Your ancestry

[Epirot]

You should be thankful that the Turks did establish an empire, because that is the primary reason for the large expansion in numbers of the Albanians. .

Not at all. The number of Albanians decreased even more during Ottoman empire. You need just to make a little research on comparing the number of Albanians in one side, and Serbs, Greeks, Bulgarians in the other. In the beginning of XIX century, the number of Albanians outnumbered that of Serbs, and sometimes were more numerically than Greeks and Bulgarians. But in the next century the demographical structure will change drastically: Serbs, Greeks and Bulgarians increased enormously their population. How come this? Because Ottoman Empire tolerated extremely the assimilating policies of those states: the missionary priests and churches took place everywhere in the territories held by Ottomans. That's why a sizable part of Orthodox Albanians passed either as Serbian or Greek.

can you show me any document written by anybody in the world that refers to "ethnic" Albanians prior to the 19th century?

Be more specific because your question is truly undefined. Are you suggesting that Albanians prior to the 19th century had no ethnic consciousness about themselves? If you are making such allusion, then you are dead wrong because Albanians at least had a very strong ethnic bond: it was the common memory for the past. Albanians of Middle Ages considered themselves as descendants of Epirotes and Pyrrhus. The Epirotic heritage was so prevalent among Albanians, as many foreign writers were compelled to accept the very fact that Albanians trace their origin to the glorious Epirotes.

[Delodephius]

Ennea, I know little about Slovaks too. I'm a Lowland Slovak, we're descendants of colonists scattered over a wide area in southern Pannonia, the majority being in Vojvodina. I went to Slovakia only once. Even though our customs are similar and we speak similarly (particularly in the central highlands from where most of our ancestors came from) we have a considerably different mentality and behaviour. We picked it up from the Serbs. We are more bold and daring, know how to have a good time and relax, while the Highlanders are very uptight and generally boring. They were under a much stricter form of Communism that, well, crushed their spirit, while we prospered under Titoism, most minorities did, noteworthy being the Albanians about whom the Serbs constantly bitch about; we had plenty of privileges Serbs, Croatians, Slovenians or Macedonians didn't have, and this kinda made us very influential in post-Communist Yugoslavia. Well, as much as it could. There's only like 60.000 Slovaks here.

But times are changing. I'm leaving for Slovakia in a month or two. I'm going to apply for citizenship, which as a diaspora Slovak I can acquire almost immediately, and finally be a citizen of the European Union. There is plenty of work to be done, particularly in the East, and my near-perfect knowledge of English could open me to some profitable opportunities on the translational market. Serbia is stagnating and I'm going to waste my youth here without gaining any education (without money) or experience (there are no jobs). My hopes are Serbia is gonna join the EU soon. It won't be a miracle makeover, I mean look at Romania and Bulgaria, they're bigger dumps than Serbia is, but it's a start to becoming a decent country and not some isolationist dump full of assholes.

[ennea]

What about Greeks and Macedonians/Arvanites/Vlachs etc ... can you tell the difference or are they all the same to you?

Well, I'm not a psychic, so I can't.
I haven't met any Arvanite, as far as I know. Yet, I have met many Albanian (& Russian) immigrants. Even when their Greek becomes almost fluent, it's still recognizable as (slightly) broken with a characteristic accent.
But, there's the new generation (called second or 1 ½ generation) that is not recognizable as foreign, unless they are Black or Asians.

[Risto the Great]

Also, I admit that while I recognized Polish things, I always confused Hungarians and Czechoslovakians.

What about Greeks and Macedonians/Arvanites/Vlachs etc ... can you tell the difference or are they all the same to you?

[ennea]

Slovak/Tomas/Anomaly,
To my horror I realize I know nothing about Slovakians. The few things I knew as Bohemian (Smetana, Dvorak) or Czechoslovakian (Janacek, Kundera, Forman, Chytilova, Passer, Menzel, Hrebejk) are actually Czech.
Still, there’s an exception. The amazing film The Shop on the Main Street seems to be considered Slovakian.
Also, I admit that while I recognized Polish things, I always confused Hungarians and Czechoslovakians.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Well, an Albanian of 1300 was the same as an Albanian of 1600. Not creating an empire has its benefits sometimes.

You should be thankful that the Turks did establish an empire, because that is the primary reason for the large expansion in numbers of the Albanians. Anyway, you fail to equate the loose meaning of an 'Albanian' with other terms commmon in the Balkans. How predictable. I think I might throw a curve ball here and give you some of your own medicine - can you show me any document written by anybody in the world that refers to "ethnic" Albanians prior to the 19th century? After you (fail to) do that, perhaps you can show us some evidence from the 1300-1600 period, where the term 'Albanians' is used specifically in reference to the ancestors of today's ethnic Albanians. I know that some exist, just not sure of the quantity and depth of information.

[Droog]

The meaning of an Albanian was hardly stable either.

Well, an Albanian of 1300 was the same as an Albanian of 1600. Not creating an empire has its benefits sometimes.

[Soldier of Macedon]

The meaning of an Albanian was hardly stable either.

[Droog]

I don't disagree with too much of the above. How recent is the term 'Turk'?

Not to mention that a Turk of 1600 was definitely not the same as Turk of 1300 etc.

[Soldier of Macedon]

I think you already know the answer of this question SOM, don't you?........We don't know for sure about when the term Turk created at first but we know that it`s became a name of a state in 6th century.

Onur, from what I read previous to my question, I could only date the term back to the 6th century, as you've indicated above. The reason for my question is simple; if terms such as Slovene and Serb are relatively new, as you suggested, then that means the term Turk is just as new, or thereabouts, doesn't it? All of them arose at the beginning of the middle ages.

the mankind DNA is 98,6% of majmun origin and 1,4% of not known origin (aliens?)....

Hahaha.....that's funny.

slovak is trying all the time to de-patriot us....to make us not to feel macedonian....and to give up our heritage

Everybody is entitled to their own opinions and perceptions, but I don't see any evidence of Slovak imposing his ideas on Macedonians with the aim of 'de'nationalising' us. If you've seen something along those lines, please share it with us. To be honest, I think you're making too much of this and aren't grasping the fact that Slovak doesn't really care about nations, as he has repeated several times. I find Slovak's participation here sobering, despite the fact that I don't agree with all of his views. Rather than looking for negatives, try and get the positives out of interaction with such a character, as opposing views need to be discussed in order to find common ground and identify the points where you will agree and agree to disagree.

[George S.]

Dp you know tests have been done on macedonian dna & genetically they say we are of the older stratum.They have concluded that we are related to the ancient macedonians.
The only problem i see is that others are writing our history for us & they are smearing history with the same brush.They are hall bent in making us fit the square peg in the round hole.Whatever happened to just being macedonian?A lot of us feel macedonian & call ourselves macedonian we are made like criminals.There's various theories floating around to say that we don't have any macedonian heritage.I think that it's wrong to theorise about who we are.We are Macedonian.We have been inder various countries.The serbs tried to inculcate in us that we aren't macedonian but slavs.The greeks called us slavophones.The bulgarians say we are bulgarians etc who is right?I think the answer lies in the fact that who we identify as we are Macedonian & not what others think we are.

[Delodephius]

Onur, you should know a few things about me first before making such assumptions. Like that I consider myself a Pagan not a Christian, nor do I associate the Latin language with Catholicism but with Roman Paganism or Pre-Christian civilization in general. So if the Romans converted my ancestors to Catholicism, even though no one in my family is a Catholics, they're all Lutherans, and so was I once, I really don't care about that. Second, I'm not from Slovakia. I went there once in my life. I live in Serbia and I was born here. There are many Slovaks here btw.
Also, do my people have to have a connection to someone for me to be fond of that people? I'm studying Japanese and practice Daoism and Buddhism. Does it matter if my people didn't have anything to do with the Japanese ever? I'd place the Japanese anthem in my signature, would that be absurd according to you?!

Without nations, you cannot survive as your own and you end being a vassal of someone.

To whom? If there are not nations but a one-world government, which is frankly inevitable, no matter who you are or from where you come from, you'd be in the same position as everyone else. And what to you mean "your own"? You mean me as an individual?

[Dimko-piperkata]

the mankind DNA is 98,6% of majmun origin and 1,4% of not known origin (aliens?)....

anyway!
should we macedonians now forget how deeply our folk/ancestries has suffered and still is suffering?

all his posts have only one target
slovak is trying all the time to de-patriot us....to make us not to feel macedonian....and to give up our heritage

he has obviously a aversion towards the macedonian history...

get rid of this dushmanche

[Onur]

Tomas, i just noticed your signature and i would like to ask some questions to you about it;

A nation is a group of people united by a common error about their ancestry and a common dislike of their neighbours.

End to ALL nations!

Tomas, i said that i agree with you about ethnicity issue but what you describe here is the false conception of a nation. Being nationalistic doesn't require you to hate from your neighbors just as being a part of certain religious community doesn't require you to hate from other people who believes other religions. Yes, some people does that but this doesn't mean that nations are bad just as it doesn't mean that religions are evil, right?

Without nations, you cannot survive as your own and you end being a vassal of someone. You should know this better than me cuz your country was part of Hungary for 1000 years `till western powers desired for smaller Hungary and the creation of Czechoslovakia after WW-1. Maybe you don't like about nation concept but it`s a fact since the start of modern era. And this concept wont end in foreseeable future. Trust me, if you go in a trouble, it will be your people again who would rush for help and ordinary French, Italian people wouldn't give a shit about you.

I see that you linked EU march in Latin language. Can i ask you about what`s your people`s relation with Latins except the fact that Latins converted your people as catholics? I mean, so what? This is absurd to me, just as i would sing a march in Arabic/Iranian language just because they converted my people to islam!!! I would never do that myself.


Btw, I don't know if you noticed but 11 out of 12 ethnicity you listed here are not related with Latins at all. Only Romans but Roman was not a name of single ethnicity either.

Slovak (what I'm considered now)
Hungarian (I'm aware to be 1/8th)
Vlach
Czech
Polish
Moravian
Celtic
Germanic
Scytho-Sarmatian
Dacian
Pannonian
Roman

So, what`s the fuss about your "death to all nations" but "vive le Latin" attitude?

[Onur]

How recent is the term 'Turk'?

I think you already know the answer of this question SOM, don't you?

As you know, Turks were part of the Huns and most definitely the ruling core and most likely the biggest population among them. After Hunnic union disbanded, several new states has been born in a short time, like Avars in Panonia. Avar is the name of the one of seven Turkic tribes but during their reign in central Europe, they always been called as Hunnic people by Romans and Franks because their state`s center was same as Attila`s, the Panonia. But the other new state around today`s Kazakhistan, Mongolia was founded in 6th century again and they called themselves as GokTurks, meaning Sky-Turks. We know that from their own monuments with runic Turkic writings in 7-8th century and from eastern Roman records. We don't know for sure about when the term Turk created at first but we know that it`s became a name of a state in 6th century.