atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on Feb 6, 2013 16:42:50 GMT -5
Maybe you albanians should stop copying everything Greek including our names... and don't give me that crap that Sotir is a byzantine name... it's a greek word with meaning... stick to what suits you like Rexepi and Xavieri... that's why i mentioned those two particular names, no dispute they are greek names and no one is saying otherwise, my point is names do not mean shit...especially at a time when people were mingling and there was no borders, you are applying you nationalistic logic to devide up stuff like this is mine and this is yours, virtually 90% of names in italian, france, spain, germany etc are common or some sort of variation of the same names but you do not hear them bickering about petty name onwership like people do in the balcans, or even worse, claiming people/heros/figures based on names.
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on Feb 6, 2013 18:22:09 GMT -5
Skandenbeg was used by the communists, but his ressurection was before. He was be honored by Western European by the 15th Century, Albanians took up Skandenbeg as their national icon during the late 1800's. There's a huge gap man, this is when your "national-awakenening" occured coincidentally during the rise of Austria. scanderbeg took his deserved place in the history of albanians, its irrelevant how long he was forgotten for or how seldom he was mentioned, none of that changes the fact that he fought for his fatherland and was an albanian, he has a big part in inspiring the moviment which culminated with the creation of the albanian state, everything else is a technicality, i'm not sure if you're expecting an apology for us using him a figure of unity. how do you know that? how can you say that with such competence? how can you talk on behalf of albanians and on a subject which has never been researched? how do you know such fine details of the time right after scanderbeg died? where are you getting this information, how do know with such certainty that christians were slightly more sad than muslims, what do we know about those times? its not as if we can go back and read articles on the following days post Scanderbeg's death, most albs at the time would have been christian anyway, i don't know where you're getting this. the only basic thing here is your approach to history, you keep fast forwarding through eras and centuries like its a movie....we're talking for a process which happened for over 4 centuries, i.e. conversions, what you are doing is taking contemporary emotional baggage and xenophobia inside yourself and transferring those feelings back to the 16 hundreds, you have no idea what that landscape was like, you can not pass judgement and resent people centuries ago for converting, they had their reasons, and everyone makes their own choices, who the fuck are you to judge anyone or question their decision? i don't understand why people keep coming back to this irrelevant point, albanians converted their own religion not yours, how about you mind your own business and not judge unless ye be judged yourself, to point fingers is unchristian like, another point, you keep revelling in the fact that you are christians, you guys seem pretty smug about it.....but how about you exercise some of those christian values you seem so chuffed about? like, no judgement and accept all others as equal? why brag about being a christian if you don't live by those values? islam was a deviding factor rather than a uniting one, where are you getting that? but albanians in spite of religion, preserved their identity, religion is part of identity but it's the level of the influence it exerts on the people decides the extent to how big a part of that identity it is. you could say for albanians that religious harmony and tolerance is part of albanian identity, just like you can say for serbs that orthodoxy is an inseparable part of their identity. muslim albs and serbs were also cool until serbs resurrected the 1389 myth as an excuse to annex kosova when they saw the ottoman empire weaken, back in the day the two people lived alongside each other, that goes for greeks as well, i have no reason to doubt that all ethnicities got along, i have heard no such thing nor do we have any documented evidence of albanians going around saying we are slavic but we we identify ourselfs as albs....that's just a weird thing to claim, where are you getting this? what do you mean by majority of christian albs back then had slavic ancestry? you mean all albs? because all of them were christians at that time, i have no idea what you're smoking.
|
|
|
Post by Balkaneros on Feb 6, 2013 19:02:58 GMT -5
I am not debating his significance, I am arguing that most Albanians take the wrong approach using Skanderbeg which ultimately contradicts current Albanian position entirely.
He was killing Muslims across the board, like any Balkan freedom fighter at the time he did not look at conversions lightly. I think this is the big lie, how Skanderbeg is used also as hero for the Muslim populas while they ignore what he was doing.
This is where you just have to use your head. Christian Albanians did not look so proudly upon the Muslim Albanians throughout the whole period - this is just logic, the Muslims had it easier under Ottoman rule whether it be minor or major implications, they were priority over the Christians - the Christian Albanians knew this and many of them still stook it out till the end and even to this day.
Yes I know I am jumping periods drastically I am just trying to get my point out there as you can maybe tell I have a lot to say. You tell me where you want to stick with.
You are totally misunderstanding what I am saying. I am not a xenophobe just because I acknowledge the brutality of the era, the point is time's have changed and for the better, we are not like that anymore. Religion meant something in the Balkans during the ottoman times PERIOD-END OF STORY, how can you argue otherwise, it was being used by all sides for benefits in numerous ways. For the Serbs, the Church acted as a sanctuary from the Ottomans, they were the heritage centers the biggest roles our Church played through those times had little to do with "God" but rather the nation and preservation through times of serious oppression. About the conversions, yes it was their choice I am not doubting that however the entire nation decided to make that move together it happened really fast - why? I personally think [alliance], the Albanians accepted the Ottomans as a "reality" and were adapting. Their heart maybe wasn't there, but on the surface they wanted to seem more Ottoman-like - opportunity.
Christianity fucked over Europe entirely - even with Serbs Christianity was at times used wrong. This is religion for you. The purpose is all the same. If we all stayed Pagan we'd be fine.
WOW you couldn't be more wrong. Firstly, Kosovo was Serbia before the Ottomans set foot in the Balkans, how do you not know this? I dare you to look at the number of Serbs that were living there AT THAT TIME, go ahead ...quick search online even will take you somewhere. Then look at the numbers following the "during period" how we started to shrink and you gain/grow in numbers. This wasn't by accident. This was the Ottomans fucking with us.
The Kosovo Battle of 1389 has nothing to do with the legitimacy Serbs have over Kosovo, you Albanians are so wrong, now I know why you focus so much on that battle trying to discredit it lol.
No, I mis-typed that. During the Ottoman era - mostly Albanians in the North.
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on Feb 7, 2013 9:42:12 GMT -5
if there were any deep rooted anemosity between christian and muslim albs that would have been evident today or even in the lead up to the independence, league of prizren or even the choice of alphabet, the fact that muslim albs take pride in scanderbeg is indicative of their mindset and affinity,everyone united for a common national goal and everyone put the survival of their identity as a priority rather than religious belief, people make a lot of fuss over religion,
as far as kosova, that land belong to whoever is living there or has lived there for centuries, it was never serbian land because serbs are very late arrivals, it was just a settlement they used and then moved further up north, just like with northern greece and south of albania, its no different, how can you claim a country where no slav has set foot for over 600 years?
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 7, 2013 9:58:11 GMT -5
^ Bingo !
|
|
|
Post by Balkaneros on Feb 7, 2013 15:07:34 GMT -5
if there were any deep rooted anemosity between christian and muslim albs that would have been evident today or even in the lead up to the independence, league of prizren or even the choice of alphabet, the fact that muslim albs take pride in scanderbeg is indicative of their mindset and affinity,everyone united for a common national goal and everyone put the survival of their identity as a priority rather than religious belief, people make a lot of fuss over religion, as far as kosova, that land belong to whoever is living there or has lived there for centuries, it was never serbian land because serbs are very late arrivals, it was just a settlement they used and then moved further up north, just like with northern greece and south of albania, its no different, how can you claim a country where no slav has set foot for over 600 years? The anemosity was "forgoten", it was stemmed out by the Ottomans - this goes back to what I was saying how the Albanian were being strategic in thinking the Ottomans were the reality of things and were "adapting". Skanderbeg had other goals besides uniting the Albanians, it's not black and white like that adt... there's a lot of other factors that need to be considered in order to perform such a feat. Muslim Albanians taking pride in Skanderbeg is not a problem for me, it just shows that they don't really understand what he was about - you're talking like today's mentality is relevent to what we're discussing. In one sentence you say... "as far as kosovo, that land belong to whoever is living there or has lived there for centuries" and in the next right over you say... " it was never serbian land because serbs are very late arrivals"... however you fail to understand the demographics of the time, Serbs were the overwhelming majority of Kosovo prior to the Ottoman arrival - Albanians have no history in Kosovo aside from being implanted there by the Ottomans. - So I guess you're failing back on the Illyrian-claim again to justify the Albanization of Kosovo... tisk tisk... again relying on the ancients to justify present-day motives... so sad - so primitive.
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on Feb 7, 2013 18:19:05 GMT -5
The anemosity was "forgoten", it was stemmed out by the Ottomans - this goes back to what I was saying how the Albanian were being strategic in thinking the Ottomans were the reality of things and were "adapting". Skanderbeg had other goals besides uniting the Albanians, it's not black and white like that adt... there's a lot of other factors that need to be considered in order to perform such a feat. Muslim Albanians taking pride in Skanderbeg is not a problem for me, it just shows that they don't really understand what he was about - i don't understand any of this at all. why are you recycling my words back at me? i am the one who has repeatedly told this to you. there is no evidence whatsoever of kosova having an overwhelming serbian population, just like there is no case to be made that kosova was ever jurisdictionally serbian, invaded yes, not only by serbs but by bulgars and ottomans, lets assume that some serb tribes were indeed scattered all over kosova, where are they now? you can't just flee from a region and then say oh but we got a couple of monasteries there and there's this battle we fought like 7 centuries ago, that's ludicrous. there is no evidence, documented or chronicled to suggest a grand masterplan by the ottomans to albanize kosova, there simply is no evidence of that, pls provide documents of that, yes! there were serbs living in kosova, just what happened to them is a mystery, just why they decided to flee is unclear, now just because you have no answers to that you cannot just assume that ottomans were going around planting people, ottomans would not have had control over albanian controlled territories until the 15'th centuary, you're talking about a centuary earlier, at a time which albs and turks would have been at each other's throat.....and you claim they 'planted' albanians in kosova? what kind disjointed historical chronological continuum is this? i don't think you are clear about what you really want to say, you're scrambling things all over the place.
|
|
|
Post by Balkaneros on Feb 7, 2013 18:42:03 GMT -5
I should charge for this sort of schooling. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Kosovo#History1321-1331 89 settlements with 2,666 households were recorded of which:[26] 3 Albanian settlements (3,3%) 86 Serbian settlements (96,6%) let's jump ahead cause we like jumping ahead... Turkish Tax census 1455 : 13,000 Serb dwellings present in all 480 villages and towns 75 Vlach dwellings in 34 villages 46 Albanian dwellings in 23 villages 17 Bulgarian dwellings in 10 villages 5 Greek dwellings in Lauša, Vučitrn 1 Jewish dwelling in Vučitrn 1 Croat dwelling and go further ... BIG LEAP are you following? Austrian numbers study done in 1871 when it came around 1876 is when the starting of Serb cleansing... onward into/during the Greek-Ottoman war, hundreds of thousands of Serb from that alone were cleansed out of Kosovo. What happened to the Serbs is not a mystery, use your head. This isn't even what we were debating, so I'll take it you folded so yes we're moving on.
|
|
atdhetar
Amicus
tonight we dine in hell!
Posts: 3,124
|
Post by atdhetar on Feb 8, 2013 7:52:19 GMT -5
1321-1331 89 settlements with 2,666 households were recorded of which:[26] 3 Albanian settlements (3,3%) 86 Serbian settlements (96,6%) lol, ok so we're saying all across kosova there were 2700 households? i thought that plac was teeming with serbs, seriously how can you rely on this sort of crude data, who recorded the population then? where was this data taken from? you cannot rely on wiki information, they could just be anything, i don't know if i can trust data for the 13 hundreds, its just laughable, but even if we take these figures on board then it just shows how sparsely populated kosova was so it was fair game fro everyone, i don't think you can calim ownership with 2000 serb households. now this is just not accurate, wwe know that there were more albanian residing in kosova by mid 14 hundreds, that's common knowledge, was this census conducted on predominantly serb inhabited regions? i wanna know the area that the census was conducted....again underpopulated. now this is just either inaccurate or distorted for your purposes, has anyone conducted a proper inquiry into this? i don't wanna look at wiki links and one sided unsubstantiated claims, i'm not saying that you're wrong i am just saying that so by the late 18 hundreds serbs fled kosova and no one has any records of that ever happening and at the same time we have numerous massacres committed by serbs towards albanians around those times so how could it be that serbs were fleeing??? makes no sense to me at all. who the fuck cleansed the serbs from kosova? albanians were fighting against the ottomans towards the last decades of the 18'th centuary, we were fighting for survival while serbs became stronger and stronger as that centuary went on, you had powerful allies and were an independent state, how is it that serbs in kosova were driven out? that is recent enough, why is it not recorded, where did 300k serbs go? that is a significant number of people, did they leave willingly or were pushed out, nothing adds up here.
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 8, 2013 10:15:00 GMT -5
these are Albanian Catholics and others being led out of kosova .... NOT SERBS don't forget that black & red flag in the background imagine all the ones not painted ..... Kosova historically was always being purged of its Albanians not the serbs ....
serbian history is criminal
![](http://i47.tinypic.com/nwc0i9.jpg)
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Feb 8, 2013 11:20:25 GMT -5
^^^ quite fair cousin boy. Makes sense. The only flaw to your logic would be if Albs DID NOT SPEAK SERBIAN, but i guess this is a mere technicality....
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 8, 2013 11:22:55 GMT -5
whats speaking serbian have to do with anything ...??
dont you see how criminal and perverted serbian history is
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 8, 2013 11:26:44 GMT -5
Fanula Papazoglu, professor of ancient history at the University of Belgrade, who has written extensively on the Illyrians (see among others, Les origines et la destinee de l'Etat illyrien - Illyrii proprie dicti, in Historia, Wiesbaden, 14, 1965, Heft 2),
has also devoted a long chapter to the Dardanians in her work The Central Balkan Tribes in Pre-Roman Times...(Engl. Transl. from the Serbo-Croatian, Amsterdam, Hakkert, 1978, 664 p.). In this latter work she indicates that
Not one of the peoples with whom we have to deal in this book has such a claim to the epithet "Balkan" as the Dardanians... because they appear as the most stable and the most conservative ethnic element in the area where everything was exposed to constant change, and also because they, with their roots in the distant prehomeric age, and living in the frontiers of the Illyrian and the Thracian worlds retained their individuality and, alone among the peoples of that region succeeded in maintaining themselves as an ethnic unity even when they were militarily and politically subjected by the Roman arms...and when at the end of the ancient world, the Balkans were involved in far-reaching ethnic perturbations, the Dardanians, of all the Central Balkan tribes, played the greatest part in the genesis of the new peoples who took the place of the old (p.131).
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 8, 2013 11:30:23 GMT -5
Constantine Porphyrogenitus (Emp. from 913-919), the Slavs Started to come to the Balkans from the Ural and the Caspian Sea during the reign of Emperor Heraclius (610-641). They were often led by nomadic Turks.46 The region, called at that time Illyria, was inhabited by the aborigine population, the Illyrians, the ancestors of the Albanians.
It is generally admitted that the Slavs settled in the Danube area along the Dalmatian coast, and in Greece. But the question as to the exact territories occupied by them has not been elucidated as yet. From various sources - historical as well as linguistic - the conclusion may, however, be drawn that if the greatest part of the vast Illyrian territories was by the end of the 9th century already colonized by the Slavs, some areas were spared. These were Dardania, New Epirus, the southern part of Prevalitania and North Epirus.47 These territories correspond exactly to the region which before the Treaty of Berlin were inhabited by Albanians.
The Slavs emerge as a strong population in the 10th century. But these Slavs are Bulgarians, not Serbs. It is they who in the 11th century named Belgrade48 the city that at present is Serbia's capital. The Slav toponyms that replaced the Illyrian and the Roman toponyms are also in many areas Bulgarian and not Serb.
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 8, 2013 11:39:57 GMT -5
As for Kosova - which is incorrectly designated as the cradle of the Nemanjic, for the Serbian nucleus did not start in Kosova, but in Raška, i.e., north of the site of present-day Novipasar - the very names of the capitals of that short-lived Serbian state suggest that Kosova was not even abidingly its center. That state, as pointed out by many historians, does not seem to have had any permanence or center.
Neither was Stefan Dušan's Empire lost to the Turks. When the Battle of Kosova took place, Serbia was insignificant and divided among various petty lords. Lazar Hrebljanovic, to whose share had fallen the Kosova Plain was merely a Knez, i.e., a prince or a simple count. His capital was Kruševac.
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 8, 2013 11:45:05 GMT -5
The Serbs did not merely make, by way of myths, the most of Stefan Dušan's short lived Empire as well as of the Kosova Battle. Their purpose was also to prove that prior to the Turkish occupation, state and nationality coincided and that the Albanians in Kosova were but an adventitious population having colonized the region as a result of the Austro-Turkish Wars when the Serbs had to seek refuge in Hungary in order to safeguard their dignity.
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 8, 2013 11:52:36 GMT -5
although the Serbian exodus, which started to receive publicity at the beginning of the 19th century, was by the middle of that same century accepted as an indubitable fact, he was sure, when journeying in Kosova (1836-1838), that at the time of the Emigration the Albanians might have occupied certain districts evacuated by the Serbs in Novipazar and in the Dukagjini Plateau, but in doing so, they were merely recuperating their ancient territory, for, he pointed out, the Albanians are the descendants of the Illyrians and these used to inhabit the territory presently occupied by the South Slavs.
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 8, 2013 12:06:35 GMT -5
-In Stefan Dušan's Code of Laws, there are indications that those who had links with Rome were persecuted.-
The ecclesiastical authority must strive to convert such (i.e., Catholics) to the true faith. If such a one will not be converted..., he shall be punished by death. The Orthodox Tsar must eradicate all heresy from his state. The property of all such as refuse conversions shall be confiscated... Heretical churches will be consecrated and open to priests of Orthodox faith".
According to Law no. 6, "The ecclesiastical authority must strive to convert such (i.e., Catholics) to the true faith. If such a one will not be converted..., he shall be punished by death. The Orthodox Tsar must eradicate all heresy from his state. The property of all such as refuse conversions shall be confiscated... Heretical churches will be consecrated and open to priests of Orthodox faith".
According to Law no. 8, "If a Latin priest be found trying to convert a Christian to the Latin faith, he shall be punished by death".
According to Law no. 10, "If a heretic be found dwelling with the Christian he shall be marked on the face and expelled. Any sheltering him be treated the same way".93
THIS IS ONLY REFERING TO CATHOLIC ALBANIANS .....so see this is one reason of possible conversion to Islam later that was a must for Albanians to preserve themselves ...survival baby !
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 8, 2013 12:08:16 GMT -5
but then again ^
It is evident that under such rigid laws it must not have been easy for the Kosovars to keep their ties with Rome. In fact, the recent examination of Turkish catastral registers has revealed that in the 15th and 16th centuries many Albanians in Kosova were Orthodox.
|
|
rex362
Senior Moderator ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_blue.png)
Pellazg
PELASGIANILLYROALBANIAN
Posts: 19,058
|
Post by rex362 on Feb 8, 2013 12:10:27 GMT -5
It goes without saying that the Albanians were not persecuted merely on religious grounds. In fact, in 1332, Father Brocardus (Gulielmus Adae, a French Dominican, Archbishop of Antebari) remarked that "The Albanoi are oppressed under the intolerable and very hard servitude of the most hateful and abominable lordship of the Slavs because they are overburdened with taxes, their clergy is lowered and humbled, their bishops and abbots often imprisoned, their monastery and priests lost and destroyed, their nobles deprived of their possessions"
The Yugoslav scholar Jovan Radonic (Rimska Kurija i Juznoslavenske zemlje XVI-XIX veka, Beograd 1950,pp. 269, 473, 511-512) has revealed that the Patriarch of Peja had the authorization of the Porte to place the Catholics under his jurisdiction, threatening to impale the Albanians who would dare to address themselves to the Pope.
n 1664, Andre Bogdani, Archbishop of Shkup (Skopje), informed his congregation in Rome that the Albanians were more persecuted by the Orthodox Church than by the Turks (see Mark Krasniqi "Les Albanais dans l'oevre d'un diplomate russe", "Gjurme e Gjurmine, Prishtine, 1979, pp. 291-391).
|
|