Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

"Slavic settlements in the Balkans"

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 21>
Author
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
  Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: "Slavic settlements in the Balkans"
    Posted: 17-Aug-2007 at 06:44

Here is a web site duscussing the matter.........

http://www.rastko.org.yu/arheologija/tstefanovicova-greece_e .html

Very interesting on this matter is the published work of Florin Curta on Slavs. In "The Making of the Slavs" he shows that neither the testimony of the Byzantine writers, nor the archaeology does not support an "invasion" in the strict sense of the word, and that the processes creating the Slavic ethnicities should be reconsidered.
 
Some online articles:
 
check on that site, for instance, the articles on Slavic fibulae:
or on Slavic archaeology:
 
or from another site an interesting criticism of "Prague type" pottery and generally on methods of pottery analysis:
 


Edited by Chilbudios - 17-Aug-2007 at 06:46
Back to Top
HEROI View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 06-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 468
  Quote HEROI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Aug-2007 at 08:12
Originally posted by Belisarius

I do not presume to be the foremost authority on Albanian history. I am only offering what my research has produced on the subject. Just because I am not Albanian and from the Philippines does not mean I am incompetent about the subject. Please do not presume so.

I believe that as an outsider, I can offer an unbiased account. I was never exposed to the propaganda of the Balkans.

Here is a map of the ancient Caucasus, by the way, compared to the modern Caucasus.

 
 
What is the research that you have made on the subject?
Because the best research one would make on albanian history would start in albania.There is countinues historical evidence of Albanian people having been were they are today from ancient times,and actually overhelming historical evidence of their conection with the Illyrians.The Language is unique,and there is not the slightest proof of any migration of albanian people throuout history.Albanian is not as you said an new name for the people who lived in albania after the illyrians,but the name of an Illyrian tribe itself,who came to be the bigest and the most important tribe,which latter gave internationally the Albanians the name they still have today.That only strengthens the Illyrian conection.The albanians today call themselves Shqipetar,does that make them a new population not conected with the Albanians?So as i said,the language,the historical evidence,the complete lack of evidence to prove otherwise,all give the Illyrian conection to history making as strong a case as to be as convincing as any other historical event.
Me pune,me perpjekje.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2007 at 19:47
This is a discussion on Slavic settlements of the Balkans, not on the ethnicity of Albanians... or ridiculous Caucaus origin claims...
 
 
 
Back to Top
Perun View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 13-Mar-2007
Location: Bosnia Hercegovina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 27
  Quote Perun Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2007 at 10:29
Slavic settlement wasn't a single occasion. It lasted for centuries.
In my humble opinion, first wave of settlers came to Panonia and were pushed to the south by another wave, and so on.
 
Southern mountainous regions as Bosnia, Herzegovina, Montenegro and Dalmatia were less slavicized in the first instance. Most of the romanized Illyrians remained in Adriatic cities and mountain regions. Slavs took control over main settlements. It is hard to say if they belonged to certain tribal groups while living in the steppes or they were conglomerate of different tribes (the second theory is more realistic to me). Under Avaric rule Slavs organized into small "tribal kingdoms". Most of their names are pre-Slavic in origin (Bosnia, Duklja/Dioclea, Neretvanska knezevina). Remnants of Avars can be found in toponyms that have word Obar, Obri in it.
 
Slavic tribes identified as Serbs and Croats were parts of next wave of migration. Croats moved over to central parts of todays Croatia, with some parts of them settling in Dalmatia, near romanized cities Split, Zadar, Sibenik, Trogir. In northern parts of Croatia (Slavonija) local settlers for a long time didn't recognize themselves as Croats but Slovins.
 
Same thing happened with Serbs. They settled in southwestern parts of todays Serbia forming Raska. Later on they moved to Kosovo, northern and eastern Serbia, and some parts of todays northern Montenegro.
 
Other tribes (or tribal conglomerates) moved to southeastern Balkans: todays Macedonia, Bulgaria and parts of Greece. Some of them were hellenized (like those in most parts of todays Greece), other mixed with local Thracian tribes (and later Turkic Bulgarians) to form Bulgarians. Some of them were asimiliated in Dacia to form Romanians. The rest of tribes living in todays Macedonia created their own kingdoms (like Samuil's).
 
They always interacted with each other, sharing same or very similar language. Most of todays Balkanic languages can be sen as dialects. That is the reason why Croatian dialect from Zagorje is not much different from Bosnian one from Herzegovina, Montenegrin from Boka or Serbian from Sumadija, than is from another Croatian dialect from Dalmatia...
 
 
Gromovnik
Back to Top
Athanasios View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2007
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 546
  Quote Athanasios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2007 at 09:40
"Other tribes (or tribal conglomerates) moved to southeastern Balkans: todays Macedonia, Bulgaria and parts of Greece. Some of them were hellenized (like those in most parts of todays Greece)"
 
Do you know something that i don't know?
 
"other mixed with local Thracian tribes "
 
In antiquity period you could say that. There were many tribes in Greece like Dorians Aeolians Ionians Macedonians Thracians etc. After hellenisation era and Roman empire's domination the population was fully homogenised...Slavs had found a compact cultural background from which they adopted some elements in 6th century.

Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
  Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2007 at 10:20
After hellenisation era and Roman empire's domination the population was fully homogenised
I am not so sure of that.
Back to Top
Anton View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Anton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2007 at 12:01
I don't agree with that either.
.
Back to Top
Brainstorm View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 407
  Quote Brainstorm Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Aug-2007 at 09:27
If not fully homogenized -almost fully.

700 years under Roman occupation and all the people of the area were leaving withing the borders of Greco-roman civilization, gradually adopted (if they werent already speaking) Greek or Latin language ,worshiped (with local influences) the same gods.

When Slavs crossed Danube ,they found a more or less homogeneous group of people.
http://protostrator.blogspot.com
Back to Top
Anton View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Anton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Aug-2007 at 16:04
Chronicles write opposite things. For example, they say that in time of Justinian people around Danube spoke their own language (not Latin or Greek). Exactly at the time when Slavs crossed Danube.

Edited by Anton - 31-Aug-2007 at 17:04
.
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
  Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Sep-2007 at 14:23
Scholars hypothesised on various evidences (toponymy, antroponymy, various mentions in chronicles, etc.) the co-existence of ancient local languages (like Thracian, Illyrian, now extinct) until 5-6th century AD. These languages are probably the source of some of the words Romanian and Albanian share, which are neither Greek nor Latin in origin.
Also the religion was even much more diverse. Besides the classical Graeco-Roman pantheon, many deities were imported (e.g. Isis, Mithra) or evolved from local cults (e.g. the Thracian Horserider).
 
Back to Top
Brainstorm View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 407
  Quote Brainstorm Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Sep-2007 at 12:15
Originally posted by Anton

Chronicles write opposite things. For example, they say that in time of Justinian people around Danube spoke their own language (not Latin or Greek). Exactly at the time when Slavs crossed Danube.


The fact that some tribes-the most distanced and primitive -like tribes near Danube or Bessoi on Rhodope mt- kept speaking their native language till 6th cent does not changes the overall status.

http://protostrator.blogspot.com
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
  Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Sep-2007 at 14:04

They were neither the most distanced nor the most primitive (it were some ex-Roman provinces, though!). Can you bring some scholarly references for this amazing linguistic homogenity in late Empire Balkans?

Back to Top
Anton View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Anton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Sep-2007 at 18:22
Originally posted by Chilbudios

They were neither the most distanced nor the most primitive (it were some ex-Roman provinces, though!). Can you bring some scholarly references for this amazing linguistic homogenity in late Empire Balkans?

 
He might bring plenty of scholars claiming hellenization of Thracians but this will say only about current status of historical methodology only.
.
Back to Top
Anton View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Anton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Sep-2007 at 18:31
Originally posted by Brainstorm


The fact that some tribes-the most distanced and primitive -like tribes near Danube or Bessoi on Rhodope mt- kept speaking their native language till 6th cent does not changes the overall status.
 
The overall status is that Thracian language was spoken and Thracians were known at the time of Malala and Prokopius. Everything else is fiction. "Primitive" tribes preserved their language in the center of Eastern Roman Empire -- Bulgarian word Plovdiv is phonetically derived from Thracian "Pulpudeva" rather than Greek "Philipopolis".
.
Back to Top
Brainstorm View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 407
  Quote Brainstorm Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Sep-2007 at 10:41
Thousands of written evidence are found throughout the area.
Even everyday arrangements or curses written by simple people.

Almost all of them in Greek or Latin.
http://protostrator.blogspot.com
Back to Top
Anton View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Anton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Sep-2007 at 11:22
Similar situation was before this proposed "hellenization". There were many inscriptions in Greek. Number of found Thracian inscriptions is, I will remind you, only 4. Yet, nobody doubted Thracian language at that time. Some poets even wrote poems in this "disapeared" language in first century AD :)
.
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
  Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Sep-2007 at 12:02
He might bring plenty of scholars claiming hellenization of Thracians but this will say only about current status of historical methodology only.
But a complete Hellenization it didn't happen, there are glosses in inscriptions, toponyms, names, rituals and narratives, etc. which prove non-Hellenic elements (or non-Roman in the Romanophone areas) in late Antiquity Balkans. He even said they were worshipping the same gods, ignoring cults like the that of the Thracian rider which is attested by tens of inscriptions!
 
Thousands of written evidence are found throughout the area.
Even everyday arrangements or curses written by simple people.

Almost all of them in Greek or Latin.
Actually it is not right quite so. Most of the area was rather bilingual (as Anton hinted with the etymology of Plovdiv, unexplainable etymologically from Greek but rather from Thracian). Not to say that the percentage of literacy in ancient Balkans was very low, the number of lapicides even lower, so your "simple" people were actually quite a minority which by the standards of that time we call rather educated, elite. Your analysis of demographics based only on inscriptions would account for probably less than 10% of the population (William V. Harris estimates the literacy rate in the Roman Empire to about 10%, with regional variation, but in steady decline in the Late Empire, some scholars give higher figures, however I've heard of none to account at least for half of the population).
 
Back to Top
Athanasios View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2007
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 546
  Quote Athanasios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Sep-2007 at 14:47
Most likely for the Bessoi tribe(due to specific reasons) to have kept the Thracian language until Late Roman period, but in a sea of Latin and/or Greek speaking population they were rendered linguistically as a living museum.Pretty sure this linguistic elements were lost short after the Slavic invasions.

 Your analysis of demographics based only on inscriptions would account for probably less than 10% of the population

I'm pretty sure that in the towns of the older civilizations (Latin and eastern Mediterranean )this percentage was high enough so that we can regard these inscriptions as trustworthy.



Back to Top
Brainstorm View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 407
  Quote Brainstorm Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Sep-2007 at 16:01
Originally posted by Chilbudios

[
there are glosses in inscriptions, toponyms, names, rituals and narratives,
 etc.


Inscriptions=4
Toponyms...so what? even "Corinth" is non-hellenic toponym/word-do u think Corinth was not "hellinized" ?


 He even said they were worshipping the same gods, ignoring cults like the that of the Thracian rider which is attested by tens of inscriptions!

I m almost sure that i ve seen with my own eyes many more sculptures of thracian god/hero rider than you.
If u look again u ll notice that i mentioned "same gods of course with local differences"-(such as this)
 

 
http://protostrator.blogspot.com
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
  Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Sep-2007 at 07:13
Inscriptions=4
I didn't say inscriptions but glosses in inscriptions and the number of these is larger and more than probably it is not properly counted (I haven't heard of any monograph dedicated to this issue). For instance you can read this article: http://soltdm.com/sources/inscr/kaga/kaga_e.htm. It is about a word which seems to occur in two inscriptions, which doesn't sound neither Latin nor Greek and it is assumed to belong to the Dacians/Getae (speaking a Thracian dialect or after some scholars a distinct language however related to Thracian) living in the Roman province of Scythia Minor. It is worth remembering that the Roman poet Ovidius being exiled in this remote province learnt the language of the Getae and wrote in it. From his poetry one could even infer the Getae were the main demographical element (larger than Greeks, at that time though a Roman province, the Roman language was hardly spoken) as himself says "barbarum ego sum qui non intellegor ulli
et rident stolidi verba Latina Getae" (I'm the barbarian because no one understands me and the Getae laugh stupidly at the Latin words). Of course, this could be just rhetorics, however it is a coordinate in any discussion about the ethnic perspective of the Balkans during the Roman Empire.
Another case is the word "midne" which occurs in a Latin inscription from 3rd century AD, which could be the Thracian word for "dwelling".
 
Toponyms...so what? even "Corinth" is non-hellenic toponym/word-do u think Corinth was not "hellinized" ?
Actually the toponymy analysis doesn't count just mentions but also other evidences which illustrate the how the toponym was actually perceived or the conditions in which it was perpetuated. In the previous posts you were reminded of Plovdiv which cannot be derived from its Latin/Greek variant, but from a possible Thracian variant of it. It is much less likely than a completely Hellenized population preserved two names for the same toponym, than the fact there were two linguistic groups which hold the both variants of the toponym.
Another interesting example: Mesembria perserved in an inscription as "Mesembria - apo Melsa kai Bria" plus some etymologies in the ancient writers, which show that the two Thracian linguistic elements were known at the time when these were written.
Other argument is density of the toponyms. There are regions where it's rather improable that a completely Hellenized population would preserve almost entirely toponyms which were not Greek/Roman. A much more likely hypothesis is that these are linguistic enclaves.
 
Of course, by the time of early Middle Ages much of these elements were assimilated. However not before their complete disappearance, the 3rd century crisis and the invasions of the 5th century would alter again the demographics of the Balkans, therefore practically I don't think we can find a moment in the ancient history of the Balkans were we can account for homogenisation, for a complete Romanization (roughly in North and West)/Hellenization (in the rest of the peninsula).
 

I m almost sure that i ve seen with my own eyes many more sculptures of thracian god/hero rider than you.
Since you have no idea who I am, your certainty is not justified.
 
If u look again u ll notice that i mentioned "same gods of course with local differences"-(such as this)
Actually you said "same gods with local influences" which is not the same thing. Which is that "same god" which was worshipped as the "Thracian rider" (as a local influence)? Which is that "same god" which was worshipped as Heros (as a local influence)? The religious perspective it is not at all homogenous, on the contrary.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 21>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.