• This topic has 20 voices and 96 replies.
Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 97 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #358841

    Anonymous
    Quote:

    Well, point is that South Slavs are descendants of Illyrians.

    That point is arguable, like mentioned in the discussion I directed you towards. They are surely a part of the genetic pool, however read the discussion.

    Do not worry about off-topics that much, there are moderators whose job is to take care of that, discussions are prone to evolve in different directions.

    #358842

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    That point is arguable, like mentioned in the discussion I directed you towards. They are surely a part of the genetic pool, however read the discussion.

    Do not worry about off-topics that much, there are moderators whose job is to take care of that, discussions are prone to evolve in different directions.

    Cvetinov, we are their descendants. There is nothing to argue there. That discussion is only about is I2 Slavic or Illyrian (it is Y-DNA halogroup, ie paternal line). It is just about of second most widespread paternal halogroup among modern Slavs. Is that Illyrian ancestry or it is just mutation of some Slavic halogroups.  And, for more decisive researches we need more substantial reseaches. If you compare research methods doen in India with those used to research us you would laugh. They had more samples in each Indian city than in Ex-Yu (23, 000 000 population is still more than any Indian city)

    #358843

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Cvetinov, we are their descendants. There is nothing to argue there. That discussion is only about is I2 Slavic or Illyrian (it is Y-DNA halogroup, ie paternal line). It is just about of second most widespread paternal halogroup among modern Slavs. Is that Illyrian ancestry or it is just mutation of some Slavic halogroups.  And, for more decisive researches we need more substantial reseaches. If you compare research methods doen in India with those used to research us you would laugh. They had more samples in each Indian city than in Ex-Yu (23, 000 000 population is still more than any Indian city)

    There is a lot to argue, since Illyrians were extinguished 800 years before Slavs came to the peninsula. Like mentioned, they are the part of the gene pool, as well as they were the part of the Roman gene pool we assimilated. Illyrians and Illyricum are two different things. One is an ancient culture, the other a Roman region inhabited by romanised citizens, Romans, which was named after that ancient culture which once resided there. Illyrian mambo-jambo is a reminiscence on romantic nationalism of former pan-slavists, that needed an umbrella term to unite the South-Slavs under one word, they took the name of the former Roman province, in the same manner Sqiptars took the former Roman region Albania for their denomination. South Slavs are related to Illyrians in the same manner as other Slavs are related to Gauls, Celts, Dacians, Thracians, in other words, yes they were here somewhere for almost a millenia before we arrived, but who the f'ck cares.

    #358844

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    There is a lot to argue, since Illyrians were extinguished 800 years before Slavs came to the peninsula. Like mentioned, they are the part of the gene pool, as well as they were the part of the Roman gene pool we assimilated. Illyrians and Illyricum are two different things. One is an ancient culture, the other a Roman region inhabited by romanised citizens, Romans, which was named after that ancient culture which once resided there. Illyrian mambo-jambo is a reminiscence on romantic nationalism of former pan-slavists, that needed an umbrella term to unite the South-Slavs under one word, they took the name of the former Roman province, in the same manner Sqiptars took the former Roman region Albania for their denomination. South Slavs are related to Illyrians in the same manner as other Slavs are related to Gauls, Celts, Dacians, Thracians, in other words, yes they were here somewhere for almost a millenia before we arrived, but who the f'ck cares.

    Cvetinov, there is nothing wrong to be blend of Slavs and Illyrians. Other Slavic people also assimilated lot of other people. (Goths, Paleo Europans, Iranians, Finno-Ugric etc). Slavic element prevailed in us. For more definite claims, I would wait for some serious genetic researches, because we now offten have contradictory researches about same population.

    #358845

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Cvetinov, there is nothing wrong to be blend of Slavs and Illyrians. Other Slavic people also assimilated lot of other people. (Goths, Paleo Europans, Iranians, Finno-Ugric etc). Slavic element prevailed in us. For more definite claims, I would wait for some serious genetic researches, because we now offten have contradictory researches about same population.

    Not stating it is wrong, but I noticed much of mythomania built around this, rather unimportant group. Which when portrayed rationally were extinct, assimilated, romanised long before we came to the peninsula (800 years before). For that we can also take Goths which existed here after the Illyrians, after the Romans , and shortly before Slavs, making them more related to us than Illyrians.

    [img height=300]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b5/Europe_526.jpg/777px-Europe_526.jpg” />

    #358846

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Not stating it is wrong, but I noticed much of mythomania built around this, rather unimportant group. Which when portrayed rationally were extinct, assimilated, romanised long before we came to the peninsula (800 years before). For that we can also take Goths which existed here after the Illyrians, and shortly before Slavs, making them more related to us than Illyrians.

    [img height=300]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b5/Europe_526.jpg/777px-Europe_526.jpg” />

    Goths never lived here in substantial numbers, Germanic componenet here are Gepids and Langobards mostly. OstroGoths rulled, but not lived. Well, you forgot more importnant component than Germanic Celtic one. Belgrade was founded by Celts.

    #358847

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Goths never lived here in substantial numbers, Germanic componenet here are Gepids and Langobards mostly. OstroGoths rulled, but not lived. Well, you forgot more importnant component than Germanic Celtic one. Belgrade was founded by Celts.

    With all this I agree, Illyrians, Goths, Gepids, Langobards, Celts, Thracians, Romans, are surely there somewhere in the gene pool, I do not see a need to choose one group and build a myth upon them.

    #358848

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    With all this I agree, Illyrians, Goths, Gepids, Langobards, Celts, Thracians, Romans, are surely there somewhere in the gene pool, I do not see a need to choose one group and build a myth upon them.

    Well, we allready chose one group for our identity and that is Slavic. Illyrian is second most importnant, then Celtic then Germanic, etc. But we are Slavs.

    #358849

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Well, we allready chose one group for our identity and that is Slavic. Illyrian is second most importnant, then Celtic then Germanic, etc. But we are Slavs.

    I didn’t want to jump in your discussions  but I will agree with you. We speak Slavic languages, we have Slavic culture, we feel being Slavs and that’s all it matters.

    Slavs moved around central and eastern Europe assimilating different ethnical groups. It happened 1000 years ago and more recently. I was accused on this forum before for loving gypsies. I like blonds and like how Slavs in Eastern Europe with light brown hair and fair skin look, I am one them, but if our ancestors assimilated Illyrians, Goths, Finns or Normans in the north, who cares. It’s been a long time ago.

    I never understood the hype surrounding haplogroups. A haplogroup provides a piece of information obtained from Y-chromosome on male lineage. There are 23 pairs from each parent that makes up human genome. The fact that someone carries R1a does not make this person look more or less Slav. The physical appearance is determined by many genes from human genome.

    #358850

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    I didn’t want to jump in your discussions  but I will agree with you. We speak Slavic languages, we have Slavic culture, we feel being Slavs and that’s all it matters.

    Slavs moved around central and eastern Europe assimilating different ethnical groups. It happened 1000 years ago and more recently. I was accused on this forum before for loving gypsies. I like blonds and like how Slavs in Eastern Europe with light brown hair and fair skin look, I am one them, but if our ancestors assimilated Illyrians, Goths, Finns or Normans in the north, who cares. It’s been a long time ago.

    I never understood the hype surrounding haplogroups. A haplogroup provides a piece of information obtained from Y-chromosome on male lineage. There are 23 pairs from each parent that makes up human genome. The fact that someone carries R1a does not make this person look more or less Slav. The physical appearance is determined by many genes from human genome.

    People that are able to grow beards mostly understand that, for the rest, well they need some sort of recognition that they are more worth than others. Identity seeking in teenage years is a general phenomena, some do it on a healthy basis, others engage Stormtropper forums or what the name is, searching for an ego-boost upon their ancestry. :)

    #358851

    Anonymous

    To me blood means shit. Slavs were masters of the fields and great assimilators. Infact our colonialism was very similar to American one. It was Americana of dark ages. It was Slovenicana a Slavic dream for simple working man! ;D ;D Hahah little bit joke but you folks know what i mean.

    #358852

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Well, we allready chose one group for our identity and that is Slavic. Illyrian is second most importnant, then Celtic then Germanic, etc. But we are Slavs.

    You cannot choose a group, ok let's be Sumerians, and say we built the oldest civilisation, that is I beg your pardon Dalibor, bullcrap (yes there are close nations that build their identity upon such a method, nonetheless wouldn't got further into the discussion). The tradition, culture, and heritage you inherit, you do not choose, no continuity BEEP you lose, should have fought preserving it. Why the Illyrian group should be the most important, not because it is, hell that group got extinguished 800 years before the arrival of the Slavs, you had Romans, you had Celts, you had Goths, Langobards, Gepids etc. after that, but because of the Illyrian Revival, that needed an umbrella term encompassing all South-Slavs that isn't bearing any connotation like Roman, Goth etc. did bear.

    In other words Illyrian is not second most important, Illyrian was chosen because it carried no connotation, in other words nobody knew who the heck they actually were, so they were found suited for a necessary umbrella term, as well as the Roman region was called Illyricum in relation to them. All the crap afterwards with Illyrians, is mythomania, yes of course Illyrians, Gepids, Langobards, Romans, Goths, Celts, Gauls, Thracians, Dacians all inhabited the parts of our current region and were surely assimilated in some moment, but calling it most important is a fabrication. By this argument, the second most important group of the Czechs are the Boii, since they were the Celtic group that gave Bohemia their name.

    #358853

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    By this argument, the second most important group of the Czechs are the Boii, since they were the Celtic group that gave Bohemia their name.

    Swata once told me that one genetic "research" found out that Czech's have more pre-Slavic blood in themself than post-Slavic blood. This dosent sound wierd to me since Slavic expansion was usualy small warrior tribes establishing control over previous population and assimilating them.

    #358854

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Swata once told me that one genetic "research" found out that Czech's have more pre-Slavic blood in themself than post-Slavic blood. This dosent sound wierd to me since Slavic expansion was usualy small warrior tribes establishing control over previous population and assimilating them.

    Povhec there is no Slavic blood, by that method Russians have the most Slavic blood, since most Slavs are Russians. Assimilation is extinguishment, the moment you assimilate a culture, that culture seizes to exist, it loses its continuity, which blood they had is irrelevant. Slavs became the vast sea they now are, because of assimilation. It is documented, that Slavs assimilated their conquered ones, rather than eradicated them. What makes a Slav, Slav, was not his genome, but his will to assimilate others into his corpus.

    #358855

    Anonymous
    Quote:
    Povhec there is no Slavic blood, by that method Russians have the most Slavic blood, since most Slavs are Russians. Assimilation is extinguishment, the moment you assimilate a culture, that culture seizes to exist, it loses its continuity, which blood they had is irrelevant. Slavs became the vast sea they now are, because of assimilation. It is documented, that Slavs assimilated their conquered ones, rather than eradicated them. What makes a Slav, Slav, was not his genome, but his will to assimilate others into his corpus.

    Ofc there is no Slavic blood but genetic traits of pre-Slavic population in Czechia are stronger among modern Czech than genetic traits of new (Slavic) arrivals. These arrivals ofc mixed with pre-Slavic folks. So that means Slavic folk was not big in numbers but had dominant position.

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 97 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Slavorum

5 User(s) Online Join Server
  • Drizzt
  • ☭Lil Commie☭
  • LCaine
  • Shnickstara89
  • Petko (the pet store)