The Thracian people and language

[Pelister]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

Nice selection of quotes and information, IoM. This is what stands out for me:

All of these quotes are really interesting. The last quote caught my eye.

Strabo informs us that the Greeks regarded the Gatae as a branch of Thracians, and says further, that the people of that name occupying both sides of the Danube.

There is one medievil source that says that the 'Getae' were one of the people who had crossed the Danube in the 6th and 7th centuries. Assuming that the proposition that people inhabiting both sides of the Danube were one and the same people, as Strabo suggests, is the correct one, and that he considered them to be Thracians, then perhaps this explains a riddle that Western historians are too afraid to confront. A long, deep and rich cultural tradition and language shared by millions of Thracians doesn't just "disappear" to be lost forever with no traces. There is no evidence of a break - no material, cultural or linguistic evidence of it. The only logical conclusion is that:

1. Before it was coined, 'Slavic' it was the mother tongue of the Thracian civilization.
2. The people on the other side of the Danube, were linguistically and culturally identical to those people on this side. The difference between the "Sklavenoi" on one side of the Danube, and the Thracian and Macedonians on the other, was political. Culturally and linguistically they were identical.

[Soldier of Macedon]

From a post by TM on another thread which is relevant here:

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...isirkov&page=9

The Slavonians, we have said, are an aboriginal European branch of the great Scythian race. Their specific name among the Greeks was 'Everoi, of which the Latin translation was Venetce; their western neighbours, the Germans, called them Wcndtn ; by the northern Scandinavians they were called the Vanar; the name by which they called themselves was Serbi or Sirbi. The name Slavonians, which has superseded all these, is of comparatively recent origin, and is derived either from the native word slava, meaning "glory," or from the native word slovo, meaning " speech." The original territories of these Venetae, Wenden, Serbi, or Slavonians, were very extensive ; Ptolemy (a.d. 140) speaks of them as an cdvoj /xEyitfrov, and Procopius (a.d. 550) calls them a natio papulosa dwelling per immensa spatia. The ancient Thracians, it is now concluded, were a Slavonic people, probably with Pelasgic intermixture ; the Dacians, the Mcesians, and other populations living north of the Thracians, and ultimately included with them in the Roman empire, were still more certainly of the Slavonic stock ; and the Veneti of the Adriatic, an aboriginal Italian nation finally conquered by Cresar, were, as the name implies, an extreme western outpost of the same great race. The chief seat of the Slavonians, however, was to the north of the Black Sea and the Carpathian mountains, and between the Baltic and the Volga. It is even likely that then, as now, their northern offshoots reached to the Icy Seas. Spreading over so vast an extent of territory, they must then, as now, have been by far the most numerous of the European races. At present the Germans of Europe are estimated at thirty-five millions, and the Slavonians at eighty millions ; and it is considered probable that their original proportions were nearly the same.......As among the Hindoos, it was the custom of their widows to burn themselves on the same pile with their deceased husbands; and altogether their women held an inferior position to that assigned to women among the Germans. They were fond of music ; and their national instrument was the gusla, a kind of cithara or guitar with only one string, played with a bow, and accompanying the voice, still the popular instrument in all Slavonic countries.

http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA2...acians&f=false page 285

This account was written in 1849.

[Soldier of Macedon]

These were posted on another thread some time ago. I think they may be from Samothrace but not sure. If anybody can confirm that would be great. They are non-Greek inscriptions.

[Soldier of Macedon]

From Thucydides:

Thrace, it was practised most extensively among the powerful Odrysians, it being impossible to get anything done without a present. It was thus a very powerful kingdom; in revenue and general prosperity surpassing all in Europe between the Ionian gulf and the Euxine, and in numbers and military resources coming decidedly next to the Scythians, with whom indeed no people in Europe can bear comparison, there not being even in Asia any nation singly a match for them if unanimous, though of course they are not on a level with other races in general intelligence and the arts of civilized life. 2, 97.

[Pelister]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

From Thucydides:

No mention of 'Slavs' in this source by Thucydides. I wonder why?

In the title, you write "European Slavs". What is a "Slav", SoM? You havn't been able to provide us with that yet. I know you want to superimpose this abstract term retroactively over a variety of different ancient people, but that would be deliberately distorting the picture on the ground and ignoring the sources. Thats what our enemies do with us.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Pelister

No mention of 'Slavs' in this source by Thucydides. I wonder why?

Don't spend too much time wondering, it was written in the 5th century BC.

In the title, you write "European Slavs". What is a "Slav", SoM?

It is merely in reference to a linguistic group in Europe. Now that I have answered your question, perhaps you can tell us what you meant on post #9 of this thread when you said the following:

Originally Posted by Pelister

This is a great thread.

If, according to Herodotus, Thrace is the most populated region of the world, and Macedonia had been "occupied by Thracians" since some dark age in the past - the question is where did all the Thracian go? How could they disappear without leaving a trace? I believe this idea pushed by the New Greeks that the 5th century constitutes "a clean break" is a cunning way of blind siding people from the fact that there are little or no traces of the ancient Thracians because the are indistinguishable from the current Slavic (Thracian) speakers living their today.

Who are "the current Slavic speakers" living there today?

[Pelister]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

Don't spend too much time wondering, it was written in the 5th century BC.

That is because there were no 'Slavs'. There were Thracians. Can you imagine telling a Thracian "are you a Slav", and then writing his or her identity down as 'Slav' anyway?

Your call our langauge "Slav", the Greeks call it "Slavophone" - whats the difference?

It doesn't matter what you think. You have proven that your capable of being mischievous and spreading 'Slav' propaganda on this forum. You have single handedly stifled any constructive criticism with your ideas. The forums are 'flooded' with your 'Slav' garbage.

You have no idea when the term was first coined, or by who. You have no idea what they meant by it. You have no idea how the term, and its meaning developed. Have you read any of the original sources?

You have adopted a Western concept of 'other'. It is an Ideal, and you have damned the Macedonians and everything that is distinctive, unique and original about us with it.

You are systematically applying it retroactively to a whole range of people and places from the ancient Thracians, to the ancient Macedonians, to 6th century invaders, to Macedonians in the 20th century.

What do you know about 6th century invaders, for example? Nothing.

When you say "its just a reference to a linguistic group" - who says it is? You use it as a reference to events (6th century invasions) ! As a reference to people (Thracians, 6th century invaders and whoever else) ! You apply it to objects (parchment, books, literature)! You apply it to architecture (Russian Cathedral)!

Reference to a 'linguistic group', yea right! Your a propogandist is all I can say. Macedonians here wouldn't be able to see how you actually use the term and how you really apply it, but I do.

Macedonian continuity sure, Thracian continuity , sure - but "Slav continuity" before the term was ever coined - tinkering with "a definition" and then applying to events, people, places, objects ...etc., you know next to nothing about? Give me a break.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Pelister

That is because there were no 'Slavs'. There were Thracians.

Because Thucydides wrote in the 5th century BC. The descendants of those same Thracians were recorded as 'Slavs' centuries later.

Your call our langauge "Slav", the Greeks call it "Slavophone" - whats the difference?

I have already explained the difference. All you need to do now is actually read the posts in this thread.

You have single handedly stifled any constructive criticism with your ideas. The forums are 'flooded' with your 'Slav' garbage.

How? Because I won't buy into some looney tune 'theories' that imbeciles like yourself wish to promote?

When you say "its just a reference to a linguistic group" - who says it is?

Most people who live in Slavic-speaking countries. They certainly don't view it as an ethnicity.

You use it as a reference to events (6th century invasions) !

The term was in recorded use by the 6th century. I didn't create it as a reference. From the same period onward, there are thousands of new placenames in the Balkans. One would logically assume that these two developments are connected. I can't speak for those like yourself who are devoid of logic.

You apply it to architecture (Russian Cathedral)!

Where did I apply it to Russian architecture, you lying, manipulative fool? What sort of game are you trying to play here?

Your a propogandist is all I can say.

The opinion of an uninformed moron.

[Voltron]

Pelister, I was the one that posted pictures of architecture that I deemed Slavic. I still do but that doesnt matter. It wasnt SOM.

Can you just answer this one question that has been asked on an infinite number of occasions ? From whom did the countless number of toponyms from Macedonia to Crete come from ?

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Pelister

The people on the other side of the Danube, were linguistically and culturally identical to those people on this side. The difference between the "Sklavenoi" on one side of the Danube, and the Thracian and Macedonians on the other, was political. Culturally and linguistically they were identical.

I agree almost completely, except I wouldn't say identical because there are differences even between neighbouring villages, but certainly more similar to each other than to any other groups. Alas, this was Pelister a few months back, before he started getting spoon-fed a new narrative by some clown who is no longer frequenting this forum.

Originally Posted by Voltron

From whom did the countless number of toponyms from Macedonia to Crete come from ?

The answer is obvious. The problem for some is interpretation based on delusion and/or propaganda.

- I would argue that the language which became widespread from the 6th century was related to Paleo-Balkan languages, based on linguistic comparison. Although evidence of Paleo-Balkan languages is scarce, the commonalities shared with Balto-Slavic languages are just too much to be overlooked. I would also argue that the language reached as far as it did due to pre-existing similarities and socio-political change, hence coinciding with the sudden appearance of 'Sklavenes' across half of Europe.

- You would argue that the language was completely foreign and sprang up from some distant unknown place and spread as a result of a massive population boom. Unlikely and unparalleled, but whatever.

- Pelister won't even touch the subject for fear of being ridiculed by his puppet master, thus he would rather play ignorant and live in the dark ages.