Die Beinamen Illyrer / Thraker / oder gar Daker (von den Griechen kennen wir sie als Pelasger) beziehen sich auf die vorchristlichen Ureinwohner der Balkanhalbinsel oberhalb Griechenlands. Welche Bevölkerungsgruppen der heutigen Balkanesen gelten denn als natives Urvolk? Aus der Literatur die uns vorliegt wären das einzig die modernen Albaner, die weder gräzisiert, latinisiert, oder gar slawisiert wurden. Die modernen Albaner sind ein Ergebnis derer, die sich abgeschottet haben - nicht derer, die sich den Invasionen hingaben.
Farkas beschreibt es ziemlich passend :
The illyrian heritage that lays claim to the geographical territory under discussion may be seen in quite positive ways.
The ancient Pelasgians and the Illyrian civilization that succeeded them were deeply rooted in the length and breadth of the balkans long before Slavic or Turkic people entered the picture. Evidence can be found from the tenth century B.C. These were people oriented to the sea and who proved to be skillful sailors. The practical utility for commercial and political development was accompanied by an impressive capacity to spread Illyrian culture and value. The various Illyrian tribes were the first settled dwellers in the Space we now call the Balkans, Greece, and Italy.
Pelasgians were responsible for spreading an alphabet to much of the central Mediterranean and beyond the seacoast unto continental Europe. They taught many subsequent peoples how to build walls and “work” metals. The Pelasgian leader Thot (Great Father) is said to have ruled Egypt and is further credited with having introduced philosophy to Moses, Pythagoras and Plato. The word “Pharaoh” is drawn from the Illyrian language, meaning “our stock” or our lineage. The names of the descendant peoples we know well from history: Illyrians, Etruscans and Thracians. Herodotus claimed that the Pelasgians were the original Athenians. As an indicator of social and cultural development, language serves us by providing a traceable trajectory. Illyrians draw their name from the word ilir, which meant “free” or “place of the free people”. This word stem can be found in the Etruscan, Italian, Latin, French, English, Spanish, Romanian, and Portuguese language. Illyrian tribes proliferated throughout the Mediterranean basin and as far north and east as the Danube river. The names resounded through history: Etruscans (brains), Danuii (separates), Veneti (homeland), Picenes (place of drinking water), Messapi (center), Lydians and italics.
The illyrian word for territory is found in Albanian Latin Italian French and English Romanian and Hungarian. The word for ship (ania) is evident in Etruscan Albanian Sanskrit Hebrew Persian Latin Italian Spanish Portuguese Romanian and English. All words and places with the suffix “ona” have Pelasgian origin. Aphrodite in Illyrian means “little girl born early in the morning”, “Celt” means clear complexion and “Balta” means mud.
The essence of these notions is not to debate any of the particular claims. It is to establish that the indigenous societies were historically and culturally significant, providing antecedents for contemporary ideas. They were in the vanguard of political and economic development. The stellar feature of Illyrian society was the education system. Just as nineteenth-century Europe and twentieth-century America have become the destination of choice for elites and aspiring elites in those epochs, in the Mediterranean world for a thousand years, such persons made their way to the Balkans. They did this to elevate their cultural prowess, advance their formal education and to establish commercial relationships. Prominent examples include Julius Caesar, Octavian Augustus, and legions of ottoman leaders. Illyrians themselves rose to positions of immense power - among them Diocletian (255-313 A.D.), Constantine the Great (274-337 A.D.) and Justinian the Great (482-565 A.D.).
The emphasis on education and language is reflected in the modern Albanian word that they use to describe themselves “Shqip” which literally means “good pronunciation” or “original language speakers”. The societies flourished by commerce and reputation. They also developed a record of piracy on the Adriatic Sea. In the third century B.C. the system boasted a female leader, and during its era of greatest unity and influence, women were afforded “equal” rights and real access to education. In relative terms, and in context, it was the enlightened society of its day.
These are mere threads of history in which Balkans could, but rarely do, take pride. The end of their visibility came in 186 B.C. when Illyrians and Macedonians fought and lost to the romans. Rome divided Illyria into three parts and the groups never again united. Many Illyrian elites fled to Venice, where vestiges of Illyrian culture can still be found, especially in the maritime culture. The Illyrians that found themselves in the Ottoman-ruled part of the Balkans had no trouble establishing themselves as worthy leaders. No fewer than thirty-six grand viziers (Ottoman prime-ministers) were of Illyrian heritage. The salient notion here is that the Illyrian societies warrant recognition as perhaps the original Balkan people (at least with a semblance of societal organization), whose energy and achievements need to stand alongside those Romans, Slavs, Ottomans Venetians and French who come along later.
Roman experiences in the Balkans suggest that they had an abiding appreciation for the advanced nature of some of the aspects of Balkan life and organization. The Romans brought an elaborately organized and militarized System of governing to the Balkans and elsewhere. As they approached “other peoples,” the Romans first offered alliance arrangements; if rejected, they proceeded to conquer the population. Roman imagery and power were projected by the “legions” of Rome. Roman civilization has been sufficiently chronicled, but it is valuable to observe that they were more clearly adept at manifesting high culture than they were creating it. They absorbed much of what they encountered culturally and added one very curious political innovation: they consistently built settlements in duplicate. That is, they constructed one settlement for the civilian population and a second nearby exclusively for the military contingent. These were largely self-sufficient and were purposefully kept apart.
The political thinking was that civilians and their ideas and behaviors would contaminate the military of allowed to mingle. Military discipline was paramount and separate settlements were a way of preserving that discipline. The Romans’ control of the Balkans was complete with the seizing of the city state of Ragusa (today Dubrovnik). It stood as the last independent city-state until its conquest by Rome.
The Slavs in various but consistently small numbers seeped into the Balkans from the north. Most histories suggest that they were “Land people” from Galicia, Ukraine or Poland. They were growers and hunters but not at all technically or culturally advanced peoples. They were rural and driven southward by the need for food and the climate benefits. They were decidedly basic peoples with a less sophisticated language and without military organization. They were also less politically organized and less interested in trade. Given who and what they were, they maneuvered around better-organized societies like the Magyars and found territorial gaps in various parts of the Balkans. To the east Russian and Kievian Rus (other Slavs) were confronting Turkic groups in and around Bulgaria and Belgrade. Both become part of the Slavic frontier. They benefit from being on the main route of the Crusaders from Western Europe to the land of the eastern Mediterranean.
Democratization in the Balkans: prescription for a badly scarred body politic: Richard P. Farkas: UPNE, 2007
Democratization in the Balkans : prescription for a badly scarred body politic / Richard P. Farkas. - Version details