 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Az
|
 |
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:23
|
|
Whoa, spam-flame thread.
Serb: Russia is based on the fusion of the Scandinavian travellers and invaders, that built small cities along the large rivers. Russians are both slavs and scandinavians, as well as some behind the Ural tribes, like the scythians, that IIRC weren't slavs.
This is not a contradiction. Just like the spanish people(s) have both the traditions of the Canaanite colonies, the Latin rule of Rome, and the German and Muslim invaders. They're a mix, a fusion, as are all other nations on earth. This is the truth.
The population of England ( not britain, that obviously is mostly celtic, with wales, and scotland, England ) has still very strong celtic roots. For example the family name owen. Also, The country has been profoundly changed by the invaders from Britanny, which were Normans, that had also close ties to the central power in Paris.
All nations are like this. Even the Japanese that mostly think of as ethnically 'pure' have lost of Chinese and Korean genetic lines, as well as lines from the ancestoral inhabitants of the Isles.
Herresson: simple flames, no imagination whatsoever.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
Whoa, spam-flame thread.
Serb: Russia is based on the fusion of the Scandinavian travellers and invaders, that built small cities along the large rivers. Russians are both slavs and scandinavians, as well as some behind the Ural tribes, like the scythians, that IIRC weren't slavs. |
Sure you rememeber correctly because:
1) Scythians (I guess you mean "Skify" esli na Russkom) weren't from "behind Ural", because...
2) Scythians it's Greek word for tribes which populated modern Ukraine and nearby territories. (That's how Aristotel determinated them, iirc)
Once again if what you've said is true, then why we don't speak on Scandinavian languge today? Or at least on some kind of mix Scandinavian and Slavic language? Why I can (particialy, not entire text, but at least the meaning) understand what peoples from other Slavic countries are saying and don't understand a single Norge or Sweden word f.e.?
quote:
All nations are like this. Even the Japanese that mostly think of as ethnically 'pure' have lost of Chinese and Korean genetic lines, as well as lines from the ancestoral inhabitants of the Isles. |
I komu ty eto govorish? Moya rodnaya babka- 100% Ukrainka, praded Belorus a sam ya 100% Russkii
 Just don't tell to anybody, I just discovered it myself.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Az
|
|
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:23
|
|
quote:
1) Scythians (I guess you mean "Skify" esli na Russkom) weren't from "behind Ural", because...
2) Scythians it's Greek word for tribes which populated modern Ukraine and nearby territories. (That's how Aristotel determinated them, iirc)
|
did he say: "the people that live in the place where one day will exist a corrupt country named Ukraine"?
or did he say "the people that live... umm... somewhere north to our colony of Hersoness." ?
IIRC, the Scythians lived at the late ancient era around the Urals. You know, everyone lived a bit to the east then. The Slovens are from around Leningrad, actuailly (!).
quote:
Once again if what you've said is true, then why we don't speak on Scandinavian languge today? Or at least on some kind of mix Scandinavian and Slavic language? Why I can (particialy, not entire text, but at least the meaning) understand what peoples from other Slavic countries are saying and don't understand a single Norge or Sweden word f.e.?
|
because the Scandinavians while the scandinavians were the rulers, the creators of states, the bulk of the population was Slavic tribes. just like the first christian Kingdoms of France were established by the franks, the people call themselves french, yet the talk a Latin language, since most of the people were there from the time of Roman rule. In England, the amount of Germans that arrived to establish Anglia was much larger, AND they ruled the land.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
did he say: "the people that live in the place where one day will exist a corrupt country named Ukraine"?
or did he say "the people that live... umm... somewhere north to our colony of Hersoness." ?
IIRC, the Scythians lived at the late ancient era around the Urals. You know, everyone lived a bit to the east then. The Slovens are from around Leningrad, actuailly (!). |
I mean that "Scythians" was common Greek word for MANY tribes including tribes which later were called Slavs. I mean that there was no such nationality as "Scythian".
quote:
because the Scandinavians while the scandinavians were the rulers, the creators of states, the bulk of the population was Slavic tribes. just like the first christian Kingdoms of France were established by the franks, the people call themselves french, yet the talk a Latin language, since most of the people were there from the time of Roman rule. In England, the amount of Germans that arrived to establish Anglia was much larger, AND they ruled the land. |
Then explain to me please how in the hell Russians are- "both slavs and scandinavians" if " the bulk of the population was Slavic tribes"?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
XarXo
|
 |
of the "I agree"
Jul 2000
time: 05:23
|
|
"spanish" doesn't exist, is the territory of the older tribes of tartesic (andalusia, murcia, algarve), basque-aquitans (basque country, navarra and aquitania in france), iberic-postcapiense (catalonia, valencia, rousillon in france and a part of aragon) and luso-celtic (portugal, galicia, asturias, cantabria and northern castile and leon).
Balearic islands had a strange small civ.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
XarXo
|
|
of the "I agree"
Jul 2000
time: 05:23
|
|
Oh, I forget: Iberic and Tartesic are from the Sahara area (when sahara losed all the water, the people moved north). Celtic are the common celts, Basques-Aquitanes are the remaining of a large but small developed culture that stayed before in northern peninsula before all the comings. Postcapiense, is a mix of iberians with another and smaller pre-iberian tribes that stayed in the pyrinean mountains and the zone of Cap de Creus. This is usually called capcirnenque or "Caves Culture".
But, in the other hand, the prevalent alphabet was iberian and ocurred an "iberization" of the two older tribes. I have to say too that Tartessos (Tharsis by greeks) was the largest culture in the peninsulae.
Finally, the political vision is: Thartessos in the south as the lonely kingdom, small tribes in all the peninsulae (near-to empty in the central areas), with a concentration of them in Valencian Country. Very primitive tribes in Basque Country and Northern Catalonia. Celtic contact in northern Galicia and Asturias.
Last edited by XarXo on 12-01-2003 at 23:34
|
|
| |
|
|
|
randomhero
|
|
The reason why nobody can win this argument is beacuse we are simply EUROPEANS. Maybe it is time to look beyond your national borders and embrace greater entity. It is time to become civilised or otherwise Africa and Middle East will ketchup.
Over the many centuries europe seen so many wars, border changes, empires, religions and population movements that it is often hard to distinguish who is who. United Europe is the next logical step and only hope for future peace.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
XarXo
|
|
of the "I agree"
Jul 2000
time: 05:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
spanish doesn't exist? but english does? italian does? french does? arab does? then, nothing exists. |
Spanish or Spaniards? Spanish doesn't exist as a language or culture like doesn't exist British or American, another thing is the common use of the word for reffering as the most spoken language or "lingua franca" of the territories between each community.
For example, in USA there are a lot of spansih speakers, but this language is thousands of light years to be a linga franca except in the reduced "ghettos" (and, if a language is used to create THIS marginal areas, what a shame!).
Spaniards, in the other hand, is more real, is just call "the ones that lived a long time basically in the Iberian Peninsulae and sorrounding islands". In this therms, the original balearaican were spaniards too!! 
Humans are beings that move, not trees, so put a human name to a land is quite difficult, and more difficult is say that a state is someting like a nation with a special language. I can't remember a state that has a coorect border according to language or similar. Look Ireland, Germany, France, China, Mongolia, Russia, etc...
Is very difficult to establish correct borders!!! 
Last edited by XarXo on 14-01-2003 at 20:27
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
most of the population was slavic, but there were many scandinavian immigrants as well. It doesn't contradict.
The first french kings were germanic ( I am not sure of the rest ), and the a couple of germanic tribes settled in Gaul, but most of the population is speaking french, which is a latin language. Still they call themselves 'the french', that means that the franks were their ancestors. It REALLY doesn't contradict serb! |
Exactly- if the first french kings were Germans, but it doesn't make French people Germans, why if first Russian Tzar was Scandinavian it makes Russians a mix of Scandinavians and Slavs?
In my understanding this statement would be true if it was mix of more or less equal proportions, lets say 60/40 or 70/30. In that case there will be traces and the first such trace is language.
Sure Vikings influenced Rus (as many other countries in Europe), sure there were many of them (as in many other European countries), sure first Russian king was Viking and his children ruled about 700 years, but I don't understand why many people here absolutely sure that Vikings created Russian state? Was their influence so critical? Are they criticaly inluenced language of Kiev Rus? No. Are they criticaly inflenced the way of life in Kiev Rus, made it more Scandinavian? I doubt. Then why, because first Russian tzar was Viking?
I think we should view this from perspective- "who was assimilated and by whom".
I guess the fact that today I speak on Slavic language, not on Scandinavian clearly answers this question.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
XarXo
|
|
of the "I agree"
Jul 2000
time: 05:23
|
|
Nationalism is a bullsh*t when is used as an excuse for things that are unjustificable like the holocaust.
Nationalism, as I see, is the love for the special order that has the people in a territory that evolved as a common reaction of this people.
Explained: You can be black, white or green, speak language A, B or C, and like sport team 1, 2 or 3. Also you can have multinationality, attack the nation idea or simply ignore it. The important thing is that you RECOGNIZE its existance (by ignoring it, too), and you see that it AFFECTS you (good or bad). In this therms, you are a part of an identity.
Nation borns when the identity create some symbols that relates to it, but the TRUE nationalism is based in the creation of typical reactions of some people (another thing is what symbol syou preffer) .
In my case, I'm something called catalan-valencian-balear-abndorran and a lot of more names, with som e different flags and with two or three languages. The conscient relation is this: We love money (very sad). We discuss about it, how to have more, how to pay less. And for it we are capable to simulate confrontations and a lot of wars (sad). But at the end, we can sit in a table and speak about it, and this because we have something that relates us, we don't know what is the true thing, but this is the concept of "nationality". I can sit with a not-catalan (or not-whatever that it is) person and be my best friend, but this simply doesn't exist. Oh! I forget! Is something felt individually, not mutually! This is the origin of discussions, people doesn't understand why each other feel different.
Is a very tiny and invisible thing, like "hope", "love" or "hungry" just this. But, in the other hand, is very powerful, this is why politics use it like a doll destroying it in some cases causing a social division.
The problem is not the nationalism, the problem is with the politics. AS The problem is not the death, the problem is with the killers.
If we are humans, WE MUST BE enough intelligent to accept our responsability in the creation of monsters and other problems. Hitler won democratically. Soviets won in old-style "sponsoring". If we aren't enough INTELLIGENT to understand the reaction of use our FREEDOM in a moment, we should do NOTHING.
But this is just my opinion! 
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
31-12-2002 12:30
|