The Thracian people and language

[Sweet Sixteen]

Originally Posted by Makedoncheto

I have a friend(he is also Macedonian) that says that the modern Macedonian language is a mixture of Antique Macedonian and Slavic(He sees Slavic as the Slavic Tribes that migrated to southern and Western Europe) he thinks that because Macedonians got mixed with some of the tribes then our language is 50 Macedonian 50 Slavic(according to him) thats his explanation why our language is similar to Polish, Czech, Russian and so on its quite strange but i do not believe him

First of all, it can’t be 50% Macedonian- 50% Slavic, as at least 75% of it can be defined as Slavic. For instance about 70-75% is the common lexical percentage with Russian language. An interesting challenge would be to characterize the parts of the language that are unique or at least different to Bulgarian, Serbian etc. Can you find these words? It would be a start.

See more here:
http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...8&postcount=23

Originally Posted by George S.

no that's wrong he languages that's spoken is a result of the spread of christianiy by s kiril & mehodius.Macedonian existed prior to the slavs coming and it has stood the test of time.People have been misinterpreting to the amount of influence slav has had.Is a misnomer to call he influence a slav language influence.I call it some linguistic influence. So the slavs went all over the Balkans including Greece & turkey do they harp about their being Slavic? as the slavs did no more no less damage than in Macedonia. Also the use of propaganda tha we are not Macedonian but Slavic has been a tool in trade by our enemies.Cours have declared that its more of a smear or derogatory term.There you go we declare we are Macedonian through & through .SElf identity is there,writers declare that we are Macedonian &we can trace ourselves to ancient imes as is our right.So all those people stop referring yourselves as slavs YOU ARE simply MACEDONIANS.

That’s crap! If there’s ANYONE who’s suggesting something close to that, it’s a good chance to remind us who that is, or give a link to another thread where these issues have been discussed. I’m talking about the idea that:
-There was no Slavic decent, there were no Slavs
-The Slavic languages are actually one: the ancient Macedonian language that (somehow) disseminated from South to North and not vice versa.

==

[George S.]

SS yor alking bs .The slavs went through hellas as atested by your writers on the history.The slavs did no more damage than anywhere else.By greek sandards hey should also be classed as slavs so should every other Balkan country.THere is no such thing as a slav language .To classify Macedonian as a Slavic language is wrong.But some kind of influence has existed somewhat a slight influence.People have exaggerated the claims that we are descended from slavs but the opposite is the case we have preserved our language,culture which existed prior to the Slavic incursions.
The use of the Slavic is a smear campaign a derogatory one at that to show the world we are not Macedonian but slavs.This is false we are just Macedonian.
You look at the literature that comes up on the mto old books & references they clearly show that we exist as Macedonians not as slav Macedonians but as Macedonians.Under Serbia the Macedonian was suppressed & people were taught they should be proud of their slav heritage and not of Macedonian descent.A crafty way of keeping people down.Note all sorts of people have come & gone over the years on Macedonian soil.Have they altered the Macedonian identity ?yes they all had some kind of influence but the identity has remained the same.
Have you noticed Macedonia has kept its name of mileniums as well as its language.
Your mates the serbs said that there are only serbo\croats language .Ignoring the Macedonian.Serbo \croats is actually Macedonian. with a slant.We know why they denied the Macedonian language.Your country has denied the Macedonian language.THey say there is no Macedonian language .(its all Greek) Is it?

[Chakalarov]

I'm going to go off on a slightly different topic here, but it obviously related to the Thracians as ancestors of many Slavic-speaking people today. Other threads (and scholarly articles for that matter) have shown there to be Proto-Slavic languages spoken in the Balkans and Central Europe.

We have already demonstrated the linguistic shifts from PIE to Thracian and Macedonian, and how that is retained even today. Simokatta clearly testifies to the fact that the ancient Getae (Thracians) were what the Byzantine chroniclers call Slavs. Furthermore, we also have work supporting that the Veneti were also a Proto-Slavic speaking entity, with their name being an exonym for "Sloventsi" or "Sloventi". Important thing I have noticed in this is that these groups did not necessarily create the other. We can assume that many people in ancient times spoke similar languages and went by different names. In other words, the Veneti and Thracians can exist in the same time-frame. However, through all the work I've seen, the Veneti is an exonym for soley the Western Slavs, with the Slovenians included in this. Futhermore, inscriptions that actually contain forms of Sloveni such as "Cluveni" on the Phrygian tablets, and the Trumuzijat handle "Slouonicu" are restricted to areas where the Veneti inhabited, and not the Balkans.

So this begs the question as to why the Getae were given a name that was almost exclusively used to refer to the more geographically distant Western Slavs? I do not think they just by chance gave themselves a relational term that was also coincidentally used by people in Central Europe. Unless my accounts are off, I have the Getae placed along the lower streams of the Danube and next to the Black sea, while most Venetic groups are in central Europe. While they did obviously speak similar languages, there was considerable geographic distance between the groups. In my opinion, this leads to two possible scenarios:

1. the Getae were much more spread than we think, and had contact with Venetic groups, thus also acquiring the name given similarities in speech. This would mean that they attacked the empire from numerous different fronts.

2. the Danube frontier of invaders extended the length of the Danube, and reached the Sava river, and included Venetic groups invading alongside the Getae. Sovius, if I'm not mistaken, is a proponent of the theory that the Vindelicians also attacked the Byzantine Empire alongside the Getae. Perhaps he can shed light on some of the sources he used to arrive to this conclusion, because I have not found any.

To sum, I believe the Getae while Slavic- speaking, had to have some contact with the Venetic groups when attacking the empire. They thus became included in the umbrella term "Sklabenoi". This may be based on either Slavonia or Sloveni, but either one is still largely associated with Venetic groups in Central Europe. Important thing to keep in mind however, which adds to the confusion, is that the earliest Sklabenoi were still ultimately placed by the lower Danube in the Balkans.

[Sovius]

The Renaissance Period Model of anthropological and historical interpretation was based on the Medieval Model, which was based on the Ancient Period Model. The Victorian Age Model, which has remained embedded in most "Western" countries' academic curriculums since the dawn of the modern nation states is based on numerous revisions made to the previous models. These revisions were adopted without any sort of thesis based on independently verifiable empirical proofs in support of the revisions; therefore, it is the Victorian Age Model that must prove its relevance, not the Renaissance Period Model. Theory based on an intellectual platform that was incorrect to begin with is of no consequence to those who simply wish to understand the past as it was and not as others would rather have us see it.

Historical Quotes

A place for collection of historical references pointing to the Veneti

Many authors mention people named Oenetoi, Henetoi, Veneti, Venedae, Wends, Vindelicians, Vandals, etc. From some sources one could understand that these names either refer to one language group or even to one Nation. There are also opinions that these authors confused different ethnica groups under the same Name.

HISTORICAL QUOTES

Homer (9th century B. C.) records in Iliad[1] the Veneti in Paphlagonia as Enetoi (the Greek did not know the letter v).

Herodotus, historian (5th century B. C.), writes about Illyrian Veneti, about Veneti living around the lower stream of the Danube, and finally about Veneti inhabiting the Northern Adriatic territory.[2]

Polibus (2th century B. C.) added to the description of events during the years 219 to 146 B. C., following: »The land to the Adriatic coast was mastered by another, very old folk, named Veneti ... They speak a different language as the Celts, but what their habbits and their clothing is concearned, they differ from them only slightly /.../ Veneti and Gonomani were persuaded by Roman representatives, to join the Romans«.[3]

Demetrius of Scepsis, grammarian, archeologist (2nd century B. C.), mentions the capital of the Veneti (Enea) in Troas (Asia Minor).[4]

Strabo, historian, geographer (1st century B. C.), designates the (V)eneti in Paphlagonia as the major tribe moving towards Thrace (nowadays territory of Bulgaria) after the fall of Troy (Asia Minor).[5]

Julius Caesar, historian (1st century B. C.), reports about the Veneti living in Gaul (Brittany).[6]

Titus Livy, historian (1st century B. C.), describes how Veneti came up to the coasts of the (northern) Adriatic, also mentioning the river "Timava", which flows through the duskiness of the Škocjan caves (Slovene Ti(e)ma means the darkness).[7]

Pliny the Elder (1st century B. C.) talks about an extensive land, named Eningia, where Sarmatians, Venedi, etc. lived. He also mentions theVenetulani in central Italy.[8]

Tacitus, historian (1st century C. E.), places Veneti on the border of Suebia together with Peucinians, Sarmatians and Fenns.[9]

Ptolemy, geographer (2nd century), mentions exceedingly large nations - the (O)venedi on the whole coastal region of the Venetic gulf (The Baltic sea).[10]

Emperor Julian (4th century) presents evidence of Veneti, who settled in the proximity of Aquilea (Italy).[11]

Jordanes, historian (6th century), notes a numerous nation of Veneti, populating the area between north of Dacia (now Romania) and up to the Visla delta (the Baltic sea). [12]

In Vita s. Columbani[13] (7th century) (the Alpine) Veneti, who call themselves Slavs, are recorded (»termini Venetorum qui et Sclavi dicuntur«).

In the Fredegarius Chronicle (7th century) we can read about the Slavs designated as Vinedi.[14]

Adam of Bremen, chronicler (11th century), mentions an extensive land Sclavania, settled by Winulians, who used to be called Vandals. The land could have been ten times bigger then Sachsen, especially if we include Bohemians (Czechs) and Polians, since they are not distinguishable from each other, nor by their appearance, or by their language.[15]

In Denmark (from latest 12th century and until the year 1972) the title "King of the Vends" (Latin Vandals) was used for enthroning Danish kings.
Helmold, historian (12th century), records a vast Slavic country, where the ancient Vandals are now named Wends or Winulians.[16]

Wincenty Kadłubek / Vincent of Cracow, historian (12th century), affirms that Poles used to be called Vandals.[17]

Heimskringla, the Chronicle of Norwegian kings(12th century) mentions, that the Black Sea »divides three parts of the earth, from which is the eastern part called Asia, whereas the western part is by some called Europe, and by others Enea.«[18]

Miersuae Chronicon (13th century) equates Vandals with Slavs.[19]

Albert Crantz, historian (15th century), reports about Wandals or Wends, and says that they are Slavs, living as a single nation from Poland to Dalmatia. According to him, the mighty acts in France, Spain and Africa are ascribed to the Wends.[20]

Marcin Bielski (16th century) says that Wandals was once the name for Slavs.[21]

The Pomeranian chronicler Thomas Kantzow (1505-1542) writes that the »Slau(v)s and Wandals are the same thing / .../ just like the Germans are called differently - Germani, Teuthones, Alemanni.«: Original text: »Dan Slaui und Wandali ist ein Dinck / .../ gleich wie die Teutzschen werden oft on Unterschied geheissen Germani, Teuthones, Alemanni.«[22]

Christophorum Entzelt von Saluelt (16. century) records ancient populousness of the lands east from the Elbe (Laba) river with Wends. At the same time he equates Veneti and Sclavenes.[23]

Sebastian Münster, cartographer (16th century), mentions a once mighty nation on the East sea (Ostsee) named Vandals or Wends. He also reports on Wandals who settled regions in eastern Germany, where inhabitants are called Sclavs or Wends. Original text: »Mecklenburg-Pommern-Preussen: jtem Brandenburg und was dem Polenland zugelegen, alles Wandali geheißen und ihre Einwohner haben auch Sclaven oder Wendengeheißen.«[24]

Antol Vramec, chronicler (16th century), writes in his chronicle for the year 928 the following: The Heneti, who name themselves Sloveni, were at that time knocked down in Germany.[25]

Adam Bohorič, linguist (16th century), links Heneti, Vene(d)ti, Vinds, Vandals and Slavs together as a single nation.[26]

Mavro Orbin (16th century) numbers Veneti, Vends, Vandals, Illyrians, Sarmatians ... among Slavs.[27]

The Chronicle of Brandenburg (16. century) emphasizes the mighty predecessors of Wends, the Vandals, who sacked Rome and Carthage, and mentions their king Genserich as the king of Vandals.[28]

Johann Weichard Baron von Valvasor, historian, geographer (1689), wrote: »Wends and Sclavenes are one folk, Wandals and Wends one and the same nation.« (»Wenden und Sclaven seynd ein Volk, Wandalen und Wenden einerley Nation.[29]

V. N. Tatiščev, ethnographer (17th -18th century), classifies the Heneti as Slavs, as well as the Vandalic or Vendenic state as the first known Slavic state.[30]

A. L. Schlözer, historian (18th century), defended his thesis about Slavs originating from Illyrians and the Veneti.[31]

Vasilij Trediakovski (18th century) classifies Dalmatians, Serbians, Bulgarians ... among Vandals.[32]

Davorin Trstenjak (19th century) wrote about the ancient Adriatic Veneti, who belonged to a Vindish-Slavic family. He accented their affinity with the Aremoric (Brittany) and Baltic Veneti.[33]

In Helmolts Weltgeschichte (end of the 19th century) it is indicated, that the Veneti, Wends and Winds were actually ancestors of Slovenes, and that they used to settle the old roman provinces Vindelitia, Raetia, Noricum, Pannonia.[34]



[1] Iliad, 851.

[2] Herodotus, History vol. 7 / G B Pellegrini, A L Prosdocimi, La lingua venetica, Padova 1967, V, 9.

[3] Polibios, Obča zgodovina, Državna založba Slovenije, Ljubljana 1964, str. 88; p. 92.

[4] On the Martialling of the Trojan Forces.

[5] Strabon, Geografija.

[6] De Bello Gallico.

[7] Titus Livius, History of Rome, Loeb Classic Library, William Heinemann, London, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1933 / Titi Livi, Ab Vrbe condita, liber I, http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/liv.html.

[8] Historia naturalis, Liber IV: 96-97.

[9] Cornelius Tacitus, De origine et situ Germaorum liber (Germania), 64.

[10] Ptolemej, De Geographia, III 5. 21.

[11] The Works of Emperor Julian, Engl. transl. Wilmer Cave Wright, I. vol., Loeb Classical Library, William Heinemann , Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1954, The Heroic Deeds of Constantius, pp. 190- 193.

[12] Iordanes, De origine actibusce Getarum (Getica), Roma 1986, str 43 (XXIII poglavje); S Rutar, Kako važnost ima "Jordanis" za slovensko zgodovinopisje, Letopis Matice slovenske, Ljubljana 1880, p. 86.

[13] J. Bobbiensis, Vitae s. Columbani.

[14] Fredegar Scholasticus, Historia Francorum, I, 48.

[15] Adamus Bremensis, Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificum (et Scholast), 11. century, II, 18.

[16] Helmoldi presbyteri Bozoviensis, Chronica Sclavorum et Venedorum, 1171, p. 2, 14.

[17] W. Kadłubek, Mistrza Wincentego Kronika Polska, Warszawa 1974.

[18] Heimskringla or The Chronicle of the Kings of Norway, The Ynglinga Saga, or The Story of the Yngling Family from Odin to Halfdan the Black, Snorri Sturluson c. 1179 - 1241, Online Medieval and Classical Library Release #15b, http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/OMACL/Heimskringla/.

[19] Miersuae Chronicon, Monumenta Poloniae Historica II, 1872.

[20] Albertus Crantzius, Vandalia, lat. Hamburg 1519.

[21] M Bielski, Kronika Polska.

[22] Thomas Kantzow, Chronik von Pommern in Niederdeutscher Mundart (orig. 1535), Dr. Martin Sändig oHG., 1973; ISBN 3-500-28260-1.

[23] Entzelt von Salfeld, Chronicon der Alten Mark, Magdeburg 1579.

[24] S. Münster, Cosmographiae Universalis, Basileae 1572.

[25] A. Vramec, Kronika, Ljubljana 1578.

[26] A. Bohorič, Zimske urice / Arcticae horulae, Vitenberg, 1584.

[27] M. Orbini, Il Regno degli Slavi /Kraljestvo Slovanov, naslov "Historiografska knjiga o izvoru imena Slave in o razširitvi slovanskega naroda in njegovih carjev ter vladarjev z mnogimi imeni in z mnogimi carstvi, kraljestvi in provincami", 1722.

[28] Angelus, Chronik der Mark Brandenburg, 1598.

[29] J. V. Valvasor, Slava Vojvodine Kranjske / Die Ehre des Herzogthums Crain, Nürnberg 1689.

[30] V. N. Tatiščev, Slovani in Rusija, str. 21 / Собрание сочинений. Т.1. История Российская. М. 1994, частъ 1. См. также фрагментъі в сборнике"Славяне и Русъ" p. 16-23.

[31] Х. А Шлецер, О происхождении словен вообще и в особенности словен российских, М. 1810.

[32] B. Тредиаковский, РИ, I-XVI - Римская история ... сочиненная г. Ролленем ... а с Французского переведенная тщанием и трудами В. Тредиаковского ... Т. I - XVI. СПб., 1761-1767.

[33] D. Trstenjak, Raziskavanja na polji staroslovanske zgodovine, Letopis matice slovenske, Ljubljana.

[34] H F Helmolt, Weltgeschichte, fünfter Band, Bibliographisches Institut, Leipzig und Wien 1900 (1899-1907), pp. 269, 270 (english: London 1902, ruskij: Petrograd); www.hervardi.com/helmolt.php.

Source: veneti.info

[Chakalarov]

Sovius,

I've seen these quotes and I am in complete agreement with you. However, my only point is that I believe different Slavic-speaking groups were known by different names, and the term "Sloveni" was originally in use by primarily Central Europeans. I've been reading "Veneti: First Builders of European Community" and it also supports this view. My confusion, as stated above, is how it became transferred to the invading Getae in the 6th century, who were located by the shores of the Black Sea. You mentioned that Vindelicians also invaded the Eastern Roman Empire. To me, this seemingly solves the dilemma since the Vindelcians were clearly of Venetic origin and it would indicate contact with the Getae. Would you care to elaborate on how you reached that conclusion? The nearest I can tell, Vindelicians, Vandals, Vindili were different names for the same group of Venetic people. However, I am having trouble placing them alongside Getic invaders in the 6th century. Are there any sources from the Renaissance Period Model that could explain this?

[Sovius]

Sorry for the confusion. I’m woefully inept at posting to internet forums. Netiquette, I think it’s called. The first part was in response to the Gestapo. The 2nd, my confusion over your request, which appears to have stemmed from your confusion on the part of my failure to address what I mean by Vindelician as opposed to how you may be defining Vindelician. Vindelicia was a Roman Province and Vindelicia was also the entire territory of what Romans generically referred to as Germania during the later part of their occupation of Europe. Vindelicia defined northern Venetia.

For clarification, the Vandali (Vindelicians) were recorded on maps as being camped out to the west of the Goths along the Danube, with the Gepidian formations between them. Sorry about that.

Your hypothesis is plausible in its entirety, but I believe that the ultimate answer may be more complex and, therefore, more elusive, as we cannot ignore the Eastern component of the equation. The Vindelicians, Veneti and Gedani, during different times and in different regions, fought against, for and alongside the Scythians. To elaborate further would require some maps. If you’ll give me some time, I think I can explain, but an explanation might be more suitable over on the thread you created for the 6th Century AD Maps, as it would reinforce your observations, as well as, provide another set of angles to consider.

[Chakalarov]

Sovius, I have moved the conversation to the maps thread I created.

[Nikolaj]

I have seen discussion in the past about P. Serafimov’s work on scripts. Never about this though.

http://www.korenine.si/zborniki/zbor...imov_tra07.pdf

Abstract

This paper offers an etymological analysis of more than 60 Thracian toponyms, hydronyms and oronyms.
It presents the evidence that the Slavs were the indigenous population in the region, in agreement to the testimony of Simokatta, who equated Thracians (called Getae) with the Old Slavs:
"Sclavos sive Getas hoc enim nomine antiquitus appellati sunt” – “Slavs or Getae, because this is the way they were called in the antiquity”.

Introduction

The toponyms, hydronyms and oronyms can provide very valuable information about the inhabitants of certain lands, because every ethnic group has their own names for mountain, valley, lake, and village more or less different from these of the other people. Slavic Bela Gora (White mountain) corresponds to German Weiss Berg, the Greek Λέύκος Oρος and Latin Albus Mons. Judging by these differences and peculiarities we can determine the ethnic affiliation of people who lived a long time ago in a certain geographical area. In this paper the attention is given to the Old Thracian lands: from the Carpathian Mountains to Asia Minor and from Black Sea till Dardania (Serbia). But I have to clarify that these regions do not represent the totality of the Thracian domain, in reality it continued to the Hercynian forest (Schwarzwald in Germany), Map 1, where according to Strabo the country of the Getae began [1], VII-2-III-1.


Map 1 - Thracian lands

His discussion progresses for another 20 pages where he compares 'Slavic' tongues to Thracian etc which ultimately ends with:

The presentation of above facts brings new light to the question: Did Thracians disappear in thin air, and were the Slavs invaders at all? If we see that the inhabitants of certain land have same burial rites, material culture and religion as the inhabitants of the same land 1000 years later, and if the place names of the oldest inhabitants are candidates to explain from the language of these, who inhabit the same land later, the most logical and parsimonious conclusion is that we have the one and the same people, only known under different names. That possibility is confirmed by the historical sources, equating the two groups, so the only thing, which remains is to rewrite the early history of the Slavs, called Thracians in antiquity.

Taking scientific data into account that supports this view denying the Turkic roots of modern Bulgarians (this was posted in the Bulgarian propaganda thread):

http://society.actualno.com/Novo-gen...ws_449255.html

"The content of genes tyurkoezichnite - ie." Altayo-Mongols "is below 1.5% and Bulgarians are absolutely European population . This study - with 900 - inferior number of surveyed only Italians, Scots and Spaniards. These data showed that modern Bulgarians are related with some Slavic populations - for example, the Croats are close to the population of Northern Greece, some regions of Italy - Northern and Central Italy. This is in relation to mitochondrial DNA. In terms of y-chromosome has close with Serbians, Romanians, northern Greece, Croats.

I also remember the discussion about the intensity of R1A1 that is distributed in the Baltic region where Sovius argued that the diminishing value of R1A1 does not imply a migration went southward.

Thoughts?

[Nikolaj]

His interpretation of data is quite interesting:

- The Slavic words show only the different stages of development of one and the same word. That excludes the possibility of loaning it from other people. This explains why you keep on seeing Thracian words varying to which Slavic tongue it relates to the most.
- This is why you find Thracian words to match at least one of the Slavic languages.
- Apparently Slovenian has the most related words due it its conservative nature. Funny, I would have expected a Balto-Slavic language instead.


From the 30 additional words extracted from the Thracian toponyms and hydronyms 30 have very good matches in Bulgarian and the other Slavic languages. Lithuanian offers 16 matches, Greek 13, Latin 5 and English 4. We can see that again the Slavic languages offer the most and the best matches. The resemblance of many names is so strikingly close that it can’t be called coincidence. And if we consider the fact that Thracian words were documented about 2000 years ago, it will not be an exaggeration to say that in fact they are identical with the Slavic ones. The comparison presented in the Tables 1, 2 and 3 has never been made by any scientist, who studied the ancient Thracian culture. That is why now we have the wrong impression that Thracians have disappeared into thin air and the Slavs came to the lands south of the Danube as invaders.


Also some good points right after:

To that wrong view contributed the ignoring of the historical testimonies of T. Simokatta (cited by Tsenov [19], p. 14), who equates Slavs and Thracians, while the old writer is very clear saying: Sclavos sive Getas hoc enim nomine antiquitus appellati sunt – Slavs, or Getae, because that was their name in the antiquity. Ignored was also the amazing similarity of the Slavic and Thracian burial rituals. Herodotus narrated how after the burial took place, games were organized around his grave [20], V-8. These are in my opinion the Old Slavic Trizna games, played after the burial [21], p. 126. Herodotus gives us another very important detail from the burial rites of the ancient Thracians: the wife of the deceased followed him voluntary into the grave [20], V-8. About the same peculiarity writes Pseudomaurikius in Strategikon, describing the life of the Thracians – Their wives are so pious that follow the man in the grave (cited by Bakalov et al. [5], p. 144.) One more peculiar ritual of the Thracian burial rites was the placing of horse and dog in the grave [22], p. 212; exactly the same ritual was practised by the Old Bulgarians till about 9th ct. AD [23], p. 330-333. If the Old Slavs were invaders in the lands south of the Danube than we should see sharp change in the material culture after the ‘invasion’, but such change is not attested. Thracian domestic pottery of 5th ct. B.C. is identical to Old Slavic domestic pottery of 5th ct. A.D. Tsvetkov’s explanation to this almost unknown fact was that the similarity appeared because the conditions of production were the same [24], p. 56. I can’t agree that the similar conditions of production would lead to same shape and ornaments. The village population of different countries might have produced its pottery in similar conditions, but every ethnic group has its own style, taste, and needs, which would be reflected in the shape, size and the ornaments of the vessels. Let’s not forget that only the Slavic domestic pottery is undistinguishable from the Thracians one. Greek, Roman and Anglo-Saxon ones are quite different.

[Nikolaj]

Mods, please move the thread to 'Exposing Lies and Propaganda.'