|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Feb 9, 2009 7:28:37 GMT -5
Good summary.
I tend to think that on appearance FYROMians are more closely related to Bulgarians. Especially the eastern ones. I met some FYROMians recently working at a store & I was sure they would be Bulgarian before they actually said where they were from. Turns out they were from the Bulgarian border right in the east. Then again most FYROMians I know are from Western FYROM & they look a lot more Serb then the ones I thought were Bulgarian. I've also seen some that look pure Greek.
What about Spartacus then? Seeing as though he was Thracian do Bulgarians claim him?
Also I didn't know that Serbs tried to make Bulgarians think that they were Serb? More details please.
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Feb 9, 2009 7:36:05 GMT -5
No. He was born in today's Bulgaria but he was not Bulgarian. In my opinion, this is the funny part in most Balkan histories: claiming someone as your ancestor just because he used to live in your land, and ignoring the fact that he had completely other consciousness, if he had any consciousness except his tribal one at all.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Feb 9, 2009 7:59:41 GMT -5
What about Spartacus then? Seeing as though he was Thracian do Bulgarians claim him? No we dont claim him. He was Thracian, but the Thracians are the big mistery in the forming of the Bulgarian ethnicity. For example, acording to the genetics, they made very significant contribution to the Bulgarian ethnicity. But as Ruse said, most probably, there was no Thracian consciousness, but rather consciousness of different tribes. There are over 25 Thracian tribes, recorded to have lived in present day Bulgaria. We know that there was romanization and hellenization of the Thracians, that happened in the cities. However, in 6th century, there is a record that there was translation of the bible in Bessian, and the Bessians were a Thracian tribe from Rodopi mountain in Bulgaria. Almost the same happened with the Ilirians with the exceptance that the Albanians remained - not romanized or hellenized. Acording to most schollars the Thracians have played some role in the forming of the bg ethnicity: but they were not Thracians per se when the Slavs and the Bulgars came. Some probably thought they were Romans, some may have saved their language like the Bessy and probably thought they were Bessian. The fact is we know the bulgarian people (in todays sense) emerged after the christianization and after adopting the slavic alphabeth. Then the Bulgar, the Slav and the Thracian element merged into one tnx to the common religion and the common language. The above mentioned doesnt contradict with the Bulgarian ethnicity of the fyrom people. As we know, the present day teritory of fyrom actually consist of the teritory of the Peonians, that was a Thracian tribe. There are recorded settlements of Slavs and Bulgars in fyrom.
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Feb 9, 2009 8:14:34 GMT -5
No. He was born in today's Bulgaria but he was not Bulgarian. In my opinion, this is the funny part in most Balkan histories: claiming someone as your ancestor just because he used to live in your land, and ignoring the fact that he had completely other consciousness, if he had any consciousness except his tribal one at all. Exactly! exactly! exactly! This seems to be the big issue with Albanians & Bosniaks. The Serbian & Croat identities/culture have been specific & continuous longer than theirs. But then you get the Bosniaks & Albanians who despite their supposed older identities all converted to Islam... so they're like hey lets just skip over a couple of identities & lets be proud Illyrians (who would have been heterogeneous tribes anyway) for which we practically know nothing about & most definitely have nothing in common with. It's totally & utterly ridiculous. Also, considering genetics it would appear that Serbs could also make such claims yet we don't need to since our culture is more continuous & older than theirs. It’s ridiculous.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Feb 9, 2009 8:23:37 GMT -5
I say this is due to the fact that Bulgarian and Serbian people formed AFTER the establishment of a state.
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Feb 9, 2009 8:25:12 GMT -5
^ ?
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Feb 9, 2009 8:29:24 GMT -5
I dont know about Serbia, but the Bulgarians emerged in a result of the establishing of the state Bulgaria. Later the rulers christenized the populace and adopted a state and church language. Thus, the Bulgar, the Slavic and the Thracian element were unified into the Bulgarian ethnicity. I think the same happened in Serbia, though at first u had more states like Rashka and Duklya.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Feb 9, 2009 8:58:35 GMT -5
I think most of the Bulgarians think this: If we trace the ethnic origins of the Bulgarian people, we first of all come across its kinship with the Eastern Slavs - the distant forefathers of Russians, Ukrainians and Byelorussians; with the Western Slavs - the ancient predecessors of Poles, Czechs, Slovaks; and with the rest of the Southern Slavs - the peoples of present-day Yugoslavia. Linguistic, archaeological and ethnographic research indicates that the process of the differentiation of the two major groups of South Slavs set in as early as the fifth to seventh century: the Serbo - Croat group (Serbs, Bosnians, Croats, Montenegrins) and the group of the Bulgarian Slavs, so called because they became a part of the Bulgarian state, which was formed later. The migration of the Slavs to the South of the Danube was in fact so pervasive that Byzantium lost considerably its control over the better part of the Peninsula. The thinning numbers of the local Thracians merged completely with the Slavs. Only a few small groups of Thracians survived in the mountain regions, where they survive to this day as, nomadic stock-breeders: they are known as Walaohians (Romanized Thracians) or as Karakachans (Hellenized Thracians). The thousand-year history of the Thracians found its continuation in the birth and Bourishment of the new Bulgarian state. Individual elemerits and features of the Thracian culture left their imprint on the formation and consolidation of the Bulgarian nation. In present times the Thracian heritage is being re-discovered to become part of the 'historical memory' of the Bulgarians and is being widely publicized. www.digsys.bg/books/history/slavs.html
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Feb 9, 2009 14:09:47 GMT -5
whoever has a slava is an ancestral Serb, its the only ubiquitous Serb custom and any Romanians & Bulgarians who have it are ancestral Serbs, although the sorrounding poplation isnt. 70% of ethnic Macs have a Slava, its the majority in all municipalities that dont border Bulgaria & even there almost 50%. The MK dialect is just simple Serbian with bulgarian grammar The stock i come from, is a tribe (maybe sarakatsani) (like the majority of Epirots) who speak greek, but have surnames and toponyms which we dont understand. Most people dont have a clue about what Kapesovo or Grbovo mean, and also their family names mean nothing: Tsongas, Gitas, Gousgounis, Stogias, Gotovos, Kapsiohas, etc... because of my little understanding of serbian, i can see few surnames are slav, but the majority remains unknown at least to me. i had a talk with my mom, and were discussing about customs in Epiros, etc about her village (Dodoni) and out of a sudden she told me: "Well back in your grand-grandpa years, ppl didnt have name days, but rather FAMILY days, each family had a special saint to celebrate" WTF?
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Feb 9, 2009 14:22:17 GMT -5
Highduke, I strongly recommend you to contunue focusing on whatever you are googling for Albanians and leave this lingustic issue on people who are familiar with it.
Pyrros, those names mean nothing in Serbian or Bulgarian as well. The first one (Tsongas) reminds me of a black French tennis player and Gotovos is similar to gotovo which means ready in Bulgarian but I doubt this is the case. Karakachani are of Greek origin, don't make them anything else.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Feb 9, 2009 15:22:28 GMT -5
Stojas, comes from Stoja(n). And gotovos, comes surely from Gotovo, as Zdravos comes from "Zdravo". Anyway, Sarakatsani are greek mountain peasants, thats true. And i think i am of greek stock big chance.
I dont try to make anyone anything. I am just putting pieces in our little balkan puzzle.
The big question remains, why dont we have memories of our places? Why cant we xlate our surnames?
most probably we are greek, but how are those phaenomena explained?
where are all those slavs who originally named those places?
i guess they left, just like in Kosovo...
|
|
|
Post by insomniac on Feb 9, 2009 15:27:45 GMT -5
Exactly! exactly! exactly! This seems to be the big issue with Albanians & Bosniaks. The Serbian & Croat identities/culture have been specific & continuous longer than theirs. But then you get the Bosniaks & Albanians who despite their supposed older identities all converted to Islam... so they're like hey lets just skip over a couple of identities & lets be proud Illyrians
Funny you say this because Albanians have nothing to do with Bosniaks and latter have more to do with Serbs/Croats. We have our own language, culture, identity free of religious dogmas and we certainly dont need any grouping.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Feb 9, 2009 17:50:49 GMT -5
"whoever has a slava is an ancestral Serb, its the only ubiquitous Serb custom and any Romanians & Bulgarians who have it are ancestral Serbs, although the sorrounding poplation isnt. 70% of ethnic Macs have a Slava, its the majority in all municipalities that dont border Bulgaria & even there almost 50%. The MK dialect is just simple Serbian with bulgarian grammar"
The culture of the two are identical.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Feb 9, 2009 17:57:29 GMT -5
"Serbs celebrate it & it was common even among the Shoptsi of W. Bulgaria until 200 years ago."
Thats right because they fell under the Patriarchate of Pech.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Feb 9, 2009 17:58:29 GMT -5
Hey did anyone read my link at all, well i'm more interested to know if Ruse or Ioan did?
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Feb 9, 2009 18:02:57 GMT -5
Pyrro bro, l think the Karakachani with those names are just isolated cases or could be a coincidence.
|
|
|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Feb 9, 2009 20:07:36 GMT -5
I dont know about Serbia, but the Bulgarians emerged in a result of the establishing of the state Bulgaria. Later the rulers christenized the populace and adopted a state and church language. Thus, the Bulgar, the Slavic and the Thracian element were unified into the Bulgarian ethnicity. I think the same happened in Serbia, though at first u had more states like Rashka and Duklya. No that did not happen in Serbia. That analogy is completely untrue regarding the Serbs who were an identified people before they had any kingdom. Serbs lived and still do in states other than Serbia but maintain their Serbian identity.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Feb 9, 2009 20:54:28 GMT -5
^ I'm sure you know this but apparently there used to be a Serbian population in and around the towns called Srpsko Selo and Srpski Samokov (west Bulgaria) which caused this area to be assigned to the restored Patriarchate of Pech.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Feb 9, 2009 21:13:27 GMT -5
"I think the Serbomans apperared after the Serbs tried to make the "Macedonians" think they were Serbs and they sucseeded. The fyrom people, acording to all sources (including native), were Bulgarian by origin, but there was Serbian and Greek propaganda and thats why there emerged serbomani and grekomani."
Ioan my friend, show us what Jordan Ivanov couldn't manage.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Feb 9, 2009 21:18:18 GMT -5
"Yeah and if you remember the proboards days, recall that I posted a world-wide directory of cities & towns in Bulgaria that listed the names of those & a dozen others villages whose names were preceded by 'Srpsko/i/a' but were changed by the authorities after WW2, long after the last Serbs were bulgarized at the end of the Ottoman period"
Don't take it the wrong way, l'm expressing myself in a shocked manner = are you for real. Are these topymns concentrated in the western reaches of Bulgaria only?
|
|