|
Post by la3ar on Jan 29, 2011 20:14:55 GMT -5
where do you think wikipedia gets ther source from?
|
|
|
Post by ushtari on Jan 29, 2011 20:16:44 GMT -5
where do you think wikipedia gets ther source from? Are you being serious or are you just playing with me?
|
|
|
Post by la3ar on Jan 29, 2011 20:18:31 GMT -5
Do I need to spell it out? These are the sources wikipedia got THAT information from; Sources[edit] PrimaryElisabeth van Houts, ed. The Normans in Europe Manchester Medieval Sources, Manchester 2000. Medieval History Texts in Translation from the University of Leeds. [edit] SecondaryBates, David. Normandy before 1066, London 1982 Chalandon, Ferdinand. Histoire de la domination normande en Italie et en Sicilie. Paris, 1907. Chibnall, Marjorie. The Normans, The Peoples of Europe, Oxford 2000 Crouch, David. The Normans: The History of a Dynasty. Hambledon & London, 2003. Douglas, David. The Norman Achievement. London, 1969. Douglas, David. The Norman Fate. London, 1976 Gillingham, John. The Angevin Empire, end ed., London 2001. Gravett, Christopher, and Nicolle, David. The Normans: Warrior Knights and their Castles. Osprey Publishing: Oxford, 2006. Green, Judith A. The Aristocracy of Norman England. Cambridge University Press, 1997. Gunn, Peter. Normandy: Landscape with Figures. London: Victor Gollancz, Ltd, 1975. Harper-Bill, Christopher and Elisabeth Van Houts, eds. A Companion to the Anglo-Norman World Boydell Press. 2003 Haskins, Charles H. Norman Institutions, 1918 Maitland, F. W. Domesday Book and Beyond: Three Essays in the Early History of England. 2d ed. Cambridge University Press, 1988. (feudal Saxons) R. Mortimer, Angevin England 1154—1258, Oxford 1994. Muhlbergher, Stephen, Medieval England (Saxon social demotions) Norwich, John Julius. The Normans in the South 1016-1130. Longmans: London, 1967. Norwich, John Julius. The Kingdom in the Sun 1130-1194. Longman: London, 1970. Robertson, A. J., ed. and trans. Laws of the Kings of England from Edmund to Henry I. AMS Press, 1974. (Mudrum fine) Painter, Sidney. A History of the Middle Ages 284−1500. New York, 1953. Lucas Villegas-Aristizábal ,"Algunas notas sobre la participación de Rogelio de Tosny en la Reconquista Ibérica", Estudios Humanísticos de la Universidad de Leon, III, 2004, pp. 263–74. dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=1078914Lucas Villegas-Aristizábal, 2007. "Norman and Anglo-Norman Participation in the Iberian Reconquista." PhD thesis, University of Nottingham. Lucas Villegas-Aristizábal, "Roger of Tosny's adventures in the County of Barcelona", Nottingham Medieval Studies LII, 2008, pp. 5–16. Thompson, Kathleen, "The Norman Aristocracy before 1066:the Example of the Montgomerys, Historical Research vol. 143, pp. 251–263,October 1987.
|
|
|
Post by ushtari on Jan 29, 2011 20:21:01 GMT -5
It does not matter, any maniac can edit wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a reliable source, or do you really think you can come along using Wikipedia at a University?
|
|
|
Post by la3ar on Jan 29, 2011 20:22:02 GMT -5
It does not matter, any maniac can edit wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a reliable source, or do you really think you can come along using Wikipedia at a University? OMG... I am telling you to research THOSE sources. If you really care to do so. I doubt, and I dont blame you. its a lot of reading.
|
|
|
Post by ushtari on Jan 29, 2011 20:26:16 GMT -5
OMG... I am telling you to research THOSE sources. If you really care to do so. I doubt, and I dont blame you. its a lot of reading. No, if you want to make a point by quoting something, its YOUR responsible to back it up with the ACTUAL source and not WIKIPEDIA. I cant really understand that im discussing this with you, WIKIPEDIA being a non-reliable source IS a commonly known fact. I have, apart from you guys presented impartial reliable sources from university's.
|
|
|
Post by la3ar on Jan 29, 2011 20:28:42 GMT -5
OMG... I am telling you to research THOSE sources. If you really care to do so. I doubt, and I dont blame you. its a lot of reading. No, if you want to make a point by quoting something, its YOUR responsible to back it up with the ACTUAL source and not WIKIPEDIA. I cant really understand that im discussing this with you, WIKIPEDIA being a non-reliable source IS a commonly known fact. I have, apart from you guys presented impartial reliable sources from university's. Its not about reading Wikipedia, its about WHERE they quoted the information from, and I am sorry I just dont have the time to nit pick info for you, even though you wont concider the fact anyway. PS> if you take a gander at all the sources posted previously, you will notice many of them come from universities, reliable eh?
|
|
|
Post by ushtari on Jan 29, 2011 20:32:46 GMT -5
Its not about reading Wikipedia, its about WHERE they quoted the information from, and I am sorry I just dont have the time to nit pick info for you, even though you wont concider the fact anyway. PS> if you take a gander at all the sources posted previously, you will notice many of them come from universities, reliable eh? You have given me quotes from wikipedia, i have given you quotes from academic sources, wich one is most reliable? Agan, Albanian being developed from a palobalkan language is a commonly known fact.
|
|
|
Post by la3ar on Jan 29, 2011 20:37:08 GMT -5
Indo-european, concequently.
|
|
|
Post by ushtari on Jan 29, 2011 20:39:27 GMT -5
Yes, Albanian is a indo-european language. Your point being what exactly?
|
|
|
Post by la3ar on Jan 29, 2011 20:42:44 GMT -5
Yes, Albanian is a indo-european language. Your point being what exactly? they genetics got merged early with the greeks/macedonias, and later turks.. The "illyirans" extinguished themselves. Conformity is something very comon in Albanian history.
|
|
|
Post by ushtari on Jan 29, 2011 20:45:41 GMT -5
Yes, Albanian is a indo-european language. Your point being what exactly? they genetics got merged early with the greeks/macedonias, and later turks.. The "illyirans" extinguished themselves. Conformity is something very comon in Albanian history. " But if Illyrian survived as Albanian, it did so only by means of physical contraction, withdrawal and isolation, which naturally would have taken place in mountain terrain. This is why the purest element of Albanian vocabulary refers to mountains, high-altitude plants and shepherding: the point is not that the proto-Albanians had never lived any other sort of life, but that the only ones who survived as Albanian-speakers did so precisely because that was the sort of isolated and independent life they led, probably for several centuries." www.scribd.com/doc/8699791/Noel-Malcolm-Origins-Serbs-Albanians-and-Vlachswww.promacedonia.org/en/nm/kosovo.html
|
|
|
Post by la3ar on Jan 29, 2011 21:02:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ushtari on Jan 29, 2011 21:11:41 GMT -5
Good that you have finally accepted that we are indigenous in Balkan. Dalmatian latin do exist, but the biggest influence is from "innerland" Latin. Speaking of Dalmatia, the tribe dalmatia was known as a tribe wich sheepherder lifestyle. Well ironically the word for sheep in Albanian is "delme". And yes, albanian do indeed share cognates with proto-romanian(dacian), wich clearly proves that we are indigenous in the Balkans.
|
|
|
Post by la3ar on Jan 29, 2011 21:17:59 GMT -5
not "proto" but rather Romanian.
In-case you missed it. Nowhere in the text shown, is it said that Albanians are indigenous to the Balkans... infact the text is stating the mix of cultures within the culture. Illyrians are non-existance today and for many years, and are a mix of all balkanic societys, including latin societys.
You argument based on language connection doesnt work in this sense. Anyone can come to another land, and learn the language, doesnt mean its thers.
|
|
|
Post by la3ar on Jan 29, 2011 21:31:02 GMT -5
Albanian belongs to the so called "satem group" within Indo European, and that Illyrian did not while Dacian did.[51] or Thracian[52]. There is a lack of clear archaeological evidence for a continuous settlement of an Albanian-speaking population since Illyrian times. For example, while Albanians scholars maintain that the Komani-Kruja burial sites support the Illyrian-Albanian continuity theory, most scholars reject this and consider that the remains indicate a population of Romanized Illyrians who spoke a Romance language.[48][53][54] Recently, some Albanian archeologists have also been moving away from describing the Komani-Kruja culture as a proto-Albanian culture.[55] books.google.com/books?id=RnDeHFOX8yIC&pg=PA74#v=onepage&q&f=falseThe great Illyrologist Hans Krahe himself was no supporter of the Illyrian theory about the origin of Albanians. In his late years he came to understand that most of his paleolinguistic theories were generally wrong. Krahe started by finding Illyrian traces everywhere in Europe, but then it was made clear that all he had found were Indo-European traces -- and nobody had any doubt that Indo-European tribes had been in Europe for a long many years. Let's move up in time, and reach the Middle Ages. In the Middle Ages the Albanians were somewhere there, though their first mention is in the 11th century. Where were they living? Where are the places they have named after their common words (technically called appellatives)? The south is full -- literally full -- of Slavic place names, especially the areas of Vlora, Tepelena, Skrapar, Mallakaster, Illyrians (with their less fortunate fellows, the Pelasgians) are a pure creation of Albanian romanticism. Ardian Vebiu famous Albanian historian members.aol.com/Plaku/illyrian.htm "Clearly, there are different points of view on the issue of Albanian origins and who exactly contributed to the modern Albanian ethnos. Before anyone can get into this question deeper, it is important to explore the Serb ethnic contribution to the Albanian ethnos." - Ardian Vebiu
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Jan 30, 2011 4:37:25 GMT -5
This idea was a farce by a Slovak-German who tried to unite the mumbo-jumbo mix of nationalities that existed around Zagreb at the time. The idea never received much popularity.
|
|
|
Post by ushtari on Jan 30, 2011 5:21:46 GMT -5
Albanian belongs to the so called "satem group" within Indo European, and that Illyrian did not while Dacian did.[51] or Thracian[52]. There is a lack of clear archaeological evidence for a continuous settlement of an Albanian-speaking population since Illyrian times. For example, while Albanians scholars maintain that the Komani-Kruja burial sites support the Illyrian-Albanian continuity theory, most scholars reject this and consider that the remains indicate a population of Romanized Illyrians who spoke a Romance language.[48][53][54] Recently, some Albanian archeologists have also been moving away from describing the Komani-Kruja culture as a proto-Albanian culture.[55] books.google.com/books?id=RnDeHFOX8yIC&pg=PA74#v=onepage&q&f=falseThe great Illyrologist Hans Krahe himself was no supporter of the Illyrian theory about the origin of Albanians. In his late years he came to understand that most of his paleolinguistic theories were generally wrong. Krahe started by finding Illyrian traces everywhere in Europe, but then it was made clear that all he had found were Indo-European traces -- and nobody had any doubt that Indo-European tribes had been in Europe for a long many years. Let's move up in time, and reach the Middle Ages. In the Middle Ages the Albanians were somewhere there, though their first mention is in the 11th century. Where were they living? Where are the places they have named after their common words (technically called appellatives)? The south is full -- literally full -- of Slavic place names, especially the areas of Vlora, Tepelena, Skrapar, Mallakaster, Illyrians (with their less fortunate fellows, the Pelasgians) are a pure creation of Albanian romanticism. Ardian Vebiu famous Albanian historian members.aol.com/Plaku/illyrian.htm "Clearly, there are different points of view on the issue of Albanian origins and who exactly contributed to the modern Albanian ethnos. Before anyone can get into this question deeper, it is important to explore the Serb ethnic contribution to the Albanian ethnos." - Ardian Vebiu You know whats most funny apart from that you dont know what you are talking about? that you made a quote from wikipedia and then addressed to a book from google-books wich is not readable. First of all, its not known whether illyrian belonged to Satem or Centum group. "Other linguistic arguments which have been deployed in this Illyrian versus Thracian debate are more technical. Much ink has been spilt, for example, on the question of whether Illyrian was a satem language or a centum language. This is a traditional classification of all Indo-European languages according to their underlying patterns of consonant development. (The labels are taken from the Old Ira) Albanian is a satem language, and Thracian is thought to have been one too. Most scholars believed that Illyrian was a satem language, until linguists analysed the surviving inscriptions in Venetic, a language of north-eastern Italy which was assumed (on the authority of ancient authors) to be related to Illyrian. This turned out to be definitely centum, and persuaded some experts that the whole Illyrian group must therefore have been centum too in which case Albanian could not have come from Illyrian. [43] However, more recent research has shown that Venetic had nothing to do with Illyrian. [44] (Similar problems caused by another language thought to be related to Illyrian, the Messapian language of southern Italy, have also been resolved in the same way.) [45] Illyrian was probably satem after all. www.promacedonia.org/en/nm/kosovo.htmlwww.scribd.com/doc/8699791/Noel-Malcolm-Origins-Serbs-Albanians-and-VlachsThe reason why there are many slavic typonoms is because Slavs have been ruling the place, while Albanian mostly have been living as sheepherders isolated at the mountains. But as i said, Albanians are descendent's from a paleobalkan people, most probably Illyrians judging by majority of historians/linguist familiar with the subject.
|
|
|
Post by ushtari on Jan 30, 2011 5:30:28 GMT -5
@emperor AAdmin
Your little wikipedia quotes does nowhere state that Albanians have their original home outside the balkans.
|
|
|
Post by ushtari on Jan 30, 2011 9:22:30 GMT -5
not "proto" but rather Romanian. You argument based on language connection doesnt work in this sense. Anyone can come to another land, and learn the language, doesnt mean its thers. No, present day Romanian is a Latin language, proto-romanian refers to Dacian. Albanian share cognates(familywords) with Dacian. You dont seem to understand simple facts. No modern historian/linguist claim Albanians have their origin outside the Balkan. Or what do you have to say against the following? Source:books.google.com/books?id=5pCBRsfJMv8C&lpg=PP1&dq=Ancient%20Indo-European%20Dialects&hl=sv&pg=PA103#v=onepage&q&f=false
|
|