbs serban, you remind me of cognate.
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Nov 27, 2008 7:58:35 GMT -5
Spot on. I have watched this film. It is really a nice one, and the director has stuck to the dialect of Nis. I bet I understood bigger number of words the characters used than Novi.
|
|
|
Post by ljubotan on Dec 1, 2008 17:19:06 GMT -5
Hey Novi,
Just got back from the holidays and saw your post.
In reference to the names, just as many Serbian names exist in our village I never understood why there were just as many Maco/Bulgarian one's. For instance, Simeon, Krume, Mirce, Mitko, etc. Also, even though we have 'lj' and 'nj' in the alphabet, you will never hear those pronounciations in Macedonian conversation. For instance, my nic is 'ljubotan' but we pronounce it just 'lubotan'. This is not the same for all other Serbs in Ex Yugo.
Again, I completely agree that there were Serbs that migrated to Vardar during medieval times, but they were very few compared to the Bulgarian element that was already present. I think for the most part in NW Macedonia there was never an clear ethnic definition.
In regards to language, you can hear more Maco accents over the Serbian border than Serbian in Macedonia. Surely you hear our Serbian accents in the north but we have zero Serbian grammer, while you do have Mak grammar with Vranje, Leskovac, Nis etc. I think 100yrs ago it was more pronounced but a lot of that population died out.
Many Serbs feel that Sumadija and South Serbia don't speak 'proper Serbian'. They contend that original Serbian is spoken in Hercegovina/Montenegro/Western Serbia. If Serbia thought we were Serbs they had the opportunity to define 'sakam' etc as such but they didn't.
The Serbian element in Vardar is most relevant in NW Macedonia but that's it, everything else comes from the tribes that made up the Bulgarian nation. We need to be fair about that. Remember, when Maco's speak in any of the Maco dialects, Serbians make fun of how we talk and say they don't understand but Bulgarians don't.
We need clear evidence that Serbs from Raska actually settled parts of macedonia.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 1, 2008 18:57:15 GMT -5
^ I hope you had a good time Ljubotan, l suppose its your opinion but l'm literally showing you historical quotes that l have found, our Bulgarian friends here will struggle to find anything pre 19th century when the Turkish backed Exarchos was in full swing imposing Bulgarisation onto the population.
|
|
|
Post by ljubotan on Dec 1, 2008 19:58:09 GMT -5
I had a nice time seeing the folks and the rest of my family. In Detroit my fellow 'Vratnicani' from the selo Vratnica, Macedonia, built a Serbian Orthodox Church about 5yrs ago. We're about 3000 strong in Detroit and everyone wanted the church under the Serbian church. These folks worked the last 35yrs in America saving to build the Serbian church below: vratnicausa.com/geeklog/public_html//mediagallery/index.php
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 1, 2008 20:49:16 GMT -5
^ My hat goes off to those hardworking people
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Dec 2, 2008 3:54:45 GMT -5
uou ljubotan I love what you ve said. When u start thinking about it, there are no big differences between Bulgarians and fyrom people. And this after 130 years not living in the same state. And that after very strong Serbian influence over you. And that after imposing the Serbian alphabeth over you... Does one need more evidences we are one? I dont think so. We are the same. Fyrom was part of Bulgaria when the Bulgarian nation emerged. We all (Bulgarians and fyrom people) have mixed origin: mainly slavic and thracian, with bulgar contribution too.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 2, 2008 6:49:35 GMT -5
^ lol....however it is described that even with the influence of the Exarchos which made the young generation learn the eastern slavic language (Bulgarian) and therefore caused it in the end to become technically closer to Bulgarian, the customs of vardar that are associated with weddings, "slava," funerals, domestic and agricultural life are identical with those in the mountain villages of old Serbia and Montenegro.
For Ljubotan:
Porphyrogenitus, states that serbs without meeting any opposition, came to Salonica "and settled near Salonica in a district which was called 'ta Serblia.'"
J.Mikotcy affirmed that in 640 the Serbs spread first over Macedonia, then Illyria.
Schafarik supposed that one part of the Serbs, unwilling to return with the majority to the north, remained in Macedonia.
The mistake which early historians made was that the ethnic boundaries, eg the 814 map of charlemagne, was confused with political boundaries. It was also seen with Byzantine writers: all those *serbian* tribes which the Bulgars gradually brought under their domination they began to call Bulgarian, being perhaps under the impression that membership of a state and ethnic character are one and the same.
Even the Bulgarian historian Zlatarski called the Vardarian Slavs "Bulgarian Slavs" even before some of them had come under Bulgarian rule. Hence why l say the tradition of slava for example could never have been imposed on the Vardarian slavic population.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Dec 2, 2008 8:27:41 GMT -5
^ lol....however it is described that even with the influence of the Exarchos which made the young generation learn the eastern slavic language (Bulgarian) and therefore caused it in the end to become technically closer to Bulgarian, Thats not true. Actually the Bulgarian revival was started by a monk called Saint Paisius of Hilendar who is from Pirin Macedonia; He is most famous for being the author of Istoriya Slavyanobolgarskaya, the first work of Bulgarian historiography. Most Bulgarians think of him as the forefather of the Bulgarian National Revival.[1] Paisius was born in the Samokov eparchy of the time, probably in the town of Bansko, Macedonia. He established himself in the Hilandar monastery on Mount Athos in 1745, where he was later a hieromonk and deputy-abbot. Collecting materials for two years through hard work and even visiting the lands of the Germans, he finished his Istoriya Slavyanobolgarskaya in 1762 in the Zograf Monastery. So a "Macedonian" writes the most patriotic Bulgarian book. And its like 110 years before the so hated by you Exarchate. Please EXPLAIN who brainwashed him into Bulgarian!!!!The most famous part of the whole book is the very first sentence: "Why are you ashamed to call yourself Bulgarian?".... And that man lived BEFORE 19 CENTURY in HISTORIC REGION OF MACEDONIA... I am waiting.................................... And u answer me that the CUSTOMS did mean they were Serbs. Bulocks! That doesnt prove anything about their origin, just that they were influenced by their Serbian neighbours. So we Bulgarians present you with quotes from supposed fyrom kings that in 11 century declare they were Bulgarians by origin, countless Greek sources call them Bulgarian. later u have Paisii that is the proudest Bulgarian from fyrom, yet we are to believe some crazy Serbian nationalist and a Sava custom that those people were Bulgarized. Do u know how absurd that sounds. You have nothing but bunch of nationalist and no evidence that the fyrom people ever thought of themselves as serbian. Hell they were rather Greek than Serbian. ok so so they moved north good. ooooooooo he supposes...how clever. on what base. i suppose they moved. but even if some remained thay were bulgarized because they were ruled for most of medievil times by Bulgarian, lived in a Bulgarian state. so we have: -all foreign sources that call them Bulgarian - domestic sources that call the people Bulgarians -selfidentification till 1945 as Bulgarian yet we have to forget about the above but believe Schafariks PROPOSITION that some serbs remained in Vardar... and those Serbs (if they remained) assimilated the Peonians the Slavs and the Bulgars into Serbs though they lived in a Bulgarian state... And though everyone has written they identify as Bulgarians. Doesnt that sound absurd? He calls them Bulgarian slavs because he wants to distinguish them from the Serbo-Croatian group. Yes they were Bulgarian because they are the same as the slavs in Thrace and Moesia that merged into the Bulgarian nation and gave that nation the Bulgarian (EASTERN BALKAN SLAVIC) language. That language was the same in Thrace Moesia and Macedonia. Thats why, even not in the Bulgarian state yet, they were Bulgarian slavs. But they were in the Bulgarian state when the Bulgarian nation emerged, when Slavs, Thracians and Bulgars mixed into us. You ruled fyrom for like 30 yars enough time to leave them with smth serbian: your so important sava custom.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 2, 2008 21:42:52 GMT -5
Yes Monk Pajsije, monk from the diocese of Samokov and was a vice abbot for the Serbian monastery of Hilandar.
Your partly correct that he was the initiator of the national awakening of the Bulgars in the nineteenth century, read the following:
Despite their condition during the early decades of the nineteenth century, it was impossible for the Bulgars not to be affected by the new ideas of national awakening that were stirring the other Balkan nations at that time. The inspirer and initiator of the Bulgarian national revival was Pajsije, a monk from the diocese of Samokov and at one time vice abbot of the monastery of Hilandar, where in 1758 he met Jovan Rajich while the latter was collecting material for his history. Rajich encouraged Pajsije to similar work on the Bulgars, with the result that in 1762 there appeared Pajsije's Slaveno-Bugarska istorija (History of the Slavs and Bulgars), the cheif source of which was Mavro Orbini's, Regno degli Slavi, published in 1601. "Of Bulgarian sources," says Jirechek, "he knew only a few legal documents and lives of the saints." According to F.Kanitz, Pajsije's work is completely uncritical, but marks the turning point in the Bulgarian national revival, since it aroused the Bulgars love for and interest in their own past.
Read on:
Another leader of this movement was George Ivanovich Venelin, a Ukrainian from the Carpathians who was born in 1802, and whose real name was Georg Huca. The son of a priest, he was intended for the Church, but later became a doctor, and finally, on the encouragement of the Russia historian pogodin, took up history. In 1829, he published the first volume of his work Stari i novi bugari u njihovom politichkom, etnografskom, istoriskom i verskom odnosu prema Rusima (The Ancient and Modern Bulgars and Their Poiltical, Ethnic, Historical and Religious Relation to the Russians). This work, too is a collection of fantastic tales without any connection with historical facts.
Before these two men began to publish their work, very little had been known about the Bulgars among historians of Europe. In 1771 Schlozer pointed out the need for a Bulgarian grammar and dictionary. In the dictionary preparred in 1787 on the command of Catherine the Great, among a total of twelve Slavic languages, Bulgarian not even mentioned, while Serbian occupies fifth place. As late as 1814, Dobrovski regarded Bulgarian as a dialect of Serbian.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Dec 3, 2008 4:14:38 GMT -5
You didnt proove anything with the above post. First u didnt answer why a fyrom person was the prodest Bulgarian some 130 years before the Exarchate. Second, u wanted an evidence how fyroms felt pre 19 century, I pointed out a figure that most significant to us as Bulgarian. I dont get WHY u mention Venelin. I dont get why u mention the Catherines dictionary. As for Serbian being the 5th slavic language: According to wiki at the period: The Early modern period saw the loss of Serbia's independence to the Kingdom of Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, interrupted briefly by the revolutionary state of the Emperor Jovan Nenad in the 16th century. Modern times witnessed the rise of the Habsburg Monarchy (known as the Austrian Empire, later Austria-Hungary), which fought many wars against the Ottoman Turks for supremacy over Serbia. Three Austrian invasions and numerous rebellions (such as the Banat Uprising) constantly challenged Ottoman rule. Vojvodina endured a century long Ottoman occupation before being ceded to the Habsburg Empire in the 17th-18th centuries under the terms of the Treaty of Karlowitz (Sremski Karlovci). As the Great Serb Migrations depopulated most of Kosovo and Serbia proper, the Serbs sought refuge in more prosperous (and Christian) North and West were granted imperial rights by the Austrian crown (under measures such as the Statuta Wallachorum in 1630). The Ottoman persecutions ofChristians culminated in the abolition and plunder of the Patriarchate of Peæ in 1766.[35] As Ottoman rule in the South grew ever more brutal, the Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I formally granted the Serbs the right to their autonomous crown land, speeding up their migrations into Austria. So Serbia was very interesting country at the time: devided between Asutia and the Ottomans, it certainly would ve caught Catherines eyes, so that can explain it. At the time Bulgaria was just an Ottoman province with the world not knowing alot about Bulgarians, let alone their language. As for Dobrovski regarding bg as serbian dialect: well alot of stupidity had been written in that period, even parts of Irecheks history of Bulgaria have been proven wrong, but the fact someone said it doesnt make it a fact. Every linguist would tell you those a 2 different language with fyrom being dialect of Bulgarian language. As for bolding Slaveno-Bugarska istorija I dont get it. Paisii just stresses Bulgarians are one of the slavic people. Nothing more, nothing less. That interpretation that Slaveno-Bugarska istorija is History of the Slavs and Bulgars laughable and it just shows you havent read it. In it Paisii just stresses the slavic character of the Bulgarians nothing more.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 3, 2008 6:33:48 GMT -5
and you didn't prove anything the post before mine, l just wanted to really explain to the readers from a 'source' who 'pajisje' was.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Dec 3, 2008 7:13:37 GMT -5
exactly your sources should be in quotation marks.. i proved to you that: 1. a "Macedonian" living pre 19 century; 2. was feeling totally Bulgarian and even wrote a book to make all Bulgarians proud of who they were. I also gave you lots of sources directly from people living in fyrom in medievil times that say they are Bulgarians. Against that I get your sava custom as a proove of "Serbian" origin. Please!
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Dec 3, 2008 17:35:27 GMT -5
And how comes no Serbs were ever mentioned around Thessaloniki, except in your claims?
Lol, Lol, Lol...even Highduke is a man of unmatchable modesty compared to Novi.
And RuseBg supposes no Serbs have ever lived in Novi Pazar. Some Somalians, followed by Nigerians and then Eskimos.
You are waiting for an explanation of your not very deep knowledge. Paisiy addressed this to all Bulgarians who were under very heavy Greek influence under that period and there was a danger of losing their Bulgarian consciousness. Nothing to do with Slava lol
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 3, 2008 19:13:18 GMT -5
^ I don't know Ruse, l'm showing everyone 'evidence'. As l have said to ioan, l respect your comments.
|
|
|
Post by Kubrat on Dec 4, 2008 17:28:01 GMT -5
you have shown no such evidence.
|
|