Thursday, October 13, 2011


I saw a funny video yesterday, trying to find some text with Albanian being read, posted by someone under the name of some Albanian guy whom he claims to be Serbo-Greek... So I assume this idiot is Serbian.

The video claims to reveal the TRUE origin of Albanians...
Yeah... every time I hear someone say something like that, I'm sure I'm going to hear something like
the TRUE origin of Halloween claiming the druids were and are Satanister, who sacrificed children if they weren't given presents
or the TRUE origin of the Jews, claiming they are Turkish.
Sure enough, this video is made to "prove" Albanians don't belong to Balkan.

The script of the video with commentary:

"Albania is not a homogenous country, it contains many different ethnic groups (Greeks, Slavs, Turks, ethnic Albanians etc.) upon all of which was applied the term Albanian."
What ever that means. If he's saying all the citizens of Albania in spite of their ethnicity are called Albanian, it's "duh!" Is there really any need to say that?
Serbia is not a homogenous country either, like most of the world's countries. I think it's very few countries in the world who actually have managed to drive through the Nazi idea of "purity" and have cleansed most of the ethnically undesired peoples from the country, either by deporting them or by killing them. A lot of nations have tried this, though. Either this or assimilation.
For some reason diversity is a huge threat to some people, and usually these people also claim to be part of the BEST nation of the world, the strongest, prettiest, most courageous and what ever they think is good, in superlative... and they are afraid of the influence of people they consider being everything but anything positive. Like Germans, the master race, was so scared of the Jews, who really only minded their own business, that they killed millions.
Now we have the Serbs trying to get rid of everyone who isn't Serbian, especially Albanians. I'm sorry, Serbians, but if you hate someone, if you see someone as a threat, it's because they ARE a threat... not because of them, but because you really don't believe all that boasting. You really believe Albanians are more viable culture, strong enough to destroy the weak Serbian culture, and not only Albanians, but every other culture is stronger...

"We are not saying that there are no people in modern Albania that may be related to Illyrians, we are saying that if there are, those are not ethnic Albanians".
Okay... that is what you claim. Now, what do you have to prove it?

BTW, there's so little data about these elusive "Illyrians" that the current scientific theory is that it's a name the Greek used of the many different ethnic groups of people living in the area, before the Slavs arrived. 

"Just like in many other Communist regimes, Enver Hoxha in order to keep this bunch of diverse people united and give them a common sense of nationalism, propagated the myth that they are descendants of the ancient Illyrians."

Er... like for example which Communist regime?

Besides, it was a Swedish historian Johann Erich Thunmann, who presented the Illyrian-Albanian theory first, in 1774, not Enver Hoxha.

"But are the ethnic Albanians really Illyrians?"
Nobody knows. There are supporters and opposers to this theory. We know too little about the Illyrians to know.

"In antiquity there was no place in the Balkans called Albania, the kingdom of ancient Albania was situatied in Caucasus near modern day Azerbaijan. In fact the ancient Albanians are also mentioned by the Greek historian Arrian, in the battle of Gaygamela fighting on the side of Darius against the Greek king Alexander the Great"

In the 2nd century bce the History of the world written by Polybius mentions "Arbona" (On this map written Albona... that pink area is Illyria... and what do I see... it looks like Albann... Albauns v... I'm not sure. You can look at it yourself. This is the "Vindelicia, Rhaetia, Noricum, Pannonia et Illyricum form Samuel Butler's Atlas of Ancient and Classical Geography. You know, the one that shows Albania in Caucasus.)
In the 2nd century Ptolemy mentions an Illyrian tribe named Albanoi and has drawn their capital city Albanopolis on a map, close to Durrës, about 33 km west of Tirana in Albania.
In the 6th century ce Stephanus of Byzantium mentions a city in Illyria called Arbon with its inhabitants called Arbonios and Arbonites.
An old Bulgarian text compiled around the beginning of 11th century says:
"It can be seen that there are various languages on earth. Of them, there are five Orthodox languages: Bulgarian, Greek, Syrian, Iberian (Georgian) and Russian. Three of these have Orthodox alphabets: Greek, Bulgarian and Iberian. There are twelve languages of half-believers: Alamanians, Franks, Magyars (Hungarians), Indians, Jacobites, Armenians, Saxons, Lechs (Poles), Arbanasi (Albanians), Croatians, Hizi, Germans."
Serbians are not mentioned, BTW. Slavs, yes, Croatians, yes, but where is that long line of kings starting from 610? If the Serbian Kingdom had really been there at the time this Bulgarian text was compiled, don't you think the guy had mentioned it?

"After the demise of the Caucasian Albania, the Albanians seeked for a new home and started to move west, reaching and settling in the Daco Mysian region where they came in touch with the natives formed, formed their languages and later moved south to the Balkans."
That's one theory, but very unlikely.

"Is it a coincidence that although Illyria was part of the Roman and afterwards the Byzantine empire, there was no mention of any Albanian until after the first centuries A.D?"
Er... if the Albanians were Illyrians, the Romans and Byzanthine people would have called them Illyrians, so if there were no mention of any Albanian until after the first centuries, this would support the claim.

"Is it a coincidence that another Asian invader, the Ottomans, used the ethnic Albanians as support troops to massacre and suppress any revolution of the Greeks and Slavs just like in 1770 when the Russian brothers Orlov tried to rouse up the Greeks?"
What's with this "coincidence" thing?
The Albanians preferred the Ottoman masters to the Slavic and Greek masters, because of the next "coincidence" thing you mention...

"due to their common Turkic origin, perhaps?"

There might be some differences of opinion on what is the origin of Albanian, but all linguistics agree on that it's definitely, without a doubt, an Indo-European language. Turkic languages are not Indo-European. Also, even if Albanians were Caucasian, Ottomans are not.

If we look at the genetics, Albanians' genome fits very well on Balkan, and really badly Caucasus and Anatolia. Serbs' genome has more in common with Caucasian people than Albanians'.

"Is it also a coincidence that Albanians like Ali Pasha and Omer Vrioni were in charge of monitoring and enforcing the Ottoman law in certain regions occupied by the Ottomans"
Omer Vrioni got into power because of Ali Pasha, and Ali got into power because he was born into the Albanian bey family. Bey is a leader of a region. He was made bey, because the region was Albanian... Not Serbian, not Greek, Albanian.
Now, how many Albanian leaders of that magnificence can you mention in Yugoslavia? Serbia? None?
Yeah... and you wonder why the pesky Albanians preferred Ottoman rule over the Slav rule or Greek rule?

"Or is it also a coincidence that Albanians participated in the muslim SS division Handzar, a name taken from the curved blade sword used by eastern people like the Ottomans?"

Let's see... The Nazis named their Muslim SS division after a sword used by Muslims, and the European Muslim nazis joined this SS division... and this is supposed to be confirming the idea that Albanians are from Caucasus? What?
(Besides, Islam arrived to Caucasian Albania after the Albanians arrived to Europe, according to the theory. They would have been Christian when they left.)
BTW, it was called Handschar, and it's not a sword, it's a dagger and it's called khanjar in English. It only exists in Oman. The Ottomans never used a khanjar. You are mixing it with shamshir, which is Shamshir also in German.
I suppose this is some sort of variant of Argumentum ad Nazium. Well... there were several SS divisions in Bosnia, among others a whole "pure" Serbian one.

"Maps, ancient and more contemporate, verify where ancient Albania was"
Or, to be more precise, they show where the ancient Caucasian or Eastern Albania was.
Ptolemy's Geography: Armenia Major
Atlas of ancient and classical geography, published by J.M.Dent
It is absolutely lovely :-)
Map of Colchis, Iberia, Albania, and the neighbouring countries ca 1770
Tartaria & Asistic Sarmatia. Cosmographia. Sebastian Münster
and so on and so forth.
This might become as a huge surprise to you, but people have known about the Caucasian or Eastern Albania for a very long time. I ask you to note what's its neighbor.
Iberia. Now... isn't Iberia Spain? Well, it is! But yet there is Iberia in Caucasus... 8-o
Does it mean the Spanish Iberia is not Iberia at all? Or that Spanish people are from Caucasus too? Nope. It doesn't. It means that there was a Caucasian Iberia and European Iberia. So... is it possible there was another Albania in Balkan?

Macedonia, Thracia, Illyria, Moesia et Dacia [Ancient Balkans]; Map from "A Classical Atlas to Illustrate Ancient Geography" by Alexander G. Findlay, Harper and Brothers Publishers, New York, 1849...
Oh, look at that. There's Albani straight in the middle of Illyria. Dang.

"Many linguists and historians, e.g. H.Hirt, V. Parvan, Th.Capidan, A.Philippide, N.Joki, G.Weigland, P.Skok, D, Detschew, H.Baric', I.Siadbei, etc. have put forward very important considerations indicating that the Albanians cannot be autochthonous in the Albania of today, that their original home was the Eastern part of Mysia Superior or approximately Dardania and Dacia Mediterranea, i.e. the Northern Central zone of the Balkan Peninsula, and part of Dacia.
(Like we said, that's the place they settled when they left Caucasus)
The most important facts and considerations for determining the origin and original home of the Albanians are the following:
The Illyrian toponyms known from antiquity, e.g. Shkoder from the ancient Scodra (Livius), Tomor from Tomarus (Strabo, Pliny etc.9 have not been directly inherited in Albanian. The contemporary forms of these names do not correspond to the phonetic laws of Albanian. The same applies to the ancient toponyms of Latin origin in this region.
The most ancient loanwords from Latin in Albanian have the phonetic form of Eastern Balkan Latin, i.e. of proto-Rumanian, and not of Western Balkan Latin, i.e. of old Dalmatian Latin. Albanian, therefore, did not take its borrowings from Vulgar Latin as spoken in Illyria.
The Adriatic coast was not part of the primitive home of the Albanians, because the maritime terminology of Albanian is not their own, but is borrowed from different languages.
Another indication against local Albanian origin is the insignificant number of ancient Greek loanwords in Albanian. If the primitive home of the Albanians had been Albania itself, then the Albanian language would have to have many more ancient Greek loanwords.
The Albanians are not mentioned before the 9th century A.D. although place names and personal names from the whole region of Albania are attested in numerous documents from the 4th century onwards.
THE OLD HOME OF THE ALBANIANS MUST HAVE BEEN NEAR TO THAT OF THE PROTO-RUMANIANS. The oldest Latin elements in Albanian come from proto-Rumanian, i.e. Eastern Balkan Latin, and not from Dalmatian, Western Balkan Latin that was spoken in Illyria.
Cf. the phonetic development of the following words:
Vulgar Latin caballum - Rumanian cal, Albanian kal
Vulgar Latin cubitum (elbow), Rumanian cot, Albanian kut
Vulgar Latin lucta (fight), Rumanian lupt, Albanian lufte
(horse, elbow, fight in Greek: alogo, ankona, agonas, in Serbian konj, lakat, borba, in Turkish at, dirsek and kavga, horse in Georgian is 'tskheni'. Look at that... Albanian is closer to Latin than Greek, Slavic languages or Turkish. Bummer.)
Therefore Albanian did not take shape in Illyria. The agreement in the treatment of Latin words in Rumanian and in Albanian shows that Albanian developed from the 4th till the 6th century in a region where proto-Rumanian was formed.
Vladimir Georgiev; The Slavonic and East Euroean Review 44, no.103, 1960, pp. 285-297

Okay... so Albanians aren't Illyrians but Dacians. Big difference. But, then again, there's this uncertainty about Illyrians, and all the other people in that area... we really don't know much about Illyrians, Thracians, Dacians and so. The Greek, Romans and Slavs were only interested in power and occupation, not about the culture and language and ethnicity.

"There goes the lie that Albanians are Illyrians or autochthonous in the region."
Which region is that? According to that Albanians are autochthonous in Balkan, not from Caucasus. Slavs are not autochthonous to Balkan, not even Bulgarians. Serbs are most definitely not. They arrived in the 6th (Bulgarians) and 7th (Serbocroatians) century and began assimilating and displacing the indigenous people, like Albanians. Serbs possibly a couple of hundred years later.There's so much inventing history going on...  If only that Bulgarian guy had mentioned the Serbs in the list. If only the Greeks and Romans had had the decency to call the Slavic people in Bosnia Serbs and not anything else but... If only... *sigh*

I did stumble over this little piece...
"Albanian belongs to the satem group within Indo-European language tree"
Oh? Then why is their word for hundred "qint" pronounced "cint"? It's not even near any other hundred from satem-group.

100 in "other" satem groups
Armenian  Harur
Lithuanian šimtas
Latvian Simts
Slavic languages sto
Romanian suta
I would like to point out here that in Finnish, which is not an Indo-European country, 100 is 'sata'

Greek ekato
Italian cento
French cent
Irish céad
Swedish hundra
English hundred
Tocharian känt

Caucasian languages:

Circassian shja
Kurdish sed
Persian/Farsi sad
Azerbaijani yüz
Turkish yüz

Or, let's look at a couple of other words. We know that the Albanians were a mountain people, forced to the coast by the invading peoples. There are words though that show with all desirable clarity these people's origins. Everyone has a mother and everyone sees stars, sun and moon.

English --- woman --- man --- mother -- star ---- moon --- sun ----- day
Georgian -- kali ----- k'atsi --- deda - vark'vlavi - mtvare - mze ---- dghe
Turkish --- kadın --- erkek --- ana ----- yıldız ---- ay ---- güneş ---- gün
Azeri ----- qadın --- oğlan ---- ana ---- ulduz ---- ay ----- güneş --- gün
Kurdish ---- jin ----- pîaw --- dayk ---- stêr ---- mang ---- roj  ---- roj
Persian ---- zan ---- mard --- madär -- setāre --- māh -- khorshid - rooz
Albanian --- grua --- burrë --- nënë ---- yll ------ hënë --- diell ---- ditë
Greek ---- yunaika - andras - mitera --- asteri --- selini --- ilios ---- mera
Latin ------ femina --- vir ---- mater --- stella ---- luna ---- sol ----- dies
Romanian - femeie - bărbat -- mamă --- stea ---- lună ---- soare ---- zi
Serbian --- žena -- muškarac- majka - zvezda -- mjesec -- sunce --- dan
Hungarian -- nő ----- férfi ---- anya --- csillag --- hold ----- nap ---- nap
Frisian ----- frou ---- man ---- mem --- stjer --- moanne -- sinne --- dei

I think it's interesting that the Albanian word for star doesn't look like anything but the Hungarian word for star... yll - csillag. Besides "yllä", in Finnish, means above...
BTW, in Finnish - nainen, mies, äiti, tähti, kuu, aurinko, päivä. Where do we got all of those words! :-D

I didn't know before that these comparative word lists are called Swadesh lists. Another tool to my language learning box :-D

No comments:

Post a Comment