Slavs are indigenous on the Balkans

[Ioulianos]

Artemidoros said:

I also believe in the early presence of IE in the Balkans but the swastika is not an exclusively IE symbol.
www.collectorsguide.com/fa/fa086.shtml

About the spread of swastika amongst almost every civilasation: perso.wanadoo.fr/archeometrie/swastika.htm

[ordinary]

Artemisia said:

Didn't you know this, labi? When you have an artificial country like FYROM, its people will try to steal the historic legacy of their neighbors. If they don't have a history of their own, they invent it!

NO one in the West (or East) actually believes that the Slavo-FYROMites have any link with the ancient Macedonians.



Well, according to the FYROMites, some ancient Greek words and names are actually found in the FYROm language today. Names like Kopria, Pyrrhos, etc. Artemidoros listed some of them in a different thread and I had a good laugh. ;D

No descent historian actually believes that the Slavs came into the Balkans prior to 500 AD. It is written all over early Christian sources. The archaeological record also proves this.

Good try

[ordinary]

Talking about Greek words in the Macedonian language today, there are some interesting ones we'e borrowed from you. One of them is "od" (walk/go). The Greek original of this word is "odos" isn't it?

There is one minor detail that it is unclear, though. How did the Serbs, Montenegrins, Bosnians, Croats, Slovenians, Czekhs, Slovaks, Poles, Russians, Ukranianians, Bulgarians... manage to copy this word from the Greeks some 15 centuries ago?

[Graeme]

All those slavic dialects/languages have been influenced by literate slavic probably from the Christian bible written in Old Bulgarian the language used by Sts Cyril and Methodius.

[Pozvacin]

Another Slovenian here.

I've been follownig Alinei's, Savli's, Tomazic's, Toulaev's et al. theories for years.

While being acquainted with them, one is hardly able to make head or tail of it. I'm having a similar discussion regarding DNA and settlement on another board.

I might chime in later.

[ordinary]

Graeme said:

All those slavic dialects/languages have been influenced by literate slavic probably from the Christian bible written in Old Bulgarian the language used by Sts Cyril and Methodius.

So the Greeks Cyril and Methodius from Solun spoke Bulgarian and spread the Greek word "odos" among Slavic languages as far as modern Russia ;D ;D ;D ;D

[ordinary]

Pozvacin said:

Another Slovenian here.

I've been follownig Alinei's, Savli's, Tomazic's, Toulaev's et al. theories for years.

While being acquainted with them, one is hardly able to make head or tail of it. I'm having a similar discussion regarding DNA and settlement on another board.

I might chime in later.

We'd love to hear from someone that has been familiar with this subject for years. There is a spearate thread.

[Andrea]

All those slavic dialects/languages have been influenced by literate slavic probably from the Christian bible written in Old Bulgarian the language used by Sts Cyril and Methodius.

1. Cyril and Methodius left Macedonia at least 2 years before the Bulgarian king Boris Michael occupied SOME Macedonian territories. Boris's second name Michael was the name of the Byzantum Emperor Michael III, which Boris took as a sign of adopting Christianity. As a compensation for becoming a Christian, the emperor Michael III let him rule some parts of Macedonia.

2. They prepeared the codification of the Old Church Slavonic for years before they left Macedonia = before Boris Michael occupied some parts of it;

3. The emperor Michael III stated very clearly (this is some 3-rd or 4-th time I quote him) speaking to Cyril and Methodius: " You both are from Salonika and Salonikians AAAALLLL speak pure Slavic (or speak Slavic well).

Conclusion:

1. The language Cyril and Methodius spoke was Slavic from Thessalonika. It CAN NOT be called Bulgarian, since Macedonia was not under Bulgarians when The Brothers learned that language, prepeared the codification and finally left it.

2. Second the name Bulgarian is missleading since there is a well separated language of Bolgars.

3. That is why that language is correctly called by most modern linguists Old Church Slavonic.

4. According to the traditional history that language was spoken in Macedonia more than 300 hundred years before Bulgarians occupied it. So, if ethnic determination is needed, it can only be called Macedonian Slavic.

5. The Bulgarian yoke in Macedonia lasted for only 90-100 years. After that Macedonia became a part of Byzantium Empire once again.

[Pozvacin]

ordinary said:

We'd love to hear from someone that has been familiar with this subject for years. There is a spearate thread.

Okay. Link, please?

[Graeme]

You slavs love splitting hairs. Those saints I mentioned had the INTENTION to christianise the slavs so they would have to SPEAK a language the slavs could understand considering that most people were illiterate at the time. That does not mean that these saints were slavs only that they spoke or understood basic slavic language. Fat lot of good two literate monks using Greek could do trying to christianise ignorant and illiterate slavs.

As for the suzerainty of Bulgarian monarchs over Macedonia - it is totally irrelevent. The people living in Macedonia whatever that area is or was, were immigrants who came from Bulgaria and spoke Bulgarian albeit a rather odd or queer dialect which is now Macedonian slav. Or are you saying that the brief occupation by Bulgarians had such a strong effect on the language of the locals.

You can split as many hairs as you like. For example Europe was once occupied and controlled by Neanderthals even Macedonia. So by your logic or illogic, the people of Macedonia are neanderthals in every way. That I can believe!

[labi]

good job graeme. besides claiming to be ancient its also funny how they deny their bulgarian past and go as far as claiming their language is a different one form that of bulgarian. the albanians that bordered the fyroms always knew them as bulgarians, never as something else. im pretty sure thats how the greeks who bordered they knew them as aswell.

they even claims tsar samuil was actually a fyrom not a bulgarian. that makes all byzantine historical refrence wrong. very logical people this maces.

[ordinary]

You may be Greek or affiliated, playing a bit dumb, or even worse...

Graeme said:

You slavs love splitting hairs. Those saints I mentioned had the INTENTION to christianise the slavs so they would have to SPEAK a language the slavs could understand considering that most people were illiterate at the time. That does not mean that these saints were slavs only that they spoke or understood basic slavic language. Fat lot of good two literate monks using Greek could do trying to christianise ignorant and illiterate slavs.

You are a Greek, or affiliated. You show nevertheless that you can be on par with the Slavs in believing in fairytales ;D. Do you speak a second language? Do you realize how extremely difficult mastering a second language is? And being a master of it is precisely what you'd need for an endevour of that nature. According to you putting together an alphabet, being copied from an older alphabet nevertheless (which one it was? ) customised for another language is quite easy. I say that this task would be extremely difficult and require long years of research and work to be accomplished if it were presented to modern linguists with the modern technology and knowledge,

Graeme said:

As for the suzerainty of Bulgarian monarchs over Macedonia - it is totally irrelevent. The people living in Macedonia whatever that area is or was, were immigrants who came from Bulgaria and spoke Bulgarian albeit a rather odd or queer dialect which is now Macedonian slav. Or are you saying that the brief occupation by Bulgarians had such a strong effect on the language of the locals.

OK, we've got it already.
I'm sorry but I have to say this: this is by far the most amusing thing I've read from you. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D You really have no idea what you're talking about on this subject. That is called: shooting from the hip.

[executiona9]

language, culture etc dont mean anything.

Yugoslavians speak slavic so they are slavic is a bullshit argument

Yugoslavians are Iranians because some words in the yugoslavian language are iranian, is a bullshit argument.

Yugoslavians are greek because the greeks were earlier in the balkans than slavic people, is a bullshit argument.

blablabla etc etc

I want hard genetic facts. I want Dna tests, y chromosome and mtdna. Thats the only way you can convince me about what the yugoslavians and other Balkan people are

;D

[nordicyouth]

The original Slavic homeland is in the region of present-day Poland and East Germany, and they are half or mostly Uralic with some Nordic elements in the North and some small Mediterranean elements in the South. Early Slavs with Iranian-Sarmatian admixture left, heading South and East. Slavic settlement followed in the footsteps of invaders such as the germanic tribes and sarmatians.

slavic settlement in the balkans was caused by a vaccuum after gothic and gepid invasions and the population decline of the illyrians, with whom the slavs mixed.

slavs are a northern european amalgamation of nordic and uralic elements - theyre cental European looks are due either to a more southern position from Scandinavia or from the IE migration, although the result of that is mentioned above - Poland and the Sorbs in Germany would be the only surviving or closest to the original proto-Slavs.

[ordinary]

NORDICyouth said:

The original Slavic homeland is in the region of present-day Poland and East Germany, and they are half or mostly Uralic with some Nordic elements in the North and some small Mediterranean elements in the South. Early Slavs with Iranian-Sarmatian admixture left, heading South and East. Slavic settlement followed in the footsteps of invaders such as the germanic tribes and sarmatians.

slavic settlement in the balkans was caused by a vaccuum after gothic and gepid invasions and the population decline of the illyrians, with whom the slavs mixed.

slavs are a northern european amalgamation of nordic and uralic elements - theyre cental European looks are due either to a more southern position from Scandinavia or from the IE migration, although the result of that is mentioned above - Poland and the Sorbs in Germany would be the only surviving or closest to the original proto-Slavs.

Do you have name(s) of any of the Slav leaders?

Some consider that the "slavs" came to the Balkans from behind the Carpathians (which can well be Japan ;D).

I do not believe that Poland and East Germany fit above description well. If you're discussing the Veneti Theory (which is close to the Continuity Theory) you may not be off the mark. But then it's much more than Poland and East Germany.

Procopius, Secret History, from the chapter How Jusitian Killed a Trillion People (very aggresive chap indeed, Justinian ;D):

The rule of the Goths, before this war, had extended from the land of the Gauls to the boundaries of Dacia, where the city of Sirmium is. The Germans held Cisalpine Gaul and most of the land of the Venetians, when the Roman army arrived in Italy. Sirmium and the neighboring country was in the hands of the Gepidae. All of these he utterly depopulated. For those who did not die in battle perished of disease and famine, which as usual followed in the train of war. Illyria and all of Thrace, that is, from the Ionian Gulf to the suburbs of Constantinople, including Greece and the Chersonese, were overrun by the Huns, Slavs and Antes, almost every year, from the time when Justinian took over the Roman Empire; and intolerable things they did to the inhabitants. For in each of these incursions, I should say, more than two hundred thousand Romans were slain or enslaved, so that all this country became a desert like that of Scythia.

For neither the Persians nor the Saracens, the Huns or the Slavs or the rest of the barbarians, were able to withdraw from Roman territory undamaged. In their inroads, and still more in their sieges of cities and in battles, where they prevailed over opposing forces, they shared in disastrous losses quite as much. Not only the Romans, but nearly all the barbarians thus felt Justinian's bloodthirstiness.

So according to one of the main sources in relation to the Theory of Slav migration to the Balkans, all lands from "from the Ionian Gulf to the suburbs of Constantinople" were overrun by Huns, Slavs and Antes, who themselves suffered major losses.

As far as the looks, the Central European appearnace of Slavs does not seem to match the reality, at least when the so-called South Slavs are concerned.