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  123 21>
Author
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: "Slavic settlements in the Balkans"
    Posted: 19-Jul-2005 at 06:13

 

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

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

There is a lot of debates here about "Slavs" , i have posted before that they settled all across the Balkans, intermingled with the previous populace, creating the new peoples today. Slav no longer is a ethnic group (not if someone today can tell me if any nationality calls himself a slav), slavic is only a language group, the slavic language group in the Balkans are not slav by origin, well not pure slavic, from Romania to the tip of the Peloponessus (modern Greece) the mix is on a great scale, if one goes through history you will see that a lot of ethnic groups occupied the balkans and settled there.

If we go this way the mixture is evident:

Serbs are Slavic-Illyrian(Dacian?), Germanic Celtic group         & nbsp;         & nbsp;       

Bulgarians are Slavic-Tatar(Vulgar), Thracian, Armenian, Turkic group

Greeks are Hellenic-Slav, Roman, Turkic group

Macedonians are Macedonian-Slav, Roman,Illyrian, Thracian Turkic group

Romanians are Dacian(Thracian), Slav, Roman group

my point is the Balkans are a mixture of these peoples, the history for these modern peoples started when these countries where created after the Ottoman Empire.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2005 at 06:34

Here is another web site that explains more...........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs

note: " In the early history of the Slavs, and continuing into the Dark Ages, non-Slavic groups were sometimes assimilated by Slavic-speaking populations: the Bulgars became Slavicized and their Turkic tongue disappeared; in other cases, Slavs themselves were assimilated into other groups such as the Romanians, Magyars, Greeks, etc. The Croats and the Serbs were probably merged Alans and/or Illyrians."

 

Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2005 at 12:23
Genetics and linguistic/cultural identity are not one and the same thing. That's self-evident.

Back to Top
TheodoreFelix View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 694
  Quote TheodoreFelix Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2005 at 15:46

No Agema, the Balkans isnt as mixed as you may think past Serbs and Croats, whom are largely made up of Slavinized Illyrian populants. Their numbers were too few to displace the population of then Illyrians, however their influence was very heavy. The Avars didnt stay in the Balkans long enough to bring any big blood donations but did place Slavs as the ruling populace and the dominant population in the region.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2005 at 21:32

Iskender they are not just my views, these web sites explained more detailed, you do know that the Illyrians & Thracians(Phrygians, Dacians) were a very numerous group in the Balkans. The ancient Hellenes described these people as the biggest populace in the Balkans, and if they were joined, which they weren't, they would have destroyed the Hellenic civilisation, to misplace these populations you would need a big influx migrations which i think didn't happen on a scale some historians think, but there only influence was the language, and even that isn't pure Slavic, modern day South Slavic Languages are mixed with ancient Thracian, Illyrian and even ancient Hellenic words, that is how the linguists showed similarities between these languages, not forgeting even Modern Albanian. These languages Modern Macedonian, Bulgarian, Albanian, Greek & Romanian have common bond even though they all belong to a different group of languages. If there was a big influx of Slavic tribes in Greece were are they, unless they mixed with the locals forming today modern Greeks, but on this forum some people write about other people being of Slavic descent, when in fact they are also....but they have there opinion, that's fine.

Back to Top
TheodoreFelix View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 694
  Quote TheodoreFelix Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2005 at 21:42

Modern Macedonian, Bulgarian, Albanian, Greek & Romanian

 

Macedonian is Bulgarian, the two are slavic languages, which probably differ in dialect. Am I wrong? Cant Bulgarians pretty much understand Serb, Croat and Bosnian? Along with upper Slavic nations with more difficulty?

Albanian has common origins with Romanians, which is believed was created through the Dardani tribe, which was a Thrako-Dacian/Illyrian tribe.  Romanian is latin based. They not only share over 300 words which are only found between the two, but also many vocab rules follow similar properties.

 



Edited by Iskender Bey ALBO
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2005 at 22:02

"Macedonian is Bulgarian, the two are slavic languages, which probably differ in dialect. Am I wrong? Cant Bulgarians pretty much understand Serb, Croat and Bosnian? Along with upper Slavic nations with more difficulty?"

Macedonian is closest to Bulgarian, but is also close to Serbo-Croat, there isn't officialy a Bosnian language, and Macedonian is an official language, besides, if the Slavs occupied the Balkans brought there dialects to the local populace the language was already there before the real Bulgars(Tatars) came, it was wrong calling "Old Church Slavonic" a Bulgarian language when the language was already there prior the Slav influx. But a lot of Byzantine chronicles do mention that Macedonians and Serbs as Bulgarians, something to think about because chronogicaly it doesn't add up:

*5-6 AD- Slavs arrive in Balkans (intermingle with Hellenes, Macedonians, Thracians, Illyrians & etc.)

7-8 AD - Bulgars arrive in the Balkans (adopt a language that is common all around them), and then modern scholars call this Bulgarian, why call it bulgarian when it was a Slavic dialect to start with....and prior to that nobody ever heard of Bulgarians....

  

Back to Top
the Bulgarian View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 25-Jul-2005
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 618
  Quote the Bulgarian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2005 at 15:50

I must correct you Agema. There is absolutely no difference between a Macedonian and a Bulgarian. Macedonian is officialy recognized as an official lenguage, because of the efforts of Tito's communists to make  Macedonian and Bulgarian as diverse as possible, and their international "popularity", shall we say it. Yugoslavia had wide international support, where as Bulgaria was hidden behind the "iron curtoin" and had no means of protecting the Bulgarians in Yugoslavia from Macedonization and Serbization. The Bosniaks were also being assimilated and that's why Bosnian wasn't proclamed an official lenguage. But Macedonian still is closer to Bulgarian then Bosnian is to Serbian, if I'm not misstaking.

And why did the Serbs bother Macedonizing the Bulgarians in Macedonia you ask? This was a prelude to their Serbization. And why not directly "Serbize" them you ask? That was impossible, because the Bulgarians hated the Serbs for the brutal occupation and Serbization of Macedonia during the period 1913-1944. Since the Serbization was unsuccesful the Serbs decided to try to "Macedonize" the population. And it was quite succesful because  the Bulgarians prefered being "Macedonians" instead of Serbs. That is how the Macedonian nation and lenguage were created. Untill 1944 there were practicaly no differences between Macedonian and  Bulgarian. The Macedonian lenguage was officialy established in a monastery in Macedonia by a few "Macedonian" linguists, forced by the commies to right a grammer of the "Macedonian" language.  I'll try to find and post that monasterie's name later. One of those linguists is still alive. Two or three years ago he published his memoirs in Macedonia in a book called  "Blood can't become water". After 60 years he found the courage to admit the betrayal to his own people. I'll look for the article where I red this and if I find it I'll give you his name, more details and hopefuly - links.

Back to Top
strategos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 09-Mar-2005
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1096
  Quote strategos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2005 at 15:53
I challange your thought of the Greeks being as mixed as Bulgarians or Serbians are.
http://theforgotten.org/intro.html
Back to Top
Phallanx View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
  Quote Phallanx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2005 at 18:38

Greeks are Hellenic-Slav, Roman, Turkic group

Macedonians are Macedonian-Slav, Roman,Illyrian, Thracian Turkic group

If there was a big influx of Slavic tribes in Greece were are they, unless they mixed with the locals forming today modern Greeks, but on this forum some people write about other people being of Slavic descent, when in fact they are also....but they have there opinion, that's fine.


Makedonians are Hellines, you are obviously refering to the FYROMians.
Now on the claims of Hellines of being of Slavic descent, sorry but genetics just don't agree with these claims, no matter whoever promotes them.

Again from a similar topic:

The Slavic myth:

Of course Hellines are not a "pure race", but the available data demonstrate that any potential introgression into the Hellinic gene pool were minor and did not replace the indigenous people. Hence, Fallmerayer's thesis has been disproved.

The Fallmerayer Thesis in the Light of Genetic Evidence

Jacob Fallmerayer stirred quite a controversy in the 19th century by proposing that the Hellenic nation had perished in the Middle Ages by admixture with Slavs and Albanians.

We are now in a position, through genetic evidence to evaluate this thesis, at least with respect to the question of Slavic settlements.

Slavs are distinguished by having a specific Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a, or HG3, or Eu19. This reaches frequencies of higher than 50% in Poles and decreases significantly in non-Slavic populations. The "Macedonians" of FYROM, the Slavic population immediately to the north of Greece have frequencies of R1a of 35%.

We must warn that R1a itself is not a Slavic marker. This means that any particular R1a sequence could, or could not be of Slavic origin. But, a population that has mixed with Slavs is likely to show this in relatively high levels of R1a.

Ornella Semino published a study in Science 290: 1155 in which the levels of R1a (which she calls Eu19 are given in various populations. Greeks have 11.8%, that is about 1/6 that of the Hungarians, who top the list at 60%. The Hungarians are not Slavs, but from the genetic standpoint they could very well be of Slavic origin, converted linguistically by the Asiatic Magyars. The Poles at 56.4% are the highest Slavic population.

We must note that ancient Slavic groups at the time of the Slavic dispersals probably had even higher levels of R1a. After all, Poles and Hungarians are themselves only partly Slavic in origin, and the result of admixture of a predominantly Slavic element with indigenous pre-Slavic ones. As a result, it is likely that at the time of their migrations, the Slavs had even higher frequencies of R1a.

R1a did not originate with the Slavs (that is why it is not a Slavic marker). Its origins in a Eastern European refugium after the Last Glacial Maximum means that it has had plenty of time to spread across the continent even to places where Slavs were never present. For example, its frequency in Syrians at a frequency of 10%, close to that of Greece, in the Saami of Scandinavia at 10%, Turks at 6.6% and in Albanians in 9.8%. It is even found in the Dutch, at a frequency of 3.7%, a population that has been largely unaffected by any Slavonic incursion. Given that Greece is closer to the area where R1a probably originated, it is very likely that R1a lineages would have been part of early population elements of the Balkans.

Thus, we know that at least a part of 11.8% of R1a in Greeks is of pre-Slavic origin. We also know that the ancient Slavs had frequencies of it in excess of 50%. It's hard to quantify the exact percentages, but I will give an educated guess, that 5% of R1a lineages in Greece are of Slavic origin, while the ancient Slavs had it in frequency of 75%. The picture is not much different if we change these numbers, but they will do for now. As a result, the Slavonic influence in Greece turns out to be about 7%, an almost exact match for the figure given by Vasiliev in his History of the Byzantine Empire based on demographic considerations.

This figure might turn out to be less, or slightly more. Better resolution using markers distinguishing R1a chromosomes might provide us with additional information. But, the conclusion seems unavoidable, that the contribution of Slavs to the Greek gene pool (if any) is very limited, certainly not enough to extinguish the noble Hellenic nation as Fallmereyer had proposed.


It seems that a certain cystic fibrosis mutation is of Slavic origin (in other words, the original population who became the Slavs came up with this gene). The intersting thing is that Serbs, Croats and Bulgarians don't carry the gene. What does this mean? It might mean that the gene is not really the Slavic gene. Or, as the authors of the report below say, southern Slavs lost the gene when they mixed with other populations. I'm not saying they're right in making that assumption. But who knows?

"Our results indicate that this mutation is particularly common in Czech, Russian, Belorussian, Austrian, German, Polish, Ukrainian, Slovenian, and Slovak patients. It is the second most common CF mutation to be identified in Central and Eastern European CF patients. By contrast, it was only sporadically detected in Western Europe and was absent in Bulgarian, Croatian, Romanian and Serbian CF patients. It was not found in diverse other populations of non-Slavic origin. The geographic distribution of the mutation is similar to the spread of Slavic populations during the first millenium."

source:
DIENEKES PONTIKOS

Some more info:

Haplogroup R1a ranges in Slavs from very low (in
Bulgarians) to very high (in Poles). Most Slavs have a
higher frequency of it than non-Slavs. Since the
various Slavs were formed by admixture of Proto-Slavs
with pre-Slavs, it follows that Proto-Slavs had a high
frequency of R1a, and this was diluted to various
degrees by admixture. Proto-Slavs had 50%+ frequency
of R1a, while Hellines have only 10%. Therefore, probable Slavic
admixture in Hellas is at most 20% in the most extreme
case.

However, not all 10% of Hellinic R1a is of Slavic origin,
since R1a is also found in the Near East where Slavs
never settled, and in Western Europe where Slavs
didn't settle either. If, e.g., 5% is of Slavic
origin, and the Proto-Slavs had something like 75% of
R1a, then the extent of Slavic admixture in Hellas is
something like 7%. Of course, it's not correct to use
"Serbs" or "Bulgarians" to quantify the extent of
Slavic admixture in Hellines, because Serbs and
Bulgarians are not representative of Slavs: they are
the result of admixture of Slavs and indigenous Balkan
people.

Near Eastern populations have high frequency of
haplogroup J1 (as much as almost 2/3 in the purest
Arabian groups), while Hellines have only 2-3%. Hence,
again, the extent of "Arab" admixture in Hellas is at
most ~5%. But, not all J1 in Hellines is of "Arab"
origin, since J1 predates the Arab expansion by many
thousands of years. Hence, the 5% must be reduced
further.

Haplogroup E3b cluster alpha is found in the Balkans,
but Hellas is part of the Balkans and Hellines have the
highest frequency of E3b (40-50% in the Peloponnese).
It cannot substantiate "Slavic" admixture, because it
represents the indigenous (pre-Slavic) population of
the Balkans, and not the Proto-Slavic population.
Indeed, E3b is almost absent in the northern Slavs,
which again indicates that it was mostly absent in the
Proto-Slavs.


In conclusion, Hellines may have a little Slavic ancestry, but they are NOT  of Slavic origin. The replacement theory does not agree with the facts.


On the Turkish claim once again genetics assist:

Let's start off by clearing that there are a couple of topics that contain articles and genetic maps that prove some Mongolian percentage in modern Turks. Based on that we continue.
-------------

The most comprehensive study of Y-chromosomal diversity in Europe thus far is Rosser et al., [1]. The human Y chromosome is passed on from father to son. One can thus study one half of a population's ancestry (along the paternal line) by studying the Y-chromosome. Greek Y-chromosomes belong to haplogroups HG1, HG2, HG3, HG9, HG21 and HG26. None of the 35 Greek Y chromosomes are of non-Caucasoid origin.

A second Y-chromosome study including Greeks have also shown similar results. Helgason et al., [2] reports one HG16 sequence of North Eurasian provenance in a sample of 42 Greeks (at least 97.6% Caucasoid). To put this in perspective, eight HG16 chromosomes occur in 110 Swedes (at least 92.7% Caucasoid) and three HG16 sequences in 112 Norwegians (at least 97.3% Caucasoid) were also found. HG16 is shared by many populations ranging from Europe to Mongolia. Its origin has been placed by [7] in the Eastern range of its current geographical distribution.

A third Y-chromosome study, by Malaspina et al., [3] which included a sample of 28 continental and 83 Cretan Greeks (total sample size of 111) found no evidence of the presence of non-Caucasoid Y chromosomes in Greeks.

A fourth Y-chromosome study, by Semino et al., [4] included 76 Greeks and 20 Macedonian Greeks. One Eu6 lineage, corresponding to HG10/HG36 [5] is probably of East Asian origin. One Eu17 lineage corresponds to HG 28 which is frequent in Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent [6]. In total, admixture of 2.1% is detected (if we label HG 28 as non-Caucasoid).

A fifth Y-chromosome study, by Weale et al., [8] included 132 Greek students from Athens. The same haplogroups found in [1] were detected in this study. No non-Caucasoid chromosomes were found.

The most recent and comprehensive study of Greek Y-chromosomes, by Di Giacomo et al., [9] included 154 individuals from continental Greece and 212 from Crete, Lesvos and Chios. In total, Greeks from thirteen separate locations were examined, thus giving the most complete picture of variation so far. A single haplogroup A chromosome was found (in Lesvos) which is usually found in Africa. The remainder belonged to haplogroups found in Caucasoid populations. The breakup (in percent) of the haplogroups observed) based on the set of markers typed is as follows.

P*(xR1a) R1a DE G2 I-M170 J2(DYS413≤ 18) J2*(xDYS413≤ 18) J*(xJ2) A Y*(xA,DE,G2,I,J,P)
12.8 9.8 20.2 6.6 14.8 20.2 4.9 2.7 0.3 7.7


A newer study by Semino et al. [10] has studied two samples of Greeks of size 84 and 59 (Macedonian Greeks). The focus was on two specific haplogroups E and J which are frequent in the Mediterranean region and can be used to detect population movements between Europe, Africa and the Near East. 2.4% of Greeks belong in haplogroup E-M123 and 21.4% in E-M78. Clades of E prevalent in Northern or Sub-Saharan Africa were not found. According to Cruciani et al. [11] most Greeks and other Balkan people belong to a specific cluster α within haplogroup E-M78 that is found in lower frequencies outside the Balkans and marks migrations from the Balkan area. E-M123 and its daughter haplogroup E-M34 originated in the Near East in prehistoric times. As for haplogroup J, most Greeks (22.8% Greeks/14.3% Macedonian Greeks) belong to J-M172 and its subclades which is associated with Neolithic population movements. Only 1.8%/2.2% of Macedonian Greeks/Greeks belonged to haplogroup J-M267 which could potentially (althought not certainly) reflect more recent Near Eastern admixture.

Thus, at present, in a total of seven studies, in which 925 Greek males were tested, one HG16, one HG28, one HG10/HG36, and one haplogroup A chromosomes have been found, for a total of 0.4% possible non-Caucasoid contribution to the modern Greek male gene pool. Additionally, the latest studies [9, 10] with a more refined version of the Y chromosome phylogeny indicate that influences from the Near East and North Africa in historical times are unlikely (perhaps in the order of ~2%). Additionally, Y chromosome haplogroup R1a which is very frequent in Slavic populations (>50%) is found in only around 9.8% of Greeks, and is also found at comparable frequencies further East (10.8% in Iraq; Al-Zahery et al. [12]) indicating that its presence in Greece need not be associated with medieval intrusions by Slavic speakers. The emerging picture of Y chromosome variation in Greece indicates genetic continuity, with slight influences from neighboring Caucasoid regions and virtually no influence from non-Caucasoids.

Future studies with larger samples and more detailed founder analyses will allow us to obtain a better pictures of Y-chromosome variation in Greece, Europe and the world at large. At present, it appears that modern Europeans share many of the haplogroups, while there is also geographic structure in the distribution. With the exception of the Northeast corner of Europe, all other European populations have very small traces of extra-Caucasoid genetic input(a).

[1] Rosser et al. (2000) European Y-Chromosome Diversity. Am J Hum Genet 67:1526-1543
[2] Helgason et al. (2000) Ancestry of Icelandic Y Chromosomes. Am J Hum Genet 67:697-717
[3] Malaspina et al. (2000) Patterns of male-specific inter-population divergence in Europe, West Asia and North Africa. Ann Hum Genet 64:395-412
[4] Semino et al. (2000) The genetic legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective
[5] Zerjal et al. (2002) Y-Chromosomal Insights into Central Asia. Am J Hum Genet 71:466-482
[6] Qamar et al. (2002) Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in Pakistan. Am J Hum Genet 70:1107-1124
[7] Zerjal et al. (1997) Genetic relationships of Asians and Northern Europeans, revealed by Y-chromosomal DNA analysis. Am J Hum Genet 60:11741183
[8] Weale et al. (2001) Armenian Y chromosome haplotypes reveal strong regional structure within a single ethno-national group. Hum Genet 109: 659-674
[9] Di Giacomo et al. (2003) Clinal Patterns of human Y chromosomal diversity in continental Italy and Greece are dominated by drift and founder effects. Mol Phyl Evol 28:387-395
[10] Semino et al. (2004) Origin, Diffusion, and Differentiation of Y-Chromosome Haplogroups E and J: Inferences on the Neolithization of Europe and Later Migratory Events in the Mediterranean Area. Am J Hum Genet (to appear)
[11] Cruciani et al. (2004) Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E3b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa. Am J Hum Genet (to appear)
[12] Al-Zahery et al. (2003) Y-chromosome and mtDNA polymorphisms in Iraq, a crossroad of the early human dispersal and of post-Neolithic migrations Mol Phyl Evol 28:458-472

And a bit of anthropology:

J. Lawrence Angel sorted Greek skeletal tendencies into six arbitrary morphological types, including several sub-varieties. These were not “races,” but rather [1]:

“Types are entirely aribitrary creations from sorting of individuals. Genetically determined traits will recombine and re-form in each new generation largely at random so that types cannot express these new individualities adequately, only schematically. At best they give a preliminary overview of change.”

Angel studied skeletal material from the Paleolithic to modern times, and participated in examinations of skeletal material throughout the East Mediterranean. With respect to Greece, he found that the morphological types already established in the third millennium BC, if not before that, persisted in all subsequent ages. Thus, he emphasized the racial continuity of Greeks, stating epigrammatically [2]:

“Racial continuity in Greece is striking.” 

1)
Angel, J. Lawrence, in Mylonas, George E., 1972-1973, Ο ταφικός κύκλος V των Μυκηνών, Εθνική Αρχαιολογική Εταιρεία, Athens
2)Angel, J. Lawrence, 1944, A racial analysis of the ancient Greeks: An essay on the use of morphological types, American Journal of Physical Anthropology

Same source as above.
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
Back to Top
Raider View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 06-Jun-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 804
  Quote Raider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 03:22

 

I think the genetic evidences are good thing, but we must take into account other things. For example the researches of the japanese scientist Hideo Matsumoto "proves" that the Japanese and the Hungarians are relatives.

Back to Top
Phallanx View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
  Quote Phallanx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 07:54
Raider

Wasn't it the Pechenegs or some other Mongol tribe that was assimilated by the Hungarians?
If so, Prof. Matsumoto's claims are obviously backed up by historic facts, so why the suprise when he claims a genetic relation to the Japanese?

To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
Back to Top
Menippos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 24-May-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1134
  Quote Menippos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 08:17
Guys, all people in the world are relatives, thanks to the first aminoacids or the amoeba...
CARRY NOTHING
Back to Top
Raider View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 06-Jun-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 804
  Quote Raider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 08:22

Originally posted by Phallanx

Raider

Wasn't it the Pechenegs or some other Mongol tribe that was assimilated by the Hungarians?
If so, Prof. Matsumoto's claims are obviously backed up by historic facts, so why the suprise when he claims a genetic relation to the Japanese?

Well Hungarians assimilated some pecheneg ,but there number were low. By the way Are the pechenegs related to the Japanese?

Above I have read that the hungarian population has slav marker-genes,  other sources mention turkic marker genes also.  We have everything.

To be on topic, if greeks not assimilated slavs, where they are? As much as I know large numbers of slavic peoples migrated to the territory of modern Greece in the early medieval period.



Edited by Raider
Back to Top
Raider View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 06-Jun-2005
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 804
  Quote Raider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 08:23
Originally posted by Menippos

Guys, all people in the world are relatives, thanks to the first aminoacids or the amoeba...
Back to Top
Phallanx View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
  Quote Phallanx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 10:53

To be on topic, if greeks not assimilated slavs, where they are? As much as I know large numbers of slavic peoples migrated to the territory of modern Greece in the early medieval period.




Maria Nystazopoulou - Pelekidou, "Les Slaves dans l' Empire Byzantin", The 17th International Byzantine Congress. Major Papers (Washington D.C., August 3-8, 1986) New York 1986, pp. 345-367, with the bibliography and the quotation of the sources; for the policy of Byzantium, see p. 355.

Mention that, not only did the Byzantine empire attempt to subjugate the new settlers but also forcibly transfered Slavic populations to Anatolia in order to achieve 2 things.
1) Slavic element in the Hellenic area was arithmetically weakened, and
2) assimilation was facilitated, since Slavs who were transferred to Anatolia found themselves among a flourishing and numerous Hellinic population.

This demographic measure was even applied vice-versa, that is, Hellinic populations from Anatolia were transplanted into Slavic populations, the "tactic" known as ("epi tas Sklabinias") in order to reinforce the Hellinic element in these areas.
Thus we learn, for example, that emperor Nicephorus (802-811) established in the northern Hellinic area populations which he transferred from all administrative districts ("ek pantos thematos") of Anatolia.

Beside the measures taken by the Byzantines, it is intering enough to note that during the time of Stefan Dusan (1331-1354), the Serbs expanded their domination into Makedonia but there is not one source to mention that the conquered population was Slavic.
The Serbian expansion is mentioned in contemporary sources, as a conquest of Hellinic regions and people.

As I said before, the Hellines may have a little Slavic ancestry, but they are NOT of Slavic origin. The replacement theory does not agree with the facts.

No one denies that a Slavic population was assimilated, but the numbers weren't large enough to displace or alter the 'original' population of the Hellinic area.



Edited by Phallanx
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 10:55
Originally posted by Raider

Originally posted by Phallanx

Raider

Wasn't it the Pechenegs or some other Mongol tribe that was assimilated by the Hungarians?
If so, Prof. Matsumoto's claims are obviously backed up by historic facts, so why the suprise when he claims a genetic relation to the Japanese?

Well Hungarians assimilated some pecheneg ,but there number were low. By the way Are the pechenegs related to the Japanese?

Above I have read that the hungarian population has slav marker-genes,  other sources mention turkic marker genes also.  We have everything.

To be on topic, if greeks not assimilated slavs, where they are? As much as I know large numbers of slavic peoples migrated to the territory of modern Greece in the early medieval period.

Yes, Greeks should give answer to  this, so we can  say where the anatolian greeks.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 13:19

Serbs---are from Russia-sllavs

Slovenian---are from ukraina

Croatia---??? perhaps from ukraina

Bulgarian---i think were thrakia

Albanian---Illyrian

Rumanian---Dacian

Macedonian (FYROM)---are from bulgarian

Back to Top
Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

Suspended

Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
  Quote Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 13:30
I am going to have to disagree with you, AlbanianTrilogy.

As far as I know, Croats have always been Croats. Buglarians were a Turkic tribe that heavily mixed with Slavs. Albanians are a mix of immigrants from the Caucasus, Illyrians, and Slavs. Romanians are Dacian, Roman, and Slavic. I am not sure what Macedonians are, but from what I have heard from both Greeks and Slavic people, they anything but Macedonian.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 13:51

Belisarius you says prapaganda from serbs, where you believe albanians from causasian?, where?

you speak albanians?, are vizited you Albania?, you know albanian history? and can you see albanian race? 

all linguist and historians evropian says (before some serbs and rrusian not) Albanian are Discenty from Illyria, it is fact before 350 years

You are from philipine but you dont nothink for Albs , ok good luck and read albanian history/culture

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 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 0.859 seconds.