|
|
Post by Kassander on Apr 13, 2005 7:39:10 GMT 10
"However, there is no evidence, absolutely none, that prove that the Macedonians are any less ethnically pure as the modern Orthodox Turks." - Dr. John Shea, National Geographic, 1998.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slovan on Apr 13, 2005 7:48:21 GMT 10
If modern Orthodox Turks can claim to be the descendants of the ancient Hellenes, then modern Macedonians with even bigger ease can claim to be descendants of the ancient Macedonians. Read the continuity theory first before referring to the “6th ct Slavic invasion”: www.continuitas.com/Or better this entire document, especially after page 23: www.continuitas.com/interdisciplinary.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by PARMENION on Apr 13, 2005 7:54:30 GMT 10
And modern Peloponisians desedants of the ancient Peloponisians,modern Cretes desedants of the ancient Cretes..e.t.c.  |
|
|
|
Post by Slovan on Apr 13, 2005 7:57:56 GMT 10
Barely.
Peloponisians (Moreans) are more Slavs and Avars.
I know Cretans did not speak Orthodox Turk at all before Orthodox Turksconquered the isle.
As I said: at the creation of Orthodox Turksin 1829 only priests and wealthy people knew Koine, which after Greece's creation was taught to the simple people: Slavs, Turks, Albanians, Vlachs...
|
|
|
|
Post by PARMENION on Apr 13, 2005 7:59:46 GMT 10
Peloponisians..slavs?  ..now where the hell did you get that idea from? ...are you surely not joking me?? The Cretans are dorian Orthodox Turk. |
|
|
|
Post by PARMENION on Apr 13, 2005 8:02:47 GMT 10
Slovan,may i ask you something??
Do you know anything about "Omada-E" ?? ( The E team )..?
|
|
|
|
Post by Slovan on Apr 13, 2005 8:03:01 GMT 10
The Illyrian Slavs and Avarswho moved down the Adriatic and Ionic coast conquered Morea in the 6th ct. Byzantine writters clearly state thet, in their own words: "entire Orthodox Turk land has been Slavinized".
Same say foreigners who visited Morea even during Reneissance.
Come to think of it Crete was inhabited by Turks and Venetians (Vlachs). Slavs unlikely.
No I don't. It was not mentioned before.
|
|
|
|
Post by PARMENION on Apr 13, 2005 8:05:39 GMT 10
The few slavs "slavinized" the enourmously more Orthodox Turks??,in a Orthodox Turk land??...hmm..sounds silly,i have to say.You are wrong!!..
|
|
|
|
Post by Slovan on Apr 13, 2005 8:08:14 GMT 10
No, Orthodox Turks have not been a majority back then. They were constantly raided and slaughtered even before, by Huns for example. Slavs conquered Morea in couple of decades not years. You can check Byzantine and Venetian sources if you like. They all claim the same.
Not to mention the Slavic strength during that period. Back then Slavs lived in every part of Europe. An Arab traveler from the 6th ct wrote:
"Slavs are the mighties of all nations. If they ever unite there will be no force on Earth to stop them."
|
|
|
|
Post by Kassander on Apr 13, 2005 8:10:33 GMT 10
Here is your Pelleponesus, Parmenion. LEARN:
"Evidence of tribal names found in both the Peloponnese and northern Orthodox Turkssuggests that there were probably extensive Slavic-speaking populations in many districts; and from the 10th century to the 15th century Slavic occupants of various parts of the Peloponnese appear in the sources as brigands or as fiercely independent warriors. Whereas the Slavs of the south appear to have adopted Orthodox Turk, those of Macedonia and Thessaly retained their original dialects, becoming only partially Hellenophone in certain districts." (Britannica Online)
|
|
|
|
Post by PARMENION on Apr 13, 2005 8:15:44 GMT 10
As i said before..you know what you read..i can present you books that say all slavs are mongols and huns and that they are the plague of Europe(Hitlers theory)..so what?? ( May i inform you,many people believe that theory,almost all the Europeans)
P.S Byzantine historians never reffered to the Orthodox Turks as "Orthodox Turks"..but as "Romans"..."Orthodox Turks" where called the ones that believed in the Orthodox Turk Pantheon.It is logical they where the "minority", speaking of religion that is,not ethnicaly!
|
|
|
|
Post by Kassander on Apr 13, 2005 8:21:31 GMT 10
I'm sorry. I thought Britannica was reputable. I take what I said back.  |
|
|
|
Post by Slovan on Apr 13, 2005 8:23:49 GMT 10
Before the reunification of Germany in the 19th ct, European scholars declared: Slavs are the builders of European civilization.
But when such a declaration did not soothe the German people who sought to claim Europe as theirs, history was rewritten. Later when the communist USSR emerged Slavic history was put away to an even deeper shadow.
|
|
|
|
Post by PARMENION on Apr 13, 2005 8:29:28 GMT 10
As i said..every one writes whatever he wants!!
P.S. The slavs are not Europeans of Arian origin.That is what Germany ( and all Europeans ) declared.They talked of "Sub-human slavs,desedants of the barbaric Huns..even their names and language are disgusting!! "
That is what they said!
|
|
|
|
Post by Slovan on Apr 13, 2005 8:35:32 GMT 10
Germans paid for their crimes. Now they claim: Slavs were the first Indo Europeans.
Did you read the continuity theory?
|
|
