|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Feb 8, 2011 23:01:37 GMT -5
Sarmatians were called by the Greeks "Sauromatae" which means 'lizard eyes', does this now mean that the Sarmatians were named by the Greeks due to the shape of their eyes? No, of course not. Of course not you say.
Universal geography, or, a description of all parts of the world, ...
- Page 696
Conrad Malte-Brun - 1828 - Free Google eBook - Read
Hippocrates, a co-temporary of Herodotus, supposed the Sarmatians, a Scythian people that differed from the other Scythians, for their women used the bow and the javelin ; but in other respects, his account of the Scythians is applicable to the Sarmatians. " The people arc swarthy, short and fat, of a relaxed and phlegmatic temperament; the women are not fruitful, but their slaves being lean give birth to many children.") The Greeks were struck with their small and lively eyes, and cdmpared them to those of lizards; hence the incorrect etymology of their name, which was corrupted into Sauromates.
books.google.com/books?id=JIztEHioIYUC&pg=PA696&dq=Lizard+eyes+Sarmatians&hl=en&ei=FBBSTfbWKYSClAeW1oCjCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=falseLizard small eyes to me sound like at least semi-mongoloid shaped eyed. Mongoloid eyes just like the lizard eyes go in the same general direction as they are moving away from the nose hence why Greeks would call them such, due to shape of the eyes.   Arc swarthy basically means fully dark, short and fat suggest mongoloid direction, of a relaxed and phlegmatic temperament certainly doesn't suggest anything Mediterranean nor Balkanic but again Mongoloid behavior patterns. So far these people are described as having mongoloid eyes, mongoloid appearance and mongoloid behavior. This puts a freaken nail in this coffin as far as having any relation to us, Serbs from Balkans. |
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Feb 8, 2011 23:09:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Feb 8, 2011 23:31:27 GMT -5
Sarmatians were called by the Greeks "Sauromatae" which means 'lizard eyes', does this now mean that the Sarmatians were named by the Greeks due to the shape of their eyes? No, of course not. Of course not you say.
Universal geography, or, a description of all parts of the world, ...
- Page 696
Conrad Malte-Brun - 1828 - Free Google eBook - Read
The Greeks were struck with their small and lively eyes, and cdmpared them to those of lizards; hence the incorrect etymology of their name, which was corrupted into Sauromates.
Yep, of course not. As I told you, advanced societies had a habit of corrupting foreign people's names to formulate meaning in their own tongue. Thus corruptions such as 'Sauromates' and 'Servii' aren't reflections of how these people called themselves. This was a description of the Scythians (close relatives to the Sarmats), not of the Sarmatians. Though the eyes and swarthyness are on point; one thing Serbs are known for are tendency towards slanted-like eyes. Ancient Greek scholars wrote of the Amazons, being Sarmatians: Herodotus reported that the Sarmatians were descendants of Amazons and Scythians, and that their females observed their ancient maternal customs, "frequently hunting on horseback with their husbands; in war taking the field; and wearing the very same dress as the men". Moreover, said Herodotus, "No girl shall wed till she has killed a man in battle".en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AmazonsThe Ancient Amazons were renown for being of tall stature. |
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Feb 8, 2011 23:34:55 GMT -5
They were basically oriental people and we are not Oriental people, it is that simple. They were referring to Sarmatian in that text and not to Scythians. Serbs as a rule certainly do not have oriental eyes. Mongoloid eyes become rarity in isolated Mountain regions such as Montenegro (almost all the girls in Montenegro girls link you made do not have them).
Montenegro is clearly a region where Greek shaped eyes are very noticeable. It is also the region (western Balkans) furtherest away from Asia versus rest of Balkans and together with Greece has the least influence from Mongoloids as far as Balkans is concerned.
|
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Feb 8, 2011 23:40:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Feb 8, 2011 23:43:40 GMT -5
Krivo
Just just turned pro-mongoloid cause there is a clear connection between mongoloids and Sarmatians (their description eliminated then from being physically related to Iranians btw).
|
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Feb 8, 2011 23:43:57 GMT -5
I think you have a bit of a bias when it comes to the Eyes thing. My Baka (from Kuci) has noticeably slanted eyes (obviously not asian-like but getting there), and my Uncle (from Krivosije, on top of mount Orjen, one of the most isolated parts of the Hercegovina region) has extremely chinky eyes.
I could make a thread on the Serbia forum regarding this particularly Serb characteristic.
|
|
|
|
Post by plisbardhi on Feb 8, 2011 23:47:29 GMT -5
Admin, Sarmatians cannot be significant in the Balkans but a Frankish army that carried supposedly proto-Albanian speakers of which there is no indication whatsoever can? Its clear you two mountain niggers have serious problems with objectivity and producing outlanish theories. You guys pick and choose what scientific fields you can base your theories on and totally ignore others. Admin goes off physical anth. for the most part, then totally ignores linguistics as far as Albanians are concerened. Illyrians must be Hellenic, although no scholar has ever said so and more importantly the ancient Greeks themselves disagreed. And then you have Krivo who looks for any connect that can even possibly be Iranian and uses that as evidence while ignoring physical anth. genetics, and whatever else gets in his way.
Has it ever occured to you guys that its ok to be Slavicized Illyrians/Albs? You can still hate us, just stop hating your roots. For example Vlachs/Romanians, they could be like Admin and say they were previously Hellenic locals that were Romanized or like Krivo and say they are they true heirs of Rome and the descendants of the original Latins. Thankfully they don't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Feb 8, 2011 23:46:49 GMT -5
Well guess what, they are influenced somehow by Mongoloid race and certainly that is not related to natives and such eyes are clearly a small minority in Montenegro. Just look at any one of the countless photos we posted of Montenegrins.
|
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Feb 8, 2011 23:51:48 GMT -5
^When have I ever denied physical anthropology, or genetics for that matter. However I do believe linguistics, culture and history all play very crucial roles in the analysis as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by plisbardhi on Feb 9, 2011 0:03:14 GMT -5
Who are you kidding? You said that Montenegrin girl you posted with dark curly hair was "Iranic".
According to physical anthropology and genetics Serbs are as Iranic as Italians. Linguistically your a Slav, culturally your Illyrian, and history is up for speculation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Feb 9, 2011 0:03:37 GMT -5
I have nothing against Albanians but was rather curious about their enigmatic origins.
Normans seem to perfectly explain many things such as very name Albania is derived from them, they enter with big army (30,000) and become ruling class (leading families being of Norman origin) and even introduce the style of feudalism which only existed in Albania and no where else in Balkans was clearly introduced by Normans.
The so call Dacian connection does not appear to actually exist since the words presented are Slavic, Latin, Greek, Norse etc.
Albanian population is local genetically speaking and I do not dispute that but their identity and language doesn't not appear to be so. I do not see them as unrelated to me, on contrary.
Balkans was under intense Hellenic cultural influence (only remains are in Greek and even Phyrgian connection points to Greek direction) and later under intense Roman influence where much of Balkans become romanized (rest remained Hellenic).
There is no way Albanians survived these influences (linguistically speaking) and existed in what was the most volatile part of Balkans which is region between Serbia and Bulgaria where there were numerous Roman colonies later to boot and which produced many emperors for Rome (emperors elected by their own loyal troops many stemming from our neck of the woods).
It is even less probable to be located in Dacia which was far more volatile in terms of invasions and where even once mighty Dacians are gone (yet Albanians survived?).
There are no records of people who lived next to Rome and Greece and while Greeks describe in detail far away mongoloid Sarmatians (who could not have been that numerous either unless someone lists some cities) yet Albanians are living like ninjas unnoticed right under Roman and Greek noses.
|
|
|
|
Post by drinus123 on Feb 9, 2011 0:13:33 GMT -5
why is that hard to believe? being survivalist is pretty evident even in more modern times. not been up to question. also think albanians were much more numerous then in terms of population then rather than now. they shrank and formed nucleus in northern albania for which they expanded again(in process still).
|
|
|
|
Post by plisbardhi on Feb 9, 2011 0:38:00 GMT -5
They were noticed, as Illyrians and all the tribes they were divided into. You just choose to ignore the connection. Already in recorded history we have seen Albanians go from calling themselves Arben(r) to later using Shqiptar.
|
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Feb 9, 2011 0:42:21 GMT -5
Who are you kidding? You said that Montenegrin girl you posted with dark curly hair was "Iranic". According to physical anthropology and genetics Serbs are as Iranic as Italians. Linguistically your a Slav, culturally your Illyrian, and history is up for speculation. I lived all my life around Persians, in my humble opinion she has Iranic features (dark, rough curly hair, complexion, almond-shaped eyes, etc). These are classic Persian physical characterstics. AAdmin - you're exaggerating the Mongoloid eyes, during that time (100 BC), Mongoloid types weren't present in the area. Almond-shaped eyes were viewed by Early Hellenes as exotic, strange even. Sarmatians were under intense Hellenic influence as well: The Siraces (Greek: Sirakoi, Latin: Siraci, also Siraceni and Seraci[1]) were a hellenized Sarmatian tribe that inhabited Sarmatia Asiatica; the coast of Achardeus at the Black Sea south of the Caucasus mountains, Siracena[1] is mentioned by Tacitus as one of their settlements. They were said to be relatively small nation but with great moral.[2] They were neighbours to the later enemy tribe of Aorsi. They are believed to be the same or connected to the Serboi.Their King was Zorsines, and capital city, Uspeh. |
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Feb 9, 2011 0:52:07 GMT -5
why is that hard to believe? being survivalist is pretty evident even in more modern times. not been up to question. also think albanians were much more numerous then in terms of population then rather than now. they shrank and formed nucleus in northern albania for which they expanded again(in process still).
That is hard to believe because there is an example here that suggests strongly that such scenario did not work. Example is right in your vicinity. Basically entire Dinaric mountain chain east of you was filled with Vlachs and who lived next to Roman cities like Ragusa yet they all become slavized gradually. Albania was filled with Slavic toponyms and ruled by various Slavs, Bulgarians and Serbs until the coming of Normans. Cities on the coast are Greek especially Durres which during Norman attacks must have been pretty populated judging by the military numbers in bellow link. Battle of Dyrrhachium (1081), fought between the Normans and the Byzantine Empire en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dyrrhachium_(1081)After this battle situation starts changing in Albania especially as it related in bellow link. Second Norman invasion of the Balkans (1184–1185) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine%E2%80%93Norman_wars#Second_Norman_invasion_of_the_Balkans_.281184.E2.80.931185.29Albanians appear on historical scene right after thisThe Principality of Arbër or Arbëria (1190–1255) was the first Albanian state during the Middle Ages.[1]
Principality of Arbër en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Arb%C3%ABr |
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Feb 10, 2011 5:25:31 GMT -5
From Roman and Greek depictions, it is clear Sarmatians are of Caucasoid stock. Depiction of Sarmatians on Trajan's column  Warrior Saint Merkourious (Srp. Mrkonja), a Scythian by birth.  Sarmatians paying tribute to the Romans (to the left)  |
|
