Who are the Slavs? - Citations and Sources

[Voltron]

Nice pic, yes that is certainly similar. Interesting.
Who knows, maybe the Slavs made it to Norway

[slovenec zrinski]

On a side note..they are actually very beautiful churches all of them. I read about the lemko ones a few years ago when I was into their folk music

[slovenec zrinski]

http://www.pictureninja.com/pages/norway/image-wooden-church.htm

Norwegian wooden church

[slovenec zrinski]

I read a little about it and i see that Poles and Lemkos built these wooden churches...but so did the norwegians and swedes as well ))

[Voltron]

Yes, i read that part in wiki. Those are "influences" that doesnt mean Slavs did not have any uniqueness to their buildings. All cultures are influenced in one way or another that doesnt mean its not unique or distinct. Ottoman mosques were influenced by Byzantine churches but they are still Ottoman. We dont have that type of church architecture here in Greece. I also dont see those types in Germany either espescially such as those wooden Polish churches with the steep roofs.



Dont be silly, im not racist against Slovenes. I just commented how they are more Germanised than the rest of the Slavic countries. Do you not agree ?

[slovenec zrinski]

Do yourself a little, little favour and read the text of the wikipedia-article and not just look at the pic...in the text we find gems like:

"Built using the horizontal log technique, common in eastern and northern Europe since the Middle Ages...""

gothic, rococo and baroque influences....

"The form of these Roman Catholic churches is deeply influenced by the Greco-Catholic and Orthodox presence in the region. Some display Greek cross plans and onion domes, but the most interesting of the churches combine these features with the Roman forms with elongated naves and steeples."

I dont see these churches as anything to do with the "slavs" some hundreds years after Christ...

And besides...I dont know for sure so dont take it as a truth (which I know u wouldnt do anyway) but I believe many of these churches are in fact not polish but ruthenian/lemko/rusyn...

I dont understand your rascism towards slovenians either....do u mean that we speak german in Slovenia?
I also dont like the fact that the autrogermans and the germans have so to say stolen the cultural traits of the alps and made it out like it is their culture and only borrowed by the other peoples of the region when it is in fact an alpine culture that is common for many different peoples...french,raetoromance,austrogerman,german, czech,slovenian,italian and even slovakian and croat. The polkadance for example that the germans have made into a must on every octoberfest is in fact a czech dance. And the oompa oompa orchestras were based on the , mostly, czech military bands of the Austrohungarian empire....
But if u want to make it all german culture in the alps you are very welcome...but also very wrong....

[Voltron]

I dont think the architecture of Poland is a reflection of the buildings they lived in 600 after Christ but I might be wrong. I will have to look into that some more. Some years ago I was in Rujana/Rugen in Germany and saw the remains and the reconstructions at Kap Arkona. They did not look like Polish or any other "slavic" architecture of today At least not to my eye....

Would you consider those wooden churches in Poland Slavic architecture ? Very unique with the sloping roofs.

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

This link below also has a variety of Slavic architecture. Stunning btw.

http://slavic-unity.com/viewtopic.ph...t=331&start=15

I still dont understand how u can come to your conclusions about the Poles and I really should since I am half "germanic" and half "slavic" lol

Well that shouldnt be a problem since most Slovenes are Germanisized anyway. J/K. But to be honest, I have a bias towards Poland. They have a great history and any country to come up with the winged Hussar and save Europe from the Turks earn a special place in my book.
And before anybody says anything, yes, I know the hussar originally is Serbian, but the Poles refined it in a way that is only theirs.

[slovenec zrinski]

If u are ironic about about Austrians then yes....probably half of the Autrians are germanified "Alpine Slavs"/Karantanians/Slovenians...

I dont think the architecture of Poland is a reflection of the buildings they lived in 600 after Christ but I might be wrong. I will have to look into that some more. Some years ago I was in Rujana/Rugen in Germany and saw the remains and the reconstructions at Kap Arkona. They did not look like Polish or any other "slavic" architecture of today At least not to my eye....

I still dont understand how u can come to your conclusions about the Poles and I really should since I am half "germanic" and half "slavic" lol

[Voltron]

[QUOTE]

So u believe that the Poles are the ones that have preserved the "ethnos" from the slavic speakers of the first few hundred years after christ?

Yes

In what way?

You mentioned most of the reasons yourself except for religion for obvious reasons (As if I worship Zeus). Everything else is spot on. Look at the architecture in Poland, the language, physical characterisics of the people. I firmly believe that Poland best represents all of these.

I am being honest when I say that I still do not really get what u mean by this.

So if I say Austria represents the best of the Germanic Nations would you be confused ?

[slovenec zrinski]

So u believe that the Poles are the ones that have preserved the "ethnos" from the slavic speakers of the first few hundred years after christ? In what way? Do they still worship Triglav_Svantevit? Or do they have the highest percentage of the so called "slav marker" in their DNA? Do they speak the same unchanged language as they did back in the days? Do they still dwell in the same sort of hamlets as they did back then? What have they preserved from that time that makes them eligable for your award of best slavs in the class?

I am being honest when I say that I still do not really get what u mean by this.

[Voltron]

What is a Slavic Nation?

Same as a Germanic one, unless your suggesting they came down from a different planet and provided half of Europe a language that does not belong any country.

[slovenec zrinski]

What is a Slavic Nation?

[Voltron]

Like Zrinski, I would also like to know how you came to this conclusion.

Ok, what nation today do you think best represents the Slavic Nation ?
Anthropologically speaking the Poles best represents themselves as a Slav ethnos in all capacities.

They weren't condensed, they were spread out across several areas. Keep kidding yourself that their numbers weren't great.

Several specific areas just like in Tetovo today. ROM has also high numbers of minorities including Gypsies and Albanians not to mention Vlachs. What are we supposed to say a hundred years from now ? Apply the same logic to Macedonia.

It isn't as simple as pretending to be something you're not.

That would only be acceptable if their ancestry has historically been Macedonian and if their position on the matter is genuine.

Its not pretending, and entirely possible. I can change from an American to a Greek just by going on a plane and depending where I land to.

Again, that would only be acceptable if your ancestry has historically been Vlach and if your position on the matter is genuine. Otherwise, you can delude yourself into think you're anything if you tried hard enough, but that doesn't make it genuine.

What is genuine in the Balkans when our history comes from Multi-faceted empires ? Its romanticism at best.

That is because collective identification was encouraged through policy. It is different when one ethnicity begins to unfairly impede on and dominate the identities of other ethnicities.

Their is nothing wrong with encouriging people to be good citizens and belonging to a group. This is an instinct that has been passed down from our earliest human ancestors. The tribal mentality if you will. This is the only way to survive in a hostile enviroment. I also agree it is unfair to impede on other people but if those other people have a country of their own then they should move to it if they cant conform.

It also shows that the number of invaders wasn't that great, and that the indigenous cultures remained dominant. There is no doubt that some areas were sacked by the invaders (if they were Slavic, Germanic, Finno-Ugric, Iranic or Turkic peoples, or a combination, needs to be assessed for each incident), but in most cases these were urban centres where the cosmopolitan upper classes and aristocracy resided. The way of life for the rural populations changed very little and they adapted to the new socio-political conditions in a relatively short period of time. Furthermore, (as far as I am aware) there were no internal uprisings of formerly Roman citizens among the indigenous population in Macedonia against the warrior elite that established rebel enclaves known as 'Sclavinias'.

I agree with this statement. Just that I think the numbers were higher. I can understand the different socio political conditions but why is Slavic terminology so popular ? Espescially in an area within the Byzantium empire ?

[Soldier of Macedon]

I never said they were 100% purebred, but the least compromised.

Like Zrinski, I would also like to know how you came to this conclusion.

Again, Vlachs and Arvanites simply do not make that much of an impact numbers wise. There were only condensed in certain areas.

They weren't condensed, they were spread out across several areas. Keep kidding yourself that their numbers weren't great.

All in all, I think we have to be open to the fact that ethnicity can be switched if one wanted to.

It isn't as simple as pretending to be something you're not.

I mean if a Bulgarian tommorrow officially says he is Macedonian how many here would doubt him ?

That would only be acceptable if their ancestry has historically been Macedonian and if their position on the matter is genuine.

Or if I tommorrow identify myself as a Vlach would there be anybody that would dispute it ?

Again, that would only be acceptable if your ancestry has historically been Vlach and if your position on the matter is genuine. Otherwise, you can delude yourself into think you're anything if you tried hard enough, but that doesn't make it genuine.

During the Byzantine and Ottoman era's this subject would be non-existant.

That is because collective identification was encouraged through policy. It is different when one ethnicity begins to unfairly impede on and dominate the identities of other ethnicities.

Also the lack of archeological evidence showing that there was a struggle implies peacefull settlement in some areas.

It also shows that the number of invaders wasn't that great, and that the indigenous cultures remained dominant. There is no doubt that some areas were sacked by the invaders (if they were Slavic, Germanic, Finno-Ugric, Iranic or Turkic peoples, or a combination, needs to be assessed for each incident), but in most cases these were urban centres where the cosmopolitan upper classes and aristocracy resided. The way of life for the rural populations changed very little and they adapted to the new socio-political conditions in a relatively short period of time. Furthermore, (as far as I am aware) there were no internal uprisings of formerly Roman citizens among the indigenous population in Macedonia against the warrior elite that established rebel enclaves known as 'Sclavinias'.

[slovenec zrinski]

but the least compromised

How did u come this this conclusion? Very curious how u can possibly know this...