Greek occupation of South Albania.(NYT 1913 article)

[Orphic_Hymn]

Originally Posted by boreans79

Yes Korca was """liberated""" by Hellenic army in DEC. 1912 after Albanians proclaimed independence in....NOV.1912

Not much I can do if you don't know your own history.. While Albanians had indeed proclaimed their independence prior to the date I mention, you obviously ignore that your borders (and thus your actual existance as a nation) hadn't been yet decided hence why the Treaty of London of May 30th 1913 reads:

Art. 3
His Majesty the Emperor of the Ottomans and their Majesties the Allied Sovereigns declare that they remit to His Majesty the Emperor of Germany; His Majesty the Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary; the President of the French Republic; His Majesty the King of Great Britain and Ireland, Emperor of India; His Majesty the King of Italy; and His Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias the matter of arranging the delimitation of the frontiers of Albania and all other questions concerning Albania.

I would say its purely Pelasgic while the real Hellenes(Dorians &/or Heraclides) are just an Illyrian tribe "grown up" on the Pelasgic soil.

And this wild assumption is obviously based on the babblings of Barthold Georg Niebuhr, right?
A Barthold Georg Niebuhr that claims that Thucydides provides proof that the Epirotes' language was unintelligible based on his use of the word "ἀξυνετώτατοι" (literally "witless" from the word "συνετός" = "intelligent, sagacious, wise" and the priprative a- which indicates the lack of such virtues.)

By the way, there is no Greek-speakers in Korca, just orthodox Albanians who would be offended to be called byzantine Greeks.

Might not be any now but there were several of them once.

In the text above is mentioned that Epirots are the same people with SYCELI in South Italy(according some ancient authors).
SYCELI means something in Albanian language:

OK so after this kindergarden level celebration of ignorance of linguistics we hear that Sicily means "to open your eyes"..

Now as far as what Barthold Georg Niebuhr claims..

Firstly its NOT some, since the text makes reference to a single author who's work is lost.
Furthermore his lack of credibility is obvious from his flawed claim that the Siculi were the "Pelasgians in southern Italy" since his original choice of source (Thucydides) gives us the full history of the settlement:

Thucydides 6.2

It was settled originally as follows, and the peoples that occupied it are these. The earliest inhabitants spoken of in any part of the country are the Cyclopes and Laestrygones; but I cannot tell of what race they were, or whence they came or whither they went, and must leave my readers to what the poets have said of them and to what may be generally known concerning them. [2] The Sicanians appear to have been the next settlers, although they pretend to have been the first of all and aborigines; but the facts show that they were Iberians, driven by the Ligurians from the river Sicanus in Iberia. It was from them that the island, before called Trinacaria, took its name of Sicania, and to the present day they inhabit the west of Sicily. [3] On the fall of Ilium, some of the Trojans escaped from the Achaeans, came in ships to Sicily, and settled next to the Sicanians under the general name of Elymi; their towns being called Eryx and Egesta. With them settled some of the Phocians carried on their way from Troy by a storm, first to Libya, and afterwards from thence to Sicily. [4] The Sicels crossed over to Sicily from their first home Italy, flying from the Opicans, as tradition says and as seems not unlikely, upon rafts, having watched till the wind set down the strait to effect the passage; although perhaps they may have sailed over in some other way. Even at the present day there are still Sicels in Italy; and the country got its name of Italy from Italus, a king of the Sicels, so called. [5] These went with a great host to Sicily, defeated the Sicanians in battle and forced them to remove to the south and west of the island, which thus came to be called Sicily instead of Sicania, and after they crossed over continued to enjoy the richest parts of the country for near three hundred years before any Hellenes came to Sicily; indeed they still hold the centre and north of the island.

From the above its more than simply evident that the.. not 1st nor second, but 4th wave of settlers is anything but what could be titled the "Pelasgians of S.Italy"

Originally Posted by boreans79

I know dramatically gipsy is normal on your side but since your tone was lower I will provide you the answer here:

Your vivid imagination is obviously worth a whole lot in your little make-believe world ... So you found a pic of students being taught ANCIENT HELLENIC (keyword ANCIENT) so what?

[akritas]

Originally Posted by TirAlb

American schools seiyed bz Greeks

How can you say for Greek occupation when Albania republic was formed in 1920 ?
any answer of that ?

[boreans79]

Originally Posted by Orphic_Hymn

Not much I can do if you don't know your own history.. While Albanians had indeed proclaimed their independence prior to the date I mention, you obviously ignore that your borders (and thus your actual existance as a nation) hadn't been yet decided hence why the Treaty of London of May 30th 1913 reads:

You my 'Allergic Hymn' confuses two concepts: nation and state.
If the Albanian state was created in 1913 the Albanian nation has existed prior this event.
The Albanian nation has existed when it was no borders at all but when newly barbaric states (like Serbia and Greece) were artificially created it was priority for Albanians to set up their borders like you rightly say " borders in function of existance".

Originally Posted by Orphic_Hymn

And this wild assumption is obviously based on the babblings of Barthold Georg Niebuhr, right?
A Barthold Georg Niebuhr that claims that Thucydides provides proof that the Epirotes' language was unintelligible based on his use of the word "ἀξυνετώτατοι" (literally witless from the word "συνετός" = intelligent, sagacious, wise and the priprative a- which indicates the lack of such virtues.):

This has nothing to do with Epirots being Pelasgians or not.

Originally Posted by Orphic_Hymn

OK so after this kindergarden level celebration of ignorance of linguistics we hear that Sicily means "to open your eyes"..

One now-baby 'expert' in linguistic is enogh babble-spraying to compete within this forum, but outside it you dont pass the class. I have looked at some of your ''jobs'' and crying was conquering the screaming out of my mouth.

Originally Posted by Orphic_Hymn

Your vivid imagination is obviously worth a whole lot in your little make-believe world ... So you found a pic of students being taught ANCIENT HELLENIC (keyword ANCIENT) so what?

My vivid imagination is the last resource I will use against your best inteligence offsprings. For now I can show you the way how to be obedient to somebody superior to you.

[boreans79]

Originally Posted by akritas

How can you say for Greek occupation when Albania republic was formed in 1920 ?
any answer of that ?

What could you call it other than OCCUPATION?

[boreans79]

And this was Greece in 1812

[Draco]

Originally Posted by boreans79

You my 'Allergic Hymn' confuses two concepts: nation and state.
If the Albanian state was created in 1913 the Albanian nation has existed prior this event.

Wrong. Nation and nation-state develop together and there is rarely a fully fledged nation before the establishment of the nation state, Albania is a prime example of this. Before Albania's independence most Muslim Albanians were self-identifying as Turks and most Christian Albanians as Greeks; the Albanian nation was being developed, but they needed the independent state apparatus to "educate" the masses into the new national ideology.

Originally Posted by boreans79

The Albanian nation has existed when it was no borders at all but when newly barbaric states (like Serbia and Greece) were artificially created it was priority for Albanians to set up their borders like you rightly say " borders in function of existance".

Wow, the gloves are on!

[boreans79]

And this was Greece before that:

[boreans79]

Originally Posted by Draco

Wrong. Nation and nation-state develop together and there is rarely a fully fledged nation before the establishment of the nation state, Albania is a prime example of this. Before Albania's independence most Muslim Albanians were self-identifying as Turks and most Christian Albanians as Greeks; the Albanian nation was being developed, but they needed the independent state apparatus to "educate" the masses into the new national ideology.

Wow, the gloves are on!

Really? What about Albanians being Epirots/Illyrians?

[boreans79]

Draco, Dreq, Greks & Co
You like em?

[Orphic_Hymn]

Originally Posted by boreans79

You my 'Allergic Hymn' confuses two concepts: nation and state.
If the Albanian state was created in 1913 the Albanian nation has existed prior this event.
The Albanian nation has existed when it was no borders at all but when newly barbaric states (like Serbia and Greece) were artificially created it was priority for Albanians to set up their borders like you rightly say " borders in function of existance".

So the child resorts to pittyfull distortions of screen-names in further celebration of his inferiority complexes..
So we and Serbs were artificially created but you, the righteous, weren't nothing more than the implementation of Austro-Hungarian geopolitic interests.. yeah that is indeed bright.

As for nation according to the comprehensive Merriam Webaster:

1 a (1): nationality 5a (2): a politically organized nationality (3): a non-Jewish nationality <why do the nations conspire — Psalms 2:1 (Revised Standard Version)>
b: a community of people composed of one or more nationalities and possessing a more or less defined territory and government
c: a territorial division containing a body of people of one or more nationalities and usually characterized by relatively large size and independent status


Question:
Was the territory defined during the time in question?

Answer:
NO

This has nothing to do with Epirots being Pelasgians or not.

No it has to do with the credibility of the provided source.

One now-baby 'expert' in linguistic is enogh babble-spraying to compete within this forum, but outside it you dont pass the class. I have looked at some of your ''jobs'' and crying was conquering the screaming out of my mouth.

Wake up and see that Albanian nationalistic crap theories like Thermopyles deriving from "There Pyle" have no place in any historic discussion. But then again we've concluded that you're incompotent of having one.

My vivid imagination is the last resource I will use against your best inteligence offsprings. For now I can show you the way how to be obedient to somebody superior to you.

Child you are but a nationalist hot-head with no ability of comprehending the simplest of notions..
You claim that we spoke Albanian and provide as proof a pic of students being taught ANCIENT Hellenic.. if you don't see that you've made a fool of yourself that isn't my problem but do keep out your NAZI fixations (we do know your history) of being superior to someone that has your kind cleaning the shit off his toilet.