Maps of 6th Century Europe

[Sovius]

It has been hard to follow this discussion (well, nobody else does). I think it would be great if each one of you could summarize in less than five lines per answer your opinions in:

(a) What is your main point in this thread?

(b) What are your main arguments?

(c) What are your main objections towards the mainstream views on Slavs, e.g. as presented here:

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

Is there anybody here who can translate Greek?

[Sovius]

Timacus

Timochanians were interesting in that they were known by a specific place name, not simply a general topological description. Like the Timavus (tema), a river that flows through darkness, the river obviously possessed a quality for the locals to name it as such, similar to one of its tributary streams, Crna Reka, also apparently in reference to its black silt bottoms (black water). The Timavus was named for its flowing into the mouth of a dark cave, very important when considering the usage of the same root for two different rivers that shared a similar characteristic in two completely different ways. The Romans referred to the river as the Timacus.

The closest Baltic form, I believe, is 'tamsa', meaning darkness, as well, (the Tamsacus?), something to consider when considering whether or not Thracian was closer to "Slavic" or Baltic. Personally, I would think Thracian was closer to Thracian, but that's just me.

According to naming conventions, this is an endonym (auto, intra) that also existed as a regional exonym, an excellent piece of evidence for two different fronts. They must have revolted over unsanitary drinking water. I'd put them down as native, as well.

OK, so we're heading back north towards the Danube again. Now we're talking about an army of people who came to be referred to as Sclaveni or rather, an army who fought for the Sclaveni or the common people (people who spoke the common tongue). This must have been what Jordanes was referring to, because I still can't locate a 'Slav Mountain' or a 'Land of the Slavs' north of the Danube. And he was all over the place as far as where he thought they actually came from that they must have come from all over when referring to Sklaveni as a term existing within the popular culture of the aristocracy. The use of the term as political identifier outside the bounds of the original relational usage helps us understand the use of 'Anti', as well, and the perceived relationships between the two factions. One set of words with so many different meanings and uses!

Nordic language speaking Slavs? (there's an irony in there somewhere) Would you happen to have a citation or a source to study? I'm unfamiliar with any populations from Jutland or the surrounding areas within close proximity joining in any of the alliances. It might be interesting to take a look at the Iranic presence, as well, as they're very confusing from an anthropological point of view.

[Chakalarov]

I believe it was on an earlier post made in another thread here. The "Germanic" reference was only about the Guduscani group in Croatia. I also looked into it a bit and some researchers connect them to Gothiscandza found in Jordanes' account. Now the question arises about what language the Goths spoke at this time. While I believe in their Getic origin, I have read articles stating that some did eventually begin to favor a Nordic language. So naming the tribe Germanic-speaking, is based on that assumption.

Here is where they are connected to geographically:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Croatia-Lika.png

[George S.]

chak if you do a search on the mto you will find quite a lot of material/books etc references about slavs.Also references to maps .

[Chakalarov]

chak if you do a search on the mto you will find quite a lot of material/books etc references about slavs.Also references to maps .

Thanks, George. However, this thread is meant to look at the 6th century in general and all the groups of people that are of interest to us. We aren't looking at the "Slavs" ; we are looking at Scythians, Sarmatians, Veneti, Vandals, Vindili, Vindelicians, Goths, Getae, etc.

[Sovius]

Guduscani

I’m going to have to side with Thomas the Archdeacon on this one, although Safarik had an interesting hypothesis regarding the term. Let’s recall the Subjectivist English language translation again:



From the Polish territories called Lingonia seven or eight tribal clans arrived under Totilo. When they saw that the Croatian land would be suitable for habitation because in it there were few Roman colonies, they sought and obtained for their duke...The people called Croats...Many call them Goths, and likewise Slavs, according to the particular name of those who arrived from Poland and Bohemia.



‘Scandia’ (scani) was a Latin and Greek term for all uncharted islands throughout the Venetic Gulf, not a specific place name for Scandinavia. Guduscani, as with Abodrites and Timochiani were all Dalmatian language exonyms in use in the area. Dalmatian is an extinct Romance language. Scandia only came to be erroneously associated with Germanic language speakers after the Germanic languages replaced the Venetic languages in use in the area and this may not have been fully completed until after the Consolidation of Sweden. The treatment of “Gothiscanza” as Germanic is anachronistic, but very effective when key information is omitted. As the Archbishop specifically refers to the regions of Poland and the land of the Boi, he had to have been writing about the Vistula island groups, not what came to be associated with Scandinavia proper later on.

I have no doubt Nordic language speaking mercenary groups would’ve been involved in the campaigns of the Goths, their territories were threatened too, but to blind future generations as to what “Gothic” meant during the period the actual term was actively used is very similar to what neo-Grecianists (Intellectual Regressionists) have been doing with Macedonian history. Think Proto Fabian Socialists of the early 19th Century. Historical revisionism had a political purpose back then, as well, as the Nazi Holocaust continues to remind those who still choose to remember.

Have you been able to find anything yet on the Persians? They were (in part) a descendent people of our ancestors by way of R1a, but I’m not sure they were willing to head all the way back to Europe just to help liberate the peninsula.

[George S.]

guys a big point is missed why aren't the croats called slavs if they were slavs.Alot of bo oks have been written on the proviso that the slavs caused great damage & annihiliation of the Macedonian identity.We know the slavs came to the Balkans in the 6 0r 7 century.if they caused untold damage as our enemies say WHY are we Called Macedonians today.And not just slavs.Their effects were slight lingual effects.No more & no les than other peoples that came through the Balkans.Can anyone claim today that they are totally slav when the effect was a lingual albeit slight one.Think about how the Macedonian language has survived as Macedonian and not slav.Slavic tonts is more a smear campaign about who we are.WE are just Macedonian.

[Soldier of Macedon]

you know the thracians were originally from Mesopotamia

Yep, but you forgot to mention that they landed there from Mars.

Where did you get the source from, "Mesopotamian origin of the Thracian's".

Although he may have good intentions, I wouldn't pay much attention to what George has to say when it comes to the Thracians.

As for the so-called Slavic "tribes", my research indicates that they were heterogeneous.....

There is no doubt that some early citations of 'Sklavenes' referred to heterogeneous groups of people, much like those for the Goths, Huns, Avars, and others.

It has been hard to follow this discussion (well, nobody else does).

I find the discussion interesting and quite easy to follow. And with only 22 posts but almost 1000 views, it is obvious that the thread is being read by normal people (and then there is yourself).

.......‘Sklabenoi’ during that period could not have been synonymous with Thracian, but must have been used to refer to a specific group of Thracians amongst other peoples.

That is perhaps the most plausible scenario. What remains of the Thracian language(s) reveals a closer connection to Baltic and Slavic languages than it does to any others. Whatever western historians and linguists would like to suggest about the origin of Slavic languages, they will, at some point, need to address the elephant in the room which has hitherto been ignored. For the meantime they continue to dodge that bullet by creating fictitious tales about a small tribe of people who suddenly sprang from behind the Carpathians to become the largest linguistic group in Europe and replaced another group (Thracians), who, incidentally were the largest linguistic group in Europe up until that point and suddenly disappeared from the face of the earth

[George S.]

sorry to spoil it for you guys the thracians original homeland was sumeria ,Mesopotamia As taken from the wikipaedia.

[Soldier of Macedon]

George, post the Wikipedia link.

[Sovius]

sorry to spoil it for you guys the thracians original homeland was sumeria ,Mesopotamia As taken from the wikipaedia.

I recall Chuck Norris mentioning this in The Secret History of Chuck Norris by Chuck Norris. He was riding shotgun with Spartacus during the Third Servile War, when someone came up to him and boldly and most implicitly stated that the Sumerians came from Thrace and he just turned around and bitch slapped that dude into the dirt and told him straight up that it was the Thracians that came from Sumeria and that they had invented everything ever worth inventing - and that he’d kill any man there that said otherwise, and nobody ever did say otherwise.

[George S.]

http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi52.htm

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?337396-Thracian-civilization-and-greek-civilization/page8

http://www.dacia.org/history/trdac_e.html

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/Dacia_around_60-44_BC_during_Burebista%2C_including_campaigns_-_French.png

Guys i can't find the actual wikipaedia link where it describes the origin of the thracians to the sumerians -mesopotamians ,maybe taken down??.Then their dissappearance into sweden & other parts of europe.If i find it you will be the first to know There was a map of where people's movements were from to the caspian area & slavs..Has anyone seen there was a map of the origin & movements of slavs .Shows
different types of slavs .(levels).I think someone bought it up on one of the mto threads.The map was very interesting.I think it shows a common origin.One One thing I read was the unbelievable that the world spoke a common one language prior to dispersal by god from mans Zigurat (skyscraper) this is also interesting How all the different languages came to be.

[Sovius]

'Igi' apparently meant "eye" in the Sumerian language. Compare this to 'oko'. 'Zú' meant tooth. 'Zub' possesses the same meaning in Croatian. Beyond a few basic vocabulary words and some other similarities here and there, Sumerian was very different from what would become known as the Indo-European languages. It was a different type of language altogether. I'd say that there was likely trade between Southeastern Europe and Sumeria, similar to civilizations in other areas of the ancient world, as well as significant cultural exchanges, but the kind of language they spoke at the point in time they gained literacy would put them in a category more similar to Dravidian language speakers, but as an isolated language speaking group. This is, of course, if the language has been accurately translated. It may be that R1a bearing populations were living in the Mesopotamian region prior to rise of Sumerian civilization, given its presence in the Middle East, which is presently thought to be largely, but not solely upstream from European R1a, which, itself, is upstream from Indo-Iranian R1a, but we're talking about things that would be difficult to prove at this point in time. It might now be realistic to argue that Indo-European terms such as words for 'eye' and 'tooth' may have come from the same source population that would go on to establish Sumerian civilization or that some portion of early settlers to Southeastern Europe from the Near East also settled in what would become Mesopotamia, but there's really no evidence that one culture developed out of the other or as a result of the other and basic vocabulary words aren't the best proofs for that sort of thing.

I haven't a clue as far as what the 23 levels of Slavdom are, but it sounds like it would have made for an excellent Bruce Lee movie or an extremely bad one, which would likely be just as good.

[George S.]

Yeah the sumrians have been around a long time .But have you heard of the king nebuchenezar & the dispersion of people from the Mesopotamia region into the caucoses and beyond.These people becoming the slavs.I saw a map showing the different level of slavs & what type came to the Balkans.I think it was in one thread that talked abot slavs & had a map of slav dispersions.?