The Illyrians

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Philosopher
    replied
    Originally posted by spitfire View Post
    From what I gather so far Amphipolis, the thesis of the macedonians in this forum is that the language and the alleged slavic migration is not relevant to their origin, as they adopted a form of slavic language, or probably the slavic language that was used in macedonia is the basis for other types of slavic languages/dialects.
    Cyril and Methodious gave the written form and codified slavic languages,yet this is not relevant or it does not explain the origin of the people in the balkan area.
    People adopt and develop languages all the time.

    Feel free to correct me if I am under a wrong impression about this.
    Generally correct Spitfire.

    We are indigenous to the Balkans. No Macedonian on this forum denies this. The conflict in this thread has been about the language -- whether Slavic was adopted or whether it is indigenous to the Balkans.

    Leave a comment:


  • spitfire
    replied
    From what I gather so far Amphipolis, the thesis of the macedonians in this forum is that the language and the alleged slavic migration is not relevant to their origin, as they adopted a form of slavic language, or probably the slavic language that was used in macedonia is the basis for other types of slavic languages/dialects.
    Cyril and Methodious gave the written form and codified slavic languages,yet this is not relevant or it does not explain the origin of the people in the balkan area.
    People adopt and develop languages all the time.

    Feel free to correct me if I am under a wrong impression about this.

    Leave a comment:


  • makedonche
    replied
    Originally posted by Amphipolis View Post
    I'm sorry I just noticed that. I had been reading relevant material elsewhere (ranging from other threads to Risto Stefov) but I still haven't understood your national position, or at least some variations of it. I would like a relatively simple version (max 10-20 lines) on how Cyril and Methodius fit in your narrative(s), either the ones that accept or the ones that reject the Slavic migration.
    Amphipolis

    An answer was required, not the following bullshit guised as a question:-

    I can't understand exactly what has been discredited, by whom and when.

    If there was no Slavic Migration how does one exactly explain Cyril and Methodius (for instance)?
    Furthermore what exactly does Slavic Migration (theory) have to do with Cyril & Methodius? Refrain from quoting wiki, try using an internationally accredited reliable source, not one that is edited by idiots!

    Leave a comment:


  • Amphipolis
    replied
    I'm sorry I just noticed that. I had been reading relevant material elsewhere (ranging from other threads to Risto Stefov) but I still haven't understood your national position, or at least some variations of it. I would like a relatively simple version (max 10-20 lines) on how Cyril and Methodius fit in your narrative(s), either the ones that accept or the ones that reject the Slavic migration.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nikolaj
    replied
    I know right, every day when I come onto this forum I look for this thread first to see if Amphi has responded. His been posting everywhere else so I assume his avoiding it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Redsun
    replied
    I have wanted to thank SOM for the last three days for directing me to the information that I had asked for.

    I had been waiting patiently for Amphipolis to reply first, allowing Amphi the space to write back on the same page.

    Thank you SOM.

    Leave a comment:


  • makedonche
    replied
    3 days later and still no response? Time for you to disappear again into your Greek dreamland, where everything is Greek....including Mike Tyson!

    Leave a comment:


  • Dejan
    replied
    Don't think this thread can go any further until amphipolis responds lol

    Leave a comment:


  • Брсјак
    replied
    Subbing and waiting on the response

    Leave a comment:


  • Nikolaj
    replied
    Amphipolis?

    Leave a comment:


  • Dejan
    replied
    I too am interested...

    Leave a comment:


  • Nikolaj
    replied
    Yes Amphipolis, what about them?

    Leave a comment:


  • Soldier of Macedon
    replied
    What about Cyril and Methodius?

    Leave a comment:


  • Amphipolis
    replied
    Originally posted by George S. View Post
    RS i think the slavic migration theory was covered in one of the threads it was covered ad nauseaum by constellation.The thing we found that it was a discredited theory.HOw come the theory stipulates there were slavic migrations in the 7th century ad ?Its been discredited that it doesn't explain the pre slavic theory on slavic influence and that the migrations might not have realy occured as people say.
    I can't understand exactly what has been discredited, by whom and when.

    If there was no Slavic Migration how does one exactly explain Cyril and Methodius (for instance)?

    Leave a comment:


  • Soldier of Macedon
    replied
    Originally posted by Redsun View Post
    I too would like to learn more about the "Slavic migration" theory.
    Start here:

    The first attestations of the word in the sense of “Slavic” can also be found in Greek, in the 6th century of ourera. According to Vasmer himself, for example, the attestation of sclavos in Agathias (6th century) already has the meaning of “slave” (Aebischer 1936, 485). How do scholars explain the

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X