We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The balkan slavs were under heavy influence from byzantium,even the croatian kingdom had extensive dealings with the byzantines,im just saying its illogical for the albanians to be a tribal society during the time period if they trully are illyrians.
If the Albanians were trully descendants of romanized illyrians then one would expect them to have a bit more developed culture and society above simple tribal mountain hermits.
The balkan slavs were under heavy influence from byzantium,even the croatian kingdom had extensive dealings with the byzantines,im just saying its illogical for the albanians to be a tribal society during the time period if they trully are illyrians.
Watch yourself using the word Byzantine around these parts. Soon we'll see a thread claiming Byzantium should start owning all Serbian provinces because of said cultural influence.
Well, if the Dacian-Thracian migration theory is correct, Albanians would be natives aswell. IMHO that theory seems like the most logical compared to others;
-Illyrians lived at the coast but Albanian words related to sea and naval matters are mostly loans, which would suggest that they migrated from an inland area (Skopje/East Bulgaria etc)
-Caucasian Theory is honestly outright ridicilous, Caucasian Albanian Language isn't even Indo-European, why would some non Indo-European people randomly migrate from Caucasus to Albania and create a distinct branch of Indo European? Also how could they?
Illyrian sounds probably more appealing to teach children instead of saying "We came from there and we aren't natives and such", but none of the Balkans is made out of non-migrationary peoples anyways :/
Watch yourself using the word Byzantine around these parts. Soon we'll see a thread claiming Byzantium should start owning all Serbian provinces because of said cultural influence.
Here is a full interview with a persecuted Albanian scholar, linguist etc, i suggest you read it, the man has made quite a renown. He has doctorate degrees in albanological studies from universities in Skoplje AND Tirana. This man has also been imprisoned almost countless times by the reguime of Enver Hoxha.
Dr. Kaplan Resuli-Burovich: - It became clear to me that there will not be peace on the Balkan until the albanian question is clarified. For that reason I switched from the law faculty to the albanological studies ... I discovered that not only the Albanians are not autochthonous people, but they are also not related in any way to the Pelasgians or the Illyrians. Understandably, not one of the professors in albanology has said this to me. They still continued with the tale that allegedly Albanians are autochthonous pelasgoillyrian descendants. I discovered that by chance, studying the albanian language, which, all agree, is of the type SATEM. According to that global division of languages, researching the illyrian language I discovered that it is of the type KENTUM. The most elementary logic was saying to me that one SATEM language can not be a direct descendant, not even a kind of derivative of some KENTUM language, without a change of its substrate. Since the albanian language does not have any changes in its substrate, that means that the Albanians can’t be, under any circumstance, genealogical descendants of the Illyrians. Later I discovered this, as well, in the works of the world renown professors and scholars Paul, Hirt, Vaigand, Tomashek, Georgiev, Puscariu and many others, who with numerous scholarly arguments, linguistic and historical, have proven that the Albanians not only do not have anything in common with the Illyrians, not only that they are not autochthonous at any place in the Balkan, but they are not even autochthonous in the territories of modern day Albania. Vaigand for example has formulated 12 arguments. To all of those I’ve added another five. Unfortunately, these scientists are not being mentioned in (the study) Albanology, nor in Albania, nor aret they mentioned in Yugoslavia, or in Macedonia, because the albanian professors consciously hide the truth about the origins of the Albanians and, instead of it (the truth), to their pupils and students they serve up the lies about their autochthony and illyrian origin. Via those lies they poison the whole nation. This is not done accidentally, but with the aim to incite the Albanians against the neighbouring nations, thus, hooking them on the “fishing line” of some invented, wide ethnic territories, to use them as cannon fodder for the interests of some criminalised leaders and the international Capital. The primary motive that inspired me to oppose the albanian pseudo science about their illyrian origin was the truth, the love for the truth, my special inclination towards it, but second and equally as important motive was the fact that, watching the Albanians being breast-fed with chauvinism and racism, are being encouraged to fight their neighbouring peoples (nations), I was hoping that if the truth is explained to them, they will move away from the tales, legends and myths about their autochthony and illyromania, thus ceasing with their inexcusable and baseless hatred towards their neighbours
I would like to see his proofs in regards to Illyrian definitely being a centum language - mainstream linguistics would love a firm answer to this question. The fact is that it's up in the air as to whether it was centum or satem, because we have almost no record of the Illyrian language. We simply don't have enough information on the language to decide firmly.
I would, however, presume that Illyrian, as well as other paleo-balkan languages aside from Greek, to be largely satem, with some odd centum-like features. This is the case with Armenian, which got to its current position by going from the northern Black Sea coast (i.e. the Indo-European homeland), down the west coast into the Balkans, and then into Anatolia and then Armenia. I believe this is also the case with the small remnants we have of the Phrygian language, which did the same thing but stopped in western Anatolia. Sadly, we don't have enough from Thracian, Dacian, or Illyrian to go this far, but there's enough around to suggest that they may have been satem, i.e. they are not 100% centum certified. And IIRC Albanian is another example of a mostly satem language that lacks a few features from the more definitely satem Slavic and Indo-Aryan. Which, of course, wouldn't clash with Albanian being descended from the Paleo-Balkan languages which at least had the possibility of being equally satem.
Also, to your claim that Albanian has a lot of loan words from Latin, explain how come it has no or insignificant numbers of loan words from ancient greek? Could it be that they borrowed those words from Italian, like they did with many slavic words as well? Caucassus or not, it is clear that Albanians are not inedigenous people of the Balkan peninsula, and most persumably, they came around X century or later.
The lack of Greek loanwords is a good argument against proto-Albanians being from the coast. Given how sketchy the Illyrian linguistic material is, I personally believe that it's just as likely that supposed similarities between it and Albanian could just as likely derive from Albanian descending from a language related to Illyrian, but in the interior.
And coming from the interior of the Balkans would explain a few things. IIRC pre-Roman Romanian substrate has as many similarities to Albanian as do the sparse remnants of Illyrian that we have. It would explain the reconstructible vocab of Albanian being heavily geared towards mountains than the coast. And it would explain the lack of Greek loanwords, and the presence of Latin - the Greeks simply didn't penetrate all that deeply into the interior of the Balkans, while the Romans ruled all the way up to the Danube and beyond for centuries and centuries. See this:
We simply don't have all that much linguistic material from the Paleo-Balkan Indo-European languages. We will never be able to point to one and say, "This is proto-Albanian!". But the Latin evidence should be enough on its own to prove to you that Albanians have been in the Balkans since at least the Roman Empire. Read this section from Wikipedia:
This is small scale - the REAL problem is that the area of modern day Illinois should be Serbian in 1444, because there's a lot of Serbs living there in the 21st century. The lack of Serbian names in 1444 can be explained by fashion and intermarriages.
I would like to see his proofs in regards to Illyrian definitely being a centum language - mainstream linguistics would love a firm answer to this question. The fact is that it's up in the air as to whether it was centum or satem, because we have almost no record of the Illyrian language. We simply don't have enough information on the language to decide firmly.
You cant get any proof about Illyrian language as there is no proof about Illyrians.
All we know is that Greeks called northern tribes Illyrians and that territory Illyria. There is no proof that all those tribes were even related or even similar. There is no proof that those tribes spoke same or similar language. And all those tribes didnt call them selves Illirian, that is how Greeks and Romans called them!
So i shall throw my voice in this,
The First "Albanian" State, the Principality of Arbanon, included Kosovo, formed in 1190 it was dissolved in 1255, and the "kingdom of Albania was formed in 1271 from conquered lands of the Byzantine Empire, by a French Anjou Prince, However it was wittled down until what was left was turned over to Venice. A case can be made that Kosovo should be Albanian Culture at game start, probably just as much as could be made that it is Serbian, however to me i'd prefer it be Albanian, simply because a one province Culture is annoying.
to the Illyrian, Dacian, and whatever other Historical Pre-Roman/Roman Period Culture that existed in any lands outside of Greece... Yes Most likely the Native peoples that once lived there still exist as part of the present, Mideaval and Renessaince Cultures there. Illyrians are the Albanians, just as much as Lombards and Romans are Italian, or Gaulic peoples are French. Invading Tribes didn't just massacre or expel entire populations, they assimilated them... they made babies with them as it were.
The Wallachian/Romanians Could Be as claimed Dacian, however they were invaded by Bulgaria, and a large number of other Slavic and Hungarian tribes.... So they Could have survived intact or they could have been a Slavic Tribe that invaded the Dacian Tribes and merged with them.
So i shall throw my voice in this,
The First "Albanian" State, the Principality of Arbanon, included Kosovo, formed in 1190 it was dissolved in 1255, and the "kingdom of Albania was formed in 1271 from conquered lands of the Byzantine Empire, by a French Anjou Prince, However it was wittled down until what was left was turned over to Venice. A case can be made that Kosovo should be Albanian Culture at game start, probably just as much as could be made that it is Serbian, however to me i'd prefer it be Albanian, simply because a one province Culture is annoying.
to the Illyrian, Dacian, and whatever other Historical Pre-Roman/Roman Period Culture that existed in any lands outside of Greece... Yes Most likely the Native peoples that once lived there still exist as part of the present, Mideaval and Renessaince Cultures there. Illyrians are the Albanians, just as much as Lombards and Romans are Italian, or Gaulic peoples are French. Invading Tribes didn't just massacre or expel entire populations, they assimilated them... they made babies with them as it were.
The Wallachian/Romanians Could Be as claimed Dacian, however they were invaded by Bulgaria, and a large number of other Slavic and Hungarian tribes.... So they Could have survived intact or they could have been a Slavic Tribe that invaded the Dacian Tribes and merged with them.
This thread was remarkably informative, I was certain it was going to be a flame war of "Culture A sucks!", "No, you guys suck!". Guess even a forum can occasionally surprise you
To go back to the original topic, beyond bemoaning the fall of the mighty Byzantines and making my daily sacrifices to The Johan and the Wiz to add more proper (Byzantine naturally) cores to the region, Albanian culture has one major problem. If I play in the region I always culture convert it away. It's never accepted, it's always cheap to remove and getting rid of the wrong culture modifier can occasionally help keep the province calm. Rebels in mountains are never fun.
So, from a gameplay perspective. Does it matter? To be perfectly honest I'd far rather see the province of Albania changed to either Serbian or Greek culture, despite that being about as realistic as making the province Norwegian cultured, but it would mean that Albania proper wouldn't be Turkish by 1450 when I play as the Ottoman. Since that isn't likely to happen, and I highly doubt Albania will be split into more provinces, I'd say leave Kosovo as it is. Serbian has a chance to not be culture converted away at least, no point in making Kosovo Turkish by 1480 after all.
We simply don't have all that much linguistic material from the Paleo-Balkan Indo-European languages. We will never be able to point to one and say, "This is proto-Albanian!". But the Latin evidence should be enough on its own to prove to you that Albanians have been in the Balkans since at least the Roman Empire.
So basically what you are saying is this: Well, we don't have enough material to actually find and decide what a proto albanian language was, or what their language is, but since they have words that were influenced by Latin, it means that they have been there since the Roman times - fact that Venice controled Albania and that other languages have Latin influence be damned!" In other words, you base your entire argument on the fact that one language has borrowed words from latin, therefore nation usig it has been there from Roman times.
Let's get one thing clear from the start: I never said Albanians are caucasian, i only said that there is a theory that they come from caucasus and one could spin those things any way he wants to suit his interest. What i DID say, is that Albanians came to balkans only much later, after slavs settled it, and expanded by overpopulating areas that were vacated by slavs after numerous wars with Ottomans etc.
Here are the arguments of Dr. Kaplan Resuli, an ethinc Albanian that claims otherwise to your persumption that Albanians are original inhabitants of the Blakans:
On the territory of today’s Albania, as has already been confirmed by the most distinguished world scholars, from whom I have already mentioned some, first settled the Slavs. In 548 A.D. they enter also in Durrachium (Drach, Durrls). The Albanians come via Transylvania (Romania) and Bulgaria much later, IX-X century. In the meantime, understandably, the Slavs have already named all mountains, valleys, rivers, towns and villages, and built some new ones, giving them their own names. When the Albanians arrive on the Balkan and today’s Albania, there is nothing else they can do except to take those toponyms. A large part of Albania is flooded with serbian and macedonian toponyms. Just as an example I wish to mention the towns of Pogradec, Korça (Korcha), Çorovoda (Chorovoda), Berat, Bozigrad, Leskovik, Voskopoja, Kuzova, Kelcira, Bels and others.
"The oldest evidenced text in an albanian language is “Formula ë paleximit” (Formula for communion), translated from Latin in 8-11-1462 by the Montenegrin Pavle Angjelich, whom the Albanians have albanised with the name Pal Engylli. The first book in albanian is “Meshari” (The Book of Thoughts), a manual for religious sermons, dates from 1555 and is written by the Croatian Ivan Buzuk and published in Montenegro."
When Albania is proclaimed and recognised as an independent nation (1912-1913) its population numbered 700,000 of which hardly 50% were Albanians, while the other half was made up of Vlachs (around 20%), “Slavs” (Macedonians, Serbs, Montenegrins, around 15%),Greeks (around 5%) and others (Turks, Roms, Cherkesians, Italians, Jews and others, around 10%). With the passing of time, mostly by force, with denial of all national rights, including the right to speak in their own languages at home, or to carry their own national family names, they are to a certain extent assimilated. But, even besides the such forced albanisation, in Albania even today over 30% of the population speaks a non albanian language and retains its non albanian national identity, although they are registered as Albanians, as they are not permitted to declare differently. The non albanian origins of the population of Albania is also evident from their surnames Bello, Blushi, Bogdani, Buda, Budi, Dida, Dobraci, Dragovoja, Dragusha, Haveri(ch), Kapisuzi(ch), Mexi, Millani, Milloshi, Mojsiu, Muzaka, Najdeni, Peku, Prela, Ruka, Sillil, Shkura, Shundi, Ziu and many others.
Dr. Kaplan Resuli-Burovich: - Once even Enver Hoxha was forced to admit that the albanian science lacks scientific objectivity. The albanian poet Mimoza Erebara in the Science Academy asked them directly what was the situation with my scientific discoveries. They had told her: “We knew that very well even before Kaplan, but now is not the time for all of that to be told”
VD: - Recently from Tirana were launched some “evidences” about an existence of 14 million Albanians. Amongst the numerous “Albanians” who had indebted the world civilisation was included, as well, Alexander of Macedonia!?
Dr. Kaplan Resuli-Burovich: - I’ve read that, as well. The albanian academic, Prof. Dr Skender Rizaj once even in his “scientific” works stated that, also all Serbs, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Bosnians and Herzegovians are, in reality, “slavicised” Albanians. By that method we should “admit” that they are not only 14, but possibly even 140 millions. I have already published a study about the “scientific” work “The Illyrians spoke albanian – The Albanians speak illyrian” published by Preloc Margiljaj. I would like to present for this suitable moment only a few short quotes which can also be found in other albanian historical-linguistic “experts”: “The Albanians are one of the oldest nations (peoples) in Europe” (page 438) “it is clear that Crete is the first fireplace of culture and civilisation in the aegean region and in Europe. Crete from the forgotten times of the past was settled with the pelasgian, rather the illyrian or albanian people, thus in Crete ruled the albanian language, which in other words, is the starting point and the first source of the european culture and civilisation”. (page296). Starting from this, this albanian “scientist” wants the albanian language to be taught in all schools around the world as a compulsory language because, according to him, without knowing that language it would not be possible to comprehend the world culture(!?). In respect of Alexander of Macedonia, even Enver Hoxha has written that he is an Albanian, expressing that also in one discussion with the indian ambassador in Tirana, as if personally he, Enver, had sent him to India, even as an ambassador to establish friendly relations between these two countries and peoples. These undoubtedly racist yearnings of the Albanians are certainly the result of their economic and cultural poverty, of their backwardness and late development in comparison with the other nations, amongst which are those of its neighbours, I would say of their frustration because of all of that.
------ THEY ALSO CLAIM THIS FOR SOCRATES, ARISTOTEL, PLATO ETC -------
And finally, for all those of you who claim that Kosovo should be Albanian, read this:
This truly is absurd and, in any case it is good that there remain numerous proofs for their undeniable expansion, which I have integrally collected and published in my study “The origins of the Albanians in Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro and Greece”. One needs to be objective and tell the truth, not because of the truth itself, but because it will contribute toward overcoming of the many problems on the Balkan. That the Albanians only in the past couple of centuries have expanded admitted publicly, via the printed media, the most eminent contemporary albanian scientist, academic professor Elrem Cabej (Tsabej), who, forced by the numerous arguments, was unable, but to conclude that today’s territories on which the Albanians live are not “a zone of RESTRICTION”, but “a zone of EXPANSION”. And not only he! That also is verified in the “HISTORIA Ë SHQIPERISË” itself, compiled by the albanian scientists themselves.
In other words, even Albanian scholars claim that Kosovo was a zone of expansion in the last several centuries, and not native Albanian land.
And if you are interested in motives of Dr. Kaplan, he said that this mythomania is used to instrumentalize Albanians, and that by only using the truth can the problems in the Balkans be solved. I wish that there are more, much more men like him, in every nation.
After everything said, there is no doubt about the culture of Kosovo at the game start, it's even a question if the province of Albania should even have Albanian culture in 1444.
I'm here only to point out something that DanubianCossack sort of implied in one of his posts: In-game culture does not necessarily reflect the cultural or ethnic composition of a province. It tries to reflect the culture of the "elites" in the region, which, for the time-frame, is probably the best compromise solution (although, in some cases, not perfect). You have an example of that in the Danubian basin, which at game start is basically a Hungarian blob. It does not mean there were no Slavic tribes there (in modern-day Slovakia for instance), it simply means the elites were Hungarian or Hungarian speaking, and the in-game interactions of the countries would happen with them, not with the peasants.
Specially at game-start, you need to think in much more CK2esque terms.
.png){kind=avatar}
