| Revision as of 16:06, 23 November 2017 editAigest (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,029 edits →Some more of Paleo-Balkan travesty (Paleo-Balkanic predecessors section)← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:26, 24 November 2017 edit undoCalthinus (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users22,472 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 156: | Line 156: | ||
| <pre>The origins debate is often politically charged, and to be conclusive more evidence is needed. Such evidence unfortunately may not be easily forthcoming because of a lack of sources. The area of what is now Macedonia, Kosovo, and Albania was a melting pot of Thracian, Illyrian and Greek cultures in ancient times.</pre> ] (]) 14:12, 23 November 2017 (UTC) | <pre>The origins debate is often politically charged, and to be conclusive more evidence is needed. Such evidence unfortunately may not be easily forthcoming because of a lack of sources. The area of what is now Macedonia, Kosovo, and Albania was a melting pot of Thracian, Illyrian and Greek cultures in ancient times.</pre> ] (]) 14:12, 23 November 2017 (UTC) | ||
| :As for the Illyrian language we have no data. Venetic was thought to be Illyrian dialect but later studies classified it as an Italic language. Take a look on Illyrian languages article. for the complexity of the issue. Summary -- From very few data that we have from Illyrian languages we have (more) Satem examples and (than) Centum examples. Also Centum examples are not perfect examples because their reflexes (sound changes) are the same as some Satem languages like Albanian and Slavic. In the end of the day Occam razor goes to Satem, but we can not be sure because we have not enough data. ] (]) 16:06, 23 November 2017 (UTC) | :As for the Illyrian language we have no data. Venetic was thought to be Illyrian dialect but later studies classified it as an Italic language. Take a look on Illyrian languages article. for the complexity of the issue. Summary -- From very few data that we have from Illyrian languages we have (more) Satem examples and (than) Centum examples. Also Centum examples are not perfect examples because their reflexes (sound changes) are the same as some Satem languages like Albanian and Slavic. In the end of the day Occam razor goes to Satem, but we can not be sure because we have not enough data. ] (]) 16:06, 23 November 2017 (UTC) | ||
| ::On top of what Aigest wrote, the whole satem-centum affair is no longer viewed as diverging branches but rather geographic glosses of no greater importance than other ones (like "taihun-decem", as goes one historical phonologist's paradigm, with Armenian and Germanic versus the rest of IE). Given the proposals of etymologies a few Albanian words with initial ''th'' supposedly coming from (very Ancient) Greek words with initial ''k'' before a palatal, one might even argue that the "satemization" of Albanian (whichever language it stems from) occurred in the traceable period linguistically. We don't even know what sounds letters referred to in the few ''Latinized'' data we have -- Latin didn't have any phonemic palatal stops (which would be the earliest results of satemization) and very well might have been written with velar ones which could make a recently satemized language mistakenly appear to be a centum one (or one that preserved the threeway distinction, like Hittite). Long story short, the whole satem-centum argument is very difficult to maintain for either side due to the ambiguities involved. --] (]) 05:26, 24 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:26, 24 November 2017
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
 | This talk page is becoming long. Consider archiving inactive discussions. |  |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Origin of the Albanians article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 21 days  |
Movements of Albanians in Illyria chronology
Recently I was reading Vladimir Orel's etymological dictionary, in the preface (here's the page ) I read this particular sentence: "The Proto-Albanans migration to Illyria via the Eastern Slopes of the Balkans must have taken place before (but not considerably earlier than) their contact with Romance speakers at the end of the Proto-Albanian period in the history of the Albanian language". A page before () clarifies that Proto-Albanian precedes the contacts with Latin "before the I-II centuries CE" Shouldn't this be included? Perhaps added somewhere at "Thracian or Dacian origin"?
Pelasgians
"Another obsolete myth..." Obsolete myth. That's laying it on a bit thick, eh? We may want to employ a slightly less derogatory, passive-aggressive tone there. It amazes one to what lengths the powers that be will go to delegitimize the poor Albanians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:DD00:5000:D51C:D53F:86D5:4F2A (talk) 22:30, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Fabrications, malversations and manipulations (Introductory section)
It appears that the editors are unable to agree upon on how to structure the introductory section properly, for which reason it is necessary to return back to ground zero. Thus some wikipedian correctly notices a fabrication, but he is unable to resolve the problem because the citation was taken from another source. The article on 15 April 2017 looked like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Origin_of_the_Albanians&diff=prev&oldid=775584288 https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Origin_of_the_Albanians&direction=prev&oldid=775584288
The origin of the Albanians has been for some time a matter of dispute among historians. Contemporary historians conclude that the Albanians are descendants of populations of the prehistoric Balkans, such as the Illyrians, Dacians or Thracians.
It is evident that this citation was not taken from J. V. A. Fine's book, but from J. P. Mallory's Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture instead (p.9, p.11).
The origins of the Albanians cannot be separated from the problem of assigning their linguistic ancestors to one of the three main groups of the Balkans: Dacians, Thracians or Illyrians.
However, this was probably not what that editor was aiming at. I guess, he was rather disturbed by the part which said: "Contemporary historians conclude that the Albanians are descendants of populations of the prehistoric Balkans"; but we will return to this part later. Aleksandër I Madh Është Shqipëtar (talk) 09:52, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Official position of the Albanian Academy of Sciences (Introductory section)
Throughout the entire article there is not a single mentioning of the official position by the Albanians, in regard to their origins, but only random citations which never fully explain their aspirations clear enough. Sources like J. V. A. Fine and J. P. Mallory are, therefore, inadequate. Let me take the privilege here and list few sources which might be more suitable instead.
The Albanians presented their stances to the broader Yugoslav public for the first in a book, which was published by Cankarjeva Publishing House, and was compiled in accordance with the Kosova Academy of Sciences and Arts in Priština, titled Albanci (Ljubljana, 1984). On page 11, Albanian scholar Aleksandar Stipčević will give his full support to Johann Erich Thunmann and the Illyrian origin of the Albanians:
Thunmann, who only had historic sources available at the time, already then assumed that Albanians are indigenous, as proof to this thesis, he notes that there is no evidence of any migration in medieval sources of Albanians to their current habitat. This proof holds up to this day and is rightfully referred by all of those who maintain or have maintained in the past the autochthony of Albanians. (Translation note)
In an English publishing from 1985, The Albanians and Their Territories, one can read in introductory on page 3 the following statement:
In this volume we are acquainting the reader with some of the more recent achievements of our Albanological sciences, about two of their more important problems which are closely linked together: the autochthony of the Albanians on the territories they inhabit to this day and the history of the formation of the Albanian people, and of their language and culture during the centuries of the Early Middle Ages.
In a joint symposium, which was held in 1993 and had a political connotation, between the Albanian Academy of Sciences in Tirana and the Kosovo Academy of Sciences in Priština a group of authors came out with the following statements:
Introduction: The volume "The Kosova issue - a historic and current problem", presented to the reader, is a collection of communications held in the Symposium organized in Tirana on April 15-16 1993 by Albanian scholars from Albania, Kosova, Macedonia, Montenegro as well as by foreign scholars. The communications of the Albanian and foreign scholars, included in this volume, are devoted to important questions of the political history of the Albanian population in Kosova and in other Albanian territories in Macedonia, Montenegro and in Serbia. Based on historical sources, the communications of this volume shed light on the authoctony of the Albanians in those lands, on their cultural and spiritual community with the Albanians from other lands (with whom they faced the same historical challenges), on the tragedy experienced by them after the arbitrary inclusion in the boundaries of the neighbouring states at the end of the Balkan Wars (1912, 1913) and the decisions of the Conference of the Ambassadors in London in 1913. A number of communications has as object of study the unprecedented genocide exercised over the Albanians from 1913 up to now, the efforts for their assimilation as well as the stubborn struggle of the Albanians for the national rights which has known violent outbursts from the time of the occupation until now. Consequently, it is natural that the question of the Albanians, of this great non-Slav community, unjustly included in the former state of Yugoslavia, as is shown in the materials of this volume, would make up the key problem of the Yugoslav crisis. For this reason, only the right solution of the national question of the Albanians in the former-Yugoslavia would create the possibility to establish the stability in the region and the spirit of understanding in the Balkans. Edi Shukriu: In conclusion, it might be said that the thesis of the Illyrian character of the Dardanians is the most tenable. Dardanian society developed to the extent that a Dardanian tate was formed. Tradition, and economic and political interests contributed to the Dardanians' ties with other Illyrians. As a result, the territories where Illyrian states had formerly existed (in modern Albania, Kosova, western Macedonia, southern Serbia, Montenegro, and Cameria) did not succumb to Romanization, but continued to be inhabited by an indigenous Illyrian or Arberian-Albanian population. Neritan Ceka: If history is studied in order to build both the present and the future, it would be a very good lesson not only' for the predecessors of the Dardans in their own areas, but also for the Albanians, the successors of the Illyrians. Skënder Anamali: The history of the Albanians of the early Middle Ages is a continuation of the history of the Illyrians of late antiquity. The Albanians, as descendants of the Illyrians, inhabited the same areas and inherited from the Illyrians their language and material and spiritual culture. This holds true of all the Albanian-inhabited regions, including Kosova and the other Albanian territories in what was Yugoslavia. In late antiquity, Kosova was included in the province of Dardania, which included such important cities as Naisus, Ulpiana, and Shkup. The regions of Tetove, Gostivar, Kercove, Struge and Oher belonged to the province of New Epirus, while the Albanian areas in modern Montenegro were included in the province Prevalitania... Thus, the early mediaeval items discovered in Kosova lead us to the logical conclusion that they belong to an indigenous Albanian population, direct descendants of the ancient inhabitants, for whom historical sources still for a time used the imperial and administrative term Byzantine-Roman. Closing speech, Gazmend Zajmi: Scientific work on a sound basis from the field of history testified and widened our horizons of knowledge with regard to the Albanian autochthonous ancient and incessant continuity in the territory of former Yugoslavia and the other Albanian ethnic territories in the territory of decomposed Yugoslavia. It is this Illyrian-Dardanian continuity that later assumed the distinctive charasteristics of the Albanian ethnos and later of the Albanian nation, beginning with the earliest medieval history and coming down to the contemporary national history. The glimmers of the Albanian national feeling, as a feeling which distinguished them from the others and as an integrative sentiment in the fold of their ethnos and the territory they are living on, can be traced much earlier than in the national Renaissance.
Though one of the sources in this article, which is often being cited, also briefly mentions the Albanians idea of their origins (J. Wilkes - The Illyrians, 1992, p.11):
The current version of the Albanian theory of their Illyrian origins is centered on the unbroken descent of modern Albanians from an Illyrian people already formed in Bronze Age times and in a geographical area that coincided with that occupied today by Albanian speakers, the modern state of Albania and the Yugoslav region of Kosovo.
Same is also reiterated by Maja Gori (In Search of Pre-Classical Antiquity, 2016;p.136). Thence Albanian linguist Xhevat Lloshi declares (Handbuch Der Südosteuropa, 1999, pp.281-283):
Among Albanian language scholars there is practically no dispute over the thesis that Albanian is related to Illyrian: Albanian is a direct descendant of a south-west group of Illyrian dialects... Albanian linguists in general - E. ÇABEJ, S. RIZA, M. CAMAJ, SH. DEMIRAJ, M. DOMI, A. KOSTALLARI - advocate the Albanians’ autochthony and the Illyrian filiation of the Albanian language.
An article dedicated to the Origin of the Albanians, without knowing the opinion of the Albanians themselves, is essentially a flawed article. This is a crucial piece of information and it ought to be corrected as a priority. Aleksandër I Madh Është Shqipëtar (talk) 12:56, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Contemporary scholars stance towards the Origin of the Albanians (Introductory section)
Since we successfully established the Illyrian origin of the Albanians and their autochthony in previous section, we can now move back to the part where "contemporary historians" supposedly conclude something. In the next following examples we will see what these "contemporary historians" actually conclude.
Zef Mirdita - Neki aspekti pitanja o ilirskoj osnovi albanskog etnosa (Posebna izdanja XII, knj. 4, p.157, p.159):
That this is the case, F. Cordignano's thought is sufficient when he states: "... I openly claim, that for me, the connection between the present-day Albanian peoples with those of the ancient Illyrians is only a myth." Unfortunately, several renown students came out with such aprioristic stance, be it for objective or subjective reasons. Moreover, matters developed in such a way as to prove the centum character of the Illyrian language, as it was done so by C. Pauli, H. Hirt, H. Barić, and Albanians to be treated as the continuation of the Thracians, Albanian language as the continuation of the Thracian language, which is supposedly a satem-reflex... Main representatives who reject the autochthony of the Albanians on present territory of Albania are linguists starting with H.Hirt, G.Weigand, H.Barić, Vl.Georgiev. They are either treating Albanians as offshoots of Thracians(H.Hirt, C.Pauli, G.Weigand), Thraco-Daco-Phrygians(H.Barić) or as Daco-Mysians(Vladimir Georgiev). (Translation note)
Vladimir Georgiev - The Genesis of the Balkan Peoples (The Slavonic and East European Review Vol. 44, No. 103, 1966, pp. 285-297):
But many linguists and historians, e.g. H. Hirt, V. Pârvan, Th. Capidan, A. Philippide, N. Jokl, G. Weigand, P. Skok, D. Detschew, H. Barić, I. Siadbei, etc. have put forward very important considerations indicating that the Albanians cannot be autochthonous in the Albania of today, that their original home was the eastern part of Mysia Superior or approximately Dardania and Dacia Mediterranea, i.e. the northern central zone of the Balkan Peninsula, and part of Dacia.
Vladimir Sotirović - National identity: who are the Albanians? the Illyrian anthroponymy and the ethnogenesis of the Albanians (History Research, Vol. 1(2), 2013):
For Albanian scientists it is incontestable that not only cultural, but also, ethnic continuity exists between the ancient Illyrians and the present-day Albanians. Many of the 20th century scholars, especially after the Second World War, however, have quite opposite opinion for the very scientific reason: the theory of Illyrian origin of the Albanians is not supported by any single historical source!
But none of what was said above matters, here's what the leading Albanian scientist Eqrem Çabej said about the general opinion of these contemporary historians (The Albanians and Their Territories, Tirana, 1985, pp.34-35):
For the scholars of the past century the thesis that Albanians are autochthonous in Albania since the Antiquity was self-understood, so was it accepted a priori. Opposite to it is the stand taken by many scholars and especially their new generation in this century. For some historians and many linguists the Albanians are not autochthonous.
As you can see, dear friends, these contemporary historians conclude something very different from what Albanians imagine to be the case. It follows to reason that these contemporary historians are denying the Illyrian origin of the Albanians, and that they are denying the autochthony of the Albanians. Aleksandër I Madh Është Shqipëtar (talk) 07:57, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Illyrian, i.e., "Paleo-Balkanic" culture (Introductory section)
Among others, one can observe this interesting sentence under introductory section:
Very little evidence of pre-Christian Albanian culture survives, although Albanian mythology and folklore are of Paleo-Balkanic origin and almost all of their elements are pagan, in particular showing Greek influence.
1. What "Paleo-Balkanic" culture!? There is none, Albanian culture is rather poor and consists mostly out of the borrowings from their neighbours. Under source is listed encyclopediac book American, African, and Old European Mythologies (1993), I was unable to find anything about the Paleo-Balkanic origin of Albanian folklore and mythology between the pages 253-254, If that's not the case, then please provide an appropriate quote.
2. The second source is The Encyclopedia of Religion (1993); where does the author state that Albanian culture or religion shows particular similarity to the Greek?? It looks like, to me, that someone forced this out of context part into the article because the "..in particular showing Greek influence" is a very specific wording.
On the other hand, Alexandru Madgearu (The Wars of the Balkan Peninsula, 2008, p.146) disagrees with Skënder Anamali (The Albanians and Their Territories, 1985; p.105, p.114) that there are cultural elements, which supposedly give "proof" to the survival of the non-Romanized Illyrian population.
The surviving Illyrian person names and the representations of Illyrian popular dress on tombstones are not enough to prove the so-called resistance against Romanization.
Ion Iosif Russu - Die Sprache der Thrako-Daker (1969, p.206):
..the Albanians have inherited no cultural element from the Antiquity. (Translation note)
Kaplan Burović - Who Are Albanians? (2008, p.132):
Archaeology has until now produced no evidence of the continuity of Albanians from the Illyrians, and the same applies to material and spiritual culture. There are absolutely no traces of Illyrians among Albanians neither in costume, customs, tradition or folklore.
Ardian Vehbiu - DISCUSSING ALBANIAN PROTOHISTORY, 2006:
My personal opinion is that the issue of Albanians descending or not from Illyrians doesn't deserve the interest it has traditionally aroused. There is absolutely NO Illyrian cultural legacy among Albanians today. In a certain sense, Illyrians (with their less fortunate fellows, the Pelasgians) are a pure creation of Albanian romanticism.
So on and forth, not to make this too lengthy, there is also a nice study by Armanda Hysa (Historični seminar 8, 2010, p.103 et seq.) on the past development of Albanian ethnography. I'd recommend reading that paper. Aleksandër I Madh Është Shqipëtar (talk) 12:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Some more of Paleo-Balkan travesty (Paleo-Balkanic predecessors section)
The naming of this section in such deterministic way is wrong and needs to be changed, especially since the """Paleo-Balkanic predecessors""" claim, as we shall see further on, stands on a very shaky ground. I would advise some caution instead before declaring one or the other peoples as the possible "predecessors" of the Albanians. Except for its sub-sections, the entire text is incoherent and simply put there to serve its own purpose, it chronically lacks sources for such amount of writing, and it contains plenty of errors and miss-citations too. Nevertheless, let us scrutinize the content:
While Albanian (shqip) ethnogenesis clearly postdates the Roman era,...
This part belongs under Ethnonym section, not here. The listed source doesn't even elaborate its first appearance, it's completely out of context. Likewise, stating that "Shqip clearly postdates the Roman era" is a very convenient way of wording since it leaves a lot of space for speculations, doesn't it!? We can be more specific than that.
Noel Malcolm, known as a fabricator and a great friend of the Albanians thinks that it appears in 14th century (Kosovo: A Short History, 1998, p.29):
The origins of shqiptar, which first crops up as a personal name in late-fourteenth-century documents, are completely obscure: some think it means 'he who understands', from a verb shqipoj, while others connect it with the word for an eagle, shqipojne, which may have been the totem of an early tribe.
Peter Bartl - Albaner (Name und Ethnogenese):
The modern Albanian self-designation Shqiptar is of later date (probably only after the 17th century), because neither the earlier Greek (14th century) nor the earlier Italian (from 15th century) migrants of the Albanians know it. (Translation note)
Xhevat LLOSHI - Albanian (Handbuch der Südosteuropa-Linguistik, 1999, p.277):
The Albanians of today call themselves shqiptarë, their country Shqipëri,and their language shqipe. These terms came into use at the end of the 17th century and beginning of the 18th century.
Let us proceed to the rest of that sentence now:
... an element of continuity from the pre-Roman provincial population is widely held plausible, on linguistic and archaeological grounds.
How is an element of continuity from the pre-Roman (i.e. Illyrian) provincial population widely held plausible, when it is being denied by all scientific branches, including linguistics and archaeology!? Should I remind you of what is being written under Archaeological evidence section? https://en.wikipedia.org/Origin_of_the_Albanians#Archaeological_evidence
The Komani culture theory... has found little support outside Albania.
Danijel Džino - Becoming Slav, becoming Croat (2010, pp.85-86)
Komani-Kruja was, in the earlier scholarship, mostly linked with the pre-Slavic population, which was imagined to be the ancestors of the modern Albanians in Albanian scholarship. More recent studies show that, as with the other archaeological cultures, Komani-Kruja did not represent a specific ethnicity, especially not the ‘first Albanians’, but rather a specific regional expression of the change in funerary practices amongst the local population, similar to the changes in other areas of the Adriatic coast and, in a wider context – the post-Roman West.
Alexandru Madgearu - The Wars of the Balkan Peninsula (2008, p.146):
It is true that some Albanian words and place-names descend from Illyrian, but it was proven by a great specialist in the Balkan languages, Gustav Weigand, that the language itself was not of Illyrian stock. Many linguists (not only Albanians) tried to establish a link between Illyrian and Albanian, but they did not achieve clear results. In fact, the phonetics and the main part of the lexis are of Thracian origin and for this reason are akin with the Dacian substratum of the Romanian language.
Kaplan Burović - Who Are Albanians? (2008, p.128):
Acad. Cabej thus mentioned for the first time in his paper presented at the Assembly for Illyrian Studies in Tyranna, 1972, the 12 arguments of the German Acad. Gustav Weigand, by which he proved that Albanians are neither Illyrians nor their descendants. Sure enough, he did it by disparaging those discoveries and without laying any particular weight to them. Cabej continued his verbal annulment of the scientific truth and support of the thesis of the Illyrian origin. After the world’s academia reacted, particularly the prominent Italian balkanologist Acad. professor dr Giuliano Bonfante, the president of the Albanian Academy of Sciences, prof. Aleks Buda in his report to the Assembly responded that assertions of the Albanian scholars for the Illyrian origin are taken by them as an operating method, not as something that has been proven. On the contrary, he continues, Albanian scholars are working hard on trying to prove that. In 1988 professor Demiraj attempted to scientifically refute the arguments of the Acad. Weigand and others that Albanians are not Illyrians, but to no effect. In the end of his efforts Demiraj is forced to admit that by criticizing the arguments of non-Illyrian origin of Albanians one cannot corroborate their Illyrian origin. Proving that would take hard work and extensive research, he continues, which means that this origin from Illyrians has not been proved yet.
Prior to the First Colloquium of Illyrian Studies in Tirana in 1972, Eric P. Hamp explained in his study that the theses by E. Chabej and W. Cimochowski are less favoured than the one by G. Weigand (Ancient Indo-European Dialects: Proceedings, 1966, p.102):
6. W. Cimochowski (BUShT 1958:3.37-48) displaces the Albanians much less than others: to the mountains near the Mati, north to Niš. Çabej (BUShT 1958:2.54-62) is even less willing to see them moved: on the basis of toponyms, he argues for a coastal region. Particularly because of the relative inaccessibility of these articles, and because their theses have tended to be out of favor, it is worthwhile discussing them at some length.
Petar Hr. Ilievski also finds E. Chabej's stances as "..tendentious and unconvincing" (Balkanološki lingvistički studii, 1988, p.55):
Ivan Popović brings convincing arguments against the autochthony of the Albanians in their present territories. Chabej70 also notices that the arguments against Illyrian origin of the Albanian have weight, yet he remains consistent champion of the Illyrian theory... (under source 70 he continues) E.Çabej, L'Illyrien et l'Albanais - Questions de principe, Studia Albanica, 1970/1971, 157-170. In the study Le probleme du territoire de la formation de la langue albanaise, published two years later in Bulletin d'Association Internationale d'Etudes du Sud-Est Europeen, X, 2, 1972, Bucarest, p.71-99, Chabej undergoes to systematically criticize theses of Weigand, Popović, Seliščev, taking into defence Illyrian thesis. The attempt to present Albano-Rumanian parallels as borrowings from Albanian into Rumanian is tendentious and unconvincing. (Translation note)
What element of continuity, based on linguistic and archaeological grounds, are we talking about!?!?
No sources:
The three chief candidates considered by historians are Illyrian, Dacian, or Thracian, though there were other non-Greek groups in the ancient Balkans, including Paionians (who lived north of Macedon) and Agrianians. The Illyrian language and the Thracian language are often considered to have been on different Indo-European branches. Not much is left of the old Illyrian, Dacian or Thracian tongues, making it difficult to match Albanian with them.
No sources:
There is debate whether the Illyrian language was a centum or a satem language. It is also uncertain whether Illyrians spoke a homogeneous language or rather a collection of different but related languages that were wrongly considered the same language by ancient writers. The Venetic tribes, formerly considered Illyrian, are no longer considered categorised with Illyrians. The same is sometimes said of the Thracian language. For example, based on the toponyms and other lexical items, Thracian and Dacian were probably different but related languages.
Ironically under citations and is listed an author who say's something quite interesting about the centum/satem classification of the Illyrian language (The Illyrians, 1992, p.73):
A more difficult question is how Illyrian fits within the family of Indo-European languages. As a whole this has been divided into a western group (Germanic, Venetic, Illyrian, Celtic, Italic and Greek) and an eastern group (Baltic, Slavic, Albanian, Thracian Phrygian, Armenian, Iranian and Indian)... There is no evidence that Illyrian in fact belongs to the satem group, but the argument that it does is crucial to the case that modern Albanian is descended from Illyrian.
That part about the Venetic isn't entirely true either, Jürgen Untermann states that the differences between these languages were so minor that they allowed the exchange of individual names, adoption of morphological elements, and the formation of similar words (Godišnjak 7, 1970, pp.19-20). That Illyrians spoke several different languages is not true either (See: Who Are Albanians?, 2008, pp.74-75:
It is well known that Albanians today live on the territories where Southern Illyrians once lived. It was this hypothesis that Albanian ‘scholars‘ clutched at like a drowning man at a straw, especially the mentioned Sh. Demiraj, who has gone at length into this issue. As I said, he admits that the Northern dialect of the Illyrian language was a Centum language, but goes on to say:“Bearing in mind the well-known fact that the Albanian language is in the Satem group, it remains to determine first and foremost what type of language was the Southern Illyrian, SATEM or CENTUM?”. Then by using linguistic puns and tricks he gave his best to prove that the Southern dialect of Illyrian was apparently a Satem language. I told Mr Demiraj and I am repeating it now: “Etymological games of this sort degrade sometimes into sophisticated clownery, but futile as they are with phonetic laws, word roots and Indo-European suffixes, they obscure rather than clarify the problems”. These words had been directed to him long before me by V.Besevliev, but Mr Demiraj did not pay any attention to them. Hirt says “that the division of Illyrian language into two dialects (Centum and Satem) is unfounded”. A language can either belong to the Centum group with all its dialects or to the Satem group. No single language (with any of its dialects !) can belong to both Centum and Satem groups. If the northern part of a language (dialect) is a Centum language, then the southern part (dialect) is in the Centum group, and the other way round. If, according to S.Demiraj, the northern were a Centum and the southern a Satem language, then there would be TWO LANGUAGES, two entirely different languages and not one and the same language, nor even two dialects of the same language. The southerners would not understand the northerners at all. just as the modern Germans (Centum) cannot understand the Slavs (Satem). In this way if the northern Centum language (Venetic) were Illyrian, then the southern Satem language (of Labeates or Taulantes) would not be Illyrian. The latter one should in that case present an entirely different language without relatedness to the former one. Were the Illyrians two different peoples - the Northern and the Southern Illyrians? It is known that the Southern Illyrians were nothing else but the tribes of the Northern Illyrians that in the course of migrations drove one another southwards. Southern Illyrians also include the Messapii. Their language is a Centum one and not the Satem, as would be expected if Southern Illyrians belonged to that group.
It follows to reason that Illyrian was a centum language, after all.
No sources:
In the early half of the 20th century, many scholars thought that Thracian and Illyrian were one language branch, but due to the lack of evidence, most linguists are skeptical and now reject this idea, and usually place them on different branches.
May I propose the following citation from Predrag Mutavdžić's book (Balkan i balkanologija, 2013, pp.252-253):
This hypothesis was created as a result of reconciliation between the two previously mentioned(note:Illyrian and Thracian). The first scientist who had formulated it was Norbert Jokl in his work Zur Ortsnamenkunde Albaniens, and his thought was further followed by Petar Skok, Leonid Gindin and others... Although quite original and probably fairly close to the truth, this hypothesis is apriori rejected in scientific and other circles. (Translation note)
No source, also completely redundant and unnecessary:
The origins debate is often politically charged, and to be conclusive more evidence is needed. Such evidence unfortunately may not be easily forthcoming because of a lack of sources. The area of what is now Macedonia, Kosovo, and Albania was a melting pot of Thracian, Illyrian and Greek cultures in ancient times.
Aleksandër I Madh Është Shqipëtar (talk) 14:12, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
- As for the Illyrian language we have no data. Venetic was thought to be Illyrian dialect but later studies classified it as an Italic language. Take a look on Illyrian languages article. for the complexity of the issue. Summary -- From very few data that we have from Illyrian languages we have (more) Satem examples and (than) Centum examples. Also Centum examples are not perfect examples because their reflexes (sound changes) are the same as some Satem languages like Albanian and Slavic. In the end of the day Occam razor goes to Satem, but we can not be sure because we have not enough data. Aigest (talk) 16:06, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
- On top of what Aigest wrote, the whole satem-centum affair is no longer viewed as diverging branches but rather geographic glosses of no greater importance than other ones (like "taihun-decem", as goes one historical phonologist's paradigm, with Armenian and Germanic versus the rest of IE). Given the proposals of etymologies a few Albanian words with initial th supposedly coming from (very Ancient) Greek words with initial k before a palatal, one might even argue that the "satemization" of Albanian (whichever language it stems from) occurred in the traceable period linguistically. We don't even know what sounds letters referred to in the few Latinized data we have -- Latin didn't have any phonemic palatal stops (which would be the earliest results of satemization) and very well might have been written with velar ones which could make a recently satemized language mistakenly appear to be a centum one (or one that preserved the threeway distinction, like Hittite). Long story short, the whole satem-centum argument is very difficult to maintain for either side due to the ambiguities involved. --Calthinus (talk) 05:26, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
- https://archive.org/stream/EncyclopediaOfIndoEuropeanCulture/Encyclopedia_of_Indo-European_Culture#page/n43/mode/2up
- https://archive.org/stream/Albanci1984/Albanci%20-%201984#page/n13/mode/2up
- https://archive.org/details/TheAlbaniansAndTheirTerritories
- https://books.google.si/books/about/The_Kosova_issue_a_historic_and_current.html?id=YDC5AAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y
- https://archive.org/stream/15826619JohnWilkesTheIllyrians/15826619-John-Wilkes-The-Illyrians#page/n13/mode/2up
- https://books.google.si/books?id=r9SYDQAAQBAJ&dq=In+Search+of+Pre-Classical+Antiquity:+Rediscovering+Ancient+Peoples&q=+The+Albanian+theory+of+Illyrian+origins+is+centred+on+the+idea+of+an+unbroken+and+direct+descent+of+modern+Albanians+from+the+Illyrians,+who+were+spread+in+Albania+and+Kosovo,+but+also+in+Epirus,+western+Macedonia+and+southern+Montenegro,+a+geographical+area+roughly+covering+the+Greater+Albania-an+irredentist+concept+of+land+based+on+claims+of+present-day+or+historical+presence+of+Albanian+populations+in+those+areas.#v=snippet&q=The%20Albanian%20theory%20of%20Illyrian%20origins%20is%20centred%20on%20the%20idea%20of%20an%20unbroken%20and%20direct%20descent%20of%20modern%20Albanians%20from%20the%20Illyrians%2C%20who%20were%20spread%20in%20Albania%20and%20Kosovo%2C%20but%20also%20in%20Epirus%2C%20western%20Macedonia%20and%20southern%20Montenegro%2C%20a%20geographical%20area%20roughly%20covering%20the%20Greater%20Albania-an%20irredentist%20concept%20of%20land%20based%20on%20claims%20of%20present-day%20or%20historical%20presence%20of%20Albanian%20populations%20in%20those%20areas.&f=false
- https://archive.org/stream/HandbuchDerSdosteuropaLinguistikXhevatLloshi1999/Handbuch%20der%20S%C3%BCdosteuropa-Linguistik%20-%20Xhevat%20Lloshi1999#page/n7/mode/2up
- http://www.anubih.ba/index.php?option=com_jshopping&controller=product&task=view&category_id=29&product_id=323&Itemid=583&lang=ba
- http://www.jstor.org/stable/4205776
- http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.history.20130102.11.pdf
- https://archive.org/stream/TheAlbaniansAndTheirTerritories/The%20Albanians%20and%20their%20Territories#page/n17/mode/2up
- https://books.google.hu/books?id=GYjc5POwJjAC&printsec=frontcover&hl=hu&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
- https://archive.org/stream/CiceronePoghircAlbanianReligionTheEncyclopediaOfReligion121987Pp.178180/Cicerone%20Poghirc%20-%20Albanian%20Religion%20%28The%20Encyclopedia%20of%20religion%201%262%20-%201987%2C%20pp.178-180%29#page/n0/mode/2up
- http://www.worldcat.org/title/wars-of-the-balkan-peninsula-their-medieval-origins/oclc/144570965
- https://archive.org/stream/TheAlbaniansAndTheirTerritories/The%20Albanians%20and%20their%20Territories#page/n53/mode/2up
- http://www.worldcat.org/title/limba-traco-dacilor-die-sprache-der-thrako-daker-nach-der-zweiten-auflage-aus-dem-rumanischen-ubersetzt-von-hildegard-beer/oclc/606454945
- https://archive.org/stream/KaplanBurovi-WhoAreAlbanians/K.Burovic-Who_Are_Albanians#page/n67/mode/2up
- http://www.albca.com/aclis/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=966
- http://hs.zrc-sazu.si/Portals/0/sp/hs8_n/hs8.pdf
- https://books.google.si/books?redir_esc=y&hl=sl&id=GGQ_AQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=The+origins+of+shqiptar%2C+which+first+crops+up+as+a+personal+name+in+late-fourteenth-century+documents%2C+are+completely+obscure%3A+some+think+it+means+%27he+who+understands%27%2C+from+a+verb+shqipoj%2C+while+others+connect+it+with+the+word+for+an+eagle%2C+shqipojne%2C+which+may+have+been+the+totem+of+an+early+tribe.
- http://research.uni-leipzig.de/gwzo/wissensdatenbank/artikel.php?ArtikelID=63.0000
- https://archive.org/stream/HandbuchDerSdosteuropaLinguistikXhevatLloshi1999/Handbuch%20der%20S%C3%BCdosteuropa-Linguistik%20-%20Xhevat%20Lloshi1999#page/n1/mode/2up
- https://archive.org/stream/dzino_d_becoming_slav_becoming_croat#page/n105/mode/2up
- https://archive.org/stream/KaplanBurovi-WhoAreAlbanians/K.Burovic-Who_Are_Albanians#page/n65/mode/2up
- https://books.google.ch/books?redir_esc=y&hl=de&id=5pCBRsfJMv8C&q=Particularly+because+of+the+relative+inaccessibility+of+these+articles%2C+and+because+their+theses+have+tended+to+be+out+of+favor%2C+it+is+worthwhile+discussing+them+at+some+length.#v=snippet&q=Particularly%20because%20of%20the%20relative%20inaccessibility%20of%20these%20articles%2C%20and%20because%20their%20theses%20have%20tended%20to%20be%20out%20of%20favor%2C%20it%20is%20worthwhile%20discussing%20them%20at%20some%20length.&f=false
- https://books.google.fr/books?id=KQ1KAAAAYAAJ&q=Balkanolo%C5%A1ki+lingvisti%C4%8Dki+studii&dq=Balkanolo%C5%A1ki+lingvisti%C4%8Dki+studii&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi20KT3odLXAhWMPZoKHSlAAxgQ6AEILjAA
- https://archive.org/stream/15826619JohnWilkesTheIllyrians/15826619-John-Wilkes-The-Illyrians#page/n45/mode/2up
- http://www.anubih.ba/godisnjak/izdanja/Godisnjak%207.pdf
- https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/10620537
- All unassessed articles
- C-Class Albania articles
- Mid-importance Albania articles
- WikiProject Albania articles
- C-Class Ethnic groups articles
- Mid-importance Ethnic groups articles
- WikiProject Ethnic groups articles
- Unassessed history articles
- Mid-importance history articles
- WikiProject History articles
- C-Class Romania articles
- Low-importance Romania articles
- All WikiProject Romania pages
- C-Class Linguistics articles
- Low-importance Linguistics articles
- WikiProject Linguistics articles
- C-Class Middle Ages articles
- Low-importance Middle Ages articles
- C-Class history articles
- All WikiProject Middle Ages pages
- Archive requests