|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 1, 2008 23:00:06 GMT -5
AAdmin(12/7/03 10:33 pm) Illyrians: Connections to Hellenes; Serbs/Croats; Albanians;Serbian and Croatians cover most of people of (although linguistically Slavized) Illyrian origin while Serbs and Croatians considered themselves (and were considered by outsiders) as Illyrian up to 19 century (hence the 'Illyrian movement' in Croatia in 19 century). Greek was chosen as a result of the facts; 1) that original Illyrians spoke Greek as a primary language (overwhelming evidence can be found here) for at least Hellenistic of southern and central Phrygic-Illyrian regions. " In the opinion of the present writer, Illyrian is an IE language intermediate between Venetic and Phrygian." source (thus of course the more south more it is Phrygian which again explains why southern Illyria south of Daorson was fully hellenistic without ever being conquered by Greeks) 2) Illyrians are in effect remnants of protohelenic phrygic Trojans while Troy was placed in today's Herzegovina, evidence ). 3) Illyria was named by Greeks, 4) Protogenetors of Illyrians have an important name in Greek mythology, link5) Illyrians wanted to participate in Olympic Games (thus considered themselves as Hellenes), Proof canbe found in following quote; " His (Cadmus) founding of Buthoe (Butua/Budva) consitutes a claim by the Illyrians to rank as Greeks, and therefore to take part in the Olympic games" (source: The Greek Myths, vol.I, page 190, The Folio Society). 6) Their first ruler Hyllus (is according to Mythology a son of Hercules thus placing mythologically Illyrians as kin of Dorian Greeks who saw themselves as 'children of Hercules' and their invasion of Greece called 'Return of Heracleides') " Hercules was connected with other places along the eastern Adriatic coast, and so was his son Hyllus." link7) Protogenetor of Dardanians was Dardanos (Son of Zeus) who is ancestor of Trojans. 8) Even northern Illyrians such as Venetes and Messapics believed in Hellenic gods (Zeus) even though they spoke languages that were in effect a cross between Protohellenic (Phrygic variant) and Italic language (latter influence is without a doubt influence of them being moving to Italia thus in effect meaning that original Venetes and Messapes were also protohellenic even though Venetes were very italized while Messapes remained as a Phrygic-Italic linquistical cross). Position of Albanian remains highly speculative at best and far from being proven of being of conclusive Illyrian origin (furthermore the linguistic relations with Romanian language thus the connection would most likely come from Daco-Moesian region thus its original position or position of proto-albanian speakers would be placed in either Moesia or even Dacia, and neither is Illyria). Also the first time Albanians became aware that they might have relation to Illyrians was at the end of 19 century as a result of German scientist (politically motivated) research that was in the least dubious since there is no remains of separate Illyrian language with which Albanian can be compared. First records of Albanian language are at the most 600 years old thus there is also a gap of some at least 1300 years from the time Illyria was romanized to appearance of Albanian language. As I said. Albanian remains an enigma and being enigma doesn't men that one unknown (Albanian history and fact that Albanian has no kin language) doesn't equal another (supposed illyrian language that has no remains). Conclusion: Only Greek is an element that can be most associated with Illyrians while Serbs and Croats are slavized Illyrians while Albanians remain enigma and at best can be Illyrians mixed with Dacians and who were linguistically amalgamated by middle ages to posses a language that has a multitude of Vlach, Slavic and Turkish influences). Anything other than Greek language would be fully foreign to ancient Illyrians.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 1, 2008 23:11:37 GMT -5
These is his chapter 2 (Origins: Serbs, Albanians and Vlachs) on internet. Before I proceed I will note that this N.M. quotes a multitude of German sources and some Russian ones while virtually quoting no ancient sources directly but thorough others interpretations. Bellow are the quotes from Malcolm's chapter 2 No connection to Illyrians! No connection to Illyrians! No connection to Illyrians! No connection to Illyrians! Clear how when he mentioned earlier; and there is no illyrian language to compare! still - No connection to Illyrians! For neither Illyrian nor Thracian left no remains (both used primarily Greek and Illyrians later on had their own Dalmatian Latin after being Latinized) and the Thracian one has no guaranty that it is Thracian at all since if Thracians had their own language and they were independent from Greeks and others they would certainly left more than one source while there is multitude of evidence they spoke Greek especially in the South Thrace. still - No connection to Illyrians! Thus no evidence. Still no connection to Illyrians! (at least no linguistic connection) Names do not correlate to evidence of linquistic relation. Still no connection to Illyrians while Albanian having no historical records that go beyond 600-700 years cannot inspect whether for example Ulqin or Ulcinium (Alb.: ujk or ulk, wolf), or indeed the early name for the Kosovo area, 'Dardania' (Alb.: dardhe, pear). (although it is clear where Dardania comes from and it isn't from word for pear). Structure! This is the strongest evidence? This is called grasping for straws my friend. With all do respect Malcolm started out nicely but now appears almost desperado. Thus no evidence. Still no connection to Illyrians! (at least no linguistic connection) Thus no evidence. Still no connection to Illyrians! (at least no linquistic connection) Thus no evidence. Still no connection to Illyrians! (at least no linguistic connection) Bessi by 6 century AD would have been thoroughly hellenized and on their way of being slavized while Thracians by this time (6cen.AD) are Hellenic speaking for at least 1000 years and are even starting to be slavized. Another proof that this is not the connection is that Bessi are though of as ancestors of ancient Messapics that inhabited southern Italy and Albanian is showing no affinity with this language. linkThus traceable = provable. Except the author himself stated "We do not possess a single text in Illyrian." As I have stated before the relation between Albanian and Romanian is mentioned. Malcolm mentioned that Romanian entered today's Romania from northern Bulgaria in 11-12 cent. AD thus with this proto-albanian linguistic region is placed in the same location, again far from Illyria and connecting it to romanized Dacian (not even Thracians) who obviously took refuge in this region from barbarian invasions across Danube. Granted although not a trace of Dalmatian Latin (spoken by Romanized Illyrians). ________ PS: Response to the Book of Noel Malcolm
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 1, 2008 23:14:50 GMT -5
AAdmin(12/10/03 12:55 am) Rex if you have knowledge about a subject then ask but don't assume. Originally there was no Illyrian nation and first time this name (first given by Greeks) was adopted by 'Illyrians' was by Ardieyanians( evidence) in today's Montenegro and vicinity while it was Romans to give this name for western Balkans region. Thus anything outside of Montenegro and its vicinity technically was not even in Illyria. Now in Roman Illyria or rather Illyricum you have following 'Illyrian' nations in today's Croatia (Pannonians in the North), Iapodes (Lika and Kotari), Dalmates (Dalmatia and western Hercegovina), Livurnes (Northern Dalmatia and Kvarner). About Illyrians. Southern Phrygic Illyrians were hellenistic in every aspect of the word ( evidence) and those nations apart from Daorson were Peones, Taulantes, Dardanes and Ardieyanes. In case you are still skeptical about who named Illyria go and read my original post which I edited with more links as evidence (for you and others to double-check). Here it is not me that claims that Illyrians were Slavic (that would be ludicrous for there is no evidence) but you that claims direct descent from 'Illyrians' for what there is no evidence either. 'Illyrians' adopted the Illyrian name (here I am talking ONLY about Ardieyanes in today's Montenegro and its vicinity) shortly before being overrun by Romans while Illyrians are traced ARCHEOLOGICALLY to the time of king Hyllus NOT by name. Greeks came in several waves, among oldest being Acheans who appear 2250 BC ( evidence) while earliest protogreeks are traced to early Helladic period ( 3100 BC) in today's southern Balkans thus Greeks (in one form or the other) are here for more than 5,000 years and this includes Illyrian Phrygian ancestors. Actually Greeks are the most compact while it is other regions that have loads of Greek blood (as is the case for example for most of the rest of Balkans, ex. being Bulgaria / S.Macedonia / Toskeria / coastal Romania, and at least western Anatolia). Barbarian Slavs were much less numerous than Greek Byzantine Haimos (Balkans) (100,000 versus 4 million) and Turks were at least 5 times lesser in numbers than Byzantine Greeks in Anatolia. Southern Italy with Sicily is mainly of Greek origin and it was called in antiquity Magna Graecia (it was said to have contained more Greeks than the mainland Greece that is why it was called Greater Greece in translation). The reality is that there is more people of Greek origin outside of Greece (although most are unaware) than in Greece. ps: to some Albanians stop taking this Illyrian/Albanian issue so personally and stop reacting on pure emotion. History doesn't understand desires and wants but only facts and there is simply NO FACTS to even connect Albanian language (which is not even remotely old enough) with so called Illyrian language (which never existed since Greek was used and thus was never recorded). Albanian does appear to be a language that has a close relation with Vlach and Romanian languages thus as a conciliation prize. It can be said that it still originated from Balkans from more than likely Dacia from where proto-albanian speakers around 1000 years ago came with likely Pechenegs or Cumans and later assimilated local Illyrian (many Ghegs) and Greek Epirote (many Tosks) populations. It certainly appears that only Greek is the language associated with southern and central Balkans (including southern Illyria with Daorson, Macedonia and at least southern Thrace).
|
|
|
Post by Teuta1975 on Jan 8, 2008 2:22:15 GMT -5
Ok, I (and this is exclusively my opinion) think we can't neglect the Romanized and Hellenized Illyrians. So, Illyrians were mostly either Romanized or Hellenized. Saying this, Illyrians had as OFFICAL language Romanian and Greek. So, we have a simple passage: Hellenized-Romanized-Slavized (later "Ottomanized" - not "Turkified", including Bosnians and Albanians) people in Balkans. And before Romans, we have three main groups (languages) in Balkans: Hellens, Illyrians, Thraco-Dacians. If Illyria was named by Greeks, they would have named also its tribes. Any info? Greeks also named Epirus when they first saw it (and Balkan was named by Otomans-Turks too???!!!) And the creation itself is different according to many myths (Biblic too) (Eva and the apple; Phyrra and the stones-Hesiodus re: the creation according to Greeks; etc.) As for the protogenetors of Illyrians we can't even assume because if we're talking about GREEK mythology, of course the names would be Greek. If it were another mythology, the names would be different just as well. So, let's see the Illyrian most prominent symbol: the snake! Do Greeks have it? Oh, but it was the most important event of that time. Same as today many countries want to join EU! But the constitution of the claim doesn't make them Greeks. The mythology takes us a long journey to Gods and Godesses, 'till Asia Minor and Giants and so on. "HYLLOS (or Hyllus) was a Giant of the kingdom of Lydia in western Anatolia.Hyllos was probably somehow connected with the other giants of Lydian myth described by various writers : Damasen, Atlas, Anax and Asterios. The Greeks apparently also identified him with Geryon. Source: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. Pausanias, Description of Greece 1. 35. 7 - 8 (trans. Jones) (Greek travelogue C2nd A.D.) : "But what really caused me surprise is this. There is a small city of upper Lydia called The Doors of Temenos. There a crest broke away in a storm, and there appeared bones the shape of which led one to suppose that they were human, but from their size one would never have thought it. At once the story spread among the multitude that it was the corpse of Geryon, the son of Khrysaor, and that the seat also was his. For there is a man's seat carved on a rocky spur of the mountain. And a torrent they called the river Okeanos, and they said that men ploughing met with the horns of cattle, for the story is that Geryon reared excellent cows. And when I criticized the account and pointed out to them that Geryon is at Gadeira, where there is, not his tomb, but a tree showing different shapes, the guides of the Lydians related the true story, that the corpse is that of Hyllos, a son of Ge (Earth), from whom the river is named. They also said that Heracles from his sojourning with Omphale called his son Hyllos after the river." The Lydian language was an Indo-European language in the Anatolian language family, related to Luwian and Hittite. It used many prefixes and particles[1]. Lydian finally became extinct Lydia arose as a Neo-Hittite kingdom following the collapse of the Hittite Empire in the twelfth century BC. In Hittite times, the name for the Lydia region had been Arzawa, a Luwian-speaking area. According to Greek source, the original name of the Lydian kingdom was Maionia (Maeonia): Homer (Iliad ii. 865; v. 43, xi. 431) refers to the inhabitants of Lydia as Maiones (Μαίονες). Homer describes their capital not as Sardis but as Hyde (Iliad xx. 385); Hyde may have been the name of the district where Sardis stood.[2] Later, Herodotus (Histories i. 7) adds that the "Meiones" were renamed Lydians after their king, Lydus (Λυδός), son of Attis, in the mythical epoch that preceded the rise of the Heracleid dynasty. " Hercules was connected with other places along the eastern Adriatic coast, and so was his son Hyllus." link "There are good reasons to believe that Greek Mythology is an embellished version of real history. The so-called 'gods' were just ordinary men and women whose deeds have been exaggerated so that they could be made into gods. I will go into this argument in detail in my forthcoming new book, but basically they are as follows: Ouranos and Gaia represent Noah and his wife. Titan, Kronus and Iapetus are Shem, Ham and Japheth. This is evident from a Chaldean fragment (1) which says "After the Flood, Titan and Prometheus lived, and Titan undertook a war against Kronus". Prometheus (not shown in the diagram), is a son of Iapetus in Greek mythology, and he appears in the Chaldean fragment in place of his father. Kronus must be Ham, because he appears in the Egyptian king list of Manetho (2) among the demi-gods that precede the first dynasty. This leaves only Shem to be accounted for, and he is given the name Titan which is a collective name for all the children of Ouranos and Gaia. Kronus achieves notoriety by castrating his father Uranus, an exaggerated version of the story about Ham seeing his father naked in his tent. By comparison of the Greek and Egyptian mythologies, it is possible to show that the Greek Zeus is the Egyptian Osyris, and since he is a son of Ham, he must be Mizraim. Oceanus and Tethys were additional children of Noah, born after the flood (and there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that this should not happen). They got married and had both sons and daughters. Their sons were called 'River Gods' and their daughters were called 'Oceanids'. One of the Oceanids, either Clymene or Asia, married Iapetus (Japheth) and they had a son called Atlas who had a daughter called Electra. She married Zeus who is the same as the Egyptian Osiris and the Biblical Mizraim. Zeus and Electra had a son called Dardanus who became the first king of Troy. Dardanus married Batia, the grand-daughter of Scamander the River God, who represents the river near Troy. Her father was Teucer, king of the Teucrians. Dardanus and Batia had a son called Ericthoneus who succeeded him as the next king of Troy, and the line continues as far as the Trojan war". References 1. Hodges, E.R., Cory's Ancient Fragments, A New and Enlarged Edition, Reeves & Turner, London, 1876. Facsimile reprints from Ballantrae, Ontario, Canada. This Chaldean fragment is from Alexander Polyhistor.
2. Cory's Ancient Fragments. King list of Manetho.
3. Virgil - The Aneid, Penguin Classics.
4. Cory's Ancient Fragments. See the fragments of Berosus from Apollodorus and Abydenus. And even Greeks (Hellens and Hellenized) believed in 12 Gods, that according to Herodotus, (Book 2.4.1) appears as follows: "IV. But as to human affairs, this was the account in which they all agreed: the Egyptians, they said, were the first men who reckoned by years and made the year consist of twelve divisions of the seasons. They discovered this from the stars (so they said). And their reckoning is, to my mind, a juster one than that of the Greeks; for the Greeks add an intercalary month every other year, so that the seasons agree; but the Egyptians, reckoning thirty days to each of the twelve months, add five days in every year over and above the total, and thus the completed circle of seasons is made to agree with the calendar. [2] Furthermore, the Egyptians (they said) first used the names of twelve gods1 (which the Greeks afterwards borrowed from them); and it was they who first assigned to the several gods their altars and images and temples, and first carved figures on stone. Most of this they showed me in fact to be the case. The first human king of Egypt, they said, was Min. [3] In his time all of Egypt except the Thebaic2 district was a marsh: all the country that we now see was then covered by water, north of lake Moeris,3 which is seven days' journey up the river from the sea". Some people dispute the passages blaiming the translation. (see the bold words above) As a matter of fact, linguistic analysis show more affinities of Albanian with Proto-Rumanian and Thracian; also in a deep analysis from the International Onomastic Congress : Some affinities of Albanian and proto-Romanian:
E. Çabej (VII Congresso intemacionale di scienze onomastiche, 248-249) has argued for the actual presence, of certain preserved old terms: d t 'sea' (related to 'deep') could refer to any deep water; vâ 'ford, anchorage', mat 'beach' valë 'wave' could be applied to various bodies of water. A word like grykë 'narrows' is an easy metaphor ('throat'); aní ( : an(ë) 'vessel') and some names of parts of boats (ballë 'forehead', pëlhurë 'sail', shul 'mast', lugatë 'rudder', belonging with lugë 'sthingy') are also easily understood as metaphors; likurishtë 'polyp' (cf. likurë 'skin') and many other names, often fairly transparent compounds (p. 249), are descriptive and could presumably have arisen in their attested uses at almost any time. The word ngjalë 'eel' < *engella, even if related correctly to Illyrian 'EggelaneV.
The fact that Scodra 'Scutari' (Shkodër) shows un Albanian development ( and that there are few ancient Greek loans (Jokl, Albaner §5; and that there are arguments in favor of old Dardania: Ni < Naíssos, with development as in pyll 'forest' < *pëýll < *pad le(m) : pal dem (Jokl, Albaner §5).
Reichenkron (Romanistisches Jahrbuch 1960:11.19-22) rehearses succinctly a number of hypotheses, which I summarize here: a) Not all Albanian-Rumanian correspondences are loans from Albanian into Rumanian; they may be from Illyrian and Daco-Thracian as sources.
"Autochthonous" elements of Rumanian show only in part Illyrian-Thracian-Albanian regularities; in part proto-Romance developments appear. c) Most Albanian-Rumanian correspondences come from borrowings by Vulgar Latin (as precursor of Rumanian) in Dardania from an Illyrian substrate. Then, we suppose, pre-Rumanian moved north of the Danube and merged with a Daco-Romance dialect, which contained Thracian elements showing correspondences with Armenian (allegedly a sound shift, and certain affixes dealt with in Rom. Jb. 9;
Some "borrowings" of proto-romanian, Greeks, Germans and Slavs:
Daco-Thracian yields Rumanian < IE *q before eu; < IE *s + front V, and IE *k; -f- < IE *p ( > p'). e) Of the residue of unexplained words, loans from Slavic and Magyar account for many.
Some ancient Greek loans are to be reckoned with, even though one would not expect Rumanian to borrow wholesale in areas where other Romance did not.
On the basis of this Daco-Thracian theory, Reichenkron tries to explain various difficult Rumanian words involving z, some of which may be related to some Albanian words.(!)
Reichenkron further continues (pp. 52-53), giving an alternative to the conventional (i.e., Jokl's) accounting for pârîu 'brook', is, independently of the above question, susceptible of a different solution. Jokl had pârîu < pre-Albanian *per-r n- (Rotacism in Albanian - tosk) (> Albanian përrua, përroni; cf. Latin fr num > Rumanian frîu);
However, Çabej has recently argued (VII Congresso intemazianale di scienze onomastiche 250-251) that these Greek loans do not necessarily remove the pre-Albanians far from Greek territory; that is, that they fit well with a location in present-day Albania, in contact either with Doric Greek colonists or with the Northwest Dorians. His points on the Doric character of the loans certainly look persuasive: drapën, Tosk drapër 'sickle' < *drapanon rather than drepanon; kumbull 'plum' < kokkumhlon, brukë 'Tamariske' < murikh, trumzë 'thyme' < qumbra ~ qrumbh.
Certain words, such as man 'mulberry, blackberry' are shared with Thracian (manteia). But this could merely show that there were contacts; besides, Thrace-Phrygian BrigeV are known to have lived near Durrës. Moreover, Çabej thinks that even these words can be shown to be Illyrian. Cimochowski goes on to point out (p. 48) that karpë and mën are shared in the Italian pre-Romance area; hence this alleged Thracian correspondence is vitiated. d) Certain Thracian names are supposedly explained with the help of Albanian. Of these, only Dacia Maluensis ( : mal) is well explained in this way; Decebalus ( : ballë) and Burebista (burre + bisht) are surely WRONG.
Çabej points out that villages in the Balkans are generally of recent date and changeable settlement. Hence for the study of toponyms city names and rivers are best. If we inspect such names attested by ancient sources, we find that many follow Albanian phonological development: Scardus > Shar, with no metathesis, as in Scardona > Skradin. Scodra > Shkodër; Çabej remarks that sk- > h- belonged to the pre-Balkan period, and compares (VII Congresso internazionale 244), for phonology, shkamb < scamnum and kulshedër < chersydrus. (Rogame is a recent suffixation in -ame of rëge, and therefore no problem because of the medial -g-.) Barbanna > Buenë is regular, as shown by Jokl (IF 1932: 50.33 ff.), Slavia (1934-1935:13.286 ff.), Glotta (1936:25.121 B.). Lissus > Lesh (cf.) missa > meshë, etc.); Çabej points out (VII Congresso intemazionale 245) that Latin + CC is regular, a statement I can neither affirm nor control at the moment. Dyrrachium > Durrës, Isamnus > Ishm, Drivastum > Drisht show, as Krahe claims, the Illyrian initial accent. Shkum(b)î < Scampinus is regular in the Central Albanian dialect, where pretonic ë > u and mb > m are expectable (VII Congresso internazionale 246). Aulwn > Vlorë may perhaps involve a Slavic intermediary. Thyamis > Çamëria, as Leake saw in 1814, is accepted by Çabej; however, one might expect s < t (cf. pus 'well' < Lat. puteus). Arachthos > Arta is supposedly better explained by Albanian than by Greek; but, apart from the surprising syncope, kt should yield ft or jt, and not t, from that time level. Ragusium (Ragusa) is Rush in Bogdan (1685). Thus, says Çabej, the seacoast has remained Albanian since antiquity.
INFLUENCES: It has long been recognized that there are two treatments of Latin loans in Albanian. Bari sets forth (LS 27-28, and Godi njak, Balkanolo ki Institut, Sarajevo 1.1-16 [1957], esp. 7-11) a very convincing looking solution for this duality. Latin ct, cs gives Albanian ft, f (luftë 'war', kofshë 'thigh'), which matches Rumanian lupt , coaps ; these would easily represent sound substitutions after IE *kt had become *t. (One problem I see in this is ftua 'quince' < cotón um, which would have to have become *ct- almost immediately to avoid falling in with këta 'this [n.], these [m.]'.) This group also includes Albanian traft r < tract-. On the other hand, we have in derjt 'straight' < d(i)rectus and trajtonj a different outcome, which matches Old Dalmatian traita < tract-. Similarly, there are both Albanian a and e as reflexes of Latin a, which match Rumanian and Dalmatian developments. These, then, would look back to two chronological and geographical layers, one an "inner Balkan" and the other a "coastal Adriatic." Bari (Godi njak 13) considers that since Rumanian has loans from Albanian, but Albanian has practically none in the opposite direction, these Rumanian shapes must all be "Restwörter," not "Lehnwörter"; but, as Reichenkron (above) takes into account, the loan situation may easily be more complex than this. Example: An improvement of Bari 's presentation of the name of the Bojana river (LS 29) might be to posit from Livy's Barbanna a form *bar anna (note that Berat lost its Slavic -g-) = /bar anna/ > *borjan(n)a (by Slavic adoption) > *bojana (in EARLIER Albanian; cf. ujë 'water' < *udrj ).
CENTUM or SATEM?
Russu (Cercet ri de lingvistic 1958:3.89-107) finds Illyrian to be a satem language, and Thracian likewise; but since they have a clearly different toponymic and onomastic lexicon, they are not one and the same language. Illyrian would have been Romanized at an early date, and Albanian, since it survived as an independent, would more likely be from Thracian. But, Russu declares, the problem of Albanian is still not solved. Rosetti (Istoria II3 51-63) reviews the question generally. The two areas of Illyrian and Thracian were divided by the Morava-Vardar river line. While asserting what I take to be his considered conclusion that Albanian is a Thracian dialect, Rosetti mentions Georgiev (p. 53) and Bari (p. 54), citing V. V. Ivanov and Hamp to the effect that Albanian is neither sat m nor centum typologically (see more on this below in relation to Illyrian), and mentioning Russu and Cimochowski as defending a sat m character for Illyrian (see below also), while C. de Simone (IF 1960:65.33) doubts the latter. A good list, of the proposed lexical equations with Illyrian and Thracian, follows (pp. 56-62). A proper consideration of this list would easily generate a good-sized essay, for there are problems on all sides, and Rosetti is essentially reporting the state of scholarship as he sees it/
ALBANIAN AND ILLYRIAN WORDS
Jokl's Illyrian-Albanian correspondences (Albaner §3a) are probably the best known. Certain of these require comment: Strabo (7.314) eloV Lougeon : lëgatë 'swamp'. This could be *lug-, but there is also *lag- 'wet', which might of course also represent *loug-. Ludrum : Tosk lum 'muck', Geg lym, Tosk ler, but there are also Latin and Greek cognates. Aquae Balizae : baltë 'mud'. But Krahe (IF 1962:67.151-158) thinks Balissae is from Bal-is(i)a : *Bal-sa in Balsenz < *Bal-s-antia (: *Ap-s-antia > Absentia) : Lith. balà 'swamp' : OCS blato, Alb. baltë. Therefore, for Krahe Balissae/Balizae is "Alteuropaisch" (see below).
Place names in -V-ste/a/o : kopshtë 'orchard', vresht 'vineyard' : (Illyrier §4) Lith. -ysta 'membership'.
Cimochowski adduces Gentius, Genusus, Epicadus, Magaplinus (the last supposedly belonging with Skt. mahant-, Alb. i madh 'big'), Bersumno beside Berginium and Bargulum, Barzidihi beside Bargilius and Bargulis. (Bardhe - white in Alb)
Vescleves, Can-davia (for which * - is gratuitously reconstructed, but which points only to * - at most), Acra-banis, Bargulis/Bargilius, Skerdis, ''AggroV. This environment matches exactly that posited by me for the merger of palatals and velars in Albanian (KZ 1960:76.275-280),
Cimochowski also claims that Albanian shares with Messapic au > a and with Illyrian IE * > (then * > Albanian o); the last would be seen in Spalatum : Spolhtion in Italy. But O. Haas (Messapische Studien 173-174 [Heidelberg, 1962]) states that au > a occurs in Vulgar Latin adaptations (Ascoli : Ausculum; Basta : Bausta), and not in Messapic itself, which had au > ao > o.
(§3.14) Çabej also adduces ndë 'in', but not the others. (§3.16) Pertinent to the comparative aspect of the discussion of atavetes and sivjet now is Mycenaean za-we-te (opposed to pe-ru-si-nwa PY Ma 225) = kjawetes 'this year' according to Palmer and Killen (Nestor 240 [March, 1963]), and 85-u-te, which would not be *sjawetes, as Palmer wants, according to Killen (Nestor 258). In Mycenaean *kj and *tj would perhaps give the same result in this instance. (§3.19) Krahe (IF 1959:64.248) sees here the Messapic suffix -id o, also seen in alzanaidihi (gen.). This could then be compared to the Albanian plural and diminutive -z-. (§3.24) Çabej, too, adduces this equation. (§4.3) Çabej wonders whether veinan is not to be equated with Lith. víenas. Note that Haas (Mess. Stud. 37 and 221) continues the unacceptable reconstruction of Albanian vetë as *s e-ti- by suggesting a comparison with Messapic vetai 'ihr selbst'.
In passing, it is worth observing that Haas (p. 95) makes an identification and Messapic reconstruction that is suggestive of a new line of thought. He translates aran as 'illam' (contrast A&M §3.1) and compares Umbrian oro-; this may or may not be so. Here (and again on p. 177) he translates ennan also as 'illam', reconstructing *en m and comparing Greek enh 'jenen Tag', OCS on , Latin enim. If so, this same reconstructed shape would also accommodate Albanian një 'one', and the sense is not too far off.First records of WRITEN Albanian. Not of Albanian Language. So, the person here has not expressed himself correctly to begin with. Second: Albanians may have been only ONE isolated tribe of Illyrians (survived) as to write the language! Thus the difference from Greek or Slavic groups in Balkan. (Of course borrowings from Greek (old and new) are essencials to confirm the co-existence with Greeks and Romans). And further more, if there are similar words in Albanian with Illyrians (very few indeed) means that somehow Illyrians and Albanian tribe would have been also in contact with each-other because those few words does not appear to have gone through Greek-Illyrians-Romans-Albanians, but according to SOME theories (fonetical and gramatical structures) they have gone directly from Illyrian-Albanian. Third: if there is a gap, it can be for 2 reasons: 1. Either Illyrian has no connection with Albanian (yet, impossible if we addmit the Thracian affinities with Alb. and the Geographic position of Albanopolis = Adriatic-Jon Sea and also the fact that Albanians couldn't have arrived with Airplane along those seas) or 2. Albanian and Illyrian are the same language evolved, thus no "link" is needed...because...is the same...so there is no link!!! "An enigma is a puzzle, something mysterious or inexplicable, or a riddle or difficult problem". Is difficult because the dominant periods have been Greek and Romanian. So, by having so many evidences of these two civilizations, is obvious that their shadow has covered Albanian tribe somehow. If this were true, Albanian language would have belonged to either Slavic family or Greek bruch! But Albanian is a unique one, same as Greek and Basque. From this, my conclusion would be: Linguistically: Even if we addmit that "Only Greek is an element that can be most associated with Illyrians" Old Homeric Greek language does associate with Illyrians only seen through the binom: Old Albanian-Old Greek; If Old Greek can be associated with Old Albanian, then Old Albanian can be associated with Illyrian. PS: when the modern "scholars" discuss about Albanian, they always "forget" to compare affinities with Old Albanian....
|
|
|
Post by albanesehoney on Jan 8, 2008 11:49:34 GMT -5
AAdmin Originally there was no Illyrian nation and first time this name (first given by Greeks) This begs the equally important question, who gave Athenians, Spartans, Chaeronia, Thebes their national name: "Greek"? These tribes never called themselves "Greece" back in 800bce. Was it the Romans or Illyrians ? And, this word "Greek" came down way before 700'sad, when Slavs entered the Balkans (Turkish Word). If Romans gave the Greek tribes their national name, then, how can "Greeks" give the Illyrian Tribes their national name, when the name Greek came way after the arrival of the Illyrians? Aadmin, your proposal makes no sense in terms of the timeline of the arrivals of these people in the 'Balkans" (named in ca. 1300ad by Turks). BTW, Teuta is correct when she asks "If Illyria was named by Greeks, they would have named also its tribes. Any info?" So, what were the 'Greek names" of these Illyrian Tribes? Would be interesting to know the "Greek" names of these Illyrian Tribes.
|
|