Map of European Peoples - 2000 AD

[Gaztelu]

Ethnicity is not about feelings, remember? An ethnic group is a scientific clustering of humans based on a combination of linguistic AND cultural AND racial bonds.

What do you mean by racial bonds?

[poiuytrewq0987]

Ethnicity is not about feelings, remember? An ethnic group is a scientific clustering of humans based on a combination of linguistic AND cultural AND racial bonds.

If we're doing that then Vardarska is more "Yugoslavian" than it is Bulgarian today. The pure fact you made the region Bulgarian only because you heard from Bulgarians who say they are Bulgarians and not from objective study is well... dumb.

[Zephyr]

Aherne, different peoples group in different ways.

You are applying the logic of Romania+Moldavia to the rest of Europe.

The logical error is in the fact that the separation of Romania and Moldavia is pretty much like the former separation between the 2 Germanies (FRG+GDR).

Romania (including Moldavia) doesn't border any "cousins" anymore. It's isolated now, unless you consider the gap between Valachians and Moldavians similar to the gap between Britain and Ireland or between Portuguese and Basque.

[aherne]

What do you mean by racial bonds?

Looks specific to an ethnicity. Visual clues one belongs to the tribe...

[Boudica]

Confused.. So poles were in italy?

[aherne]

If we're doing that then Vardarska is more "Yugoslavian" than it is Bulgarian today. The pure fact you made the region Bulgarian only because you heard from Bulgarians who say they are Bulgarians and not from objective study is well... dumb.

Macedonian ethnicity is a communist 1940s creation, exactly like Moldavian. The aim was to prevent these region from ever being reunited with Bulgaria and Romania, respectively. Communists were very good at inventing ethnicities (Karelians is another good example) and judaized scholars of today follow their "teaching" like gospels. There has been absolutely no critical examination of these phantom ethnic groups ever since. Prior to that "discovery", "Macedonians" used the term Bulgarian to describe themselves, belonged to Bulgarian Orthodox Church (with a Pomak minority), spoke various Bulgarian dialects (and still do), looked Bulgarian (I can confirm that because I've been in Macedonia). There is absolutely no reason to consider them different.

The Macedonian language belongs to the eastern sub-branch of the South Slavic branch of the Slavic languages of the Indo-European family of languages. The closest relative of Macedonian is Bulgarian,[16] with which it has a high degree of mutual intelligibility.[15] Prior to their codification in 1945, Macedonian dialects were for the most part classified as Bulgarian[17][18][19] and some linguists consider them still as such, but this view is politically controversial.[15][20][21] The next-closest language is Serbo-Croatian (often known by the names of its standard languages, Serbian, Montenegrin, Bosnian, and Croatian). All South Slavic languages, including Macedonian, form a dialect continuum,[15] in which Macedonian and Bulgarian are sharply divergent from the Serbo-Croatian.[22] The Torlakian dialect group is intermediate between Bulgarian, Macedonian and Serbian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_language

[poiuytrewq0987]

Macedonian ethnicity is a communist 1940s creation, exactly like Moldavian. The aim was to prevent these region from ever being reunited with Bulgaria and Romania, respectively. Communists were very good at inventing ethnicities (Karelians is another good example) and judaized scholars of today follow their "teaching" like gospels. There has been absolutely no critical examination of these phantom ethnic groups ever since. Prior to that "discovery", "Macedonians" used the term Bulgarian to describe themselves, belonged to Bulgarian Orthodox Church (with a Pomak minority), spoke various Bulgarian dialects (and still do), looked Bulgarian (I can confirm that because I've been in Macedonia). There is absolutely no reason to consider them different.

More Bulgarian propaganda. The Slavic Macedonians never called themselves Serb or Bulgarian and only identified as either following political trends in the Balkans. When the Bulgarians came to rule Slavic Macedonians, they would call themselves Bulgarians and when the Serbs came, they would call themselves Serbs. The language they speak is not a Bulgarian dialect but rather a distinct language with Bulgarian and Serbian influences. Would you call Slovak a dialect of Polish or Ukrainian a dialect of Russian?

However, Vardarska has been part of Serbia since 1912 and therefore it is Serbian whereas Vardarska hasn't been part of Bulgaria since the medieval ages except for short occupation periods in WW1 and WW2.

[Talvi]

Your map is wrong and stupid. Its time for you to admit it.

[Peerkons]

Exactly.

[Comte Arnau]

Yet, my views have somewhat changed in the clusterings I've provided:
- Iberians should have been split into Iberians and Occitans (Catalans being an Occitan group). Differences between the two are enough to have them splitted.
- French should have been split into French and Occitans. The problem is that both used to be connected by a narrow continuum in Central France.
- what "Italians" means exactly is a matter of debate. Italian "dialects" are languages in their own right, connected by no continuum. Theoretically, they should have been split into Lombards, Piedmontese, Venetans, Emilians and so on. I've clustered them together because of strong cultural and racial bonds (in the sense that Italians, as a group, have their own looks).

Well, some wiser considerations.

Going by ethnogeneses, the Latin South-West should be something like this: