Happy For Putin
J. Anderson
vello
May I recognize Abkhazia?
Dmitry
> On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>
> > At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>
> > By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
I doubt that Putin's ambitions would go beyond the reality margine.
He is not a "dreamer" type.
>
> > So let's all rejoice and laugh happily at the successful project Abkhazia!
>
> May I recognize Abkhazia?
Of course you can. I do, I tend to recognise places that exist. Join
in! It will be Russia, Nauru, Nicaragua, South Ossetia, Hamas, Dmitry
and Vello -)))
Besides, the "recognition" have very little effect on the reality of
situation. I don't see how Abkhazia can become part of Georgia again?
Can you?
J. Anderson
> On 17 Dec, 18:40, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>> On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>>> At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>>> By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>
> I doubt that Putin's ambitions would go beyond the reality margine.
> He is not a "dreamer" type.
>
>>> So let's all rejoice and laugh happily at the successful project Abkhazia!
>> May I recognize Abkhazia?
>
> Of course you can. I do, I tend to recognise places that exist. Join
> in! It will be Russia, Nauru, Nicaragua, South Ossetia, Hamas, Dmitry
> and Vello -)))
In that case it would be fair that Vello and Dmitry also get their 50
million dollar share each.
> Besides, the "recognition" have very little effect on the reality of
> situation. I don't see how Abkhazia can become part of Georgia again?
That could easily be fixed by the next Stalin.
vello
> On 17 Dec, 18:40, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>
> > > At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>
> > > By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>
> I doubt that Putin's ambitions would go beyond the reality margine.
> He is not a "dreamer" type.
>
>
>
> > > So let's all rejoice and laugh happily at the successful project Abkhazia!
>
> > May I recognize Abkhazia?
>
> Of course you can. I do, I tend to recognise places that exist. Join
> in! It will be Russia, Nauru, Nicaragua, South Ossetia, Hamas, Dmitry
> and Vello -)))
It's pragmatic but someway moralless attitude :-) If all people would
start to think this way, all world would be divided between two
Empires fighting each other day and night.
Eugene Holman
<88f5627a-51a4-4ed6...@s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com>, vello
<vell...@hot.ee> wrote:
> On Dec 17, 10:46=A0pm, Dmitry <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote:
> > On 17 Dec, 18:40, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
<deletions>
>
> It's pragmatic but someway moralless attitude :-) If all people would
> start to think this way, all world would be divided between two
> Empires fighting each other day and night.
>
> > Besides, the "recognition" have very little effect on the reality of
> > situation. =A0I don't see how Abkhazia can become part of Georgia again?
> > Can you?
No, I think Abkhazia is irretrievably lost. On the other hand, we must not
forget that the separation of ethnically non-Georgian Abkhazia and
Southern Ossetia from Georgia was Putin's cynical but understandable
response to the breakaway of ethnically non-Serbian Kosovo from Serbia.
regards,
Eugene Holman
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Well, Saakashvili is gradually filling his idol's shoes better and
better, but I can't see him succeeding in getting Abkhazia and S.
Ossetia back even if he betters Stalin.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
>
> I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was
> recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a
> bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid
> to Nauru.
>
> At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate
> Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of
> the world's couple of hundred national governments
>
> will have recognized Abkhazia.
>
On Dec 13, 4:15 pm, Vladimir Makarenko <vmak...@nospamgmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Baltics today is a beloved child of yellow press
> morons - "Failed Economies of failed EE states of EU".
>
> I am angry with Russia - Baltics are next door neighbors, weak and poor,
> Russia should have helped. It has a lot of cash.
>
Here is a solution that synthesises both of your ideas:
Let Russia save the "weak and poor" Baltics financially in exchange
for their recognition of Abkhazia and S. Ossetia. Why should Nauru be
any better than the Baltics?
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> On Dec 17, 10:46 pm, Dmitry <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 17 Dec, 18:40, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > > I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>
> > > > At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>
> > > > By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>
> > I doubt that Putin's ambitions would go beyond the reality margine.
> > He is not a "dreamer" type.
>
> > > > So let's all rejoice and laugh happily at the successful project Abkhazia!
>
> > > May I recognize Abkhazia?
>
> > Of course you can. I do, I tend to recognise places that exist. Join
> > in! It will be Russia, Nauru, Nicaragua, South Ossetia, Hamas, Dmitry
> > and Vello -)))
>
> It's pragmatic but someway moralless attitude :-)
>
Yes, giving freedom to Abkahzian people is "morallless" unless they
promise to hate Russia and to join NATO, in which case giving freedom
to them will become highly "moral".
Anton
> Well, Saakashvili is gradually filling his idol's shoes better and
> better, but I can't see him succeeding in getting Abkhazia and S.
> Ossetia back even if he betters Stalin.
Only the Tsar of Kremlin can do that.
--
Anton
J. Anderson
"Eugene Holman" <hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote in message
news:holman-1812...@ke-hupnet44-27.hupnet.helsinki.fi...
> No, I think Abkhazia is irretrievably lost. On the other hand, we must not
> forget that the separation of ethnically non-Georgian Abkhazia and
> Southern Ossetia from Georgia was Putin's cynical but understandable
> response to the breakaway of ethnically non-Serbian Kosovo from Serbia.
But of course. It's as understandable as if Juan Per�n would have created an
'independent' Indio republic inside Bolivia to avenge France's loss of
Algeria.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> "Eugene Holman" <hol...@mappi.helsinki.fi> wrote in message
>
> news:holman-1812...@ke-hupnet44-27.hupnet.helsinki.fi...
>
> > No, I think Abkhazia is irretrievably lost. On the other hand, we must not
> > forget that the separation of ethnically non-Georgian Abkhazia and
> > Southern Ossetia from Georgia was Putin's cynical but understandable
> > response to the breakaway of ethnically non-Serbian Kosovo from Serbia.
>
> 'independent' Indio republic inside Bolivia to avenge France's loss of
> Algeria.
>
A more appropriate and equally intelligent analogy: Algeria asking for
independence from France to avenge Juan Perón's failure to create an
'independent' Indio republic inside Bolivia.
vello
Only the Stalin in Kremlin can do such things.
vello
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 17, 2:07 pm, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 17, 10:46 pm, Dmitry <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > On 17 Dec, 18:40, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > > > I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>
> > > > > At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>
> > > > > By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>
> > > I doubt that Putin's ambitions would go beyond the reality margine.
> > > He is not a "dreamer" type.
>
> > > > > So let's all rejoice and laugh happily at the successful project Abkhazia!
>
> > > > May I recognize Abkhazia?
>
> > > Of course you can. I do, I tend to recognise places that exist. Join
> > > in! It will be Russia, Nauru, Nicaragua, South Ossetia, Hamas, Dmitry
> > > and Vello -)))
>
> > It's pragmatic but someway moralless attitude :-)
>
> Yes, giving freedom to Abkahzian people is "morallless" unless they
> promise to hate Russia and to join NATO, in which case giving freedom
> to them will become highly "moral".
In your primitive mental world. In real world, abkhazians deserve
freedom as much as any other nation on the Earth. Problem is, they
were titulated by Russia to "own" territoey where they made up 17% of
population. There are still assyrians alive - but hardly they can
claim all Mesopotamia "back" for today.-
J. Anderson
> In real world, abkhazians deserve freedom
> as much as any other nation on the Earth.
> Problem is, they were titulated by Russia
> to "own" territoey where they made up 17% of
> population.
I'm waiting for the Karelians to get their independent republic. I'm
sure Finland would gladly recognize Karelia. No 50 million dollars needed.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
That is a false percentage.
>
> There are still assyrians alive - but hardly they can
> claim all Mesopotamia "back" for today.-
>
Tell me, if a few more people from other parts of USSR had settled in
Latvia in Soviet times, the Russian-speakers would have been the
majority of population of Latvia. Would that mean that Latvia would
have to be part of Russia forever?
Was Brezhnev's mistake that he didn't send enough settlers into Latvia
and Estonia, the way Comrades Stalin and Beria flooded Abkhazia with
Georgian settlers?
Dmitry
> Dmitry wrote:
> > On 17 Dec, 18:40, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
> >> On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> >>> I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
> >>> At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
> >>> By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>
> > I doubt that Putin's ambitions would go beyond the reality margine.
> > He is not a "dreamer" type.
>
> >>> So let's all rejoice and laugh happily at the successful project Abkhazia!
> >> May I recognize Abkhazia?
>
> > Of course you can. I do, I tend to recognise places that exist. Join
> > in! It will be Russia, Nauru, Nicaragua, South Ossetia, Hamas, Dmitry
> > and Vello -)))
>
> In that case it would be fair that Vello and Dmitry also get their 50
> million dollar share each.
Great! It would be a great opportunity to provide many disadvantaged
people on this planet with basic needs. How do I apply for funds?
>
> > Besides, the "recognition" have very little effect on the reality of
> > situation. I don't see how Abkhazia can become part of Georgia again?
>
> That could easily be fixed by the next Stalin.
Whoever comes after Saakashvili won't have power to achieve this goal.
Eugene Holman
<ander...@inbox.lv> wrote:
No, Argentina doesn't have that cynical a history. A better analogy is the
British cynicism that led to the creation of Portugal, Uruguay, Kuwait,
and Pakistan to weaken and/or humiliate countries that it wanted to teach
a lesson: Spain, Argentina, Iraq, and India.
Regards,
Eugene Holman
vello
>
Stalin's workplace was not in georgia.
Dmitry
It would be funny if he rulled USSR from Tbilisi office.
vello
Read soviet constitution - not some empire but union of 15 republics.
So no difference from which one all union is governed :-)
The Black Monk
By the same logic Crimea should belong neither to Ukraine nor Russia
but to the Tatars (currently 14% or so of the Crimean population).
And, as Andersion pointed out, Karelia ought to be returned to the
Finns.
regards,
BM
>
> - Show quoted text -
The Black Monk
And, of course, Georgians were the original inhabitants of Ossetia.
BM
>
> regards,
>
> BM
>
>
>
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Really? Aside from the fascist Gamsakhurdia propaganda, give me
objective evidence.
And how about Abkhazia?
The Black Monk
You doubt the Alans (Ossetians' ancestors) came to Georgia centuries
after Georgians had been living there? Did you know the Alans lived
in what is now southern Ukraine and Russia before coming to Georgia?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alans#Medieval_Alania
In the 13th century, fresh invading Mongol hordes pushed the eastern
Alans further south into the Caucasus, where they mixed with native
Caucasian groups and successively formed three territorial entities
each with different developments. Around 1395 Timur's army invaded
Northern Caucasus and massacred much of the Alanian population.
The linguistic descendants of the Alans, who live in the autonomous
republics of Russia and Georgia, speak the Ossetic language which
belongs to the Northeastern Iranian language group and is the only
remnant of the Scytho-Sarmatian dialect continuum and which once
stretched over much of the Pontic steppe and Central Asia. Modern
Ossetic has two major dialects: Digor, spoken in the western part of
North Ossetia; and Iron, spoken in the rest of Ossetia
--------------
Did you know Georgia is older than the 13th century?
More:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetians
Kudar (sometimes mispelled Tual, after the indigenous Dvals people),
the southern Ossetic tribe. Initially they lived in the upper course
of the Ardon River and the Darial Pass. [14] Subsequently, around the
17th century, part of them started to migrate over the Caucasus and
into Georgia. [15] After the Russian annexation of Georgia in 1801, an
Ossetian okrug was formed within the Tiflis governorate from 1846 to
1859. In 1922 the surrounding region received an autonomy within the
Georgian SSR as South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast. In 1991 Republic of
South Ossetia declared independence from Georgia in aftermath of the
Georgian-Ossetian conflict.[16]
> And how about Abkhazia?
I have more sympathy towards it, than towards the idea of an
independent Ossetia built on stolen ancient Georgian land.
regards,
BM
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
>
> Did you know Georgia is older than the 13th century?
>
So what? Where does it say that "the native Caucasian groups" that
Alanians mixed with, were actually pure Georgians? If it were just
Georgians, why doesn't Wikipedia say so, but instead mentions several
unspecified "groups"? What this says, is that modern Ossetians are a
mixture of Alanians and "the native Caucasian groups. Just as Russians
are a mixture of Slavs and Finns.
BTW, which Georgian tribe was it?
>
> More:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetians
>
> Kudar (sometimes mispelled Tual, after the indigenous Dvals people),
> the southern Ossetic tribe. Initially they lived in the upper course
> of the Ardon River and the Darial Pass. [14] Subsequently, around the
> 17th century, part of them started to migrate over the Caucasus and
> into Georgia. [15] After the Russian annexation of Georgia in 1801, an
> Ossetian okrug was formed within the Tiflis governorate from 1846 to
> 1859. In 1922 the surrounding region received an autonomy within the
> Georgian SSR as South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast. In 1991 Republic of
> South Ossetia declared independence from Georgia in aftermath of the
> Georgian-Ossetian conflict.[16]
>
Where does it say that the district that is called "South Ossetia" was
previously occupied by Georgians and not other groups?
>
> > And how about Abkhazia?
>
> I have more sympathy towards it, than towards the idea of an
> independent Ossetia built on stolen ancient Georgian land.
>
Sorry to hear. But my question was whether, in your opinion, the
current Abkhazia was initially populated by pure Georgians; and which
Georgian tribe was it?
The Black Monk
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 20, 10:13 pm, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > > > And, of course, Georgians were the original inhabitants of Ossetia.
>
> > > Really? Aside from the fascist Gamsakhurdia propaganda, give me
> > > objective evidence.
>
> > You doubt the Alans (Ossetians' ancestors) came to Georgia centuries
> > after Georgians had been living there? Did you know the Alans lived
> > in what is now southern Ukraine and Russia before coming to Georgia?
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alans#Medieval_Alania
>
> > In the 13th century, fresh invading Mongol hordes pushed the eastern
> > Alans further south into the Caucasus, where they mixed with native
> > Caucasian groups and successively formed three territorial entities
> > each with different developments. Around 1395 Timur's army invaded
> > Northern Caucasus and massacred much of the Alanian population.
>
> > --------------
>
> > Did you know Georgia is older than the 13th century?
>
> So what? Where does it say that "the native Caucasian groups" that
> Alanians mixed with, were actually pure Georgians? If it were just
> Georgians, why doesn't Wikipedia say so, but instead mentions several
> unspecified "groups"?
Because presumably not all fo the ALanians fled into Georgin areas
such as South Ossettia.
> What this says, is that modern Ossetians are a
> mixture of Alanians and "the native Caucasian groups. Just as Russians
> are a mixture of Slavs and Finns.
>
> BTW, which Georgian tribe was it?
Here are some maps to help you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Georgianiberia_andersen565.JPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geor_david.gif
Note that traditional Georgia actually extended slightly north of the
1990 border. Alania, Ossetia's ancenstral territory, bordered tot he
north.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geor_1450_1515.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > More:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetians
>
> > Kudar (sometimes mispelled Tual, after the indigenous Dvals people),
> > the southern Ossetic tribe. Initially they lived in the upper course
> > of the Ardon River and the Darial Pass. [14] Subsequently, around the
> > 17th century, part of them started to migrate over the Caucasus and
> > into Georgia. [15] After the Russian annexation of Georgia in 1801, an
> > Ossetian okrug was formed within the Tiflis governorate from 1846 to
> > 1859. In 1922 the surrounding region received an autonomy within the
> > Georgian SSR as South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast. In 1991 Republic of
> > South Ossetia declared independence from Georgia in aftermath of the
> > Georgian-Ossetian conflict.[16]
>
> Where does it say that the district that is called "South Ossetia" was
> previously occupied by Georgians and not other groups?
Well, it was "into Georgia". Who else lived in the region. Can you
name them please?
>
>
> > > And how about Abkhazia?
>
> > I have more sympathy towards it, than towards the idea of an
> > independent Ossetia built on stolen ancient Georgian land.
>
> Sorry to hear. But my question was whether, in your opinion, the
> current Abkhazia was initially populated by pure Georgians; and which
> Georgian tribe was it?
Abkhazians seem to be ther natives in Abkhazia, unlike Ossetians in
Georgia. Although Abkhazians, like Bosnian Muslims or Montenegrans vis
a vis Serbs, seem to be ethnic Georgians. Still, they are the natives
of their particular territory so I have more sympathy for their
aspirations than I do towards those of migrating Ossetians which are
exactly like the Albanians in Kosovo.
Here is an article about Ossetian native territory:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alania
regards,
BM
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
vello
> On Dec 17, 1:40 pm, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>
> > > At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>
> > > By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>
>
> > May I recognize Abkhazia?
>
> "democratic government" even if you dare to set your foot on Abkhazian
> soil.
Never been out of Putin's Russia? Or you live in China or North Korea?
To be serious, abkhazia do have (well, not too big) support in
Estonia. It depends will one take Abkhazian case like small nation
fighting for freedom or like very large country f*cking his much
smaller neighbour using abkhazians as tin soldiers.
Dmitry
Splitting Russia into 15 republics didn't make any significant change
to the size of the empire. Soviet constitution could be a nice read,
but a total bulshit in practice -)) Russian empire stayed as an
empire throughout the whole Soviet era.
> So no difference from which one all union is governed :-)
I can't remember now why Bolsheviks moved the capitol from Piter to
Moskva?
Here is an opinion on Saakashvili from back in 2005
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1335682/posts
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> On Dec 21, 2:16 am, "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr."
> <ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 20, 10:13 pm, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > > > Really? Aside from the fascist Gamsakhurdia propaganda, give me
> > > > objective evidence.
>
> > > You doubt the Alans (Ossetians' ancestors) came to Georgia centuries
> > > after Georgians had been living there? Did you know the Alans lived
> > > in what is now southern Ukraine and Russia before coming to Georgia?
>
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alans#Medieval_Alania
>
> > > In the 13th century, fresh invading Mongol hordes pushed the eastern
> > > Alans further south into the Caucasus, where they mixed with native
> > > Caucasian groups and successively formed three territorial entities
> > > each with different developments. Around 1395 Timur's army invaded
> > > Northern Caucasus and massacred much of the Alanian population.
>
> > > --------------
>
> > > Did you know Georgia is older than the 13th century?
>
When did the term “Georgia” or “Gruzia” first start to denote the
territory of modern Georgia? Maybe the term “Georgia” is quite a
modern one?
When was the ethnic group “Georgians” created/born?
>
> > So what? Where does it say that "the native Caucasian groups" that
> > Alanians mixed with, were actually pure Georgians? If it were just
> > Georgians, why doesn't Wikipedia say so, but instead mentions several
> > unspecified "groups"?
>
> Because presumably not all fo the ALanians fled into Georgin areas
> such as South Ossettia.
>
Where does it say that South Ossettia is “Georgian area”?
First of all, let us look at the big picture. In my original post to
Vello, was talking about the massive settlement of ethnic Georgians
into Abkhazia by Stalin and Beria in the 1930s-1950s. You claim that
these developments from 60 years ago are no more important than the
events from the 13th century, and (as we see below) from the 11th
century and even from the 1st century, almost 2 thousand years ago.
Well, if we go this far, then recall that all of Asia Minor (i.e.,
Turkey) used to belong to Armenians, Greeks and other Europeans.
Should Turks be expelled back to Baikal Lake?
And earlier, Europe belonged to Neanderthals. Should all humans be
kicked out of Europe?
Surely, Stalin’s deeds and crimes are more relevant that the events
from 2 millennia ago, no?
>
> > What this says, is that modern Ossetians are a
> > mixture of Alanians and "the native Caucasian groups. Just as Russians
> > are a mixture of Slavs and Finns.
>
> > BTW, which Georgian tribe was it?
>
> Here are some maps to help you:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Georgianiberia_andersen565.JPG
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geor_david.gif
>
Wow. Looks like “Georgia” under David in the 11th century conquered a
lot of other peoples and became a rather big empire. But any evidence
that all of the conquered peoples were pure Georgians?
Let me remind you what Andrei Sakharov said about Georgia:
http://www.intertrends.ru/fourteen/011.htm
Academician Sakharov wrote in 1989: “Like the Soviet Union itself,
Georgia is an empire, only a little one. If the Georgian people have a
right to freedom from an empire, then so do all other minorities, no
matter how small they are.”
>
> Note that traditional Georgia actually extended slightly north of the
> 1990 border. Alania, Ossetia's ancenstral territory, bordered tot he
> north.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geor_1450_1515.jpg
>
What you have shown is that in ancient times, various Georgian states
conquered and occupied the territory of modern Ossetia. However, you
have not proved that the occupied people, living there, were pure
Georgians, or even that they were more genetically or culturally
related to modern Georgians than to modern Ossetians.
I will be glad to show you maps of the Russian Empire which include
the territories of modern Georgia, Ukraine, Baltics and even Finland
and Poland. But it doesn’t prove that the inhabitants of Georgia or
Finland in the Russian Empire were ethnic Russians, or does it?
>
> > > More:
>
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetians
>
> > > Kudar (sometimes mispelled Tual, after the indigenous Dvals people),
> > > the southern Ossetic tribe. Initially they lived in the upper course
> > > of the Ardon River and the Darial Pass. [14] Subsequently, around the
> > > 17th century, part of them started to migrate over the Caucasus and
> > > into Georgia. [15] After the Russian annexation of Georgia in 1801, an
> > > Ossetian okrug was formed within the Tiflis governorate from 1846 to
> > > 1859. In 1922 the surrounding region received an autonomy within the
> > > Georgian SSR as South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast. In 1991 Republic of
> > > South Ossetia declared independence from Georgia in aftermath of the
> > > Georgian-Ossetian conflict.[16]
>
> > Where does it say that the district that is called "South Ossetia" was
> > previously occupied by Georgians and not other groups?
>
> Well, it was "into Georgia". Who else lived in the region. Can you
> name them please?
>
Not really. The very concept of a “Georgian” is a modern one. AFAIK,
there were no Georgians 1000 years ago. There were numerous different
ethnicities living there over the course of history. Most likely, when
the Alanians came into Ossetia, they absorbed various small ethnic
groups previously living there. These ethnic groups no longer exist,
they are part of the Ossetian ethnos (like Prussians no longer exist
but are part of the German ethnos), so their names are unknown to lay
men like myself. I suspect some members of these ethnic groups may
have also integrated into the Circassian ethnos.
It is you who made the claim that “of course, Georgians were the
original inhabitants of Ossetia”. So, it is your responsibility to
prove this claim.
>
>
> > > > And how about Abkhazia?
>
> > > I have more sympathy towards it, than towards the idea of an
> > > independent Ossetia built on stolen ancient Georgian land.
>
> > Sorry to hear. But my question was whether, in your opinion, the
> > current Abkhazia was initially populated by pure Georgians; and which
> > Georgian tribe was it?
>
> Abkhazians seem to be ther natives in Abkhazia, unlike Ossetians in
> Georgia. Although Abkhazians, like Bosnian Muslims or Montenegrans vis
> a vis Serbs, seem to be ethnic Georgians. Still, they are the natives
> of their particular territory so I have more sympathy for their
> aspirations than I do towards those of migrating Ossetians which are
> exactly like the Albanians in Kosovo.
>
Ossetians have been the majority population in S. Ossetia for many-
many centuries, and they directly descend from the various Circassian-
like tribes who had been living there prior to the Alanians. Ossetians
are a mixture of Alanians and these ancient inhabitants of Ossetia.
In the modern millennium, Albanians became a majority in Kosovo only
at the turn of the 20th century, after a massive campaign of
settlement on the part of the Ottoman Empire.
However, if we were to go back to years 500 BC or 150 AD (as you did
wrt Georgia), then there were no Slavs there at all, so if we were to
use the logic that you apply to S. Ossetia, then not only Kosovo but
all of Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia, Bulgaria and Macedonia should
belong to Greece and Albania. In fact, have Slavs been in Kosovo that
much longer than Alanians in S. Ossetia?
>
> Here is an article about Ossetian native territory:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alania
>
Cool.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
In other words, as I said, most Estonians view conflicts around the
World in the following way: Figure out which side likes Russia more,
and side against it.
High principles, eh?
No wonder Estonia has supported American aggressions all over the
world, and no wonder quite a few Estonians supported Nazi Germany in
WW2. You will support any genocidist as long as he hates Russia.
As Peteris once said when Saakashvili's police attacked opposition
demonstrations with bats, clubs and bullets: "Saakashvili is a son of
a bitch, but he is MY son of a bitch", meaning: "As long as
Saakashvili professes hate for Russia, I will support anything he
does, no matter how criminal it is."
vello
vello
> On Dec 21, 6:13 pm, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 21, 10:29 pm, Mikhail Medved <mikhail_b...@mail.ru> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 17, 1:40 pm, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > > > I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>
> > > > > At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>
> > > > > By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>
> > > > > So let's all rejoice and laugh happily at the successful project Abkhazia!
>
> > > > May I recognize Abkhazia?
>
> > > Yeah, right, recognize Abkhazia. You'll be arrested by your
> > > "democratic government" even if you dare to set your foot on Abkhazian
> > > soil.
>
> > Never been out of Putin's Russia? Or you live in China or North Korea?
>
> foreign office about visiting Abkhazia without the Georgian visa. I
> think you'll be surprised.
>
Why surprised? I can't visit part of a country without visa of that
country. Will Russia let me into some subject of Federation without
Russian visa? Hardly.
The Black Monk
Good question. The term itself is not used by actual Georgians:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgians
Georgians call themselves Kartvelebi (ქართველები), their land
Sakartvelo (საქართველო), and their language Kartuli (ქართული
The consensus is that Georgians are the natives of Georgia. Yes, they
had different kingdoms as did ancient Greeks but there is no doubt
that these people were Georgians.
>
>
>
> > > So what? Where does it say that "the native Caucasian groups" that
> > > Alanians mixed with, were actually pure Georgians? If it were just
> > > Georgians, why doesn't Wikipedia say so, but instead mentions several
> > > unspecified "groups"?
>
> > Because presumably not all fo the ALanians fled into Georgin areas
> > such as South Ossettia.
>
> Where does it say that South Ossettia is “Georgian area”?
Those areas were all parts of Georgian kingdoms.
> First of all, let us look at the big picture. In my original post to
> Vello, was talking about the massive settlement of ethnic Georgians
> into Abkhazia by Stalin and Beria in the 1930s-1950s. You claim that
> these developments from 60 years ago are no more important than the
> events from the 13th century, and (as we see below) from the 11th
> century and even from the 1st century, almost 2 thousand years ago.
I was clear is stating that the situations in Abkhasia and S. Ossetia
are different - Abkhazians are natives of Abkhazia while Ossetians are
not native to Georgia.
However, by your logic, would you support the Baltics doing to Russian
settlers of the communist era what Abkahasians did to Georgian
settlers of the communist era - mass expulsion? Be consistent,
please.
> Well, if we go this far, then recall that all of Asia Minor (i.e.,
> Turkey) used to belong to Armenians, Greeks and other Europeans.
> Should Turks be expelled back to Baikal Lake?
Let's use common sense. Sometimes it's just too late (though it would
have been nice to expell them from Constantinople at least).
> And earlier, Europe belonged to Neanderthals. Should all humans be
> kicked out of Europe?
>
> Surely, Stalin’s deeds and crimes are more relevant that the events
> from 2 millennia ago, no?
Sure. Who is arguing that this is not the case?
BTW Russians became a majority in Crimea only during Stalin times,
too.
> > > What this says, is that modern Ossetians are a
> > > mixture of Alanians and "the native Caucasian groups. Just as Russians
> > > are a mixture of Slavs and Finns.
>
> > > BTW, which Georgian tribe was it?
>
> > Here are some maps to help you:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Georgianiberia_andersen565.JPG
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geor_david.gif
>
> Wow. Looks like “Georgia” under David in the 11th century conquered a
> lot of other peoples and became a rather big empire. But any evidence
> that all of the conquered peoples were pure Georgians?
All earlier maps show the region of South Ossetia to have been part of
one Georgian kingdom or another prior to the influx of Alans in the
13th century.
> Let me remind you what Andrei Sakharov said about Georgia:
>
> http://www.intertrends.ru/fourteen/011.htm
> Academician Sakharov wrote in 1989: “Like the Soviet Union itself,
> Georgia is an empire, only a little one. If the Georgian people have a
> right to freedom from an empire, then so do all other minorities, no
> matter how small they are.”
Would you apply the same logic to all of Russia's republics? How
about Yamal-Nenets, where 90% of Russia's gas comes from. Do you
believe that the 14% of the population who are local natives have the
right to sell their oil through BP instead of Gazprom, if BP or Shell
gives them a better deal?
> > Note that traditional Georgia actually extended slightly north of the
> > 1990 border. Alania, Ossetia's ancenstral territory, bordered tot he
> > north.
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geor_1450_1515.jpg
>
> What you have shown is that in ancient times, various Georgian states
> conquered and occupied the territory of modern Ossetia. However, you
> have not proved that the occupied people, living there, were pure
> Georgians, or even that they were more genetically or culturally
> related to modern Georgians than to modern Ossetians.
Whom else were they related to? Estonians?
From ancient times the territory of South Ossetia was home to Georgian
kingdoms. Is 600 BC far back enough for you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Colchisiberiamapandersen.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_Iberia
Iberia (Georgian — იბერია, Latin: Iberia and Greek:Ἰβηρία), also known
as Iveria (Georgian: ივერია), was a name given by the ancient Greeks
and Romans to the ancient Georgian kingdom of Kartli[1] (4th century
BC - 5th century AD), corresponding roughly to the eastern and
southern parts of the present day Georgia.[2][3] The term Caucasian
Iberia (or Eastern Iberia) is used to distinguish it from the Iberian
Peninsula, where the present day countries of Spain, Portugal and
Andorra are located.
The Caucasian Iberians provided a basis for later Georgian statehood
and along with Colchis (early western Georgian state) formed a core of
the present day Georgian people (or Kartvelians).[4][5]
Should I post links to 10 more maps showing vrious Georgians kingdoms
on the territory of what is now called South Ossetiua throughout the
middle ages?
Here's one, from 1450-1550:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geor_1450_1515.jpg
South Ossetia is clearly within the Kingdom of Kartli.
Basically, like Albanians in ancient Serbian Kosovo, Ossetians moved
from into ancient Georgian territory reaching what is now South
Ossetia in the 17th century. Also like Albanians in Kosovo (at least,
until NATO intervention), the Ossetians despite settling in Georgian
territory did not actually have their state into one was created for
them by the Bolsheviks in 1922:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetian_Autonomous_Oblast
Which would serve as the basis of the later "independent" state, much
like the Commuinist-created autonomous Kosovo would serve as the basis
of the "independent" Kosovo Albanian state.
> I will be glad to show you maps of the Russian Empire which include
> the territories of modern Georgia, Ukraine, Baltics and even Finland
> and Poland. But it doesn’t prove that the inhabitants of Georgia or
> Finland in the Russian Empire were ethnic Russians, or does it?
No, but a lot of evidence exists showing that Poles, Finns etc. are
not Russians.
Any evidence proving that the people of ancient Georgian kingdoms were
not Georgians ethnically?
>
> > > > More:
>
> > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetians
>
> > > > Kudar (sometimes mispelled Tual, after the indigenous Dvals people),
> > > > the southern Ossetic tribe. Initially they lived in the upper course
> > > > of the Ardon River and the Darial Pass. [14] Subsequently, around the
> > > > 17th century, part of them started to migrate over the Caucasus and
> > > > into Georgia. [15] After the Russian annexation of Georgia in 1801, an
> > > > Ossetian okrug was formed within the Tiflis governorate from 1846 to
> > > > 1859. In 1922 the surrounding region received an autonomy within the
> > > > Georgian SSR as South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast. In 1991 Republic of
> > > > South Ossetia declared independence from Georgia in aftermath of the
> > > > Georgian-Ossetian conflict.[16]
>
> > > Where does it say that the district that is called "South Ossetia" was
> > > previously occupied by Georgians and not other groups?
>
> > Well, it was "into Georgia". Who else lived in the region. Can you
> > name them please?
>
> Not really. The very concept of a “Georgian” is a modern one. AFAIK,
> there were no Georgians 1000 years ago.
Just like there were no Germans before Herder, Goethe et al? Just
Bavarians, Swabians, Saxons, etc.? No Greeks in the ancient world,
only Spartans, Athenians, Corinthians, etc.?
There were Georgians there from at least 400 BC.
> There were numerous different
> ethnicities living there over the course of history. Most likely, when
> the Alanians came into Ossetia,
To be precise, we are talking about South Ossetia which the Alans only
reached in the 17th century.
> they absorbed various small ethnic groups previously living there.
Probably.
> These ethnic groups no longer exist,
> they are part of the Ossetian ethnos (like Prussians no longer exist
> but are part of the German ethnos),
AFAIK Baltic Prussians were mostly wiped out by the German invaders
who merely took their name.
> so their names are unknown to lay
> men like myself. I suspect some members of these ethnic groups may
> have also integrated into the Circassian ethnos.
>
> It is you who made the claim that “of course, Georgians were the
> original inhabitants of Ossetia”. So, it is your responsibility to
> prove this claim.
Which I have done (see above). The Caucasian Iberians are as much
Georgians as Bavarians are Germans. They did not think of themselves
as Georgians in the modern sense (no different than Spartans or
Athenians thinking of themselves as "Greek" in the modern sense), but
they clearly weren't Alans.
>
> > > > > And how about Abkhazia?
>
> > > > I have more sympathy towards it, than towards the idea of an
> > > > independent Ossetia built on stolen ancient Georgian land.
>
> > > Sorry to hear. But my question was whether, in your opinion, the
> > > current Abkhazia was initially populated by pure Georgians; and which
> > > Georgian tribe was it?
>
> > Abkhazians seem to be ther natives in Abkhazia, unlike Ossetians in
> > Georgia. Although Abkhazians, like Bosnian Muslims or Montenegrans vis
> > a vis Serbs, seem to be ethnic Georgians. Still, they are the natives
> > of their particular territory so I have more sympathy for their
> > aspirations than I do towards those of migrating Ossetians which are
> > exactly like the Albanians in Kosovo.
>
> Ossetians have been the majority population in S. Ossetia for many-
> many centuries, and they directly descend from the various Circassian-
> like tribes who had been living there prior to the Alanians. Ossetians
> are a mixture of Alanians and these ancient inhabitants of Ossetia.
Maybe in northern Ossetia. However S. Ossetia has always been a part
of a Georgian kingdom, and the Alans didn't reach it until the 17th
century.
> In the modern millennium, Albanians became a majority in Kosovo only
> at the turn of the 20th century, after a massive campaign of
> settlement on the part of the Ottoman Empire.
Actually depending on the source this could have been a bit earlier,
sometime in the 19th century. At most, only a 100 years or so after
ethnic Ossetian newcomers became the majority in S. Ossetia. OTOH
while Serbs eventually became reduced to 10% of the population of
their native Kosovo by 1990 (half have been ethnically cleansed since
then) Georgians were still about 30% of S. Ossetia at the times of
their recent expulsion.
If you want to support independence of S. Ossetia, fine, just don't be
a hypocrite and equally support the independence of Kosovo. You can't
support one and not the other (and this goes both ways - westerners
shouldn't support Kosovo independence while denying that of S.
Ossetia).
> However, if we were to go back to years 500 BC or 150 AD (as you did
> wrt Georgia), then there were no Slavs there at all, so if we were to
> use the logic that you apply to S. Ossetia, then not only Kosovo but
> all of Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia, Bulgaria and Macedonia should
> belong to Greece and Albania. In fact, have Slavs been in Kosovo that
> much longer than Alanians in S. Ossetia?
I was mentioning 500 BC only to prove to you that Georgians are the
natives. I was NOT basing Georgian legitimacy upon a claim dating
back to 500 BC or 150 AD. Please cut the demogoguery.
regards,
BM
> > Here is an article about Ossetian native territory:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alania
>
> Cool.- Hide quoted text -
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. kirjoitti:
>
> > Well, Saakashvili is gradually filling his idol's shoes better and
> > better, but I can't see him succeeding in getting Abkhazia and S.
> > Ossetia back even if he betters Stalin.
>
> Only the Tsar of Kremlin can do that.
>
Do you see him doing so in the next 50 years?
vello
It depends on developments in Russia. In position of leaders of
Central Asian resource-rich countries, I would be a bit worried.
Anton
> On Dec 18, 1:31 am, Anton <anton.use...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. kirjoitti:
>>> Well, Saakashvili is gradually filling his idol's shoes better and
>>> better, but I can't see him succeeding in getting Abkhazia and S.
>>> Ossetia back even if he betters Stalin.
>> Only the Tsar of Kremlin can do that.
> Do you see him doing so in the next 50 years?
I dropped my crystal ball - hard to tell...
--
Anton
Dmitry
The only way to restore GSSR borders is to take breakaway territories
by force. Georgia, whoever the leader is, is not capable of doing
this.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
I was saying that the chances that "the Tsar of Kremlin" is going to
give Abkhazia and S.Ossetia to Georgia, are minimal.
Moreover, if that ever happens and, as the result, Abkhazian and
Ossetians suffer from a genocide - this "Tzar" and his court should be
tortured to death, slowly, over 10 days.
vello
>
I talk about czar(s) in Kremlin, not about poor neighbours of Russia.
If there will be real will, some "Abkhazia" would be find for sure
also in Turmenia, Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan.
vello
Why? Czar who did all that to chechen people is happily supported by
electorate in Russia.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
But Abkhazia and S. Ossetia are different: they declared independence
from the Georgian SSR **PRIOR** to the break-up of the USSR in 1991
and never recognised Georgian rule. No parts of Turkmenia, Kazakhstan
or Uzbekistan have done so.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
First of all, let us set the terminology straight: When you say
"Ossetia", you don't mean the main part of Ossetia: Alania, aka
"North Ossetia" with population of 700 000 people, right? Because
Georgians don't seem to have ever been a majority or even a
significant minority population of Alania, which is separated from
Georgia by a huge mountain range.
You mean South Ossetia with population of only 70,000, right?
But, even if we to assume that Ossetians settled in S. Ossetia in the
17th century, how can you equate the strength of Georgian claim to S.
Ossetia to the Abkhazian claim to Abkhazia? At no point in the history
of cencii (sp?), have Georgians (actually, Mengrelians, which is a
different ethnicity from Georgians, right?) been in the majority in
Abkhazia, not even after Stalin and Beria's actions:
http://demoscope.ru/weekly/ssp/emp_lan_97_uezd.php?reg=470
Sukhum District
1887 Census 24.5% (26,009)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Abkhazia
http://www.ethno-kavkaz.narod.ru/rnabkhazia.html
1926 Census 33.6% (67,494)
1939 Census 29.5% (91,967)
1959 Census 39.1% (158,221)
1970 Census 41.0% (199,596)
1979 Census 43.9% (213,322)
1989 Census 45.7% (239,872)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Abkhazia
According to the 1897 census there were 58,697 people in Abkhazia who
listed Abkhaz as their mother tongue, 23,810 people listed Mingrelian
as their mother tongue, 1,971 people listed Georgian (including
Imeretian dialect) as their mother tongue.
During the Soviet Union, the Russian, Armenian, Greek and Georgian
population grew faster than the Abkhaz, due to the large-scale
migration enforced especially under the rule of Stalin and Lavrenty
Beria, who himself was a Georgian born in Abkhazia.
-----------------------------
On the other hand, Ossetians have been the dominant majority in South
Ossetia in **all** known censii:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_South_Ossetia#Demographics
1926 census 60,351 (69.1%)
1939 census 72,266 (68.1%)
1959 census 63,698 (65.8%)
1970 census 66,073 (66.5%)
1979 census 65,077 (66.4%)
1989 census 65,200 (65.9%)
2007 estimate 47,000 (67.1%)
---------------------------------------------------
So, how can you equate the two?
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
So, Ossetians has the same claim on southern Ukraine as Georgians to
Ossetia? :-)
But you are wrong here: in addition to southern Ukraine and Russia,
Alanians/Scyths/Sarmatians have been living in North Caucuses since
time immemorial.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alans#Medieval_Alania
>
> In the 13th century, fresh invading Mongol hordes pushed the eastern
> Alans further south into the Caucasus, where they mixed with native
> Caucasian groups and successively formed three territorial entities
> each with different developments. Around 1395 Timur's army invaded
> Northern Caucasus and massacred much of the Alanian population.
>
> The linguistic descendants of the Alans, who live in the autonomous
> republics of Russia and Georgia, speak the Ossetic language which
> belongs to the Northeastern Iranian language group and is the only
> remnant of the Scytho-Sarmatian dialect continuum and which once
> stretched over much of the Pontic steppe and Central Asia. Modern
> Ossetic has two major dialects: Digor, spoken in the western part of
> North Ossetia; and Iron, spoken in the rest of Ossetia
>
> --------------
>
> Did you know Georgia is older than the 13th century?
>
Look at your own maps:
>
> Here are some maps to help you:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Georgianiberia_andersen565.JPG
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geor_david.gif
>
> Note that traditional Georgia actually extended slightly north of the
> 1990 border. Alania, Ossetia's ancenstral territory, bordered tot he
> north.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Geor_1450_1515.jpg
>
All your maps clearly show that Alanians/Scyths/Sarmatians have been
living in Ossetia for many-many millenia.
Also, e.g.:
http://archaeonews.blogspot.com/2006/06/north-ossetia-plundered-of-its-golden.html
09 Juni 2006
North Ossetia Plundered of its Golden Age
Archaeologists in North Ossetia say an ancient and unique heritage is
slipping away because of systematic plunder, while the authorities
stand by and do nothing. “Each year our institute rescues around one
million US dollars' worth of historical relics from being stolen or
destroyed,” Mark Bliev, director of the institute of history and
archaeology at North Ossetia’s State University, told IWPR.
Bliev and his colleagues regularly go out on excavation trips to try
to preempt the grave robbers who dig up valuable items. They have
saved an impressive amount, he said,“There are over 200,000 pieces.
For example, a set of golden harness fittings found near a dig in the
small town of Zilginsk [on the outskirts of Beslan] is worth over two
million US dollars on the world market. It dates from the Sarmatian
period of the third century BC. ”But sometimes Bliev and his
colleagues are not quick enough to stop the thieves – termed “black
market archaeologists” - who make a living from illegal excavations.
--------------------
It seems that when you wrote "Ossetia", you didn't mean the entire
Ossetia, did you? You meant only the small part of Ossetia (10% of
population) called "South Ossetia", right?
>
> > > And, of course, Georgians were the original inhabitants of Ossetia.
>
Well, it may be that Georgians were indeed the main inhabitants of
**South** Ossetia for a couple of millenia prior to the Ossetian
penetration between the 13th and the 17th century, if I were to
understand your chronology correctly. Although the famous Ossetian
archeologist Mark Bliev says otherwise:
http://bookz.ru/authors/mark-bliev/ujnaa-os_593.html
http://fb2lib.net.ru/read_online/88840#TOC_id11289259
http://www.europublish.ru/eng/allbooks/111726908?user_session=7fc9b92aa96a68d3abd2ff87573e16e8
South Ossetia in the Midst of Russian-Georgian Conflicts
Mark Bliev, Doctor of History Science, Professor, North Ossetia
University
Moscow, Europe Publishing House, 2006, pp 472
South Ossetia is usually remembered in connection with another
«prowess» of subordinates of Georgian presidents, from Gamsakhurdia to
Saakashvili. Little is known, however, of the origins of this
conflict. The detailed book by Mark Bliev immerses the reader in
history, from ancient times to an account of Georgian princes’ age-old
attempts to strip the Ossetians of their freedom and land, and
extremely inconsistent actions of Russian governors in the Caucasus,
who more often than not became an instrument of repression against the
Ossetians. It was only Nicholas I who seemed to understand the
situation better than others and opposed wide punitive measures
against the Ossetians who became divided by the mid-19th century:
while North Ossetia lived by the laws of the Russian Empire, South
Ossetia practically remained under the authority of Georgian
oppressors, and serfdom was not abolished here. Stalin continued with
this tradition, shifting the borders with Georgia so that it gained
control of the entire Voyenno-Gruzinskaya road. The book offers a
valuable opportunity to trace attempts of the independent Georgia to
expel Ossetians from their homeland.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> On Dec 18, 11:14 am, "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr."
>
>
>
> <ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 17, 2:07 pm, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 17, 10:46 pm, Dmitry <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > > On 17 Dec, 18:40, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>
> > > > > > At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>
> > > > > > By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>
> > > > I doubt that Putin's ambitions would go beyond the reality margine.
> > > > He is not a "dreamer" type.
>
> > > > > > So let's all rejoice and laugh happily at the successful project Abkhazia!
>
> > > > > May I recognize Abkhazia?
>
> > > > Of course you can. I do, I tend to recognise places that exist. Join
> > > > in! It will be Russia, Nauru, Nicaragua, South Ossetia, Hamas, Dmitry
> > > > and Vello -)))
>
> > > It's pragmatic but someway moralless attitude :-)
>
> > Yes, giving freedom to Abkahzian people is "morallless" unless they
> > promise to hate Russia and to join NATO, in which case giving freedom
> > to them will become highly "moral".
>
> In your primitive mental world. In real world, abkhazians deserve
> freedom as much as any other nation on the Earth. Problem is, they
> were titulated by Russia to "own" territoey where they made up 17% of
> claim all Mesopotamia "back" for today.-
>
Well, yes, according to Wiki, indeed only 18% identified themselves as
ethnic Abkhazians in 1989:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Abkhazia#Historical_developments
But aren't ethnic Russians, Armenians, Greeks etc people too? The
fact is that the majority of the population of Abkhazia voted to
separate from Georgia if it were to become an independent state:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abkhazia
In March 1990 Georgia declared sovereignty, unilaterally nullifying
treaties concluded by the Soviet government since 1921 and thereby
moving closer to independence. The Republic of Georgia boycotted the
17 March 1991 all-Union referendum on the renewal of the Soviet Union
called by Mikhail Gorbachev - but 52.3% of the Abkhazia's population
(most of whom ethnic non-Georgians) took part in the referendum and
voted by an overwhelming majority (98.6%) to remain with the Soviet
Union.
Dmitry
I don't think Kremlin is interested in restoring USSR borders.
Dmitry
> > Moskva?
>
> further of Evil West.
Thank you. It came back to me. At the beginning of 1918 German
troops were very close to Piter.
Vladimir Makarenko
> On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>> I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>>
>> At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>>
>> By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>>
>
> May I recognize Abkhazia?
What you are late on car loan payments?
VM.
Vladimir Makarenko
> I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was
> recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain:
> it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>
> At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is
> unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred
> national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be
> democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>
> By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>
> So let's all rejoice and laugh happily at the successful project Abkhazia!
If I would be in your place I would be *very* careful: Nauru didn't
support as Baltics did for a political/material profit a genocidal
adventure to get oil, just independence of people oppressed by the dwarf
empire.
Doesn't matter what "nauru" means in Finnish because "genocide" means
the same in all languages.
As to Putin - he is a lawyer after all, he knows what he is doing. This
is why those who recognized Kosovo and thought they get away with it are
so irked and feel helpless and angry. Putin, The Hero, He won again!
Fall on your knees mortals! Did Finland recognize "Kosova" heroin land
as an independent state?
Instead you have to be happy for Sharikov - in his recent interview to
Russians Shevarnadze said that in his last year a first compromise was
reached and first tens of thousands Georgians returned to Abkhazia, then
came the ugly Sharikov and everything came to stop.
Make no mistake - Shevarnadze is a rabid Georgian nationalist as the
others but he wasn't an stupid asshole. Maybe a corrupt godfather but
not a corrupt stupid asslicker.
VM.
Vladimir Makarenko
> On Dec 18, 11:14 am, "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr."
> <ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 17, 2:07 pm, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 17, 10:46 pm, Dmitry <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>>>> On 17 Dec, 18:40, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 17, 7:54 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>>>>>> I'm so happy for Mr Putin. His cute little puppet state Abkhazia was recognized by Nauru a couple of days ago. And the price was a bargain: it cost Putin only 50 million dollars in Russian project aid to Nauru.
>>>>>> At the same time I'm a little sad, because at this rate Mr Putin is unlikely to see the day when a majority of the world's couple of hundred national governments will have recognized Abkhazia. Even if he he'd be democratically re-elected a dozen times.
>>>>>> By the way, the word 'nauru' means laughter in Finnish.
>>>> He is not a "dreamer" type.
>>>> Of course you can. I do, I tend to recognise places that exist. Join
>>>> in! It will be Russia, Nauru, Nicaragua, South Ossetia, Hamas, Dmitry
>>>> and Vello -)))
>>> It's pragmatic but someway moralless attitude :-)
>> Yes, giving freedom to Abkahzian people is "morallless" unless they
>> promise to hate Russia and to join NATO, in which case giving freedom
>> to them will become highly "moral".
>
> In your primitive mental world. In real world, abkhazians deserve
> freedom as much as any other nation on the Earth. Problem is, they
> were titulated by Russia to "own" territoey where they made up 17% of
> population. There are still assyrians alive - but hardly they can
> claim all Mesopotamia "back" for today.-
>
Shall we go through this again? S Ossetia in some way WILL become a part
of Russia, because the situation is RIDICULOUS - 10% of the ethnic group
cannot live separately.
The Abkhaz is totally different story: they will NEVER join Russia, only
under direct threat of military defeat what in regional terms means
genocide. If you do not believe me - ask these few thousands of
Estonians who lived there and after the war started returned Amber Shores.
Or - what rarely mentioned in Russian press because it's uncomfortable
and in the West because of ignorance: the whole region looks at Abkhazia
as an example, earlier or later they all hope (and will) become
independent. Georgians screwed up. Rooskies are next. Now instead of
whining Georgians should to take care how to live in a new hostile
world. There is no return.
And btw - the West is funny - Putin and Co basically gave Chechenya
independence on a condition that there is no crime export to Russia.
Perfectly fits their social maturity. And now everybody in the West
barks at Putin that he doesn't send tanks to force them to live
according to EU criminal/civilian code: "Independence is OK only if it
follows our standards". But very reluctant to send your boys to
Afghanistan, -"it's America's problem" and in a small footnote "and
Rooskies too but not ours".
VM.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
wrote:
No. That's not why USA, NATO and the West criticize the Russian
handling of Chechnya. They criticize the Russian handling of anything
simply because it's Russian. No matter what Russia does, it will be
criticized.
Aesop's Fables
by Aesop
translated by G.F. Townsend
The Wolf and the Lamb
WOLF, meeting with a Lamb astray from the fold, resolved not to lay
violent hands on him, but to find some plea to justify to the Lamb the
Wolf's right to eat him. He thus addressed him: "Sirrah, last year you
grossly insulted me." "Indeed," bleated the Lamb in a mournful tone of
voice, "I was not then born." Then said the Wolf, "You feed in my
pasture." "No, good sir," replied the Lamb, "I have not yet tasted
grass." Again said the Wolf, "You drink of my well." "No," exclaimed
the Lamb, "I never yet drank water, for as yet my mother's milk is
both food and drink to me." Upon which the Wolf seized him and ate him
up, saying, "Well! I won't remain supperless, even though you refute
every one of my imputations."
J. Anderson
"Dmitry" <dmitrijs...@inbox.lv> wrote in message
news:f2c4deec-d36a-44b1...@22g2000yqr.googlegroups.com...
Not only German... The Finnish border was only 20 miles away, and in Finland
right then White forces led by former Czarist General Mannerheim were
fighting the Finnish Reds.
Actually the Soviet government moved to Moscow only after it had made peace
with Germany (at Brest-Litovsk) on March 3rd. Exactly one week later Lenin &
Co. boarded the night train to Moscow, and that was the end of Piter's
status as capital of Russia.
J. Anderson
"The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aedd2e68-1aad-4aca...@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> By the same logic Crimea should belong
> neither to Ukraine nor Russia but to the
> Tatars (currently 14% or so of the Crimean
> population). And, as Andersion pointed out,
> Karelia ought to be returned to the Finns.
Not 'returned' -- Russian Karelia never belonged to Finland. But by this
logic it should belong to the Karelians, 12% of the population in Respublika
Karelija in 2002.
For a map of the different 'Karelias' look here:
http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiedosto:Many_Karelias.png
Anton
> Not 'returned' -- Russian Karelia never belonged to Finland. But by this
> logic it should belong to the Karelians, 12% of the population in Respublika
> Karelija in 2002.
> For a map of the different 'Karelias' look here:
> http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiedosto:Many_Karelias.png
By the way; Karelian language has only now been granted official
minority language status in Finland. For mainly political reasonsￜ
Finland has previosly regarded Karelian as a Finnish dialect.
ￜ) Regarding Karelian as a variant of Finnish language has provided
justification to claim Karelian lands as belonging to the republic of
Finland.
--
Anton
Dmitry
> "Dmitry" <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote in message
I suspect Lenin must have planned the transfer to Kremlin a bit more
in advance. Why do you think he moved the capitol? Certainly not
running away from Mannerheim...
Dmitry
> J. Anderson kirjoitti:
>
> > Not 'returned' -- Russian Karelia never belonged to Finland. But by this
> > logic it should belong to the Karelians, 12% of the population in Respublika
> > Karelija in 2002.
> > For a map of the different 'Karelias' look here:
> >http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiedosto:Many_Karelias.png
>
> By the way; Karelian language has only now been granted official
> Finland has previosly regarded Karelian as a Finnish dialect.
I guess Latgalian language will never get such status, may be only
when it is completely dead.
>
> ¹) Regarding Karelian as a variant of Finnish language has provided
J. Anderson
Oh, but yes, that was certainly one reason. Don't forget how weak the
Reds actually were at that point and for another 2-3 years. Look at this
map:
http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiedosto:Russian_civil_war_West_1918-20.png
Lenin's government had to leave the dangerous front zone, but also for
logistic reasons it was better to be in the centre of the area that it
still controlled.
General Yudenich came to Finland to beg Mannerheim to attack Petrograd,
but the Finns were more interested in trying to seize parts of Russian
Karelia. Later Estonians, Latvians and Poles one after another defeated
the Bolshevik forces.
vello
One more reason - after Kroonlinnan uprising Lenin may well afraid
that St. Pete, "western" city for Russia, is too western, too
educated, too independently thinking to be a center point for an
religious empire.
vello
> On 29 Dec, 14:02, Anton <anton.use...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > J. Anderson kirjoitti:
>
> > > Not 'returned' -- Russian Karelia never belonged to Finland. But by this
> > > logic it should belong to the Karelians, 12% of the population in Respublika
> > > Karelija in 2002.
> > > For a map of the different 'Karelias' look here:
> > >http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiedosto:Many_Karelias.png
>
> > By the way; Karelian language has only now been granted official
> > minority language status in Finland. For mainly political reasons¹
> > Finland has previosly regarded Karelian as a Finnish dialect.
>
> I guess Latgalian language will never get such status, may be only
> when it is completely dead.
>
Estonia, there are/were at least 4 dialects differing from each other
more then modern Estonian from Finnish and surely more then Danish and
Swedish. So is it language or dialect depends on feelings.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> On 29 Dec, 14:02, Anton <anton.use...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > J. Anderson kirjoitti:
>
> > > Not 'returned' -- Russian Karelia never belonged to Finland. But by this
> > > logic it should belong to the Karelians, 12% of the population in Respublika
> > > Karelija in 2002.
> > > For a map of the different 'Karelias' look here:
> > >http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiedosto:Many_Karelias.png
>
> > By the way; Karelian language has only now been granted official
> > minority language status in Finland. For mainly political reasons¹
> > Finland has previosly regarded Karelian as a Finnish dialect.
>
> I guess Latgalian language will never get such status, may be only
> when it is completely dead.
>
Like the Novgorod dialect? :-)
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Well, if we were to listen to BM, since all cities and districts had
their own dialects in the Middle Ages, all wars between neighbouring
districts were wars of "ethnic cleansing" a la The Haague
Tribunal. :-)
vello
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
Russian is interesting language having almost no dialects (if to count
belarussian and ukrainian as separate languages).
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
In modern times - no. But France, Germany, Netherlands and most other
countries don't either. In modern times.
But different accents/pronunciations.
But in ancient times, all languages had multitudes of dialects, one
dialect per city.
There was no radio or TV, and most people didn't read.
vello
>
No, read himself into topic. 50 years ago (and partly today) in
Germany you need a translator to make himself understandable in
different parts of Germany. Same for Estonia, austria, France and a
lot of other places. Niedersaxonisch, a lingua franca in Hanseatic
League (and language of education and business in medieval Estonia)
end up as different language, Dutch, in modern days. But even books
are printed in local dialects even today. Nothing that with Russian
language. Any idea about reasons of that?
Vladimir Makarenko
Vello, Russians form Central Russia cannot understand Pomors (White Sea
shore dwellers, probably most ancient Russians, do not even regard us as
relatives, they speak - we turn to each other what did they just said?)
Phonetics is a way different.
It is easier with Ural and Siberia, still we think - very heavy accent.
VM.
Dmitry
A better looking map of the beginning of it
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ru/e/e2/Attach1.jpg
I can't find any maps covering Asian of Russia during civil war, but
Bolsheviks didn't have it easy in that part too. It puzzles me how,
did they manage to win this? They didn't have any financial support,
military equipment and not much support from Russian population. They
were against White army, Basmachi, Ukrainian People's Republic,
Belarusian People's Republic, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Estonia,
Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Emirate of Bukhara, Kokand,
People's Republic of Kuban, North Caucasian Emirate, Khanate of Khiva,
Britain, France, USA, Japan, Romania, Austria-Hungary, Germany,
Ottoman Empire and various irregular, predominantly peasant and
Cossack, military units.
Dmitry
> > when it is completely dead.
>
> Do Latgalians feel himself as separate from Latvians nation?
This is not a "nation" issue. There is no movement for "Latgola's
independence" -)) Most Latgalians are russified and not bothered
about being a "nation". However, there is a movement for retaining
Latgalian language and their cultural identity. During Latvian time
(1920-40) the language was functional in media, education system and
beureaucracy. Soviets have cut all pipes, except that people were
still allowed to speak the language, but would be laughed at when
speaking it outside Latgale. Latvia MKII follows the Soviet suite and
keeps Latgalian as a dialect, which helps to bring Latgalian to its
death.
> In small
> Estonia, there are/were at least 4 dialects differing from each other
> more then modern Estonian from Finnish and surely more then Danish and
> Swedish. So is it language or dialect depends on feelings.
Of course, there is no clear distinction between these two
definitions. But I think the fact that Latgalian is written
differently from Latvia does add to the argument that Latgalian is a
language.
Dmitry
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 29, 1:22 pm, Dmitry <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 29 Dec, 14:02, Anton <anton.use...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > J. Anderson kirjoitti:
>
> > > > Not 'returned' -- Russian Karelia never belonged to Finland. But by this
> > > > logic it should belong to the Karelians, 12% of the population in Respublika
> > > > Karelija in 2002.
> > > > For a map of the different 'Karelias' look here:
> > > >http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiedosto:Many_Karelias.png
>
> > > By the way; Karelian language has only now been granted official
> > > minority language status in Finland. For mainly political reasons¹
> > > Finland has previosly regarded Karelian as a Finnish dialect.
>
> > I guess Latgalian language will never get such status, may be only
> > when it is completely dead.
>
> Like the Novgorod dialect? :-)
Novgorod language/dialect doesn't exist any more. Latgalian is still
in use -))
Dmitry
I've never heard speach of Pomors. If you come across any audio
samples on net - let me know. I found traditional Moscow, Nizhny
Novgorod and Southern (Brezhneu&Horbachou) quite strong.
J. Anderson
Well, believe it or not, but until November 1918 they had for instance
British support. The Finnish Whites were fighting the joint Russian Red
and British forces in White Sea Karelia! Probably the Brits prefered to
forget all about this as soon as possible after the war...
vello
> I can't find any maps covering Asian of Russia during civil war, but
> Bolsheviks didn't have it easy in that part too. It puzzles me how,
> did they manage to win this? They didn't have any financial support,
> military equipment and not much support from Russian population. They
> were against White army, Basmachi, Ukrainian People's Republic,
> Belarusian People's Republic, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Estonia,
> Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Emirate of Bukhara, Kokand,
> People's Republic of Kuban, North Caucasian Emirate, Khanate of Khiva,
> Britain, France, USA, Japan, Romania, Austria-Hungary, Germany,
> Ottoman Empire and various irregular, predominantly peasant and
>
Russians itself and their support turning from whites to red ones was
the key. big European countries actually don't fight much but kept
some territories (Arkhangelsk) where their ww1 military stuff was
keeped. Nations like finns, estonians, latvians, lithuanians and poles
do fight just for their own interests (so did, ukrainians,
belarusians, caucasians and people of central asian countries,
unhappily with less success). But those figts were mostly limited with
areas where mentioned nations live.
vello
Estonia had two written languages, Southern and Northern, up to 1920.
In independent Estonia, Northern dialect takes over and for today
publishing in southern dialect is marginal. btw, southern tongue,
despite geographical realities, is more close to finnish then Northern
one.
vello
wrote:
dialects, a big part of vocabulary is completely different. Say, in
Estonia and Germany (just places about I have a data) local dialects
vary as much as russian from serbian, slovenian, polish or czech.
Knowing russian, I'm 80% able to understand bulgarian, and on lower
degree all slavic languages. With some southestonian dialect, I can't
get any second word and even those I get, they pronounce completely
differently.
I think reason why dialects do survive up to our days is lack of
strong central govt in Germany but also in Estonia - tongue of
messengers from king's city normally will overrun local habits in 100
years :-) Take France, about 150 years ago about 11% from population
was able to understand what they speak in Louvre.
Anton
Well in early 1918 all of southern Finland (including the capital) was
in Red hands. When the White's victory became evident the Red leadership
escaped to St Petersburg. (Footnote: Most of those Finnish Reds were
later "purged" by Stalin).
Reds in Finland had genuine support among the people, at least in the
beginning. What I have read about the "Red Army of Workers and Peasants"
in Russia, they held reluctant ordinary Russian civilians as hostages
thus forcing the sons and fathers to join their army. In Finland Reds
promised all kinds of material things (such as land) in exchange for
service in their ranks.
--
Anton
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Sorry but I am not convinced that this is true. Please give me some
references to read about this. I know that people in different parts
of Germany speak with different accent, but afaik, it is exactly the
same language, in terms of grammar and words, and was so even 50 years
ago.
Are you saying that 50 years ago, in 1959, there were several written
dialects of German in Germany itself? Were there parts of Germany
where Hitler's or Adenauer's speeches had to be translated for the
local people to understand what they were saying?
>
> Same for Estonia, austria, France and a
> lot of other places.
>
There were mutually non-understandable regional dialects of French in
France in 1959? I doubt it. The French language (words and grammar)
has been highly standardized by the Academy centuries ago. You
wouldn't mean variations in pronunciation, would you?
Please provide references.
>
> Niedersaxonisch, a lingua franca in Hanseatic
> League (and language of education and business in medieval Estonia)
> end up as different language, Dutch, in modern days.
>
And Russian and Ukrainian ended up as different languages in modern
days.
>
> But even books
> are printed in local dialects even today.
>
That's interesting. Does this still take place in Germany and France?
>
> Nothing that with Russian
> language. Any idea about reasons of that?
>
If you explain to me how exactly modern France and Germany are
different from modern Russia in this respect, that would be very
interesting, and I will gladly try to figure out the explanation for
this difference.
But first, i need to get some references concerning modern (or 50
years ago) France and Germany.
In Rus, even 1000 years ago, all cities - Kiev, Novgorod, Pskov,
Moscow - used the same literary and church language: Old Slavonic:
http://gramoty.ru/dnd/full/005Vvedenie.pdf
So, literate people in ancient Rus never needed any translators to
communicate with each other.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Correction: Church Slavonic.
>
> http://gramoty.ru/dnd/full/005Vvedenie.pdf
>
"Church Slavonic language. As in the rest of Russia, it served the
function of the church and literary language."
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Excuse me but when Latgalian is "completely dead", as you wrote, then
wouldn't it be indeed like the Novgorod dialect? What's wrong with my
analogy?
But would you say that when a man from Riga robs a man from Latgale,
it is a act of ethnic hatred, and if he kills him in the process - it
is "ethnic cleansing" by Rigans against Latgallians?
Also: now you are trying to elevate Novgorodian to the level of a
separate language? Any scientific evidence to support this idea of
yours? Let me give you the link to the original discovery of this
issue and have you point out where it says it was a separate language:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Novgorod_dialect
Zaliznyak, Andrey Anatolyevich (2004) (in Russian). Древненовгородский
диалект. Moscow: Языки славянской культуры. ISBN 5-94457-165-9.
http://gramoty.ru/?id=dnd.
AA Zaliznyak "Old Novgorod Dialect"
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
BTW, according to Wiki, there are plenty of different dialects and
even languages in modern Russia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_language#Dialects
Derived languages
* Balachka a dialect, spoken primarily by Cossacks, in the regions
of Don, Kuban and Terek.
* Fenya, a criminal argot of ancient origin, with Russian grammar,
but with distinct vocabulary.
Dialects
Northern dialects 1. Arkhangelsk dialect 2. Olonets
dialect 3. Novgorod dialect 4. Viatka dialect 5.
Vladimir dialect
Central dialects 6. Moscow dialect 7. Twer dialect
Southern dialects 8. Orel (Don) dialect 9. Ryazan
dialect 10. Tula dialect 11. Smolensk dialect
Other 12. Northern Russian dialect with Belorussian
influences 13. Sloboda and Steppe dialects of Ukrainian
language 14. Steppe dialect of Ukrainian with Russian influences
Despite leveling after 1900, especially in matters of vocabulary, a
number of dialects exist in Russia. Some linguists divide the dialects
of the Russian language into two primary regional groupings,
"Northern" and "Southern", with Moscow lying on the zone of transition
between the two. Others divide the language into three groupings,
Northern, Central and Southern, with Moscow lying in the Central
region. Dialectology within Russia recognizes dozens of smaller-scale
variants. The dialects often show distinct and non-standard features
of pronunciation and intonation, vocabulary and grammar. Some of these
are relics of ancient usage now completely discarded by the standard
language.
The northern Russian dialects and those spoken along the Volga River
typically pronounce unstressed /o/ clearly (the phenomenon called
okanye/оканье). East of Moscow, particularly in Ryazan Region,
unstressed /e/ and /a/ following palatalized consonants and preceding
a stressed syllable are not reduced to [ɪ] (like in the Moscow
dialect), being instead pronounced /a/ in such positions (e.g. несли
is pronounced [nʲasˈlʲi], not [nʲɪsˈlʲi]) - this is called yakanye/
яканье;[26] many southern dialects have a palatalized final /tʲ/ in
3rd person forms of verbs (this is unpalatalized in the standard
dialect) and a fricative [ɣ] where the standard dialect has [ɡ].[27]
However, in certain areas south of Moscow, e.g. in and around Tula, /
ɡ/ is pronounced as in the Moscow and northern dialects unless it
precedes a voiceless plosive or a pause. In this position /ɡ/ is
lenited and devoiced to the fricative [x], e.g. друг [drux] (in
Moscow's dialect, only Бог [box], лёгкий [lʲɵxʲkʲɪj], мягкий
[ˈmʲæxʲkʲɪj] and some derivatives follow this rule). Some of these
features (e.g. a debuccalized or lenited /ɡ/ and palatalized final /
tʲ/ in 3rd person forms of verbs) are also present in modern
Ukrainian, indicating either a linguistic continuum and/or strong
influence one way or the other.
The city of Veliky Novgorod has historically displayed a feature
called chokanye/tsokanye (чоканье/цоканье), where /tɕ/ and /ts/ were
confused. So, цапля ("heron") has been recorded as 'чапля'. Also, the
second palatalization of velars did not occur there, so the so-called
ě² (from the Proto-Slavonic diphthong *ai) did not cause /k, ɡ, x/ to
shift to /ts, dz, s/; therefore where Standard Russian has цепь
("chain"), the form кепь [kʲepʲ] is attested in earlier texts.
Among the first to study Russian dialects was Lomonosov in the
eighteenth century. In the nineteenth, Vladimir Dal compiled the first
dictionary that included dialectal vocabulary. Detailed mapping of
Russian dialects began at the turn of the twentieth century. In modern
times, the monumental Dialectological Atlas of the Russian Language
(Диалектологический атлас русского языка [dʲɪɐˌlʲɛktəlɐˈɡʲitɕɪskʲɪj
ˈatləs ˈruskəvə jɪzɨˈka]), was published in three folio volumes 1986–
1989, after four decades of preparatory work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dialects_of_Russian_language.png
Anton
> On Dec 30, 7:16 am, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>> Niedersaxonisch, a lingua franca in Hanseatic
>> League (and language of education and business in medieval Estonia)
>> end up as different language, Dutch, in modern days.
> And Russian and Ukrainian ended up as different languages in modern
> days.
>> But even books
>> are printed in local dialects even today.
> That's interesting. Does this still take place in Germany and France?
In Finland there has been a dialect revival in the late 21st century.
Often publications are small pocket books, like tongue-in-cheek "local
news" printed in relatively small quantities - or cartoons. We have
Asterix in Savonian and Donald Duck in Turkuan, for instance :)
Western Finnish dialects sometimes have their words more similar to
Estonian than Finnish: kuinka (fi), kui (est), kui (Turkuan, Rauman). In
Rauman the word for "language" is "giï¿œl" while in standard Finnish it's
"kieli" (Estonian "keel"). If say Rauman was written in a text book
almost all the words would be differently spelled than in standard Finnish.
> In Rus, even 1000 years ago, all cities - Kiev, Novgorod, Pskov,
> Moscow - used the same literary and church language: Old Slavonic:
> http://gramoty.ru/dnd/full/005Vvedenie.pdf
> So, literate people in ancient Rus never needed any translators to
> communicate with each other.
Like Old Norse in Viking Age Scandinavia. A typical linguistic
development pattern, so to speak. (It is likely that at some point Finns
and Estonians had a common proto-Finnic language).
--
Anton
vello
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 30, 7:16 am, vello <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote:
>
> > > > Russian is interesting language having almost no dialects (if to count
> > > > belarussian and ukrainian as separate languages).
>
> > > In modern times - no. But France, Germany, Netherlands and most other
> > > countries don't either. In modern times.
>
> > > But different accents/pronunciations.
>
> > > But in ancient times, all languages had multitudes of dialects, one
> > > dialect per city.
>
> > > There was no radio or TV, and most people didn't read.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > No, read himself into topic. 50 years ago (and partly today) in
> > Germany you need a translator to make himself understandable in
> > different parts of Germany.
>
> Sorry but I am not convinced that this is true. Please give me some
> references to read about this. I know that people in different parts
> of Germany speak with different accent, but afaik, it is exactly the
> same language, in terms of grammar and words, and was so even 50 years
> ago.
Please - wikipedia, german dialects: " They are traditionally traced
back to the different German tribes. Many of them are hardly
understandable to someone who knows only standard German, since they
often differ from standard German in lexicon, phonology and syntax. If
a narrow definition of language based on mutual intelligibility is
used, many German dialects are considered to be separate languages"
Rest you can read by yourself. btw, why you think I must find sources
for you, it would be easy for you to make it itself.
>
> Are you saying that 50 years ago, in 1959, there were several written
> dialects of German in Germany itself? Were there parts of Germany
> where Hitler's or Adenauer's speeches had to be translated for the
> local people to understand what they were saying?
a)Yes, not only 50 years ago but also today.
b) don't know for sure but it is very probable that in 1930-45 a lot
of old people in North Germany had problems with Führer's speeches.
>
>
>
> > Same for Estonia, austria, France and a
> > lot of other places.
>
> There were mutually non-understandable regional dialects of French in
> France in 1959? I doubt it. The French language (words and grammar)
> has been highly standardized by the Academy centuries ago. You
> wouldn't mean variations in pronunciation, would you?
>
> Please provide references.
>
>
>
> > Niedersaxonisch, a lingua franca in Hanseatic
> > League (and language of education and business in medieval Estonia)
> > end up as different language, Dutch, in modern days.
>
> And Russian and Ukrainian ended up as different languages in modern
> days.
>
>
>
> > But even books
> > are printed in local dialects even today.
>
> That's interesting. Does this still take place in Germany and France?
Yes, for Germany, dn't know - for France. France is someway fascist
country if it comes to rights of minorities, so maybe use of local
languages is forbidden thre :-)
>
>
>
> > Nothing that with Russian
> > language. Any idea about reasons of that?
>
> If you explain to me how exactly modern France and Germany are
> different from modern Russia in this respect, that would be very
> interesting, and I will gladly try to figure out the explanation for
> this difference.
Read linguistics, or if it appears too uneasy, rely on Wikipedia.
>
> But first, i need to get some references concerning modern (or 50
> years ago) France and Germany.
you get them - weird that grown-up european don't have idea about such
things.
>
> In Rus, even 1000 years ago, all cities - Kiev, Novgorod, Pskov,
> Moscow - used the same literary and church language: Old Slavonic:
>
> http://gramoty.ru/dnd/full/005Vvedenie.pdf
>
> So, literate people in ancient Rus never needed any translators to
> communicate with each other.- Hide quoted text -
J. Anderson
"vello" <vell...@hot.ee> wrote in message
news:3bd3b993-231f-4c85...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> btw, southern tongue, despite geographical realities,
> is more close to finnish then Northern one.
This is quite fascinating, and I wonder what the reason could be. According
to one theory, people from southern Estonia were pushed away by the
advancing Baltic tribes, and some of them left by sea heading for the
Finnish coast. They brought along their own old place-names: people from
P�rnu settled in what is now Perni� in Finland, those from Sauga came to
Sauvo/Sagu, those from Halinga to Halikko etc. My maternal family is from
Halikko, so I may be 'half Estonian' myself...
J. Anderson
> Niedersaxonisch, a lingua franca in Hanseatic League
> (and language of education and business in medieval
> Estonia) end up as different language, Dutch, in modern
> days.
And influenced Swedish: 'Kiek in de k�k' would be 'kika in i k�ket' in
Swedish.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
I know it all. In fact, I plan to use this information in my
discussions with BM.
But we are not talking about old times. We are talking about the last
50 years.
>
> > Are you saying that 50 years ago, in 1959, there were several written
> > dialects of German in Germany itself? Were there parts of Germany
> > where Hitler's or Adenauer's speeches had to be translated for the
> > local people to understand what they were saying?
>
> a)Yes, not only 50 years ago but also today.
> b) don't know for sure but it is very probable that in 1930-45 a lot
> of old people in North Germany had problems with Führer's speeches.
>
So, where are the references?
>
> > > Same for Estonia, austria, France and a
> > > lot of other places.
>
> > There were mutually non-understandable regional dialects of French in
> > France in 1959? I doubt it. The French language (words and grammar)
> > has been highly standardized by the Academy centuries ago. You
> > wouldn't mean variations in pronunciation, would you?
>
> > Please provide references.
>
> > > Niedersaxonisch, a lingua franca in Hanseatic
> > > League (and language of education and business in medieval Estonia)
> > > end up as different language, Dutch, in modern days.
>
> > And Russian and Ukrainian ended up as different languages in modern
> > days.
>
> > > But even books
> > > are printed in local dialects even today.
>
> > That's interesting. Does this still take place in Germany and France?
>
> Yes, for Germany,
>
Please provide references.
>
> dn't know - for France. France is someway fascist
> country if it comes to rights of minorities, so maybe use of local
> languages is forbidden thre :-)
>
Somehow, when I hear the words "fascist" and "bigotry", I tend to
associate Germany, not France, with them.
>
> > > Nothing that with Russian
> > > language. Any idea about reasons of that?
>
> > If you explain to me how exactly modern France and Germany are
> > different from modern Russia in this respect, that would be very
> > interesting, and I will gladly try to figure out the explanation for
> > this difference.
>
> Read linguistics, or if it appears too uneasy, rely on Wikipedia.
>
Well, I am too old to go for a PhD in linguistics. All I want is the
following:
You told me that modern Russia is unusual in that there are no
different dialects. My own impression is that in this respect, modern
Russia is not much different from modern Germany, France or England.
So far, you have steadfastly refused to provide any references to
support your opinion. Instead, you want me to become an expert on
linguistics.
I smell a rat here. Do you have concrete evidence to support your
opinions, or is this a wild goose chase?
>
> > But first, i need to get some references concerning modern (or 50
> > years ago) France and Germany.
>
> you get them - weird that grown-up european don't have idea about such
> things.
>
So, you have no references?
Where do all your claims come from? Your personal feelings?
vello
> "vello" <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote in message
>
> news:3bd3b993-231f-4c85...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > btw, southern tongue, despite geographical realities,
> > is more close to finnish then Northern one.
>
> This is quite fascinating, and I wonder what the reason could be. According
> to one theory, people from southern Estonia were pushed away by the
> advancing Baltic tribes, and some of them left by sea heading for the
> Finnish coast. They brought along their own old place-names: people from
> Sauvo/Sagu, those from Halinga to Halikko etc. My maternal family is from
> Halikko, so I may be 'half Estonian' myself...
True, itr's like lasagna - different layers one by one. South to south
Estonia, there were Livonian people - and THEIR tongue is very close
to ...North Estonian one.
vello
German dialects. One piece I even copy-paste in my earlier post.
Germany and Estonia (as much I know also Finland, Sweden, Italy) do
have historical dialects so different from "official language" that
one needs a translator. Nothing that with russian (and maybe lot of
other) language(s)
vello
> "vello" <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote in message
>
> news:f6616259-4214-4a36...@n16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Niedersaxonisch, a lingua franca in Hanseatic League
> > (and language of education and business in medieval
> > Estonia) end up as different language, Dutch, in modern
> > days.
>
> Swedish.
And "kiika kööki" in modern Estonian. Well "kiika" is rare in modern
days, most people say "vaata".
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
But this is Wikipedia. How do I know which information is correct and
which - somebody's fantasy?
Can't you tell me me the residents of which German cities couldn't
understand each other without a translator 50 years ago and explain
the differences?
>
> One piece I even copy-paste in my earlier post.
> Germany and Estonia (as much I know also Finland, Sweden, Italy) do
> have historical dialects so different from "official language" that
> one needs a translator. Nothing that with russian (and maybe lot of
> other) language(s)
>
You should go to Wiki yourself and read:
Dialects of the Russian Language
and
Northern Russian dialects
and even:
Differences in speech between Moscow and St. Petersburg
Of course, as always with Wiki, much of the content is wrong.
J. Anderson
On Dec 31, 12:08 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>> And influenced Swedish: 'Kiek in de k�k'
>> would be 'kika in i k�ket' in Swedish.
> And "kiika k��ki" in modern Estonian.
> Well "kiika" is rare in modern days,
> most people say "vaata".
And 'tsiigaa ky�kkiin' in a mixture of Helsinki slang and old-fashioned
Finnish.
vello
You fall childish.
>
>
>
> > One piece I even copy-paste in my earlier post.
> > Germany and Estonia (as much I know also Finland, Sweden, Italy) do
> > have historical dialects so different from "official language" that
> > one needs a translator. Nothing that with russian (and maybe lot of
> > other) language(s)
>
> You should go to Wiki yourself and read:
>
> http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%...
>
> Dialects of the Russian Language
>
> and
>
> http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%...
>
> Northern Russian dialects
>
> and even:
>
> http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%...
>
> Differences in speech between Moscow and St. Petersburg
>
> Of course, as always with Wiki, much of the content is wrong.- Hide quoted text -
vello
> "vello" <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote in message
People out there, do you see ö-letters here (a first letter of Austria
in German, Österreich)?
Dmitry
Was it still part of Triple Entente carried on for a while after
Lenin's coup?
J. Anderson
> On Dec 31, 3:58 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>> "vello" <vellok...@hot.ee> wrote in message
>>
>> news:37573d76-a2d4-46aa...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>> On Dec 31, 12:08 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>>
>>>> And influenced Swedish: 'Kiek in de k k'
>>>> would be 'kika in i k ket' in Swedish.
>>> And "kiika k ki" in modern Estonian.
>>> Well "kiika" is rare in modern days,
>>> most people say "vaata".
>> And 'tsiigaa ky kkiin' in a mixture of Helsinki slang and old-fashioned
>> Finnish.
>
> in German, �sterreich)?
I see the o with two dots in your last post but not in the previous ones
-- just empty spaces.
Vladimir Makarenko
I see. I think if one choose so called "Western Encoding" (to write and
read) you can see the whole variety of Western alphabets.
And Happy New Year, John. Hope you and your family are OK. My best
wishes to all you.
VM.
J. Anderson
He's in one of his impossible moods again, and soon he will accuse you
of lying. Strange that he has never heard of Alemannisch, S�chsisch,
Schw�bisch or even Schweizerdeutsch. That, however, doesn't mean that
they don't exist or that they aren't almost separate languages -- more
so than e.g. Swedish and Norwegian. I myself, having learned only
Hochdeutsch, don't understand much of what the Swiss are saying when the
speak their strange German. The same goes for someone from Hanover,
where they basically speak the purest German.
Here's a non-wiki link (in German), since the wiki writers obviously all
are liars: http://www6.dw-world.de/de/1122.php
Vladimir Makarenko
Wait guys when I step in - my first wife was a German linguist - she can
pin a person from Germany within few miles if not by birth but where
growing up.
Here is a funny story - a profi from Germany was sent to Russia and she
took him for a lunch - she asked him for how long he came - he said "two
weeks, and You?"
She has a Berlin accent.
Well, my ex grad student - has a perfect New England accent. And she is
Russian. She came to the States when being 19. She told me it took two
months to start to speak.
VM.
Dmitry
> in German, Österreich)?
Yes I can see "O" with two dots on the top of it.
Dmitry
> Schwäbisch or even Schweizerdeutsch. That, however, doesn't mean that
> they don't exist or that they aren't almost separate languages -- more
> so than e.g. Swedish and Norwegian. I myself, having learned only
> Hochdeutsch, don't understand much of what the Swiss are saying when the
> speak their strange German.
My mother still retains her German (or rather Schwabisch). She is
able to have a simple conversation with Germans from various parts,
but in Lichenstein it didn't work, she couldn't understand a word they
were saying, neither they understood her.