# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  An Approach to ancient Thracian DNA

## iapetoc

Although Aimos peninsula is the Mixed, specially to south (Byzantnine-ottoman empire, and ancient Greek and roman douloi (worker-services, not sclaves), we see 3 major and one minor Y haplogroups,
the 3 major are E (E-V13, E-M123) J2, I2a2, and the minor is G,
The ancient Thracians was the 2nd Biggest Numerous nation after indians according Herodotus, the map approach gives almost same quantity for all in ancient Thrace but the biiger to inner Europe is I2a2,

if J2 has to do with Greece then what has to do with ancient thracians,
then the around of ancient thracian area has to do with colonization and makedonian expand to east,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pieres
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Thracian_Greeks

then the proper genes PIE are the rulers of E or I2, 

1rst) Hypothesis

If R connect E that has to do with an arc from egypt then they must have with Gold and customs, so they build pyramids, (greek laconia and bosna and elsewerein balkans,) and cover dead kings face with gold, 
Greek E area peloponese, golden mask
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlm6A7-Xqhc
Thracian gold mask found in bulgaria.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zlatnamaska.jpg

the possibilty that albanians rulled by thracians from geto-dacia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...race_and_Dacia
the tribe albocense
and the city of alba julia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alba_Julia

links E with ancient thracians

But numerically does not fit,
also does not give passage to miner asia

2nd) the Thracians were rulers of I2

Numerically fits, and makes herodotus state that Dacians are the most taugh among Thracians, cause dacia has more I than E,
a) Explains the passage to minor asia with the big I ratio near Phrygia
causes from makedons we know that the Bruges (mak dialect) b->pf Phruges->Phrygians (Koine),
b)Explains the big I in east makedonia, and low E and Big E in west and small I in West cause Pieri were thracians and the shample from Serres (30% I2) are from were Pieri and Maedi lived,
c) Explains the maedi migration to minor asia (maedi bithynia)
d) Expalins the bithyni-Thyni migration to minor (East Bithynia),

AND THAT I2a2, is a trully european haplogroup that went East and did not come from the west,
maybe explains that a celt R1b ruled over I2a
The big ratio % of I2a2 around bosnia and Serbia where the tribaldi (maybe proto-serbs) ancient Thracian tribe
and the Big I2a2 in Dacia and around 
makes me believe *THAT ANCIENT THRACIANS WERE CELTS ruled I2a2* 

1 simple linguistica example 
greek-thracian area Serres mari means good woman
greek-cretan dia =day
athenean koine δειλι dili = end of day
Celt-English merry = happy (merry christmas)
Celt-English Day 
AlbanoDacian have a nice day ->mire Dita
the mire is probably good 
and dita is the day,
if a dacian or an ex-Yugoslavian (hrvatska-bosna-srpski-slovensko) 
or a bulgarian can find more lingua its ok

The possibility *That Thracians WERE CELTS* rulling I is more strong than the 1 approach
The linguistic probably has to do with the persian occupation
the greek influence,
The Roman occupation,
The slavonization
and the scythian and sarmates influence (probably slavonization) around Romania.

The possibility that ancient thracian speak Slavic or proto slavic language is an interesting idea, but i m not a linguist, the possibilty that they return east ....

besides balkan is ..... and the more the data the more map change colours,

for example the jews colonie in salonique,
almost 0% of jews-semetic results although they were and are a big comnunity in thessaly makedonia and thessaloniki 150 000, 50-50 christians- jews.

 :Confused:   :Confused:   :Confused:   :Confused: 

Its more possible that Herodotus speaking of thracians mention Celts, and celtospeakers, cause slavonick people if were scythians-sarmatians etc were almost unknown or liitle known at that time
besides from north italy to makedonia to ucraine, and also in minor asia, hmmm it is big

----------


## Maciamo

The similarity between Thracian and Celtic languages stems from the fact that they are both Indo-European languages. Nothing more. Keep in mind that Sanskrit, Classical Greek, Latin, Gaulish Celtic and Old German, which diverged from the mother Proto-Indo-European tongue by over 3000 years, were still mutually intelligible to a surprising degree (much more than modern German, Italian, Greek and Hindi).

The Indo-European presumably belonged to haplogroups R1a1a, R1b1b2a1 and G2a3ba1, so I don't see how the original Thracians could be I2a2 or E1b1b. These were the haplogroups of the indigenous populations of the Balkans that were subdued by the Thracians, Macedonians and other Indo-European peoples came from the steppes. Considering that the Thracian migration to the Balkans is dated to 1500 BCE, I would place them in the predominantly R1a1a group from the Yamnaya culture. R1b1b2a surely arrived in the region during the first waves of Indo-European incursions, mostly in the 3rd millennium BCE.

----------


## Garrick

> Although Aimos peninsula is the Mixed, specially to south (Byzantnine-ottoman empire, and ancient Greek and roman douloi (worker-services, not sclaves), we see 3 major and one minor Y haplogroups,
> the 3 major are E (E-V13, E-M123) J2, I2a2, and the minor is G,
> The ancient Thracians was the 2nd Biggest Numerous nation after indians according Herodotus, the map approach gives almost same quantity for all in ancient Thrace but the biiger to inner Europe is I2a2,
> 
> if J2 has to do with Greece then what has to do with ancient thracians,
> then the around of ancient thracian area has to do with colonization and makedonian expand to east,
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pieres
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Thracian_Greeks
> ...


iapetoc
Your idea that *Old Serbs were Thracians* can easily explain the many concerns.

1. The writings of Herodotus and many other ancient Greek and Byzantine texts.

2. Old articles on Tribals and other tribes as Serbs and Tribals and probably these tribes at the same time were Thracians.

3. The official listing of the Serbs as Rasčani which is almost the same as Tračani (Rascians = Thracians), many names in Serbian countries pointing to words derived from Thrakia.

4. Actual impossibility of Hamitic Illyrians from Africa to populate the entire area under the Rome called Illyric, last point Afro Illyrian tribes went middle of today's Montenegro.

5. Vicinity of the Thracians Anatolia where the holders of I haplogroup crossed into the Balkans before 25,000 years ago and today they called the Old Europeans.

6. Easily track back other people who also could belong to a haplogroup.

7. Connect with the Vinca culture and other related cultures of possible carriers of I haplogroups.


One key thing must realize:

1. Evidence that the Thracians were carriers of I haplogroup.

It is key problem because the researchers classified Thracians as R1a carriers, even as maybe E carriers.


It would be good, another:

2. Discover the original language of I carriers.




> but all these has nothing to do with my questions
> cause that I wonder is 
> 1. which is thracian DNA?
> 2. IF I2a2 was Thracian, were proto-slavonic people ???
> 3. the slavian dna is I2a2 or R?


Yes.

These are key questions that now there is no sure answers.

----------


## iapetoc

i m just thinking when that invasion done?
when myceane according GreeK Academia was 2100 to 1700 BC
and in central Greece they knew bronze before 1600 via cyprus
and in minor Asia cycladetic -ionian via hetit
so the language was given by hetit G? or by mycenean R?

and the doric invasion also according greeks never done but it was the _return of temenis_ from makedonia Greece, at about 800 BC
when the macedonian invade greece???
cause by What i know the makedonians were exiled from peloponese as temenus sons and they return as doric from city doris
Is it possible that PIE were learn by hetit from minor asia with a small >10% G

Now Celt tribes according Romans like scordici and serdi were in thracian land, down Donau, could that be evidence thracians were Celt-speaking?

----------


## Garrick

> maciamo
> 
> my approach has to do with the modern thoughts of ancient thracian being slavonic speaking people from their beginning, or the slavian DNA is the I2 than R2?
> In the map of I2 and R2 we see areas that speak slavonic today and are dominant by that 2 Haplogroups,
> *I M NOT SAYING WHO GAVE THEM LANGUAGE INDO-EUROPEAN,*
> In the Thracian land we see Both I2 and E-V13, E-V13 is linked and most Greeks and Dardanian, now the change that according ancient Greeks the dardanians were semi illyrians semi thracians, and dacians were Geto thracians the most possble that ancient thracians were mostly celto-speaking and not Greco-speaking,
> I m not telling that thracians were Pure I2a2, or thracians found the indo-european,
> but probably the thracian nation was More % I and less E (E in greece is connected with achaic and dorian)
> Cause migration to minor asia is more with I % than E %
> ...


iapetoc
Your opinion corresponds to what is for me crystallized.

I think, *Slavic people are R1a carriers*.

And Slavic languages are originally languages of R1a speakers.

*Serbs, generally I carriers, are no Slavs*, and *Serbs once spoke another language*.

Maybe Vinca culture could help in researching the original I language, however the condition for that is Vincians were I carriers.

The key of understanding Balkan (and European) history is to find *original I language*.


For Albanians, it is obvious that the *Greek Illyria* and *Roman Illyricum* should be considered separately.

Roman Illiricum is the only official term that does not mean that the whole territory was ethnic Illyrian and that *all tribes of the Illyricum were Afro Illyrian origin*.

Official *Albanian history* and official web sites placed Illyrian tribes deep into the *Pannonian plain* and *Istria*, however, *Illiryans*, the holders of haplogroup *E*, when arriving *from Africa to the Balkans*, could not go that far to the north.

And personally for me Ragusa seems too north, I would say that the boundary line was around *the middle of today's Montenegro*, if you have a websites, sources and maps would be nice to post and we will comment.

----------


## iapetoc

ok middle crnagora but if Thracians Were Slavic and came from 1500 BC then how East roman empire realizes slavs around 500 AD its almost 2000 years


If WiKI IS CORRECT THEN PROBABLY i have combined that trhasian was not a IndoEuropean-slavonick lingua, 
I repeat only If wiki is corect its morning i posted tomorow

----------


## Yorkie

> Although Aimos peninsula is the Mixed, specially to south (Byzantnine-ottoman empire, and ancient Greek and roman douloi (worker-services, not sclaves), we see 3 major and one minor Y haplogroups,
> the 3 major are E (E-V13, E-M123) J2, I2a2, and the minor is G,
> The ancient Thracians was the 2nd Biggest Numerous nation after indians according Herodotus, the map approach gives almost same quantity for all in ancient Thrace but the biiger to inner Europe is I2a2,
> 
> if J2 has to do with Greece then what has to do with ancient thracians,
> then the around of ancient thracian area has to do with colonization and makedonian expand to east,
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pieres
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Thracian_Greeks
> ...


Not _all_ I2a2 is 'eastern'. The L161 positive, I2a2b-Isles was most likely founded on the north German plain. Its oldest clades have been dated to the Neolithic, and it has a small presence on the north European plain [Germany having most continental members] and in Britain and Ireland. It was brought to the islands by different waves of invaders from pre-Celts to Celts and to later Anglo-Saxons. I2a2b-Isles is absent in eastern Europe.

----------


## iapetoc

*Thracian origin*

A specific DNA mutation which emerged about 2,000 years ago on a rare haplotype is characteristic of the Pomaks. Its frequency increased as a consequence of high genetic drift within this population. This indicates that the Pomaks are an isolated population with limited contacts with their neighbours. The DNA tree line of Pomaks suggests the hypothesis that Pomaks are descendants of ancient Thracian tribes


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

well I think that this evidence can help us found which were the Thracians

----------


## Taranis

In my opinion, from what little of Thracian vocabulary is known, I would rather say that Thracian is rather a "northern" IE language (ie, akin to Germanic, Baltic and Slavic) and not a "western" IE language (ie, Celtic, Italic, Greek, etc.). However, just like with Germanic (which has a lot of Celtic borrowings and influence and is actually a Centum-IE language as a result), Thracian effective lay at the faultline of the language supergroupings and had characteristics of both. But, in any case, Thracian was by no means a Celtic language, nor was it a Salvic language for that matter.

----------


## Regulus

Some good points were brought up on this one. Linguists believe that the sole surviving remnant of the Thraco-Cimmerian subgroup is Armenian.

The group that came to be known as Armenians developed out of the southward migration of groups that fled from the Scythian assault on those that resided between them (Scyths) and the Celts of the Danube. Those that settled in Anatolia were absorbed by others over time. The Armenians were to maintain their identity until today. Through the last 2,500+ years they and their language have become influenced to a great extent by Iranians and their tongues as a result of Median, Persian, and Parthian domination, but the language base itself survives.
In looking for glimpses into what sort of IE subgroup the Thracians may have been, I would hold that the closest modern example would be Armenian.

----------


## iapetoc

in fact taranis we know that a % of thracian was simmilar to Greek before koine simmilar attic and slavic and persian

as example I give the same in another post Bull
Bulgarian Bol
GR makedonian Bolinthros
Attic Bolos
serbian Bik, Bik is baltic propably from 5th century
cause serbs and bulgarians and croats bosnans belong to the same group south slavic 
probably 5th century invaders did not reach Aegean Rodope area and these people were there isolated
although as Elias2 said in another post they could learn slavic at 700 by christianization
pomacs have a middle slavic idiom and dialect,
although they accepted many other languages
their primary is a kind of slavic bulgarian
in greece they are 40-60 % blond with blue eyes
and many of their customs reminds ancient assyria China 
the dress of the bride is simillar to godess Eorda Arda Hera
if a search of DNA exists the the predominant YDNA can help us find the I2 people
if they are R1a then R1a is connected with slavic language
but if they are I2 is the oposite

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp8iu...watch_response

watch 0:10
watch 1:14

the flower for bride around head was also in greeks,
attested to godess Hera (eorda arda)
But not the paint face, which I think is Asian 
the woman at minute 0:10 has something that reminds me persia

about armenian language I don't think so
cimerians are mainly connected with moschi west of pontic Greeks and castamone-u area
but cimerians exist in Epirus
as chimmerians for Greeks cristians
and chammerians for muslim albans

the blue eyes we know that was typical persian
But also could be connected with Cumans Kuman 
the blond hair are 3 in balkans
The e-V13 blond like dark honey wich is simmilar with Riffian berbers
and the yellow blond of that style
and the red-blond or russo rugo rosso west and north Europe

----------


## Taranis

iapetoc, please, could you write more clean/readable in the future? It's very difficult to read that.

In general: without a doubt, R1a vastly predates the origin of the Slavic languages and is much further spread than the Slavic languages (for example Scandinavia, the Baltic countries and northern India all have sizable quantities of R1a). However, the connection can be made between R1a and the Indo-European languages (though R1a alone wasn't connected with the spread of the Indo-European languages).

----------


## iapetoc

ok the problem is mentioned also in another posts

what YDNA is dominant in slavic language

mostly say R1a which is also Viking and Germanic
But south slavic have a language that many balkan Linguist consider that it is thracian,
Means that slavic language comes from ancient Thracians and not from 500AD invasions,
so these people I mentioned are considered ancient in Area more than 2000 years
(about 20 villages) 
A Ydna could help us solve the connection
if they have I2 dominant or R1a or something else cause Turks say they are Real Turks that came from west china, although gennetic proves other

By Finding their Dna we can Find if I2a is celtic or slavic 
cause these people consider not change language by 500 AD invasion
Am I understood?
If I am not plz send me mssge to what I am not clear

----------


## Taranis

> ok the problem is mentioned also in another posts
> 
> what YDNA is dominant in slavic language
> 
> mostly say R1a which is also Viking and Germanic
> *But south slavic have a language that many balkan Linguist consider that it is thracian,
> Means that slavic language comes from ancient Thracians and not from 500AD invasions,*
> so these people I mentioned are considered ancient in Area more than 2000 years
> (about 20 villages) 
> ...


That is nonsense. First off, as stated, just because people have the same Y-Haplogroup doesn't mean they spoke the same language. Secondly, onomastic evidence from antiquity clearly shows that the Thracians, Dacians and Illyrians - though all Indo-European speaking peoples, didn't speak Slavic languages and no Slavic language was spoken on the Balkans until the Migrations Period.

In any case I would not link specific languages and haplogroups 1:1, because that is rather problematic.

----------


## how yes no 2

> Secondly, onomastic evidence from antiquity clearly shows that the Thracians, Dacians and Illyrians - though all Indo-European speaking peoples, didn't speak Slavic languages and no Slavic language was spoken on the Balkans until the Migrations Period.


actually, there is too little words preserved to claim anything about any of those languages...currently assumption is that Illyrian was kentum IE, and that Thracian and Dacian were satem IE languages...

today in Europe satem IE languages are Baltic, Slavic, and Albanian languages...
so, linguistically, link between Balto-Slavic and Dacian and Thracian can be expected...

claim that no Slavic languages were spoken on Balkan till migrations period has not more basis than claim that Slavic languages were spoken on Balkan before migration period... there simply is no data....

----------


## Taranis

> actually, there is too little words preserved to claim anything about any of those languages...currently assumption is that Illyrian was kentum IE, and that Thracian and Dacian were satem IE languages...
> 
> today in Europe satem IE languages are Baltic, Slavic, and Albanian languages...
> so, linguistically, link between Balto-Slavic and Dacian and Thracian can be expected...
> 
> claim that no Slavic languages were spoken on Balkan till migrations period has not more basis than claim that Slavic languages were spoken on Balkan before migration period... there simply is no data....
> 
> besides, if you study PIE words...it is more or less Slavic language...other IE languages are much much further from PIE for most words... that is probably why it is often spoken of R1a as PIE people...


Actually, the claim that no Slavic languages were spoken on the Balkans until the migrations period is verymuch reasonable because what little Dacian or Thracian words are non-conformous with Slavic sound laws. I mean, sure, Dacian and Thracian were without doubt related with Baltic/Slavic (and probably moreso than with any other branch of IE), but that doesn't make them automatically Slavic. It's kind of the same as people claiming that *English* was spoken in Britain before the Anglo-Saxon invasions, or that there even was no such thing as the Anglo-Saxon invasions.

Regarding PIE words, they're not "more or less Slavic". Proto-Slavic (or Proto-Balto-Slavic) made A lot of innovations and changes from PIE, just like the other branches of IE did.

----------


## how yes no 2

> Actually, the claim that no Slavic languages were spoken on the Balkans until the migrations period is verymuch reasonable because what little Dacian or Thracian words are non-conformous with Slavic sound laws. I mean, sure, Dacian and Thracian were without doubt related with Baltic/Slavic (and probably moreso than with any other branch of IE), but that doesn't make them automatically Slavic. It's kind of the same as people claiming that *English* was spoken in Britain before the Anglo-Saxon invasions, or that there even was no such thing as the Anglo-Saxon invasions.


I don't claim Thracian and Dacian languages were Balto-Slavic... I claim they were more related to Balto-Slavic than to e.g. Germanic.... from what I read few preserved Thracian words seems to show cognates in Baltic languages




> Regarding PIE words, they're not "more or less Slavic". Proto-Slavic (or Proto-Balto-Slavic) made A lot of innovations and changes from PIE, just like the other branches of IE did.


yes, you are right there...
I jumped to conclusion there after looking few words ... like numbers and body parts...

----------


## iapetoc

> That is nonsense. First off, as stated, just because people have the same Y-Haplogroup doesn't mean they spoke the same language. Secondly, onomastic evidence from antiquity clearly shows that the Thracians, Dacians and Illyrians - though all Indo-European speaking peoples, didn't speak Slavic languages and no Slavic language was spoken on the Balkans until the Migrations Period.
> 
> In any case I would not link specific languages and haplogroups 1:1, because that is rather problematic.



as in Fuct Thracian words in Greek language have same root with many thracian
thracian was satem and connect Greek with ancient persian and slavic
probably if PIE was minor asian I people spoke an aryan language simmilar pelasgic (far ancient Greek-Latin, centum) and Persian that could be thracian connected with cimmerians in minor asia
the invasion of 500 AD could be a southern movement of I people or 
if I peole were Gaete goths I people language could be germanic
*there is a possibility that slavic language and alphabet made by cyrrill and method was also used to cristianization of Russians,*
that means that east -northern people were used to slavic language and cyrill alphabet just spread thracian

----------


## Taranis

> as in Fuct Thracian words in Greek language have same root with many thracian
> thracian was satem and connect Greek with ancient persian and slavic
> probably if PIE was minor asian I people spoke an aryan language simmilar pelasgic (far ancient Greek-Latin, centum) and Persian that could be thracian connected with cimmerians in minor asia
> the invasion of 500 AD could be a southern movement of I people or 
> if I peole were Gaete goths I people language could be germanic
> *there is a possibility that slavic language and alphabet made by cyrrill and method was also used to cristianization of Russians,*
> that means that east -northern people were used to slavic language and cyrill alphabet just spread thracian


Sorry. No. What speaks severely against this is that the Slavic language family is closer related with the Baltic languages than with Thracian. Plus, although scarcely attested, the Balts are attested by the sources in Antiquity. Specifically, a West Baltic tribe (that is, akin to the Old Prussians), the Galindians, are mentioned by Ptolemy in the 2nd century AD. In other words, the Baltic-Slavic split was complete by then, and without doubt, the Baltoslavic-Thracian split was even earlier.

----------


## iapetoc

> Sorry. No. What speaks severely against this is that the Slavic language family is closer related with the Baltic languages than with Thracian. Plus, although scarcely attested, the Balts are attested by the sources in Antiquity. Specifically, a West Baltic tribe (that is, akin to the Old Prussians), the Galindians, are mentioned by Ptolemy in the 2nd century AD. In other words, the Baltic-Slavic split was complete by then, and without doubt, the Baltoslavic-Thracian split was even earlier.


oh yeah
I gave you the bull before 
whatch more
remember r=l p=b=f=v t=d=th k=g=ch s=t
e->o e->i a->u u->o u->a and oposite

Pelasgic Bellekon white
Thracian- slavic Bello 
Greek ellekon-> lefkon
pelasgic Pelloros Big Huge
Thracian Velliko 
Greek pellorios 
pelasgic piosom drink
thracian piam
Greek pino -posome
pelasgic gerom up raise 
thracian gore 
greek egiro 
pelasgic perako i made i do
thracian pravyia pravgia
Greek prasso pratto but the result prak-sis
pelasgic ???
thracian ???
*slavic glagoliti*
*Greek glotta ->glotta glossa* glossario ->ss->g r->l glogali 
aeolin glossa is greka means ss-> k=g glossary -? glogari-ti
thracian ??? 
as you see connection of Greek with thracian and slavic is bigger
than german or baltic,
*it is possible that a thracian is protoslavonic since Pomaks never change languge for 2000 years*

can you explain that? 
seems thracian language is close to pellasgic aryan 
probably thracian is the mother of slavic and not baltic as western say
remamber thracian were the 2nd biggest nation in the world, in area that today is slavic language and if thracian are proto slavic I2 people are slavic and R1a are invaders of europe,
Remember letter R is a phoneental in centum language,
But it is unknown to germans and R1a people
they wwwwww instead of Rrrrrrrrrr
how they could say Thrace thwace?
no way


about galindians do you know their language?
when thay bacame cristians
Baltic belongs in R1a clear language,
but watch that,
In the 9th and 10th centuries, Christianity made great inroads into Eastern Europe, including Kievan Rus'. This work was made possible by the work of the Byzantine-Era Bulgarian saints Cyril and Methodius. When Rastislav, the king of Moravia, asked Byzantium for teachers who could minister to the Moravians in their own language, Byzantine emperor Michael III chose these two brothers. Cyril and Methodius translated the Bible and many of the prayer books. As the translations prepared by them were copied by speakers of other dialects, the hybrid literary language Old Church Slavonic was created. Originally sent to convert the Slavs of Great Moravia, Cyril and Methodius were forced to compete with Frankish missionaries from the Roman diocese. Their disciples were driven out of Great Moravia in AD 886.[69]
Some of the disciples, namely Saint Clement of Ohrid and Saint Naum who were of Bulgarian descent, were of great importance to the Orthodox Faith in Bulgaria, as St. Clement was officially the first Bulgarian Bishop. In a short time, the disciples of Cyril and Methodius managed to prepare and instruct the future Bulgarian clergy into the biblical texts and in AD 893, proclaimed the first organized Church on the Balkan Peninsula. The success of the conversion of the Bulgarians facilitated the conversion of East Slavic peoples, most notably the Rus', predecessors of Belarusians, Russians, and Ukrainians.[70]
The work of the Thessaloniki brothers Cyril and Methodius and their disciples had a major impact to Serbs as well.[71] However, they accepted Christianity collectively by families and by tribes (in the process between the 7th and the 9th century). In commemoration of their baptisms, each Serbian family or tribe began to celebrate an exclusively Serbian custom called Slava in a special way to honor the Saint on whose day they received the sacrament of Holy Baptism. It is the most solemn day of the year for all Serbs of the Orthodox faith and has played a role of vital importance in the history of the Serbian people. Slava is actually the celebration of the spiritual birthday of the Serbian people which the Church blessed and proclaimed it a Church institution.[72]
The missionaries to the East and South Slavs had great success in part because they used the people's native language rather than Greek, the predominant language of the Byzantine Empire or Latin as the Roman priests did.[73] Today the Russian Orthodox Church is the largest of the Orthodox Churches followed by the Romanian Orthodox Church.

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

Η αρχική τους προσέγγιση με τους Καυκάσιους Χαζάρους δεν απέδωσε αποτελέσματα οπότε και στράφηκαν στους Μοραβούς. Στη Μοραβία αρχικά αντιμετωπίστηκαν ευμενώς από τον πρίγκιπα Ροσιστλάβο και εκπόνησαν ένα νέο αλφάβητο βασισμένο στο ελληνικό, το Γλαγολιτικό ή Κυριλλικό, προκειμένου να μεταφράσουν στα σλαβικά έργα της χριστιανικής γραμματείας. *Η δράση τους ενόχλησε τους Γερμανούς ιεραποστόλους και οδήγησε σε δίωξη τους* και καταφυγή τους στη Ρώμη αποζητώντας την προστασία του Πάπα. Ο Πάπας τους δικαίωσε αλλά ο Κύριλλος, ήδη καταβεβλημένος, πέθανε στη Ρώμη και το βάρος της συνέχισης της ιεραποστολής μετατέθηκε στο Μεθόδιο. Ο Μεθόδιος, αφού χειροτονήθηκε επίσκοπος, επέστρεψε στη Μοραβία και δημιούργησε γύρω του μία ομάδα ιεραποστόλων, η οποία, όμως, μετά το θάνατό του (885) και παρά τη θέση του Επισκόπου Ρώμης υπέρ του εκδιώχθηκε από τη χώρα.
Συνεχιστής του έργου τους αναδείχτηκε ο Κλήμης Αχρίδος, του οποίου η δράση έφερε αποτέλεσμα στους Βουλγάρους με τη βάπτιση του ηγεμόνα τους Τσάρου Βόρις στα 869. Το 891 βαπτίζεται και ο ηγεμόνας των Σέρβων πρίγκιπας Μούτιμιρ, οπότε ταυτόχρονα το σερβικό κράτος μετατρέπεται σε χριστιανικό. Στη Ρωσία (τότε _Κράτος των Ρως_) ο Χριστιανισμός υιοθετήθηκε αρχικά από τη βασίλισσα Όλγα το 955, η πλέον όμως καθοριστική καμπή για τη χώρα ήταν η απόφαση του εγγονού της Όλγας, Μεγάλου Πρίγκιπα Βλαδίμηρου του Κιέβου, για θεσμοθέτηση της χριστιανικής ομολογίας ως επίσημης θρησκείας του κράτους το 988, επηρεασμένος από την άποψη μεγαλείου, που του μετέφεραν οι απεσταλμένοι του από την Κωνσταντινούπολη.
Η βουλγαρική Εκκλησία αναγνωρίστηκε ως Πατριαρχείο από την Κωνσταντινούπολη το 945, η σερβική το 1346 και η ρωσική το 1589.




http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%9F%...B2.CF.89.CE.BD



*If you read Greek you see that the Germans kicked away Cyrrill cause he spead new lalphabet instead of latin alphabet and spoke these people to their language,instead of Baltic and German*
*they teach them in their own people's language and not in the language of Rulers Germans or baltic*
*they had success cause they spoke in people language, and do not try to learn them german or latin* *first*
*german and baltic was imported to north slavs* 
probably slav people wre baltic but slavic language was more ancient, thracian



*remember that slavic people have bibble in their language 700 years before germans*


*the same alphabet and language was used to russians, in Kiev area not moscow 
*
*kiev has many I ydan people,*


*semms that I2 people spoke with thracian proto-slavic


*Κυρίλλου και Μεθοδίου.

konstantinos kai michail their names
Cyrill and method 

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


whatch min 0:18 area of thracian lands, it is today I2 Ydna people
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiZIn...eature=related

----------


## how yes no 2

> Pelasgic Bellekon white
> Thracian- slavic Bello 
> Greek ellekon-> lefkon


exactly




> pelasgic Pelloros Big Huge
> Thracian Velliko 
> Greek pellorios


Slavic Veliko




> pelasgic piosom drink
> thracian piam
> Greek pino -posome


Slavic "pio sam" = I was drinking
"pijem" = I am drinking
"pijan" = drunk




> pelasgic gerom up raise 
> thracian gore 
> greek egiro


Slavic gore = up





> pelasgic perako i made i do
> thracian pravyia pravgia
> Greek prasso pratto but the result prak-sis


Slavic 
"praviti" - to make
"pravio sam" - I was making
"pravim" - I am making




> pelasgic ???
> thracian ???
> *slavic glagoliti*
> *Greek glotta ->glotta glossa* glossario ->ss->g r->l glogali 
> aeolin glossa is greka means ss-> k=g glossary -? glogari-ti
> thracian ??? 
> as you see connection of Greek with thracian and slavic is bigger
> than german or baltic,


exactly, shared old arhaic words indicate living in close proximity in ancient times...




> can you explain that? 
> seems thracian language is close to pellasgic aryan 
> probably thracian is the mother of slavic and not baltic as western say
> remamber thracian were the 2nd biggest nation in the world, in area that today is slavic language and if thracian are proto slavic I2 people are slavic and R1a are invaders of europe,


exactly, that is what I claim all the time...
proto-Slavs were I2




> [B]semms that I2 people spoke with thracian proto-slavic


exactly, Garick might not agree but I agree that I2 spoke proto-Slavic...




> whatch min 0:18 area of thracian lands, it is today I2 Ydna people
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiZIn...eature=related


 excellent point, spread of I2 exactly matches area of influence of Thracians and related people...
but I would not exclude R1a from Thracian story...

I would add here historic document Russian primary chronicle from 1113 that states following




> After the destruction of the tower and the division of the nations, the sons of Shem occupied the eastern regions, and sons of Ham those of the south, and the sons of Japheth the western and the northern lands. Among these seventy-two nations, the Slavic race is derived from the line of Japheth, since they are the *Noricians, who are identical with the Slavs.* 
> *Over a long period the Slavs settled beside the Danube, where the Hungarian and Bulgarian lands now li*e. From among these Slavs, parties scattered throughout the country and were known by appropriate names, according to the places where they settled. Thus some came and settled by the river Morava, and were named Moravians, while others were called Czechs. Among these same Slavs are included the White Croats, the Serbs, and the Carinthians. *For when the Vlakhs attacked the Danubian Slavs, settled among them, and did them violence, the latter came and 
> made their homes by the Vistula*, and were then called Lyakhs. Of these same Lyakhs some were called Polyanians, some Lutichians, some Mazovians, and still others Pomorians. Certain Slavs settled also on the Dnipro, and were likewise called Polyanians. .....


http://www.utoronto.ca/elul/English/...selections.pdf

* note that in year 1113 Bulgaria is along Danube all the way to Vojvodina (north Serbia), and Vojvodina is in Hungary....
thus, this reference of living along Danube maps to Thracians + Scordisci + Pannonians

btw. Noricans (who are identical to Slavs according to chronicle) are Pannonians originally....




> The *original population appears to have consisted of Pannonians* (a people kin to the Illyrians), who, after the great migration of the Gauls, became subordinate to various Celto-Ligurians tribes, chief amongst them being the Taurisci, who were probably identical with the Norici of Roman sources, so called after their capital Noreia, whose location is, as yet, unknown.


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




> The *Taurisci* were a people who dwelt in the north of Carniola before the coming of the Romans (c. 200 BC)[1] According to Pliny the Elder, they are the *same people* known *as the Norici.*[2][3]


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

Taurisci is same tribal name as Thrace..
it is related to mount Taurus in Asia minor...


I do however think that Thracians and Taurisci were dominantly R1a (though mixed with I2a2)
while Scordisci, Pannonians and Veneti were dominantly I2a2 (with some R1a)

Note that Vindelici (who match location and name of Serbs prior to 7th century move to Balkan) are Veneti derived people



> However, according to a classical source, Servius' commentary on Virgil's Aeneid,[2] the Vindelicians were Liburnians, themselves most probably related to the Veneti.[3][4] (A reference in Virgil[2] seems to refer to the Veneti as Liburnians, namely that the "innermost realm of the Liburnians" must have been the goal at which Antenor is said to have arrived.) Thus, it seems that the ancient Liburnians may have encompassed a wide swathe of the Eastern Alps, from Vindelicia, through Noricum, to the Dalmatian coast.


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

and that Jordanes speaks of early Slavs as of Veneti race



> Within these rivers lies Dacia, encircled by the lofty Alps as by a crown. Near their left ridge, which inclines toward the north, and beginning at the source of the Vistula, the *populous race of the Venethi dwell, occupying a great expanse of land. Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes.* (35) The abode of the Sclaveni extends from the city of Noviodunum and the lake called Mursianus to the Danaster, and northward as far as the Vistula. They have swamps and forests for their cities. The Antes, who are the bravest of these peoples dwelling in the curve of the sea of Pontus, spread from the Danaster to the Danaper, rivers that are many days' journey apart. (36)


http://people.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/.../jordgeti.html

----------


## Taranis

*facepalm*  :Petrified:

----------


## Brennus

> The possibility *That Thracians WERE CELTS* rulling I is more strong than the 1 approach
> The linguistic probably has to do with the persian occupation
> the greek influence,
> The Roman occupation,
> The slavonization
> and the scythian and sarmates influence (probably slavonization) around Romania.
> 
> The possibility that ancient thracian speak Slavic or proto slavic language is an interesting idea, but i m not a linguist, the possibilty that they return east ....
> 
> ...


Didn't the Thracians speak a language related to Dacian and Illyrian?

----------


## how yes no 2

> *facepalm*


although my post looks contradictory to conventional simple minds who try to map one tribe from past to one nation of today, one language of today to one language of past, and one haplogroup to one tribe of past.....it is not....

Russian primary chronicle claims that spread along the Danube and also Noricans were Slavs... Jordanes says Slavs were from race of Veneti....Thracians use some clearly Slavic words that do not have even remote connection to other Europe languages... so it is possible that most of east Europe did also before speak languages alike today... why would that be so surprising.....


but that is not the point.... point is in origin of people which can be quite different from what person with mind fragmented in models based on cultures of today could imagine..... cultures and languages change easily... there was so many German speakers in USA that German was close to become key official language of USA,but is now hardly spoken in USA... latin derived languages spread over big chunk of world from little village in Italy...Celtic languages disappeared from big areas of contnental Europe...all that in last 1500-2000 years...


point is that most of people of east Europe origin from people of east Europe.... and that people who are now Slavic origin from Thracians, Dacians, Scordisci, Veneti, Pannonians, Scythians, Sarmatians... ...which doesnot mean they were all speaking Slavic or Slavic related languages.... but Thracians for instance probably were speaking proto-Slavic related language...

whatever all those tribes were speaking, they were mostly R1a and I2 mix..

and they extended along Danube from Black sea to Bohemia and Bavaria....
very likely this was I2a2 mostly south of Danube and R1a north of it....but also mixed to some extent... and I2a2 further from south of Danube along Black sea shores....

btw. keep in mind that in ancient Greece Thracians were considered most numerous people in the world... while later references talk of populous race of Veneti scattered among many tribes and nothing of Thracians...
why is it hard to believe that these were overlaping sets...

----------


## Taranis

I mentioned before, the Norici were Celts, there is zero evidence pointing in any other direction. There's, although few, Noric inscriptions which readily show that it was a Celtic language - and this is in addition to plenty of Onomastic evidence.

I2a2 is clearly of Paleolithic origin and certainly predates the emergence of the Slavic peoples by many millennia (according to Eupedia's genetics page, I2a2 appeared 6000 years ago).

The idea that the Slavic people originated on the Balkans somehow is ludicrous and without basis. As mentioned, the Slavic languages are closer to Baltic than they are to Thracian.

----------


## how yes no 2

> I mentioned before, the Norici were Celts, there is zero evidence pointing in any other direction. There's, although few, Noric inscriptions which readily show that it was a Celtic language - and this is in addition to plenty of Onomastic evidence.


some traces into past of south Slavic people seems to lead to Celtic people...
and Celtic and Slavic languages are quite different... 
but why is it hard to suppose e.g. existance of some Slavic speaking people with Celtic elite in Noricum and Serbia... or originally Slavic related people who were celticized... or other way around later.... languages and culture of people change...




> I2a2 is clearly of Paleolithic origin and certainly predates the emergence of the Slavic peoples by many millennia (according to Eupedia's genetics page, I2a2 appeared 6000 years ago).


I do not understand your point....
do you imagine there is Slavic gene that appeared when cultural group named Slavs appeared in written history under that name?


when I speak of I2a2 speaking Slavic I speak of period 600 AD...
my point is that there is bulk of facts indicating that Slavs who settled south Europe were dominantly I2a2 and that there are indications that spread of proto-Slavs was marked by expansion of I2a2 and that perhaps most proto-Slavic tribes were in that point of time dominantly I2a2....which does not mean there were in time snapshot 600 AD no non-Slavic I2a2 tribes, and no non-I2a2 Slavic tribes....
languages and cultures change... 




> The idea that the Slavic people originated on the Balkans somehow is ludicrous and without basis.


why?
Would you think it is more likely that Germanic people of today originated in Balkan, or Irish or Spanish or Italian? 




> As mentioned, the Slavic languages are closer to Baltic than they are to Thracian.


you mean Baltic is closer to Thracian than Slavic?

----------


## Taranis

> some traces into past of south Slavic people seems to lead to Celtic people...
> and Celtic and Slavic languages are quite different... 
> but why is it hard to suppose e.g. existance of some Slavic speaking people with Celtic elite in Noricum... or originally Slavic related people who were celticized... or other way around.... languages and culture of people change...


Frankly, a large chunk of the western Balkans was under Celtic influence from circa the 4th century BC onward, it's more plausible that this apparent influence stems from there, than it is claiming that the Norici were Slavic or Slavic-influenced peoples. Again, what little is known about the Noric language shows words that are readily identifiable as Celtic, quite similar to Gaulish.

Noricum was very close to the core of the former Hallstatt culture - it's utterly unreasonable to assume that the Norici were anything else but Celtic-speaking. Also, in the Roman period the Norici were renowned for the iron-working techniques (in fact, they even produced something quite akin to Damascus steel!). A few days back, I mentioned about the Celtic and Germanic names for "iron" - I think the connection between Hallstatt and iron-working should be obvious.




> I do not understand your point....
> do you imagine there is Slavic gene that appeared when cultural group named Slavs appeared in written history under that name?


No, but I was under the impression that you seemed to imply that I2a2 was somehow connected with the Slavic peoples.




> when I speak of I2a2 speaking Slavic I speak of period 600 AD...
> my point is that there is bulk of facts indicating that Slavs who settled south Europe were dominantly I2a2 and that there are indications that all proto-Slavic people were dominantly I2a2....which does not mean there were in time snapshot 600 AD no non-Slavic I2a2 tribes....
> languages and cultures change...


Why? We don't really know. There's also the possibility that I2a2 is a leftover on the Balkans.





> why?
> Would you think it is more likely that Germanic people of today originated in Balkan, or Irish or Spanish or Italian?


No. The Germanic peoples, in my opinion, originate in the Battle Axe Culture of Scandinavia (which in turn was an offshot of Corded Ware), which later received blendover from the Beaker-Bell Culture. Beaker-Bell was followed by the Nordic Bronze Age, and it's reasonable to assume that Proto-Germanic developed inside the Nordic Bronze Age.




> you mean Baltic is closer to Thracian than Slavic?


No. The Baltic and Slavic families are more closely related with each other than they are with Thracian. Notably, they have the mutation of PIE initial "Gh" to "Z" in common, but this is only one out of many features. I think that the case for the common Balto-Slavic family is one of the strongest for any major sub-branches in Indo-European (the other one would be probably Indo-Iranic).

----------


## how yes no 2

> Frankly, a large chunk of the western Balkans was under Celtic influence from circa the 4th century BC onward, it's more plausible that this apparent influence stems from there, than it is claiming that the Norici were Slavic or Slavic-influenced peoples. Again, what little is known about the Noric language shows words that are readily identifiable as Celtic, quite similar to Gaulish.


oh, I am not talking about cultural issues...
I am talking about Vindelici meaning 'white' and living in Bavaria-Bohemia area, and Serbs and Croats who were according to Byzantine emperor also called 'white' before arrival to Balkan, and living next to Frankia (Serbs in Boiki land whioch is as Bavaria and Bohemia word derived from tribal name of Celtic Boii), about Sorviodurum town in Bavaria-Bohemia area and Srby place names in Bohemia...

I am speaking of Scordisci as best candidate for Seneca's Serians who live around Danube and how in same time Serians in Caspian highlands match position of Serboi tribe....

I am speaking of Celtic Scordisci around Danube, and of first Celtic than Thracian Serdi who come to Thrace as Celtic from area of Scordisci but are later Thracian, 
I talk about Illyrian Chelidoni and Celtic/Thracian Serdi being neighbours in Balkan, and pre-Celtic IE Caladuni and Seurbi being neighbours in Iberia where Caladuni according to Scotish myth of origin arrived by ships from other end of Europe 





> No, but I was under the impression that you seemed to imply that I2a2 was somehow connected with the Slavic peoples.
> Why? We don't really know. There's also the possibility that I2a2 is a leftover on the Balkans.


I do not claim there was no I2a2 dominant tribes in Balkan before Slavic people...
what I note is that Slavic people today are mostly R1a and I2a2 and that it is widely accepted that R1a spread Slavic language and culture....
but in Balkan we have Slavic Montenegro and Hercegovina with few percentages of R1a, Slavic Serbs and Macedonians with 15% of R1a, non-Slavic Albanians of FYROM who never mixed with Slavs with 12%, Greek Macedonians with 30%... in same time R1a in Balkan seems to be ancient old compared to rest of Europe which indicates spread from Balkan and not into Balkan...
I2a2 on other hand is on Balkan typical for south Slavs, while the rest of their haplogroups is quite different...

in same time, we have R1a non-IE speaking Magyars, and most likely also R1a non-IE Etruscans...

in same time spread I2a2 correlates with location and directions of spread of early Slavs towards north, northeast and northwest, while R1a doesnot show that...

so, to me it is obvious that early Slavs were probably dominantly I2a2 people who spread into R1a people....

another indication...I2a* samples are found in locations that exactly match Adriatic Veneti and Britanny Veneti... now I2a2 didnot appear out of air..it came from I2a* and in same time 
and Jordanes speaks of race of Veneti that is scattered among many tribes...biggest of those tribes being Sclaveni and Antes...

so, yes, I am pretty convinced that spread of early Slavs is marked with I2a2...
which doesnot mean I2a2 was dominant only in Slavic tribes in 500-600 AD.... nor that it was necessarily originally proto-Slavic speaking...

----------


## iapetoc

> Didn't the Thracians speak a language related to Dacian and Illyrian?



there are 2 illyrias
Greek illyria 
and roman illyricum

for Greeks Illyria stops at half montenegroand above is adra sea (adriatic)

from romans greek illyria becomes epirus nova 
and Illyricum is from dalmatia to transylavania

ancients illyrians (Illyria)spoke centum Pelasgic Phoenician Etrurian and kind of proto Greek and some thracian
ancient Illyricum area was more thracian speaking

Daci are mentioned as Thracians or Gaete 
surely today latin was not their ancient language 

in fact gaete reach asian steppes as massagaete and Quenn Tomaris 
gaete are considered as part of thracians 

gaete could mean Goth 
or Greek Hgetai Ηγεται rulers-kings 
or persian achas (greek achaic)
and also non of the above

*as infact in Bulgaria thrakologist say that 30-35% of modern bulgarian is thracian*
*
Vrygian had word water as edu Greeks Udor illyrrian Uje
so a thracian word is Edu and Greek is Udo(r),
why not also Thracian the Vedu or Vudo or Voda* *and must be northern baltic* 

watch lettonian is Ūdens (Udor)
Simmilar Greek simmilar Vrygian thracian from 700 BC 

simply byzantines were romans and romans did not accept other language than roman language or Greek Koine

Pomaks people isolated in Rodope mountains did learn Greek did not learn Latin and suddenly in 800-900 AD learn a dialect from Bulgarian? sound little ....
they are the only that accepted islam and did not change Language, as Greeks of fallen Byzantines areas.

----------


## iapetoc

> Frankly, a large chunk of the western Balkans was under Celtic influence from circa the 4th century BC onward, it's more plausible that this apparent influence stems from there, than it is claiming that the Norici were Slavic or Slavic-influenced peoples. Again, what little is known about the Noric language shows words that are readily identifiable as Celtic, quite similar to Gaulish.
> 
> Noricum was very close to the core of the former Hallstatt culture - it's utterly unreasonable to assume that the Norici were anything else but Celtic-speaking. Also, in the Roman period the Norici were renowned for the iron-working techniques (in fact, they even produced something quite akin to Damascus steel!). A few days back, I mentioned about the Celtic and Germanic names for "iron" - I think the connection between Hallstatt and iron-working should be obvious.
> 
> 
> 
> No, but I was under the impression that you seemed to imply that I2a2 was somehow connected with the Slavic peoples.
> 
> 
> ...



then how you explain the Ιφιγεανεια εν ταυροις 
the tragedy of agamemnon daughter in Crimea Thracians the Taurians

in 400 BC Thracian was spoken in Ucraine
Then how you explain that thracian language exist in Troy 
and Greeks could understand some south west thracians but not other Thracians north east

how you explain that godess Artemis (Diana) was worshiped in Ucraine before even 1rst colonization

simply when romans came thracian tribes moved north of Danub got some Baltic influence as also spread some
and later return back.


simply modern slavic are a later thracian with Baltic elements that due to cyrill and methos was spread in all Thracian areas and Baltic,

as an example look at baltic word for God in esthonia lettonia -> is latin 
watch slavic Bog is cyrillic slavic east church
if Baltoslavic why baltic countries are not that much slavic?

I think thracian is the mother of slavic language

as the dorian invasion was an inner kings chance as the @[email protected] invasion was not from north but from south, as the Illyrian invasion was made from south to north,
as the slavic invasion was the return of the outer thracian due to R1a devastasion west and Huns movements,
as today africa and asia are peacefull devastating to europe

----------


## Taranis

> then how you explain the Ιφιγεανεια εν ταυροις 
> the tragedy of agamemnon daughter in Crimea Thracians the Taurians
> 
> in 400 BC thracian was spoken in Ucraine
> Then how you explain that thracian language exist in Troy 
> and Greeks could understand some south west thracians but not other Thracians north east
> 
> how you explain that godess Artemis (Diana) was worshiped in Ucraine before even 1rst colonization
> 
> ...


I don't see how any of that would conflict with the classical idea of the origins of Balto-Slavic, even though, to be honest, regardless of that I would consider some of these claims spurious at best.

----------


## iapetoc

> I don't see how any of that would conflict with the classical idea of the origins of Balto-Slavic, even though, to be honest, regardless of that I would consider some of these claims spurious at best.



then go ahead and read Hommer and the thracian kings
read eyripidis and _Iphigenia in Tauris

read books about pelasgic and thracian language,

_thomopoulos book _is a good start,_
_also find thessaloniki university philologic scholl about pealasgic and thracian_ 
and read a bulgarian thrakologist, *Georgiev is very excellent*
and ask the bulgarian ministry of culture

in fact thracians was the biggest nation as slavs today,

from illyricum to ucrane and from south poland to greece

watch carefuly
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thracian_language

most is slavonic

watch 
such as _balios_ = white 

in fact thracian had 2 dialects the daci and south Tracian,
thracians lived until kazakstan 
read Quenn tomaris
and compare with Mt Tomaros
you will realise then why Herodotus names Thracians bigger than Persians
2nd after Indians

and carefull about spucius
cause i might return it worse,

in fact today romanians bulgarians work hard
in Bulgaria they allready connected 30% of language with Thracian
and in Romania, they are are ready to connect Dacian with Upper Tracian

----------


## iapetoc

> I don't see how any of that would conflict with the classical idea of the origins of Balto-Slavic, even though, to be honest, regardless of that I would consider some of these claims spurious at best.


1rst Homer
2nd Eyripides
3rd Hesiodus
4 Aeschylus
5 Sofocles
6 Hecateus of Miletus
7 Hellanicus 
8......
9...
*
READ* 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelasgians


Vladimir I. Georgiev asserted that the Pelasgians were Indo-Europeans, with an Indo-European etymology of _pelasgoi_ from _pelagos_, "sea" as the Sea People, the PRŚT of Egyptian inscriptions, and related them to the neighbouring Thracians. He proposed a soundshift model from Indo-European to Pelasgian

*Read him* 
Read Bible
Iayan son of Ipaet (Japheth) dwell among Tharseis (thracians)
many of the pelasgic and thracian are still in Greek language
like virb αλοιφω etc
and besides PElasgian were Pure Aryans 
http://www.apologitis.com/gr/ancient/ellinas.htm

Look at the coins carefully, since you are German you will recon a shape known to all Germans. 

In fact the naval people 
Etrurians Pelasgians Phillistines Cypriots Troyans
and their desendans
Thyrssenians Illyrians Greeks-Ionians Palaistines Cypriots Greek Aeolians


since you call that spucius 
read st Cyrill Biografy 
who were baltic and who slavic, 

Find Thracian Language from Bulgarians who had the Minus influence from North Baltic
Find Thracian Language From Greeks, who should have the almost 0 influence from Baltic.

WHY THERE IS Quite ENOUGH QUANTITY THAT CONNECTS ANCIENT GREEK WITH THRACIAN AND TODAY SLAVIC???

SIMPLY ETRURIANS ALTHOUGH HAVE PELASGIC THEY WERE AWAY FROM THRACIANS,
SO ROMANS HAVE THE MOST LITLLE THRACIANS IN THEIR LANGUAGE,
IN FACT HOMER WHO WAS PELASGIAN FROM AREA OF LESBOS, AND SPOKE AEOLIAN A DIALECT THAT SOUNDS BARBARIAN TO OTHERS, Aeolians were PElasgic living Next to Thracians.

Find why Homer names dark Erebos (Non IE word) and 
why ?



THEN FIND WORDS LIKE ALOPEKIA (bold) IS THRACIAN
AS THE OTHER 

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

_balios = white odrysse Thracian = Bulgaria Today

THRACIAN SPOKE PROTO-SLAVIC,
AND THE MOST RELATIVE TODAY IS BULGARIAN DUE TO LESS GERMAN_BALTIC
or DACI - GAETE WHO CAN EXPLAIN A LOT OF REMNANTS,


OK TARANIS???
CAREFULL ABOUY SPUCIOUS NEXT TIME

CAUSE I MAY RETURN BACK SOMETHING MORE INSULTING

_A number of scholars have pointed to the many close parallels between Dacian and Thracian placenames and those of the Baltic language-zone (Lithuania, Latvia and East Prussia, a region where an extinct but well-documented Baltic language, Old Prussian, was spoken until it was displaced by German during the Middle Ages.[61] These Baltic parallels have enabled linguists to decipher many Dacian and Thracian placenames. Of the 74 Dacian placenames analysed by Duridanov in his 1969 essay, a total of 62 have Baltic cognates, the great majority rated "certain" by Duridanov.[62] To explain this, Duridanov suggests that proto-Dacian- and proto-Thracian- speakers were in close geographical proximity with proto-Baltic-speakers for a prolonged period in prehistory, perhaps during the period 3000-2000 BC.[63] Mayer ventures further, suggesting that Dacian and Thracian were what he terms "southern pre-Baltoidic" languages, presumably meaning either proto-Baltic or close descendants of proto-Baltic.[64] The partially satem characteristics of Thracian and Dacian and their similarities to the Baltic group suggest that an ancestral Thraco-Dacian people was settled in Dacia until part of it migrated into Thrace[65]

Although Georgiev proves and suggest that until Baltic Thracian language was spoken
But Later after 500-700 AD started the area to change to GermanoBAltic and losing its Upper Thrasian character to Baltic, the reason was invasions and New rulers class that had no conection with Thracian,

Remember Slavic had alphabet and Bible before Germans and BAltic,
*
So south Thracian and North Thracian could Be Proto-slavic* 

According to Georgiev, Daco-Moesian was replaced by Latin as the everyday language in some parts of the two Moesias during the Roman imperial era, but in others (e.g. Dardania (S. Serbia/N. Macedonian Rep.), Daco-Moesian remained dominant, although heavily influenced by eastern Balkan Latin.[68] The language may have survived in remote areas at least until the 6th century.[69] Thracian, also supplanted by Latin (and by Greek in its southern zone), is documented as still a living language in ca. 500.[

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

in fact words like Bog is not thracian cause we know from Phrygian that was Tiwa, Tios later after the remove from Balkans

REmamber river Γραννικος IN Phrygia was the boarder of Thracian Phrygia
Slavic word for Boarder is Granitsa (Granikos->Granitsa)
Vryges were Thracians 
so Taramis before write insulting about Me think.

Herodotus Thracians are 2nd nation in the world after India,
(meaning bigger than persia)
Greeks did not know China that well but they knew from area of Albion (England) to area of deeper Black sea and even more to massagaete and Quenn Tomaris,

----------


## Taranis

What you are chasing is a fabrication, an illusion.

Thracian is, in a nutshell, non-consistent with Balto-Slavic sound laws. End of story.

----------


## how yes no 2

> watch carefuly
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thracian_language
> 
> most is slavonic


well, not really... looking at words...
there is perhaps some connection but quite remote...mostly via PIE....
I find much much more relation in few preserved Illyrian words...
also ancient Tocharian has lot of very clear cognate words
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthr...117#post367117


Thracian
0 / 1 opekis "cap" - no match
0 / 2 asa A Bessian word for the Coltsfoot - no match 
0 / 3 *bol*inthos "wild *bull*" - no match
0 / 4 bria "town, settlement"	-no match 
1 / 5 *bríloun* "barber"	IE *bhrī-l - brijanje = shaving
2 / 6 bríza "emmer-wheat, rye"	riža = rice
2.5 / 7 - brynchos "guitar" - Russian brenčat "to play on a stringed instrument", but no all Slavic word
2.5 / 8 brytos, bryton, brutos, bryttion "a kind of ale made from barley"	- no match

3 / 9 deiza, disza, diza, dizos "a fortified settlement"	PIE *dheigh-, "to knead clay"	Greek teichos ("wall"), Avestan daeza "wall", Slavic zidati, sozidati, (po)dizati "to build" Rom zidi, English dough
is this really a match?

4 / 10 dinupula, *sinupyla (reconstructed from ms.), kinoboila (Dacian) "wild pumpkin" - dinja

4 / 11 embades "boots"	- no match
4 /12 génton "meat"	- no match
4/13 germe "warm"	PIE *gwher-, "warm"	Greek thermos, "warm", Hindi Gharam, "warm or hot", Persian gærm, "warm" - no match
4 /14 kalamindar "Plane tree" - no match
4 /15 kemos "a kind of fruit with follicles" -no match
4 / 16 ktistai (pl.) "Thracians living in celibacy, monks" - no match 

4 /17 *para*, pera, peron "town" Sanskrit "pura" city, Old Prussian pera "group" peroni "*parish*, community" - no match

4 /18 rhomphaia "a spear"; later the meaning "sword" is attested dialect Bul. roféja, rufija "a thunderbolt", Alb. rrufë; Latin rumpere "to break, tear", Old English reofan "to tear, break" -no match

4.5 /19 skálmē "a knife, a sword"	PIE *skolmā	Old Norse *skolm* "short sword, knife", Serbian, Bulgarian kama for dagger

4.5 / 20 skárke "a coin"	PIE *skerg "to jingle"	Old Norse skark "noise", Sanskrit kharjati "to creak, crunch", Serbian škripa krcka "creak, crunch", šarke old Serbian word for shiny
this is not match, let's be serious...

4.5 /21 spinos "a stone which burns when water is poured on it" -no match

5 / 22 *titha* from Diana Germetitha ("Diana of the warm bosom")	Olteanu (et al.?) interprets this lexical element as "bosom, breasts, tit(s)" ancient Greek titthos, "breast, *tit*", West Germanic *titta (id.), Latin *titia (id.), Albanian thitha "nipples", Bulgarian "tsitsa", "breast"
- *sisa* 

5 /23 torelle "a lament, a song of mourning" -no match

5.5 /24 zalmós, zelmis "a hide, skin"	PIE *k'elm, k'olm	German Helm "*helmet*", Lith šálmas, OPruss salmis "helmet", OSl šlĕmŭ, Skt śárman "cover" - šlem

5.5 /25 zeira, zira "tunic, cloak" (a type of upper garment) - no match
5.5 /26 zelas "wine"	PIE *g'hēlo	ancient Macedonian kalithos, "wine", Sanskrit hālā "brandy", Greek khális "pure wine", Russian zel'je "a fermented or witch's brew" -no match

5.5 / 27 zetraía "a pot"	PIE *g'heutr	Grk. khútra "pipkin" -no match
5.5 /28 zibythides "noble Thracians" -no match with that meaning



summary: I see stronger matches to Germanic e.g. bull, warm, helmet, titha, parish, skolm... already those 6 matches give score better than Slavic...


look Illyrian now
http://www.wordgumbo.com/ie/cmp/illy.htm

1/1 alt- (a stream) (in Altus - a hydronym)	- liti = to flow
2/2 barba- (a swamp) - bara 
3/ 3 bra' (brother! (vocative))	*bhra'te'r 'a brother' -brat
3 /4 brisa (husks of grapes) - no match
4/5 cleves- (famous) (in Vesclevesis - a personal name)	*kleu- (to hear, to listen), Latin clarus (famous), Greek kleos (fame) - čuven
4.5 /6 lugo- (a pool) - I saw this one explained with same word in Old Slavonic but cannot confirm as I do not know Old Slavonic... there is word 'lug' = grove

5/7 mag- (great)	*meg- (great) - widespread PIE word

6 /8 metu- (between) (in Metubarbis - a toponym)	*medyo- (medium, between) - medju

7 /9 oseriates (lakes) - Slavic *ozero (a lake), Lithuanian ez'eras (a lake) - jezero/ozero (Ozero in Russian and Ukrainian, jezero in south Slavic)

7.5 /10 plo- (strong, powerful)	- ploča = strong flat stone (e.g. made of concrete)

8.5 /11 rinos (clouds) -runo (fleece) 

9 /12 sybina (a spear) - Sibinjanin Janko name given to Hungarian knight Janos Hunyadi who was leader of people armed with spears... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hunyadi

10/13 tertigio (a merchant)	Slavic *türgü (a market), Lithuanian tirgus, Albanian trege" (a market) -trg = market, trgovac = merchant

10.5/14 teuta- (people, a tribe)	"European" *teutá- (people, a tribe), Oscan touta (a tribe), Gaulish teuto- (people) - ljudi = people, četa = group of people (used as military unit)

11.5 / 15 ves- (kind, good) (in Vesclevesis - a personal name)	*wesu- (good, kind) - veseo = cheerful

----------


## LeBrok

I found couple of muches of Thracian and Polish.

2.5 / 8 brytos, bryton, brutos, bryttion "a kind of ale made from barley" - (polish) bryja, a very dirty liquid.

4 /18 rhomphaia "a spear"; later the meaning "sword" is attested dialect Bul. roféja, rufija "a thunderbolt", Alb. rrufë; Latin rumpere "to break, tear", Old English reofan "to tear, break" - (polish) rombac, to cut wood.

----------


## Garrick

> exactly, that is what I claim all the time...
> proto-Slavs were I2
> 
> 
> exactly, Garick might not agree but I agree that I2 spoke proto-Slavic...
> 
> 
> 
> excellent point, spread of I2 exactly matches area of influence of Thracians and related people...
> but I would not exclude R1a from Thracian story...


Exatcly
Garrick does not agree.

Let me explain.

R1a and I are two completely different clans and they had once completely different languages.

After long-term coexistence languages ​​of the two clans were approached. 

Who is who picked up more should be explore my personal opinion is that the language I carriers used to be more different and this is what today Serbs speak the language closer to R1a.

----------


## iapetoc

How yes no 

remember that in Bulgarian Bolinthos is Bol
Gr Makedonian Bolinthros
Athenes Bolos

3 matches
4 Bulgarian _rid_ "promontory", Greek _ríon_ "id", Tocharian A _ri_, Tocharian B _rīye_ "town" matches
5 etc

18/32 of south thracian fits
18/32 has some coonection
we still don't know Northern Thracians Dialect and is difficult to find,

besides reading *Georgiev's* work you find more Thracian that exist in Slavic areas,
Remember that Thracians reach area bigger than we think today


*Sorin Mihai Olteanu*, a Romanian linguist and Thracologist, recently proposed that the Thracian (as well as the Dacian) language was a centum language in its earlier period, and developed satem features over time.[15] *One of the arguments for this idea is that there are many close cognates between Thracian and Ancient Greek.* There are also substratum words in the Romanian language that are cited as evidence of the genetic relationship of the Thracian language to ancient Greek and the Ancient Macedonian language (the extinct language or Greek dialect of ancient Macedon). *The Greek language itself may be grouped with the Phrygian language and Armenian language, both of which have been grouped with Thracian in the past.*

*Ivan Duridanov* publishes his _Ezikǎt na trakite_ (*The Language of the Thracians*) in which a number of Thracian words and lexical elements are given Balto-Slavic cognates and possible Balto-Slavic cognates. Using Duridanov's _Ezikǎt na trakite_ essay as his basis, in the late 1980s and 1990s the linguist Harvey E. Mayer claimed that the Thracian language was a Southern Baltoidic language. *There is no agreement on whether Thracian was even very close to Balto-Slavic itself, let alone agreement on which of the two it was closest to.*


*Now A CONTINENT IS CONQUERED FROM SOUTH TO NORTH,
AND FROM EAST WEST
ONLY WHEN CONTINENT IS FULL WE HAVE MIGRATION BACK
THE THRACIAN WERE SPOKEN FROM 6000 BC AND BACK
CAUSE PELASGIC YAVAN SETTLED IN THARSEIS (THRACIANS)
THRACIAN WERE SPOKEN FROM GREECE TO POLLAND
LATER WITH NEW INVASION SLOWLY NEW ELEMENTS ENTER
AND BOLINTHOS CHANGE TO VIK
UNDERSTAND THAT*

If Thracian were not Proto Slavic then It would be not that easy areas around Con/polis to speak Slavic incoming Language,
since R1a is not that Big (10-20%) and only 100 years *can give 3 generations not the time to change language total, as a Language with out alphabet before cyrill
simply cyrill bind more baltic than thracian in his bible so to satisfy some rulers* do you believe that 50-100 years are enough to change language, from incoming Slavic around Serbia
to an area outside Con/polis Byzantium?
how many they were?
and what about old people all dead?
and with no alphabet and teachers?
sound crazy,
simply thracian was a prot-slavic language, and at slavic invasions to south simply more Baltic elements came,
the difference was not that big.

*Huns also invaded Balkans Cumans Bardars Ungarians,
why their language was not spread as slavic?*

400 years of Turkish occupation and Greek language still exists and had 30 million speakers at 1922
*why Turks that ruled 400 years did not change languages as easily as slavic did?*
come on guys, open your eyes,
*Ezikǎt na trakite* 
Thracian was proto-slavic
in fact it was centum that slowly turn to satem and later bind with baltic and became slavic

open your eyes,
edu and udo in Greece Uden in baltic area no matter PIE that similarity is big than wassa-wattar with edu and aqua


Taranis go ask a Thrakologist, 
Thracian are connected with areas from krakovy to Greece and Albania to Russia
same area Slavic is spoken
only Romania kept roman
and Hungaria the hun
Even modern Greek are the Thracian Idiom of Ancient Greek koine (Thraco-byzantine dialect-idiom)
and a few Ionic that die today
_1955 Tsolakis Η θρακικη ως βαση της νεας δημοτικης (thracian dialect as basis to modern common Greek language)_

----------


## how yes no 2

> How yes no 
> 
> remember that in Bulgarian Bolinthos is Bol
> Gr Makedonian Bolinthros
> Athenes Bolos


keep in mind that Slavs that got name after Bulgarian elite rulling over them have assimilated previous inhabitants and took some words from them...

thus, local Bulgarian words are not good match for this research, only the ones spread among all Slavic people make sense to be used as argument about relation between proto-Slavs and Thracians......





> we still don't know Northern Thracians Dialect and is difficult to find,


north Thracian is likely very much more related to proto-Slavic as Triballi who lived north of Thrace were probably proto-Slavic tribe as I indicated on topic about Slavic people... 




> besides reading *Georgiev's* work you find more Thracian that exist in Slavic areas,
> Remember that Thracians reach area bigger than we think today


I am not sure they do....
think that early Greek historians when claiming Thracians are numerous did put in Thracians all nearby IE people...





> Sorin Mihai Olteanu, a Romanian linguist and Thracologist, recently proposed that the Thracian (as well as the Dacian) language was a centum language in its earlier period, and developed satem features over time.[15] One of the arguments for this idea is that there are many close cognates between Thracian and Ancient Greek.


perhaps J2b was first there... before R1a
I2a2 probably came with Slavs...
non-Slavic Bulgars probably brought some additional R1a...

so, ancient Thrace was probably J2b (kentum IE) + E-V13 + some R1a (probably satem IE alike to Iranian)
I am sure that proto-Slavic people were I2a2
read http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26341




> Ivan Duridanov publishes his _Ezikǎt na trakite_ (_The Language of the Thracians_) in which a number of Thracian words and lexical elements are given Balto-Slavic cognates and possible Balto-Slavic cognates. Using Duridanov's _Ezikǎt na trakite_ essay as his basis, in the late 1980s and 1990s the linguist Harvey E. Mayer claimed that the Thracian language was a Southern Baltoidic language. There is no agreement on whether Thracian was even very close to Balto-Slavic itself, let alone agreement on which of the two it was closest to.


Ivan Duridanov sounds Bulgarian name... I do not think it's easy for Bulgarian scientist to be neutral (not biased) regarding that issue.... comparable to how hard it would be for Albanian scientist to support anything than Illyrian origin theory... or for Greek scientist to support non-hellenic theory for ancient Macedonians...




> If Thracian were not Proto Slavic then It would be not that easy areas around Con/polis to speak Slavic incoming Language,
> since R1a is not that Big (10-20%) and only 100 years *can give 3 generations not the time to change language total, as a Language with out alphabet before cyrill*


it's wrong assumption that proto-Slavic spakers are R1a...
I think that R1a were divided between iranian dialects and non-IE speakers... I2a2 were probably original Slavic speakers... they originally lived more north - around Danube and in Noricum....

thracian could have been alike to Iranian...






> simply cyrill bind more baltic than thracian in his bible so to satisfy some rulers do you believe that 50-100 years are enough to change language, from incoming Slavic around Serbia
> to an area outside Con/polis Byzantium?
> how many they were?
> and what about old people all dead?
> and with no alphabet and teachers?
> sound crazy,


apparently, languages are changed much faster then we are ready to believe.... look at all latin derived languages... and can you apply same argument for Celtic areas...




> simply thracian was a prot-slavic language, and at slavic invasions to south simply more Baltic elements came,
> the difference was not that big.


same argument hold for Roman province of Illyria...





> Huns also invaded Balkans Cumans Bardars Ungarians,
> why their language was not spread as slavic?


it's not the same...
language is not spread by war, they are spread by culture and need to interact with environment....
warrior tribes are outnumbered and need to use words of subjugated tribes in every day life... so they switch language....
btw. wonder if Celts were such warrior tribe....
Thrace was Greek-Roman speaking in time of arrival of Slavs... most of previous people probably moved to safety of Byzantium and the Bulgarians of today origin mostly from Slavs who massively settled there, and from Hunnish Bulgars who rulled over them...
besides no detailed genetic sampling is done in Bulgaria....





> 400 years of Turkish occupation and Greek language still exists and had 30 million speakers at 1922
> *why Turks that ruled 400 years did not change languages as easily as slavic did?*


Turks never massivelly settled areas and mixed with locals....
they just collected money and army from Balkan...
there were attempts to make collonies...but those people were driven out after liberation.....
but in areas where Turks did massively settle (in Asia minor) they did largely replace previous languages (how much is Greek spoken in Turkey of today?)




> come on guys, open your eyes,
> *Ezikǎt na trakite* 
> Thracian was proto-slavic
> in fact it was centum that slowly turn to satem and later bind with baltic and became slavic


Thracians might have been related to proto-Slavic
but from preserved words Thracian does not look at all as proto-Slavic...
Illyrian or even Dacian would be much better candidate...




> open your eyes,
> edu and udo in Greece Uden in baltic area no matter PIE that similarity is big than wassa-wattar with edu and aqua


yes, water ("voda" in Serbian)
is very important word...very basic part of vocabulary of any language...
so, yes, that indicates some relation...




> Taranis go ask a Thrakologist, 
> Thracian are connected with areas from krakovy to Greece and Albania to Russia
> same area Slavic is spoken
> only Romania kept roman
> and Hungaria the hun


Magyar language is not Hunish
Magyars came there after Huns and Avars...
their language is same group as Finish...

----------


## sir_morphy

> so, ancient Thrace was probably J2b (kentum IE) + E-V13 + some R1a (probably satem IE alike to Iranian)
> I am sure that proto-Slavic people were I2a2


*nonsence* J2b indoeuropean language familly?!?!?
i thank you that gave to poor thracians a little R1a.

today romanian Y haplogroups di giacomo 2004 (for Romania)
haplogroup I 25%
haplogroup J 15 %
Haplogroup E 10%
Haplogroup R (R1a+R1b)= 45%
other (G, T) 5%

today bulgaria
E 12%
J 17%
I 36%
R 32%

today serbia
24% E
11% J
35% I
22% R

so 35% in Serbia (E+J), bulgaria 29% (E+J) and 25% romania (E+J). If 
someone belive you that thracians were E+J+some R1a may think that slavs were I2a+R1b+(some!!!!)R1a!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

nonsence from the first to the last word of you

----------


## sir_morphy

> Thracians might have been related to proto-Slavic
> but from preserved words Thracian does not look at all as proto-Slavic...
> Illyrian or even Dacian would be much better candidate...


Dacians were a thracian tribe who spoke *the same* ''thracian'' language or if u want a ''northern thracian'' language.

----------


## how yes no 2

> *nonsence* J2b indoeuropean language familly?!?!?
> i thank you that gave to poor thracians a little R1a.
> 
> today romanian Y haplogroups di giacomo 2004 (for Romania)
> haplogroup I 25%
> haplogroup J 15 %
> Haplogroup E 10%
> Haplogroup R (R1a+R1b)= 45%
> other (G, T) 5%
> ...


stereotypes without critical thinking from first to last line from you....

I2a2 was proto-Slavic there are many many very strong indications for that... non good reason for R1a being proto-Slavic except that majority of Poles and Russians opf today are R1a....

look at:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26341

it's another thing that it is not politically correct claim that most of today Slavs do not really origin from proto-Slavs

----------


## how yes no 2

> Dacians were a thracian tribe who spoke *the same* ''thracian'' language or if u want a ''northern thracian'' language.


there is absolutely no evidence for such a claim...
languages might have been somewhat related, but all we have from both are more or less location names and those are quite different.... e.g. -para ending in Thrace vs. -dava ending in Dacia and Moesia

----------


## sir_morphy

So who were thracians? Indoeuropean people. R1a or R1b. Who can say for sure? And they assimilate natives I2a+E+J. Of course those indoeuropean speakers impose their language to natives. Their language was satem or kentum? What we know is that all of them was conquered by Rome. All of them? What about free thracians (dacians) east of Carpathians mountains? What about those living in today western Ukraine? Were they thracians? All of them lose their language? What about today albanians? Ok Excluding albanians all thracians (or thraco-illirians) were at some point romanized. For sure two thing happened. Some of them prezerved romance language. I would say half of romanized thracians (today romanians and vlach from slavic countries). Another part switch language to a slavic one. If we can take away the slavic ''genetic admixture' from Balkans i think we can take a look at *pure thracian romanized people.* What was slavic ''admixture''? And how slavs change genetic map of Balkans? And how celts and germanic people change so called ''genetic map of Balkans or genetic map of thracians''? Too many questions and few people who can answer to those questions.

----------


## iapetoc

> look Illyrian now
> http://www.wordgumbo.com/ie/cmp/illy.htm
> 
> 1/1 alt- (a stream) (in Altus - a hydronym) - liti = to flow
> 2/2 barba- (a swamp) - bara 
> 3/ 3 bra' (brother! (vocative)) *bhra'te'r 'a brother' -brat
> 3 /4 brisa (husks of grapes) - no match
> 4/5 cleves- (famous) (in Vesclevesis - a personal name) *kleu- (to hear, to listen), Latin clarus (famous), Greek kleos (fame) - čuven
> 4.5 /6 lugo- (a pool) - I saw this one explained with same word in Old Slavonic but cannot confirm as I do not know Old Slavonic... there is word 'lug' = grove
> ...




2 barba - bara Greek Makedonia Barikos and *bara in area of Thrace Greece*
3 bra Greek Fra Frater = brother Phrater 
4
5 Luga Thracian Lago Porto Lagos in Thrace,Λαγος many Lagos in Greek Thrace
6
7
8
9 Ossa water falls in Thracian many areas with waterfalls were named as Ossa -kissav in Gr Makedonia and Thrace as even in minor asia Phrygian area

----------


## sir_morphy

> it's another thing that it is not politically correct claim that most of today Slavs do not really origin from proto-Slavs


what has to do with our theme?


i repeat question: where did you read that J2 were indoeuropean speakers?

----------


## how yes no 2

> So who were thracians? Indoeuropean people. R1a or R1b. Who can say for sure? And they assimilate natives I2a+E+J. Of course those indoeuropean speakers impose their language to natives. Their language was satem or kentum?


yes, I forgot that R1b is not negliglible in Bulgaria...
it might be Celtic or it might be part of Thracian marker...

Thracians language was satem
but Iapetoc mention some Romanian guy who claims it was originally kentum... this might be biased theory as Romanians like you are kentum speakers due to their ancestors being romanized.... so they like you want to show Thracians as Romanians...




> What we know is that all of them was conquered by Rome. All of them? What about free thracians (dacians) east of Carpathians mountains? What about those living in today western Ukraine? Were they thracians?


those are free Dacians...
not Thracians...
we can't be easy in putting equality between them as for all we know Dacians and Thracians are different unrelated people...preserved words from the languages are distant... nothing indicates same culture/language...

who do you speak about when you talk of west Ukraine?
btw. west Ukraine is also supposed birthplace of Slavs....
and Romanians cluster in genetic research with Serbs, Croats, east/west Hungary (not centar which was settled by Magyars), and central Ukraine
this indicates common origin for people living in central Ukraine, Pannonia, and Romania with Serbs and Croats...

I argue that proto-Slavs were Pannonians, Triballi and Veneti ( see http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26341) and that they were related to Dacians on one side and Illyrians n other... 

I think that in neolithic cultures ancestors of Dacians would be eastern linear pottery, ancestors of proto-Slavic people would be western linear pottery... and those cultures are related...




> All of them lose their language? What about today albanians? Ok Excluding albanians all thracians (or thraco-illirians) were at some point romanized. For sure two thing happened.


actually, all "proofs" you read on forums about Albanian language being same as Illyrian are just forum "proofs"....they do not hold as Albanian is completely alien to few Illyrian words whose meaning is preserved.
Illyrian is dead language, same as Thracian, Dacian, Hittite, Hunnic, Gothic, Celtic of Central Europe, and many many other languages...




> Some of them prezerved romance language. I would say half of romanized thracians (today romanians and vlach from slavic countries). Another part switch language to a slavic one. If we can take away the slavic ''genetic admixture' from Balkans i think we can take a look at *pure thracian romanized people.* What was slavic ''admixture''? And how slavs change genetic map of Balkans? And how celts and germanic people change so called ''genetic map of Balkans or genetic map of thracians''? Too many questions and few people who can answer to those questions.


there is abundance of indications that Slavic people were I2a2...
I did post them on topic http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26341
Romanians are romanized Dacians, Getae, Carpi and other people, but not Thracians...

----------


## how yes no 2

> what has to do with our theme?
> 
> 
> i repeat question: where did you read that J2 were indoeuropean speakers?


where did you read they were not IE speakers?
where did you read it is actually established as a fact who were carriers of IE language in Europe? there is just a bunch of biased theories...no facts at all...

especially in time frame when we can speak of Thracians even E-V13 is IE...

besides J2 are very very likely original Aryans 
(see thread http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26093)
that would make them in fact very likely original IE speakers...

----------


## how yes no 2

> 2 barba - bara Greek Makedonia Barikos and *bara in area of Thrace Greece*
> 3 bra Greek Fra Frater = brother Phrater 
> 4
> 5 Luga Thracian Lago Porto Lagos in Thrace,Λαγος many Lagos in Greek Thrace
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9 Ossa water falls in Thracian many areas with waterfalls were named as Ossa -kissav in Gr Makedonia and Thrace as even in minor asia Phrygian area


sure, but what is a proof that it is not all due to Slavic people?
btw. Luga and bra are probably PIE as you have lake and brother in english for example...


besides, there is area of Serrai/Serres in Greece thrace...that I relate to Serians (Serres are mentioned as nation dwelling upon mount Athos, but also as synonym for Serians in other places where they lived).... you know that in my theory Serians are proto-Serbs...

but were people of Serrai/Serres same in culture and origin as other Thracians? my guess is not.... if they were, that would imply that Thracians were proto-Slavic... but I think they were not...

----------


## willy

> The similarity between Thracian and Celtic languages R1b1b2a surely arrived in the region during the first waves of Indo-European incursions, mostly in the 3rd millennium BCE.


Both scenarios are on list about R1b1b2 : the neolithic or the upper paleolithic post glacial expansion from a southern eastern European glacial refuge thats the last scientific conclusion *actually* . May be R1b1b2 had spoken an earlier Indo European language during his expansion . Anyway I think (just an opinion) that the proto Indo European language is older than 5000 or 6000 years bp Some eastern migrations as LBK few Caucasian people G2a3 were also may be Indo Europeans in terms of language and spread it on the earlier R1b1b2 people in central Europe or on the Danube river area .

----------


## sir_morphy

> it might be Celtic or it might be part of Thracian marker
> 
> Romanians are romanized Dacians, Getae, Carpi and other people, but not Thracians...


first phrase: not to forget the over 20% percent of romanian R1b.it is a strong thracian marker. (i think) or northern thracian

second one:
hehehe.... the second phrase.. this is KGB theory. Impose to make origins of romanians only from dacians. That's because soviet union wanted to prove that people from Soviet republic of Moldova are a different nation and have different origin!! A close one to slavic people. And after ethogenesis of moldovan people from thracians and slavs came ''bad romanians'' who change their language!!
I thank you that you mention ''carpi and other people''!!

----------


## how yes no 2

> first phrase: not to forget the over 20% percent of romanian R1b.it is a strong thracian marker. (i think) or northern thracian


I would not bet on R1b being Thracian marker...
thing is Romanians speak latin derived language because there was enough people from Roman empire who settled the area... many of them were likely R1b....

another source of R1b are Celtic people who were more or less present throughout Europe...

and let me add that Romania was home to many tribes during migration period, so any of those people could have brought some R1b...





> second one:
> hehehe.... the second phrase.. this is KGB theory. Impose to make origins of romanians only from dacians. That's because soviet union wanted to prove that people from Soviet republic of Moldova are a different nation and have different origin!! A close one to slavic people. And after ethogenesis of moldovan people from thracians and slavs came ''bad romanians'' who change their language!!
> I thank you that you mention ''carpi and other people''!!


when you show me proof that Dacians were Thracians I can accept that...
until there is a proof or very strong set of indications, I consider them different people.... especially because from little that we know abouyt their languages, we know that they named towns quite differently... 

well it is not really about Moldavians...
Romanians in general are very related to Slavic people....
generally, in researches Romanians cluster best with people from Serbia and Bosnia ... thus, with Serbs...
and Serbs are original Slavs according to some historians (e.g. Shafarik)... and Serbs are I2a2 dominant people...

----------


## sir_morphy

> where did you read they were not IE speakers?
> where did you read it is actually established as a fact who were carriers of IE language in Europe? there is just a bunch of biased theories...no facts at all...
> 
> especially in time frame when we can speak of Thracians even E-V13 is IE...
> 
> besides J2 are very very likely original Aryans 
> (see thread http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26093)
> that would make them in fact very likely original IE speakers...


J2 oryginal aryans? im speachless... !!!!!!!!!!!!

----------


## how yes no 2

> J2 oryginal aryans? im speachless... !!!!!!!!!!!!


J2 spread matches very nicely known locations of Indo-Aryans in Asia... it is also very present in India highest caste but not in lower castes... R1a is present in both high and low castes... and R1a spread show match with later Indo-Scythians..
so, why would J2 not be marker of Indo-Aryans?





> hehehe.... the second phrase.. this is KGB theory.


lol, I find it hilarious whenever I see how Romanians are well trained to blame Russians for everything.... btw. there was similar mass-media produced anti-Serb brain conditioning for masses in west Yugoslavia in years before war... so, don't be surprised if Romanians, together with Poles end up as land forces fighting Russians....

----------


## sir_morphy

> when you show me proof that Dacians were Thracians I can accept that...
> until there is a proof or very strong set of indications, I consider them different people.... especially because from little that we know about their languages, we know that they named towns quite differently...


herodotus "getae are the bravest between the thracians"

dio cassius: getae and dacians are the same people. romans called them dacians and greeks called them getae. he also said that getaes lived north of haemus mountains and along the danube (north and south)

and people from dionysopolis name kingdom of Burebista "Thracia" 

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

satisfied?

----------


## how yes no 2

> herodotus "getae are the bravest between the thracians"
> 
> dio cassius: getae and dacians are the same people. romans called them dacians and greeks called them getae. he also said that getaes lived north of haemus mountains and along the danube (north and south)
> 
> and people from dionysopolis name kingdom of Burebista "Thracia" 
> 
> http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burebista
> 
> satisfied?


no...
I want links to actual sentences...
if it is correct, it is not difficult to find...
many ancient texts are online now...

----------


## sir_morphy

> J2 spread matches very nicely known locations of Indo-Aryans in Asia... it is also very present in India highest caste but not in lower castes... R1a is present in both high and low castes... and R1a spread show match with later Indo-Scythians..
> so, why would J2 not be marker of Indo-Aryans?


... wikipedia information = zero


j2 is found also in iran 
who can have relatives from susa or pasargade, poor dravidians?

----------


## sir_morphy

> no...
> I want links to actual sentences...
> if it is correct, it is not difficult to find...
> many ancient texts are online now...


 i have a life
i dont need to prove you anything
end of story and discution with you
http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getae

----------


## how yes no 2

> i have a life
> i dont need to prove you anything
> end of story and discution with you
> http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getae


ok, well, from link you sent:



> Strabo, one of the first ancient sources to mention both, stated that Dacians lived in the western parts of Dacia, "towards Germany and the sources of the Danube", while Getae in the eastern parts, towards the Black Sea, both south and north of the Danube. The ancient geographer also wrote that the Dacians and Getae spoke the same language, after stating the same about Getae and Thracians.[1]


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

let's see:




> 2 *Now the Greeks used to suppose that the Getae were Thracians; and the Getae lived on either side the Ister, as did also the Mysi, these also being Thracians and identical with the people who are now called Moesi;* from these Mysi sprang also the Mysi who now live between the Lydians and the p177Phrygians and Trojans. And the Phrygians themselves are Brigians, a Thracian tribe, as are also the Mygdonians, the Bebricians, the Medobithynians,*59* the Bithynians, and the Thynians, and, I think, also the Mariandynians. These peoples, to be sure, have all utterly quitted Europe, but the Mysi have remained there. And Poseidonius seems to me to be correct in his conjecture that *Homer designates the Mysi in Europe* (I mean those in Thrace) when he says, "But back he turned his shining eyes, and looked far away towards the land of the horse-tending Thracians, and of the Mysi, hand-to‑hand fighters"*60* for surely, if one should take Homer to mean the Mysi in Asia, the statement would not hang together. Indeed, when Zeus turns his eyes away from the Trojans towards the land of the Thracians, it would be the act of a man who confuses the continents and does not understand the poet's phraseology to connect with Thrace the land of the Asiatic Mysi, who are not "far away," but have a common boundary with the Troad and are situated behind it and on either side of it, and are separated from Thrace by the broad Hellespont; for "back he turned" generally*61* means "to the rear," and he who transfers his gaze from the Trojans to the people who are either in the rear of the Trojans 296or p179on their flanks, does indeed transfer his gaze rather far, but not at all "to the rear."*62* Again, the appended phrase*63* is testimony to this very view, because the *poet connected with the Mysi the "Hippemolgi" and "Galactophagi" and "Abii," who are indeed the wagon-dwelling Scythians and Sarmatians.* *For at the present time these tribes, as well as the Bastarnian tribes, are mingled with the Thracians* (more indeed with those outside the Ister, but also with those inside). *And mingled with them are also the Celtic tribes — the Boii, the Scordisci, and the Taurisci.* However, the Scordisci are by some called "Scordistae"; and the Taurisci are called also "Ligurisci"*64* and "Tauristae."*65*
> ...
> 
> 12 But there is also another division of the country which has endured from early times, for some of the people are called Daci, whereas others are called Getae — *Getae, those who incline towards the Pontus and the east, and Daci, those who incline in the opposite direction towards Germany and the sources of the Ister.* The *Daci,* I think, were *called Daï in early times; whence the slave names "Geta" and "Daüs"**156** which prevailed among the Attic people*; for this is more probable than that "Daüs" is from those Scythians who are called "Daae,"*157* for they live far away in the neighbourhood of Hyrcania, and it is not reasonable to suppose that slaves were brought into Attica from there; for the Attic people were wont either to call their slaves by the same names as those of the nations from which they were brought (as "Lydus" or "Syrus"), or addressed them by names that were prevalent in their countries (as "Manes" or else "Midas" for the Phrygian, or "Tibius" for the Paphlagonian). But though the *tribe was raised to such a height by Boerebistas, it has been completely humbled by its own seditions and by the Romans; nevertheless, they are capable, even to‑day, of sending forth an army of forty thousand men.* p215 13 The Marisus River flows through their country into the Danuvius,*158* on which the Romans used to convey their equipment for war; the "Danuvius" I say, for so they used to call the upper part of the river from near its sources on to the cataracts, I mean the part which in the main flows through the country, of the Daci, 305although they give the name "Ister" to the lower part, from the cataracts on to the Pontus, the part which flows past the country of the Getae. *The language of the Daci is the same as that of the Getae.* Among the Greeks, however, the *Getae are better known because the migrations they make to either side of the Ister are continuous, and because they are intermingled with the Thracians and Mysians*. And also the tribe of the *Triballi, likewise Thracian*, has had this same experience, for it has admitted migrations into this country, because the neighbouring peoples force them*159* to emigrate into the country of those who are weaker; that is, the Scythians and Bastarnians and Sauromatians on the far side of the river often prevail to the extent that they actually cross over to attack those whom they have already driven out, and some of them remain there, either in the islands or in Thrace, whereas those*160* on the other side are generally overpowered by the Illyrians. Be that as it may, although the *Getae and Daci once attained to very great power, so that they actually could send forth an expedition of two hundred thousand men, they now find themselves reduced to as few as forty thousand*, and they have come *close to the point of yielding* obedience *to the Romans*, though as yet p217they are *not absolutely submissive, because of the hopes which they base on the Germans*, who are enemies to the Romans.


http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...trabo/7C*.html

so, Getae are Thracians, speak same language as Dacians... but Dacians live toward Germans and Getae towards Black sea... designation Thracians may easily be about people living in area called Thrace... no data is given about whether language of Thracians and Dacians or Thracians and Getae is same...

Dacians in time of Strabo are much weaker (can gather 40000 soldiers) than in time of Burebista (could gather 200 000 soldiers)...not completely subdued, as they lay their hopes in *Germans....*

interesting is that Germans call themselves Deutch and in Dutch language Germans are Duits...
is it conceivable that tribal names Deutch/Dutch/Duits, are related to Dacian tribal name?
worth noting is that R1b is key haplogroup in Germany, while haplogroup I is somewhat less common...
another peculiar similarity of tribal names is Getae and Goths
now if Getae are Dacians, and Goths are Germans(Deutch) this is bit too much for coincidence...
much later Jordanes claims that Getae are same people as Goths...




> 33) In the land of Scythia to the westward dwells, first of all, the race of the *Gepidae*, surrounded by great and famous rivers. For the *Tisia flows through it on the north and northwest, and on the southwest is the great Danube.* On the east it is cut by the Flutausis, a swiftly eddying stream that sweeps whirling into the Ister's waters. (34) Within these rivers lies *Dacia, encircled by the lofty Alps as by a crown.* *Near their left ridge, which inclines toward the north, and beginning at the source of the Vistula, the populous race of the Venethi dwell, occupying a great expanse of land. Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes.* (35) The abode of the Sclaveni extends from the city of Noviodunum and the lake called Mursianus to the Danaster, and northward as far as the Vistula. They have swamps and forests for their cities. The* Antes, who are the bravest of these peoples dwelling in the curve of the sea of Pontus, spread from the Danaster to the Danaper*, rivers that are many days' journey apart. (36) But on the shore of Ocean, where the floods of the river Vistula empty from three mouths, the *Vidivarii dwell, a people gathered out of various tribes*. Beyond them the *Aesti, a subject race*, likewise hold the shore of Ocean. To the south dwell the *Acatziri, a very brave tribe ignorant of agriculture*, who subsist on their *flocks and by hunting*. (37) Farther away and *above the Sea of Pontus are* the abodes of the *Bulgares*, well known from the *wrongs done to them by reason of our oppression*. From this region the *Huns,* like a fruitful *root of bravest races*,* sprouted into two hordes of people*. Some of these are called *Altziagiri*, others *Sabiri*; and they have different dwelling places. The Altziagiri are near Cherson, where the avaricious traders bring in the goods of Asia. In summer they range the plains, their broad domains, wherever the pasturage for their cattle invites them, and betake themselves in winter beyond the Sea of Pontus. Now the *Hunuguri* are known to us from the fact that they *trade in marten skins*. But they have been cowed by their bolder neighbors.
> 
> 38) We read that *on their first migration the Goths dwelt in the land of Scythia near Lake Maeotis*. On the *second migration* they went to *Moesia, Thrace and Dacia*, and after their *third* they dwelt *again in Scythia, above the Sea of Pontus*. Nor do we find anywhere in their written records legends which tell of their subjection to slavery in Britain or in some other island, or of their redemption by a certain man at the cost of a single horse. Of course if anyone in our city says that the Goths had an origin different from that I have related, let him object. For myself, I prefer to believe what I have read, rather than put trust in old wives' tales.
> (39) To return, then, to my subject. The aforesaid *race of which I speak is known to have had Filimer as king* while they remained in their first home in Scythia near Maeotis. *In their second home,* that is *in the countries of Dacia, Thrace and Moesia, Zalmoxes reigned*, whom many writers of annals mention as a man of remarkable learning in philosophy. Yet even before this they had a learned man Zeuta, and after him Dicineus; and the third was Zalmoxes of whom I have made mention above. Nor did they lack teachers of wisdom. (40) Wherefore the Goths have ever been wiser than other barbarians and were nearly like the Greeks, as Dio relates, who wrote their history and annals with a Greek pen. He says that those of noble birth among them, from whom their kings and priests were appointed, were called first Tarabostesei and then Pilleati. Moreover so highly were the Getae praised that Mars, whom the fables of poets call the god of war, was reputed to have been born among them. Hence Virgil says:
> "Father Gradivus rules the Getic fields." (41) Now *Mars has always been worshipped by the Goths with cruel rites, and captives were slain as his victims. They thought that he who is the lord of war ought to be appeased by the shedding of human blood.* To him they devoted the first share of the spoil, and in his honor arms stripped from the foe were suspended from trees. And they had more than all other races a deep spirit of religion, since the worship of this god seemed to be really bestowed upon their ancestor.


http://people.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/.../jordgeti.html

now, Huns as bravest race... one of two Hunish people Sabiri, other Altziagiri...
alziagiri is coin word altzia+ Giri...Giri is possibly about Hurians...Altzia could be about place name or side of world in some language...

thus, Hunish are again Serian/Hurian pair, same as earlier Germanic Sciri/Hirri, Celtic Scordisci / Helvetti, and last Slavic Serbs / Croats.... interestingly those tribe pairs are mentioned in different times... first Celtic pair, than Germanic pair, than Hunnish pair, than Slavic pair....

Hunu*guri* are known for trading with marten skin...
Croats are known to have traded with marten skin in ancient times...
their money is now called kuna = marten
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croatian_kuna



back to Strabo:

Zalmoxes is religious leader of Dacians in times of Burebista



Moesi and Tribali are also Thracians... 
Moesi are Thracians who live intermingled with Thracians (?), but also with *Sarmatians, Scytians and Celtic* people (Boii, Scordisci and Taurisci)... intermingled probably means that in Moesia (along Danube) there are settlements of all of those people all over Moesia without clear teritory borders.... this is possible as Moesians are peaceful, religious people....

btw. Moesi are vegetarians!



> 3 Poseidonius goes on to say of the Mysians that in accordance with their religion they abstain from eating any living thing, and therefore from their flocks as well; and that they use as food honey and milk and cheese, living a peaceable life, and for this reason are called both "god-fearing" and "capnobatae";*66*


http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/7C*.html

----------


## iapetoc

sory

dacos = wolf Δακος Dagkono Δαγκωνω = i Bite, i tear flesh using teeth, I eat meat
Lykos is the Greek World for wolf but also Δακος means wolf

Daci = wolf people, simmilar Lycan if Lycan comes from Greek Lykos and not Λουσιος Lucian (water bath) (c as k or c as ts)

I don't know in which language it is (ancient lingua)
but insect @Dacus [email protected] means @olives wolf [email protected]

Tauriski Ταυρισκοι is the area around Crimea peninsula,
Tauriski means Bull = cattle people 
remember a great hero with name Thrax (Tyras - (thor) lived in that area

,

----------


## zanipolo

> Sorry. No. What speaks severely against this is that the Slavic language family is closer related with the Baltic languages than with Thracian. Plus, although scarcely attested, the Balts are attested by the sources in Antiquity. Specifically, a West Baltic tribe (that is, akin to the Old Prussians), the Galindians, are mentioned by Ptolemy in the 2nd century AD. In other words, the Baltic-Slavic split was complete by then, and without doubt, the Baltoslavic-Thracian split was even earlier.


So, do you agree with A. Paabo theory/papers ( january 2011) that the finnic language ( not uralic-finnic ) infested the black sea area around 2000BC ,. He goes on to bascially say , this finnic language was used as a trading language ( lingua franca) and eventually was the language of the venetic. 
This finnic was used also by by aesti in the baltic sea and the cimbri in jutland. 
Also confirmed by another - Felice Vinci in his book The baltic origins of homers epic tales. More of a migratory/trading book than a "homeric" book

In regards to the old prussians, did'nt they use Suebi language

----------


## iapetoc

well i will stay in how yes no post about capnobatai 3 66

smoke walkers, or carbon walkers or pyrobatai




Greece





Bulgaria,

who knows where else existed,

why St Constandine and Helen?
may be not to be punished from Christians?

why they sacrifice a bull that day? tavros

----------


## Taranis

> So, do you agree with A. Paabo theory/papers ( january 2011) that the finnic language ( not uralic-finnic ) infested the black sea area around 2000BC ,. He goes on to bascially say , this finnic language was used as a trading language ( lingua franca) and eventually was the language of the venetic.


It's the first time I hear this, and frankly, none of this makes any sense. What do you mean by "Finnic" if not "Uralic-Finnic"?  :Weird: 

We do not know what languages the Baltic "Venedi" spoke, but there is this: consider that "Venedi" was, with high probability, a Germanic *exonym* for the peoples living towards their east, and that the Venedi didn't constitute a coherent ethnolinguistic group (though it stands to reason that they were - with high likelihood - Baltic- and Slavic-speaking peoples). Indeed, much later, during early medieval ages, the term "Wends" is collectively used for a variety of West Slavic peoples who refer to themselves by completely different names. For a comparison, take a look at the Germanic word "Walha-" (foreigner), which can be today found in place names like "Wales", "Wallonia" and "Wallachia". Does it mean that because they have the similar name the Welsh, Walloons and Wallachians must speak the same language?




> This finnic was used also by by aesti in the baltic sea and the cimbri in jutland.


The Cimbri, in my opinion, spoke the Pre-Germanic Language outlined here in this thread.




> Also confirmed by another - Felice Vinci in his book The baltic origins of homers epic tales. More of a migratory/trading book than a "homeric" book


Why should they be Baltic? It seems kind of unlikely. Apart from amber trade, the ancient Greeks had no contact to the Baltic region. It seems very sensationalistic and implausible to suggest the Homeric tales originated in the Baltic.




> In regards to the old prussians, did'nt they use Suebi language


No.

What, in your opinion, was this "Suebi language"? The Suebi were a bewildering group of Germanic peoples *in Antiquity*, living along the Elbe river, who spoke Germanic. Parts of them moved into Galicia during the migrations period, while others became part of the Alemanni and moved to southern Germany - the name "Swabia" ("Schwaben" in German) is derived from them.

In contrast, the Old Prussians are well-known to have spoken a Baltic language. During the medieval ages (specifically, the Northern Crusades), the Prussians were conquered by the Teutonic Order. In the subsequent centuries, the Prussians were gradually Germanized - though, the Old Prussian language itself lingered to the 17th or 18th century. The East Prussian dialect of German (which in itself is now virtually extinct) also inherited a fair number of vocabulary from Old Prussian.

----------


## LeBrok

Great explanation Taranis. Information about Baltic Veneti makes perfect sense.

----------


## how yes no 2

> I
> For a comparison, take a look at the Germanic word "Walha-" (foreigner), which can be today found in place names like "Wales", "Wallonia" and "Wallachia". Does it mean that because they have the similar name the Welsh, Walloons and Wallachians must speak the same language?


actually, they did speak same language...
word is related to areas and people where populations spoke reminders of latin based languages ... in some cases latin language was lost but name stayed (e.g. in Wales which used to be stronghold of Roman empire with many settlements of latin speakers)...

equivalent in Slavic languages is "Vlah".. 
word is used in medieval Russian primary chronicle to denote invaders that in fact were latin speakers who were spreading borders of Roman empire... there are "Vlah" villages throughout Balkan - in Serbia, Macedonia, Greece, Albania... there were some in Croatia till 18th century... big chunk of what is now Romania used to carry name Wallachia


as for languages of Suebi, Cimbri, Veneti... those are all more or less likely assumptions...

Suebi are very likely to have spoken some variant of Germanic language, as 'Schwaben'' represent clear continuity of tribal name and this tribal name is often used for all Germanic people.... (e.g. in Slavic lands Germans = Schwaben which tells us that key Germanic people that Slavs knew the best were Suebi...this speaks about possible locations of proto-Slavs that coincide more or less with known Vistula and Baltic Veneti locations)

though I am confused with the North sea being called Germanic sea and in same time the Baltic sea being called Suebic sea .. actually this was in times when Veneti/Venedi are mentioned on Baltic... if Germani = Schwaben = Suebi why one sea being Germanic and other one just next to it being Suebic? 

what if Suebi were I1 people and original Germani were more R1b people or mix of R1b and I? afterall it is suggested in historical sources that word German came to existence in order to identify original Celts... though I keep thinking that it has something to do with province of Kerman/Germania in Persia that had meaning *battle/bravery* and haplogroup I because mention of Gomer people matches island of I2a in Cappadocia Asia minor and those people were later called white Syrians......

Gomer ancestors of Germanic people gave in Asia minor Cimmerians (proposed ancestors of Cimbri) and interestingly that area is I2a island now...tribal name of Cimmerians is related to word gimmri = *hero*

in my opinon Gomer = Cimmerians = Serians = Zeruiani whose land according to manuscript of Bavarian geographer was so big that all Slavs origin from them..
note that tribal name Serians may be related to iranian ser/sar = *head*, zerre/zærdæ = *heart*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_languages
also 'suras ‘*strong, brave; a hero*’ [Old-Ind. súra-h ‘a *hero, a warrior’*, Avest. súra- ‘brave, courageous; a hero’].
http://www.wordgumbo.com/ie/cmp/thra.htm


another confusing point is that Srbi (Serbs) who are people with tribal name related to Suebi did according to official history come to Balkan from area they called Boika (land of Boii) that neighbours Frankia and that can only be identified as east Bavaria/west Bohemia area (Bavaria = land of Boii, Bohemia = land of Boii)...and we can even see local hotspot of I2a2 there and Serb related place names...according to same historic source this is where they originally dwellt... 
interrestingly tribal name Boii in Slavic languages = *battle*... 
if Ser = head, would not Ser Boii be key Boii people... something like there are Scythians and Royal Scythians?


I think similarity of tribal names Srbi (Serbs) and Suebi comes from original tribal name of haplogroup I.... also names of Sardinia and Swedes comes from the same origin....

regarding the languages spoken by Veneti and Cimbri, we do not know much about language of Veneti, and if there is some real historic reference regarding language of Cimbri I would like to hear more about it......

to further confuse you, from what I see we cannot even be sure that Germanic people were not originally speaking Slavic-alike languages but than have mixed with Celtic and other people and adopted big chunks of their vocabulary...we also cannot be sure that Slavic people were not originally speaking Germanic-alike languages but were influenced heavily by the similar IE language of iranian Sarmatians (btw. could Sarmatians be Sar+Madai meaning key tribe of iranian Madai) ...

----------


## Taranis

> actually, they did speak same language...
> word is related to populations that were reminders of latin based languages ... in some cases latin language was lost but name stayed (e.g. in Wales which used to be stronghold of Roman empire with many settlements of latin speakers)...
> 
> equivalent in Slavic languages is "Vlah".. 
> word is used in medieval Russian primary chronicle to denote latin speaking people of Roman empire... there are "Vlah" villages throughout Balkan - in Serbia, Macedonia, Greece, Albania... there were some in Croatia till 18th century... big chunk of what is now Romania used to carry name Wallachia


Yes, you are right about that, but I was refering to these modern place for the sake of an argument.




> as for languages of Suebi, Cimbri, Veneti... those are all more or less likely assumptions...
> Suebi are very likely to have spoken some variant of Germanic language, as 'Schwaben'' represent clear continuity of tribal name, but we do not know much about language of Veneti, and if there is some real historic reference regarding language of Cimbri I would like to hear more about it......


With regard for the Veneti, if you read Ptolemy it's clear that they were not a homogenous group - he speaks of "greater" and "lesser" Venedic _races_. I think it's reasonably plausible to assume that they spoke Baltic and Slavic languages - it's clear that they were neither Germanic nor Iranic, for instance. And we know that the term "Wends" is used later on for Slavic peoples. It would make verymuch sense if this is a Germanic exonym.

As for Cimbri, check out the thread I made about the relationship of Celtic and Pre-Germanic, it makes a strong case for the Cimbri being speakers of Pre-Germanic.

----------


## zanipolo

> It's the first time I hear this, and frankly, none of this makes any sense. What do you mean by "Finnic" if not "Uralic-Finnic"? 
> 
> We do not know what languages the Baltic "Venedi" spoke, but there is this: consider that "Venedi" was, with high probability, a Germanic *exonym* for the peoples living towards their east, and that the Venedi didn't constitute a coherent ethnolinguistic group (though it stands to reason that they were - with high likelihood - Baltic- and Slavic-speaking peoples). Indeed, much later, during early medieval ages, the term "Wends" is collectively used for a variety of West Slavic peoples who refer to themselves by completely different names. For a comparison, take a look at the Germanic word "Walha-" (foreigner), which can be today found in place names like "Wales", "Wallonia" and "Wallachia". Does it mean that because they have the similar name the Welsh, Walloons and Wallachians must speak the same language?
> 
> 
> 
> The Cimbri, in my opinion, spoke the Pre-Germanic Language outlined here in this thread.
> 
> 
> ...


Link below is long but interesting
http://www.paabo.ca/veneti/

It was written in 2006 and updated in January 2011. Also confirmed by the others I mentioned.

Its basically says that the finnic speakers pre union with uralic speakers, where traders in the baltic sea, they over time, had outposts in the black sea, these outposts where the eneti of the town enete ( modern Samsun) , these eneti , fled the kaska invasions from the crimien area, and joined with another trading power, the trojans. After the trojan wars, the eneti migrated through thrace, into illyrian lands and eventulally the adriatic area of veneto. they then established 2 routes for an amber and fur trade. ( see link for maps). the trade to Jutland led to the migration of these veneti to brittany.

Tacitus, described this language as a britanic ( pre anglo-saxon) language.

There are also, sites which have a finnic-basque link as well as a Finnic -Galician link. be it linguistic but also gene link.

Of course, I am skeptical in that I need some questions answered, like, why are all the venetic inscriptions only in the veneto and not in denmark and baltic areas, and others

----------


## zanipolo

another link, these are pre slavic times

http://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgu...=0CCwQ9QEwBDge

http://www.paabo.ca/uirala/uini-name.html


as for the suebi tacitus says
*For Tacitus, the Suebi comprise the Semnones, who are "the oldest and noblest of the Suebi";[7] the Langobardi;[8] the seven tribes of Jutland and Holstein: Reudigni, Aviones, Anglii, Varini, Eudoses, Suarini, Nuitones;[8] the Hermunduri on the Elbe;[9] three tribes along the Danube: Naristi, Marcomanni, Quadi;[10] the Marsigni and Buri.[11] Then there is a mountain range, and beyond that, in the drainage system of the Vistula, Tacitus places five tribes of the Lugii including the Harii, Helveconae, Manimi, Helisii and Naharvali;[11] the Gothones, Rugii, Lemovii along the Baltic Sea;[11] all the states of the Suiones, located in peninsular Scandinavia;[12] and finally the non-Germanic Aestii,[13] and the Sitones, beyond the Aestii along the Baltic yet "continuous with the Suiones".[13] Says Tacitus then: "Here Suebia ends."[14]*
*But few clues to the identity of the Suebi are given by Tacitus. They can be identified by their fashion of the hair style called the "Suebian knot", which "distinguishes the freeman from the slave";[15] in other words, was intended as a badge of social rank. The same passage points out that chiefs "use an even more elaborate style."*


I assume, that subi refers to tribes that had access to the baltic sea.

----------


## how yes no 2

> But few clues to the identity of the Suebi are given by Tacitus. They can be identified by their fashion of the hair style called the "Suebian knot", which "distinguishes the freeman from the slave";[15] in other words, was intended as a *badge of social rank*. The same passage points out that chiefs "use an even more elaborate style."
> 
> I assume, that subi refers to tribes that had access to the baltic sea.


yes, that can be explanation - Suebi = free as opposed to the ones who willingly subjugate to other peoples... slave is not opposite of freeman, as slaves are obtained in wars and thus not from the tribes who willingly subjugate but from the ones who decide to try to stay free...

note the cult of thracian horseman or Sabazios (= Saba + Zeus)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabazios

and thracian word sabazias = ‘free'
http://www.wordgumbo.com/ie/cmp/thra.htm

again, accidentally or not, hand gesture typical for cult of Sabazios is identical to the one used by Serbs to express their identity...


so, we have tribal names:

Boii = battle

German = battle, hero, seed / genuine (original Celts)

German = Gomer = Cimmerians (= Cimbri ?) = Cappadocians = white Syrians (? = Seneca's Serians = ? Zeruiani whose lands are so big that all Slavs come from them) = hero

Suebi = free

we have king of Cimbri having name (or title?) Boiorix (= king of Boii)


I think this is about haplogroup I people...

----------


## Taranis

> Link below is long but interesting
> http://www.paabo.ca/veneti/
> 
> It was written in 2006 and updated in January 2011. Also confirmed by the others I mentioned.
> 
> Its basically says that the finnic speakers pre union with uralic speakers, where traders in the baltic sea, they over time, had outposts in the black sea, these outposts where the eneti of the town enete ( modern Samsun) , these eneti , fled the kaska invasions from the crimien area, and joined with another trading power, the trojans. After the trojan wars, the eneti migrated through thrace, into illyrian lands and eventulally the adriatic area of veneto. they then established 2 routes for an amber and fur trade. ( see link for maps). the trade to Jutland led to the migration of these veneti to brittany.


None of this makes sense, to be honest.




> Tacitus, described this language as a britanic ( pre anglo-saxon) language.


No, Tacitus talks about the Aestii.




> There are also, sites which have a finnic-basque link as well as a Finnic -Galician link. be it linguistic but also gene link.


It makes no sense, though.




> Of course, I am skeptical in that I need some questions answered, like, why are all the venetic inscriptions only in the veneto and not in denmark and baltic areas, and others


Simple: the Adriatic (V)eneti (note that the spelling variant "Enetoi" also exists) and the Baltic Vene_d_i were completely unrelated. The Adriatic Veneti spoke a language similar to the Italic languageas, whereas the Baltic Venedi probably spoke early Baltic/Slavic.

Also, the "Veneti" of Gaul were also completely unrelated, since they were a Celtic people.

----------


## zanipolo

> No, Tacitus talks about the Aestii.


Tacitus says the britonic is similar to the finnic and the finnic was the language of the aesti
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...finnic&f=false







> Simple: the Adriatic (V)eneti (note that the spelling variant "Enetoi" also exists) and the Baltic Vene_d_i were completely unrelated. The Adriatic Veneti spoke a language similar to the Italic languageas, whereas the Baltic Venedi probably spoke early Baltic/Slavic.
> 
> Also, the "Veneti" of Gaul were also completely unrelated, since they were a Celtic people.


I think they could have been related prior to the VeneDI becoming slavitized. When did the slavs migrate there?
I also agree that the venedi of the baltic area which ended up being slavitized where no longer related to the adriatic veneto, but, I was wanting to know how they got there, because the original people of the veneto where the euganei and east of them where the carni. Homer traces them to the black sea area, a city called enete ( later called amisus and now Samsun). 

The original venedi of the baltics where initially not slavic as you would know. 

I am guessing then that you believe that the Eneti originated from the black sea. My issue is that I cannot find hittite script on them, yet find script on the trojans.

----------


## iapetoc

that is just 2 thoughts,

1) Veneto in Byzantines was Blue team at Justinianus time,
could Veneti be Blue eyes people?

2) if I don't connect Veneto with Venice but with another state and city,
Wienn Vienna Βιεννη, could Veneti be the first Wienn people?

just wondering

----------


## LeBrok

There was a big settlement of Celts/prot-celts/or Italic in Bohemia in first millennium BC. We know there was a celtic influence in culture and pottery where poland is now in same time. I suspect there could have been farthest reaching east celtic tribe, possibly called Veneti, that ruled for some time there over local (whatever they were). With time they must have gotten slavonized, with ever stronger slavic influence. It's possible that remnants of Veneti tribe survived till 1 000 AD as Vieleti that settled in Polabia, north of Berlin, eventually getting Germanized.

----------


## zanipolo

so you all rule out the link provided in post #68 ..link #2

a link which shows old tribeable area at the time prior to slavic encrounchment into europe.

On the thracian DNA trail, does it not show that they where related to the trojans and had a luwian common language

http://www.palaeolexicon.com/default...Language_ID=16

----------


## Dagne

"Tacitus says the britonic is similar to the finnic and the finnic was the language of the aesti
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...finnic&f=false"


One likely interepretation is that Aestii was the name used by Tacitus to refer to all tribes who lived East(Aesti)ward of the Suiones (Scandinavians). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesti) 

According to this interpretation the Latin word Aestii is similar to an Old German word (sorry I don't know it) meaning East, which was used by Germanic tribes to refer 'Eastward' tribes. It should be remembered that Tacitus himself only recorded information he had obtained from others and it is quite likely that Aestii is a descriptive name rather than original name of the tribe as they had been referring to themselves in their own language. 

These generic Aestii were composed of pre Baltic (later Lithuanian, Latvian, Prussian and other) and also Finnic (later Estonian, Finnish, Sami) tribes. Their languages were very different as they are now, Finnic not belonging to IE language group, but genetically the peoples are very similar. 

Regarding similarity of Britonic to Aestii this is a bit puzzling. It might be that the languages were similar in their rhythm, or in some similar words and grammar retained from PIE... For instant Taranis compared the word Tauta (peoples) in Gothic, Pre Germanic, Gaulish which was very similar to Baltic, too. So at that time were could have been many similarities between many IE languages. 

Again, Tacitus wasn’t there to judge and the only Aestii word he gives is for amber “an apparently Latinised form, _glesum_ (cf. Latvian _glīsas_). This is the only word of their language recorded from antiquity, but seems to be Germanic in origin (from Gothic _glas_).[3]”

If we agree to this interpretation of Tacitus, then Aestii included both Finnic who spoke finnic languages and also Baltic people, who spoke pre-baltic languages.

----------


## LeBrok

[QUOTE=zanipolo;371144]so you all rule out the link provided in post #68 ..link #2

a link which shows old tribeable area at the time prior to slavic encrounchment into europe.

QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure slavic tribes were always in europe.

----------


## zanipolo

[QUOTE=LeBrok;371149]


> so you all rule out the link provided in post #68 ..link #2
> 
> a link which shows old tribeable area at the time prior to slavic encrounchment into europe.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> I'm pretty sure slavic tribes were always in europe.



I dount very much that the slavs where in europe prior to 1000BC because as all linguistic and historical scholars have noted, they do not even know/knew a word for amber which was the major trading item, a item which was even traded to ramses of egypt, as per this quote

*Proto-Slavic had no maritime terminology whatsoever, be it in the domain of seafaring, sea fishing, boat building, or sea trade. Especially striking is the absence of a Proto-Slavic word for amber, the most important item of export from the shores of the Baltic to the Mediterranean. In view of this, the very fact that Ptolemy refers to the Baltic as the Venedic Bay appears to rule out a possible identification of the Veneti of his times with the Slavs.*

I would like to find out when the slavs did arrive

----------


## zanipolo

> [FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]
> 
> 
> 
> According to this interpretation the Latin word Aestii is similar to an Old German word (sorry I don't know it) meaning East, which was used by Germanic tribes to refer 'Eastward' tribes. It should be remembered that Tacitus himself only recorded information he had obtained from others and it is quite likely that Aestii is a descriptive name rather than original name of the tribe as they had been referring to themselves in their own language.


I initially thought the same thing, but I now have doubts.

We do agree though that baltic tribes, had either a baltic, norse(scandinavian), finnic or germanic language

----------


## Dagne

> I initially thought the same thing, but I now have doubts.
> 
> We do agree though that baltic tribes, had either a baltic, norse(scandinavian), finnic or germanic language


 
If we use the term Baltic in a geographic sense it may mean tribes living around the Baltic sea=Baltic, Norse(Germanic), Finnic. 

But the common understanding of Baltic people include only those tribes that speak Baltic languages - Lithuanian, Latvian, Prussian, etc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balts):



The wiki on the Baltic tribes tells that their historic homeland were much larger that it is now or was in the c.1200 C.E

"Some of the major authorities on Balts, such as Būga, Vasmer, Toporov and Trubachov, in conducting etymological studies of eastern European river names, were able to identify in certain regions names of specifically Baltic provenance, which most likely indicate where the Balts lived in prehistoric times. This information is summarized and synthesized by Marija Gimbutas in _The Balts_ (1963) to obtain a likely proto-Baltic homeland. Its borders are approximately: from a line on the Pomeranian coast eastward to include or nearly include the present-day sites of Warsaw, Kiev, and Kursk, northward through Moscow to the River Berzha, westward in an irregular line to the coast of the Gulf of Riga, north of Riga."

----------


## Dagne

Baltic (indoeuropean) tribes came to the Baltic sea region arround 2000 BCE. 
And Fenni mentioned by Tacitus, could have been Sami, who resided in the reagion since the ice age (10 000 BCE) http://stravaganzastravaganza.blogsp...rehistory.html

----------


## Taranis

> There was a big settlement of Celts/prot-celts/or Italic in Bohemia in first millennium BC. We know there was a celtic influence in culture and pottery where poland is now in same time. I suspect there could have been farthest reaching east celtic tribe, possibly called Veneti, that ruled for some time there over local (whatever they were). With time they must have gotten slavonized, with ever stronger slavic influence. It's possible that remnants of Veneti tribe survived till 1 000 AD as Vieleti that settled in Polabia, north of Berlin, eventually getting Germanized.


In regard for Bohemia, in my opinion the area was Celtic-speaking, and became only Germanicized between the 2nd century BC and the 1st century AD. The main Celtic tribe of this area was the Boii (which actually means "Cattle", not "Battle" as how-yes-no asserted), from which the names "Bohemia" ("Boiohaemum" - "Boii home") and "Bavaria" also derive. It seems likely to me that the pressure of Germanic migrations from the north caused the Boii to eventually abandon their homeland and migrate southwards:

- There were Boii who settled in the Pannonian basin, and were present there as late as the 1st century AD.

- Parts of the Boii participated in the invasion of Greece and became part of the Galatians in Anatolia later on.

- Parts of the Boii invaded northern Italy, seizing Etruscan lands and renaming the city of Felsina into Bononia (modern Bologna).

- Strabo (1st century BC) refers to the areas north of the Danube as the "Boiian desert" (ie, the areas deserted by the Boii), and says that "Boiohaemum" has become occupied by the Germanic Markomanni.

- Caesar refers to a small fraction of Boii that were affiliated with the Helveti and invaded Gaul in the 1st century BC.

- Even by the 1st/2nd century AD, however, there were Celtic remnants living in Germania. Ptolemy lists many towns which have readily identifiable Celtic names, some as far north and east as Silesia.

- One undoubtly Celtic tribe that persisted in Germania was the Cotini (or "Gotini"), of which Tactitus says that they spoke the Gaulish language, which lived in the approximate area of modern-day Slovakia.

From what I know, there is however no Celtic evidence towards the northeast beyond Silesia or the western Carpathians.




> Tacitus says the britonic is similar to the finnic and the finnic was the language of the aesti
> http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...finnic&f=false


Where do you take from that the Aesti spoke Finnic? I do not know if the Aesti and the Estonians were actually related.




> I think they could have been related prior to the VeneDI becoming slavitized. When did the slavs migrate there?
> I also agree that the venedi of the baltic area which ended up being slavitized where no longer related to the adriatic veneto, but, I was wanting to know how they got there, because the original people of the veneto where the euganei and east of them where the carni. Homer traces them to the black sea area, a city called enete ( later called amisus and now Samsun).


There is simply no reason to assume that the Venedi of the Baltic spoke the same language as the Adriatic Veneti.




> The original venedi of the baltics where initially not slavic as you would know.


The Venedi, as stated before, were not a homogenous group. Ptolemy is very clear about that.




> I am guessing then that you believe that the Eneti originated from the black sea. My issue is that I cannot find hittite script on them, yet find script on the trojans.


I didn't say that. Why are you implying that I believe certain things without me having ever said them? The idea that the Eneti originated from Anatolia (black sea shores) was a Roman one, but I don't know how accurate it is.




> "Tacitus says the britonic is similar to the finnic and the finnic was the language of the aesti
> http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...finnic&f=false"
> 
> 
> One likely interepretation is that Aestii was the name used by Tacitus to refer to all tribes who lived East(Aesti)ward of the Suiones (Scandinavians). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesti) 
> 
> According to this interpretation the Latin word Aestii is similar to an Old German word (sorry I don't know it) meaning East, which was used by Germanic tribes to refer 'Eastward' tribes. It should be remembered that Tacitus himself only recorded information he had obtained from others and it is quite likely that Aestii is a descriptive name rather than original name of the tribe as they had been referring to themselves in their own language. 
> 
> These generic Aestii were composed of pre Baltic (later Lithuanian, Latvian, Prussian and other) and also Finnic (later Estonian, Finnish, Sami) tribes. Their languages were very different as they are now, Finnic not belonging to IE language group, but genetically the peoples are very similar. 
> ...


Great points there, Dagne. I think I find it pretty compelling that the Venedi spoke Baltic (or-Pre-Baltic, if you will - given the time-frame this is entirely possible), or Finnic languages. Given how the ethnic makeup looks like later on (Baltic, Finnic people). However, it is also possible that some of the Venedi living to the south and east (away from the Baltic Sea) actually spoke early Slavic. That we do not know.

I also think that this didn't preclude the German people much later on from applying the term "Venedi" to the Slavs who had settled up to the Elbe. In fact, the term "*Wendland*" is informally still used today for an area of northern Germany (roughly corresponding with eastern Lower Saxony, northern Saxony-Anhalt, northwestern Brandenburg and Mecklemburg).

Where I am not so sure is with the etymology of "Aestii" as "Eastern Ones". In Gothic for instance, the word for "east" was "austr".

----------


## zanipolo

> In regard for Bohemia, in my opinion the area was Celtic-speaking, and became only Germanicized between the 2nd century BC and the 1st century AD. The main Celtic tribe of this area was the Boii (which actually means "Cattle", not "Battle" as how-yes-no asserted), from which the names "Bohemia" ("Boiohaemum" - "Boii home") and "Bavaria" also derive. It seems likely to me that the pressure of Germanic migrations from the north caused the Boii to eventually abandon their homeland and migrate southwards:
> 
> - There were Boii who settled in the Pannonian basin, and were present there as late as the 1st century AD.
> 
> - Parts of the Boii participated in the invasion of Greece and became part of the Galatians in Anatolia later on.
> 
> - Parts of the Boii invaded northern Italy, seizing Etruscan lands and renaming the city of Felsina into Bononia (modern Bologna).
> 
> - Strabo (1st century BC) refers to the areas north of the Danube as the "Boiian desert" (ie, the areas deserted by the Boii), and says that "Boiohaemum" has become occupied by the Germanic Markomanni.
> ...



the aesti
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesti
check the roman map of 125AD, the slavs are still in the area north of the crimia*

Finnic Language Descent* 

aesti are finnic that became estonian


Note: finnic represent pre ugalic-finnic

note, my fault in using the word guess, I meant assume, but then again I should not assume, sorry for that.

----------


## zanipolo

> If we use the term Baltic in a geographic sense it may mean tribes living around the Baltic sea=Baltic, Norse(Germanic), Finnic. 
> 
> But the common understanding of Baltic people include only those tribes that speak Baltic languages - Lithuanian, Latvian, Prussian, etc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balts):
> 
> 
> 
> The wiki on the Baltic tribes tells that their historic homeland were much larger that it is now or was in the c.1200 C.E
> 
> "Some of the major authorities on Balts, such as Būga, Vasmer, Toporov and Trubachov, in conducting etymological studies of eastern European river names, were able to identify in certain regions names of specifically Baltic provenance, which most likely indicate where the Balts lived in prehistoric times. This information is summarized and synthesized by Marija Gimbutas in _The Balts_ (1963) to obtain a likely proto-Baltic homeland. Its borders are approximately: from a line on the Pomeranian coast eastward to include or nearly include the present-day sites of Warsaw, Kiev, and Kursk, northward through Moscow to the River Berzha, westward in an irregular line to the coast of the Gulf of Riga, north of Riga."


your map is a bit too "new" that is, 2000 years too new

maybe this one.........................note the position of the fenni
*Figure 1.4*

----------


## how yes no 2

> In regard for Bohemia, in my opinion the area was Celtic-speaking, and became only Germanicized between the 2nd century BC and the 1st century AD. The main Celtic tribe of this area was the Boii (which actually means "Cattle", not "Battle" as how-yes-no asserted), from which the names "Bohemia" ("Boiohaemum" - "Boii home") and "Bavaria" also derive.


I think I did emphasize that in Slavic languages Boii = Boj = battle
Vojnik/Bojovnik = soldier, warrior

while I can imagine people having for own nation tribal names related to heroes, battle, warrior......I can not imagine people having a selfname cattle... that interpretation can only origin from neighbouring languages e.g. due to Boii beiing rich in cattle...... this is very strong indication that language of Celtic Boii might have been closer to early Slavic than to old Irish or Germanic...





> It seems likely to me that the pressure of Germanic migrations from the north caused the Boii to eventually abandon their homeland and migrate southwards:
> 
> - There were Boii who settled in the Pannonian basin, and were present there as late as the 1st century AD.


true...
btw. according to Byzantine emperor Serbs came to Balkan from the land that they *in their language* call *Boiki*. The land is beyond Turkey (Turkey was name used for Hungary due to Avars and Huns...) and neighbours Frankia....
This reference of north or west from Hungary, neighbour to Frankish state taken together with area of south Bohemia being local hotspot of I2a2 (3 times more than in the rest of Czech republic) and having place names such as Srby and Sorviodurum, this is clear reference to land of Boii = west Bohemia+ east Bavaria).... is clear confirmation that Serbs came to Balkan from land of Boii

Now he also says *where they have also originally dwellt.*.. and we know that Boii oiginally dwellt in these areas...

http://books.google.nl/books?id=3al1...page&q&f=false

so why would it be so hard to suppose that
Serboi = ser + Boii = head/leading (in iranian languages, but also evident in english title 'sir'/'ser') + Boii




> Sir is an honorific used as a title (see Knight), or as a courtesy title to address a man without using his given or family name in some English speaking cultures. It is often used in formal correspondence (Dear Sir, Right Reverend Sir).
> The term is often reserved for use only towards equals, one of *superior rank or status*, such as an educator or *commanding officer*, an elder (especially by a minor), or as a form of address from a merchant to a customer.


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


related people to Boii or in fact their south most branch were Scordisci/Serdi which is again same tribal name as tribal name Serbi....

if many central Europe Celts were germanized, why would some not be slavicized? e.g. due to the influence of the language spoken by iranian Sarmatians who settled throughout east Europe?

but even more, why do we expect that Celtic cultures of central Europe spoke same Celtic language as old Irish? what if it was language much closer to the language of early Slavs?






> - Parts of the Boii participated in the invasion of Greece and became part of the Galatians in Anatolia later on.


tribe known as Serdi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serdi







> - Strabo (1st century BC) refers to the areas north of the Danube as the "Boiian desert" (ie, the areas deserted by the Boii), and says that "Boiohaemum" has become occupied by the Germanic Markomanni.


this area is today Vojvodina 
which is a word whose origin is normally seen as teritorial unit related to military rank of Vojvoda (Voj/Boj + voditi = battle + lead)

but it might be in fact coin word = Boii + large water = Boi/Voi +vodina...

----------


## Taranis

Zanipolo, Ptolemy (2nd century AD) actually explicitly mentions the Galindians ("Galindae").

----------


## iapetoc

I still don't get it

1 we know that Thracians were R1a by tombs exams, Although being I2 solve many problems,

we know that Thracians had some simmilar with Myceneans burring customs,

in the area that once was Thracia today dominant is I-Ydna, meaning that majority of R1a moved

the link that zanipolo gave us is connecting Thracians with Slavic languages in some east Europe countries I-Ydna is high,

on the other hand I read in a post ( sorry don't remember name, plz excuse) that Daci and Gaete in ancient times could be Dutc -Deutch and Goth, meaning that Thracians could be pre- or proto-Germanians,


on the other hand Veneti that moved from minor asia went to Adriatic sea, 
Veneto means Blue in Byzantines Justinianus
Veneti could be Wienn Vienna (2 nn is characteristic of Greek words and exist only in Wienn, so probably Wienn is named after people who knew or passed from Greece, or relative speaking) and as Taranis say Aestii could be Austr, Veneti are linked with Germanic,
while as Dagne say could be Esthonian-baltic,

hmmmm,

probably the DYS of Thracians can help us, if they belong to Germanic or Baltoslavic Branch,

until yesterday I knew that Thracians could be connected with Slavic speaking people, the case of connecting Thracians with Germans is new to me,

As for Venneti adriatic coast and Venice is not that far from Wienn.

the possibility that Thracians where a cut part of a bigger group of nations, (like today south slavic with rest slavic) is it open?

----------


## Taranis

> I think I did emphasize that in Slavic languages Boii = Boj = battle
> Vojnik/Bojovnik = soldier, warrior
> 
> while I can imagine people having for own nation tribal names related to heroes, battle, warrior......I can not imagine people having a selfname cattle... that interpretation can only origin from neighbouring languages e.g. due to Boii beiing rich in cattle...... this is very strong indication that language of Celtic Boii might have been closer to early Slavic than to old Irish or Germanic...


Umm, WHAT!? The Boii 'spoke a language closer to early Slavic than to Old Irish or Germanic'?!?  :Petrified: 

Sorry, no offense, but that is linguistically complete NONSENSE. The Boii, without a doubt, spoke a Celtic language.

For comparison:

Old Irish:
"Bo" - "Cow"
"Bóaire" - "cow-noble", "stockmaster"

Welsh:
"Buwch" - "Cow"

Breton:
"Buoc'h" - "Cow"

As you can see, the stem is attested in _both_ Goidelic and Brythonic, and since Brythonic is closer with Gaulish than with Goidelic, it stands to reason that this word is Proto-Celtic as well.

Also, it makes verymuch sense to have the term "cattle" in name. For one, cattle ownership was a symbol of status, and secondly, the bull was also a sacred animal to Gauls.

Also there's these obviously Celtic town names in the area formerly inhabited by the Boii:
- Boiodurum (Passau) - "Boii fort/gate"
- Eburodunum (Brnno/Brünn) - "Yew fort"

There's also the other Galatian tribes to be considered (principally the Volcae, who also moved into southern Gaul), as well as Galatian personal names. In my opinion, the Boii were, without a doubt, a Celtic-speaking people. The assertion that they were Slavic, and that Bohemia-Bavaria is actually the Slavic homeland, is totally insane.




> true...
> btw. according to Byzantine emperor Serbs came to Balkan from land they *in their language* call *Boika* that neighbours Frankia (clear reference to land of Boii = west Bohemia+ east Bavaria) *where they have also originally dwellt.*.. 
> http://books.google.nl/books?id=3al1...page&q&f=false
> 
> tribe known as Serdi
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serdi
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How about, just NO!?  :Petrified: 

None of that holds up linguistically.

----------


## how yes no 2

> Umm, WHAT!? The Boii 'spoke a language closer to early Slavic than to Old Irish or Germanic'?!? 
> 
> Sorry, no offense, but that is linguistically complete NONSENSE. The Boii, without a doubt, spoke a Celtic language.


why not?
do you have any written text of Boii?
how do you know that Slavic languages are not just mix of languages spoken by Boii (perhaps I2a2 people) and the ones spoken by Sarmatians (probably R1a people)?




> For comparison:
> 
> Old Irish:
> "Bo" - "Cow"
> "Bóaire" - "cow-noble", "stockmaster"
> 
> Welsh:
> "Buwch" - "Cow"
> 
> ...


sure, for comparison do you know what word "germ" means? 

origin of tribal name Boii is disputed... what you explained here is one of the proposals...
the other interpretation is "warrior" and is related to PIE *bhei(ə)-, *bhī-, "hit;" 
as I said in Slavic languages warrior is fitting interpratioon...

no nation in world will call themselves cattle, tribal name is always of noble origin, being special in some noble way...it is often suggesting bravery, higher knowledge... so my guess is that originally it meant warrior, but that neighbouring people did come up with cattle due to something....





> As you can see, the stem is attested in _both_ Goidelic and Brythonic, and since Brythonic is closer with Gaulish than with Goidelic, it stands to reason that this word is Proto-Celtic as well.
> 
> Also, it makes verymuch sense to have the term "cattle" in name. For one, cattle ownership was a symbol of status, and secondly, the bull was also a sacred animal to Gauls.


perhaps...
Taurisci would be name of same origin... 
in fact, tribal name Taurisci I relate also to people from Taurus area in Asia minor where bull was also sacred animal... and I think name Thracians and Tyrsenians might be related tribal names.... 

note here that Etruscans/Tyrsenians (or Taurus people from ) didnot call themselves Tyrsenians but that they have called themselves Rasena...

note also that Rasena is same tribal name as Russians and same as alternative name of Serbs - Rascians... in my opinion, this is about R1a tribal name

note that Thracians are known for cult of Sabazios (= Saba + Zeus) with hand gesture same as the one used by Serbs to express national identity...

there are also Shardana/Serden/Sherden people whose mark was helmet with bull horns...Sherdana left place name Serbonian bog in Egypt...

note that when I mentioon Etruscans and Thracians and Taurus and Sherdana I do not talk of recent history here, but about distant common roots of tribal names..... this may to some extent reflect in genetics more than in languages because linguistics of ethnic groups has much faster rate of change...

I think that I2a2 originated in central Europe in Bohemia and have spread in many occasions along Danube to Black sea coasts, Caucasus and Asia minor and deep in Asia in different times under names such as Sherdana, Cimmerians/Syrians, Serians, Scordisci/Serdi ... the last wave would be Serbs... those waves may have spoken completely different languages as we today know how easy languages are changed... (compare spread of latin derived languages now and 2500 years ago when it was only spoken in small village called Rome)... related tribe are Veneti... same as in Hebrew world Paphlagonians were son of Ripath who was son of Gomer (Cappadocians)., Veneti were also I2a people...hence today I2a* we find only in areas of Celtic Veneti and Adriatic Veneti... in larger scope Gomer people were originally all haplogroup I people...hence tribal name Germans





> Also there's these obviously Celtic town names in the area formerly inhabited by the Boii:
> - Boiodurum (Passau) - "Boii fort/gate"
> - Eburodunum (Brnno/Brünn) - "Yew fort"


what about Servio*durum* exactly in area from which Serbs came to Balkan?
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serviodurum

----------


## Taranis

> why not?
> do you have any written text of Boii?
> how do you know that Slavic languages are not just mix of languages spoken by Boii (I2a2) and the ones spoken by Sarmatians (R1a)?


Could you just please keep Y-Haplogroups out of this. You cannot randomly assign Haplogroups to certain tribes (or vice versa). On the flipside, you decide to ignore a lot of onomastic evidence I provided. Also, there actually are inscriptions, not from Bohemia, but from Vindelicia and the Norici - which identify them obviously as having a Celtic language.




> sure for comparison do you know what word "germ" means? 
> 
> origin of tribal name Boii is disputed... what you explained here is one of the proposals...
> the other interpretation is "warrior" and is related to PIE *bhei(ə)-, *bhī-, "hit;" 
> as I said in Slavic languages warrior is fitting interpratioon...


I think that my interpretation is the most plausible/parsimonious one given all the evidence. Yours is just too far out, especially given how the earliest unambigious mentioning of the Slavs occurs many centuries later during the migration period.




> no nation in world will call themselves cattle, tribal name is always of noble origin, being special in some noble way...it is often suggesting bravery, higher knowledge... so my guess is that originally it meant warrior, but that neighbouring people did come up with cattle due to something....


Why not? Have you done any closer research into other Celtic tribal names= There is quite a few ones which have similarly offbeat connotations:

"Aedui" - "Fiery Ones"
"Arverni" - "(those who live) Upon/Near Alders"
"Atrebates" - "Inhabitants"
"Eburones" - "Yewy Ones"
"Nemetes" - "Sacred Ones"
"Senones" - "Elderly Ones"
"Volcae" - "Falcons"




> perhaps...
> Taurisci would be name of same origin...


Not quite. There's a distinction between "bull" and "cow".




> what about Servio*durum* exactly in area from which Serbs came to Balkan?
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serviodurum


Actually, it is verymuch reasonable to assume that "Servio-" is of Celtic etymology as well, in particular if "-durum" is itself already Celtic in etymology.

- Old Irish "Serb" means "bitter". The cognate also exists in Welsh "Chwerw" (bitter"), which has been changed according to Brythonic sound laws (S became H/Ch in Common Brythonic). Since the word is, again, attested in both the Goidelic and Brythonic branch of Celtic, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that it also existed in Gaulish or the more eastern Celtic dialects related with Gaulish (the word can be reconstructed as either as "Servos" or "Serbos").

- Old Irish "Dúr" means "hardy", "hard".

Therefore, the etymology of "Serviodurum" as "Bitter fort" is verymuch plausible. Why should it be not Celtic if other nearby towns also had Celtic names (Abodiacum, Artobriga, Brigantium, Cambodunum, etc.).

----------


## how yes no 2

> Could you just please *keep Y-Haplogroups out* of this. You cannot *randomly* assign Haplogroups to certain tribes (or vice versa).


this is thread about haplogroups and not about linguistics...
as I indicated in many occasions languages are useful only for analyzing very recent history as they are easily changed...again where are Celtic languages of central Europe today, where were latin languages 2500 years ago and where they are now....

thing is that I2a2 has highest variance in Serbia and Bohemia... this indicates key settlements... that is why I propose Boii might have been I2a2 people...

Sarmatians were Iranian tribe, perhaps Avestan relaed...high R1a is very likely...acompanied with multuitude of other haplogroups in lesser extent...
they are also in Greek legends offshot of Scythians who from what we know were dominantly R1a people...





> On the flipside, you decide to ignore a lot of onomastic evidence I provided. Also, there actually are inscriptions, not from Bohemia, but from Vindelicia and the Norici - which identify them obviously as having a Celtic language.


I suggest you to study languages of latin America from that period and now...
languages change and are thus not reliable indicator about distant origin of ethinic groups...





> I think that my interpretation is the most plausible/parsimonious one given all the evidence. Yours is just too far out, especially given how the earliest unambigious mentioning of the Slavs occurs many centuries later during the migration period.


 their earliest mentions put them among Veneti race...and claim them to origin from state of Zeruiani that was so big that all Slavs origin from it... there is also claim that Noricans are of same race..

this all fits perfectly in my theory about Serians and Veneti... and with I2a2 + R12a mix of current Slavic people....
you base all your thinking on languages, but that is completely unreliable...




> "Aedui" - "Fiery Ones"
> "Arverni" - "(those who live) Upon/Near Alders"
> "Atrebates" - "Inhabitants"
> "Eburones" - "Yewy Ones"
> "Nemetes" - "Sacred Ones"
> "Senones" - "Elderly Ones"
> "Volcae" - "Falcons"


actually, Nemetes is perhaps same tribal name as Nemci - which is official name used by Slavic people for Germans




> Old Irish "Serb" means "bitter". The cognate also exists in Welsh "Chwerw" (bitter"), which has been changed according to Brythonic sound laws (S became H/Ch in Common Brythonic). Since the word is, again, attested in both the Goidelic and Brythonic branch of Celtic, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that it also existed in Gaulish or the more eastern Celtic dialects related with Gaulish (the word can be reconstructed as either as "Servos" or "Serbos").


have you ever considered an idea that same tribal name words can have different meaning in different languages not by chance but by neighbouring people creating a word that sounds as tribal name and assigning it a meaning that seems to them as most characteristic for the group carrying the tribal name?

e.g. Taurus people might have meant something completely different than bull in original language...but those people had bull as sacred animal, so neighbouring Greeks started calling bulls with name of Taurus people....

similarly Slavs use word "bik" for bull...and this may be due to (perhaps it was not a myth) helmets with bull horns carried by Vikings?

word germ may have come into existance because Germanic people looked filthy to some people... perhaps proto-Serbs looked bitter and sardonic/sarcastic to some people... what is in one culture seen as negative in other can be positive...




> Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[14] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[15]


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

while Boii tribal name may originate in them calling themselves warriors, the word can have got meaning cattle due to their neighbours identifying Boii with being owners of big herds of cattle....

words Boj/bojovnik/vojnik/vojvoda - all related to battle and warriors in Slavic languages might have origin from absorbing some Celtic Boii people... but it may as well be that Slavic language and language of Boii are more related than it is conventionally thought to be the case...

----------


## Taranis

> this is thread about haplogroups and not about linguistics...
> as I indicated in many occasions languages are useful only for analyzing very recent history as they are easily changed...again where are Celtic languages of central Europe today, where were latin languages 2500 years ago and where they are now....
> 
> thing is that I2a2 has highest variance in Serbia and Bohemia... this indicates key settlements... that is why I propose Boii might have been I2a2 people...
> 
> Sarmatians were Iranian tribe, perhaps Avestan relaed...high R1a is very likely...acompanied with multuitude of other haplogroups in lesser extent...
> they are also in Greek legends offshot of Scythians who from what we know were dominantly R1a people...


Sorry, this was verymuch about linguistics and not about genetics: you argued that the Boii were a Slavic people, and I have presented you plenty of evidence that that statement is, simply put, impossible.




> I suggest you to study languages of latin America from that period and now...
> languages change and are thus not reliable indicator about distant origin of ethinic groups...


Sorry, what are you trying to say there?




> their earliest mentions put them among Veneti race...and claim them to origin from state of Zeruiani that was so big that all Slavs origin from it...
> this fits perfectly in my theory about Serians and Veneti... and with I2a2 + R12a mix of current Slavic people....


Which "earliest mentioning" puts the Boii amongst the Veneti? The earliest mentioning (the Celtic invasion of Greece, as far as I know - though the invasion in Italy was probably even earlier) would put them amongst the _Galatians_.

Also, you already randomly lump the Adriatic (V)eneti and the Baltic Venedi together as the same group. It's pretty insolent and unfounded to ad-hoc, in addition, to declare the Boii to be part of the same group, and declare that they spoke a Slavic language?! That's... just... GAH!  :Petrified:

----------


## iapetoc

> Umm, WHAT!? The Boii 'spoke a language closer to early Slavic than to Old Irish or Germanic'?!? 
> 
> Sorry, no offense, but that is linguistically complete NONSENSE. The Boii, without a doubt, spoke a Celtic language.
> 
> For comparison:
> 
> Old Irish:
> "Bo" - "Cow"
> "Bóaire" - "cow-noble", "stockmaster"
> ...



just for the record,

I don't know if Boii where German-Speaking or Slavic Speaking,

But 

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


boyάr sounds like Bόaire (exept tone mark)

the possibility that Boiare left west, but the title remained,
or cames from root of valor-vallois etc Noble man

or means the same to both, 

the cattle master is an officer of war.

----------


## how yes no 2

> Sorry, this was verymuch about linguistics and not about genetics: you argued that the Boii were a Slavic people, and I have presented you plenty of evidence that that statement is, simply put, impossible.


you are so black and white... and trying to project classifications of today on past, and even on distant past...

I argued that Boii were part of Slavic ethnogenesis...
and that hat participation may have left imprint in languages...e.g. that slavic words for war, battle, soldiers are related to Boii tribal name...





> Sorry, what are you trying to say there?


that origin of people may or may not be reflected in language spoken... history teaches us that languages change more easily than one would expect... latin America is an example that clearly shows how drastic the change of language can be....





> Which "earliest mentioning" puts the Boii amongst the Veneti? The earliest mentioning (the Celtic invasion of Greece, as far as I know - though the invasion in Italy was probably even earlier) would put them amongst the _Galatians_.


not Boii... I was talking about the early Slavs... as a reply on your claim of earliest mention of Slavs...don't play the game of taking sentences out of context...




> Also, you already randomly lump the Adriatic (V)eneti and the Baltic Venedi together as the same group. It's pretty insolent and unfounded to ad-hoc, in addition, to declare the Boii to be part of the same group, and declare that they spoke a Slavic language?! That's... just... GAH!


it is the same tribal name and very likely there is partially common genetic origin....
you systematically fail to understand timeline of genetics....
3000-5000 years before present a tribe can split in 2-3 parts heading in different directions.... 2000 years ago subtribes may still carry same tribal name, but can speak unrelated languages....
if that is the case one should be able to see traces of common origin in genetics...
unfortunatelly we cannot identify any ethnic group of today directly with Adriatic Veneti, Celtic Veneti or Vistula Veneti...but we can look in spread of haplogroups...
for me good indication of Veneti being I2a people is that I2a* we find only in small confined areas that match locations of Adriatic Veneti and Celtic Veneti....look for I2a*-P37 Alpine and I2a*-P37 France in these map 
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...x?section=ymap

now how likely is that unless I2a* was carried by original Veneti tribe...

----------


## Taranis

> "you base all your thinking on languages, but that is completely unreliable..."


Sorry, you just delivered yourself ad-absurdum there. You take two or more similar-sounding words and ad-hoc proclaim them to one and the same, and derive from that that ethnic group X and Y must be the same, and that they must have spoken the same language, and must have shared the same Y-Haplogroup. That is, with all due respect, what _*I*_ would call not only completely unreliable, but completely unscientific and without making a stand to closer scrutiny.

In contrast, I'm not only thinking about languages, I'm also considering the time frame, and I'm considering the way languages change across timeframe - and that sometimes cognates with words can look very different if you take into account how certain sound laws change them. Lastly, I'm making use of Occam's razor.

----------


## how yes no 2

> Sorry, you just delivered yourself ad-absurdum there. You take two or more similar-sounding words and ad-hoc proclaim them to one and the same, and derive from that that ethnic group X and Y must be the same, and that they must have spoken the same language, and must have shared the same Y-Haplogroup. That is, with all due respect, what _*I*_ would call not only completely unreliable, but completely unscientific and without making a stand to closer scrutiny.


nope... tribal name is not just a word... it is an identity!!!
much more than language is...

you can move to other country and your son may speak different native language than you did, but his last name will be same as yours and of your father and grandfather... in few generations language will say nothing of ancestors, but last name and genetics will...




> In contrast, I'm not only thinking about languages, I'm also considering the time frame, and I'm considering the way languages change across timeframe - and that sometimes cognates with words can look very different if you take into account how certain sound laws change them. Lastly, I'm making use of Occam's razor.


your Occam's razor suggest that all latin Americans origin from a person born in a village called Rome 2500 years ago...but their genetics speaks many quite different stories... perhaps what you think is Occam's razor is in fact a misconception, illusion...

----------


## Taranis

> nope... tribal name is not just a word... it is an identity!!!
> much more than language is...
> 
> 
> 
> your Occam's razor suggest that all latin Americans origin from a person born in a village called Rome 2500 years ago...but their genetics speaks many quite different stories... perhaps what you think is Occam's razor is in fact a misconception, illusion...


*sigh*

I'm not arguing with you anymore on this. Say hello to my ignore list.

----------


## how yes no 2

> *sigh*
> 
> I'm not arguing with you anymore on this. Say hello to my ignore list.


well you were so far ignoring all my arguments...
so I see no essential difference in that respect...

----------


## Taranis

> well you were so far ignoring all my arguments...
> so I see no essential difference in that respect...


That is not the truth. I did not ignore any of your arguments, I _debunked_ them, and you in turn just decided to ignore _that_.

----------


## how yes no 2

> That is not the truth. I did not ignore any of your arguments, I _debunked_ them, and you in turn just decided to ignore _that_.


nope, you did not debunk any of them....
you are using set of very poor linguistic arguments as evidence of what is possible and what is not possible ethnic origin...
more one goes in past more ridiculous are those arguments...

----------


## Thrace

Has there been a comparison of a large Pomak y-dna study to y-dna discovered from Thracian tombs? Pomaks are condsidered by some to have have been in the Balkans prior to the many Slavic and other tribes who settled there after 6 century AD.

----------


## iapetoc

> Has there been a comparison of a large Pomak y-dna study to y-dna discovered from Thracian tombs? Pomaks are condsidered by some to have have been in the Balkans prior to the many Slavic and other tribes who settled there after 6 century AD.



yes there has been, in Bulgarian tombs, Thracian that were buried there were R1a i heard,

about Pomaks Gorani Torbesi read my post #8 in same thread.

simply we know that these people sre isolated communities, they could be thracians,

but the biggest R1a in south east and central Balkans is in Greek Makedonia,

so the exact Pomak = Thracian is still under Discuss,
that was the starting point of Georgyev works, to connect Pomaks with Thracians,

and only in case of Echinos (Greece) pomak DNA is isolated for about estimation 2000 years max, although could be 1500 and pomaks be pure slavic or Balkars, or pomaks torbesi Gorani are Kumans, or Bardarians, the connection of Pomaks with ancient Thracian although is the most possible, it maybe is mistaken, 
that is promoted by Turkish goverment propaganda, since most pomaks are muslim,
but officially that language is Slavic, not Turkish,
the most pure Pomaks isolated for more than 1000 years are in south Rodope, in Greek thrace,
they speak a Bulgarian Dialect of Slavic,
the possibilty that they are Thracians is same with possibility of being Slavic,

the case of Pomaks, especially the ones in south Rodope should have better search.

----------


## zanipolo

being confused on this boii issue, i found this

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...0italy&f=false

The town of Lodi sits between Milan and Verona in Italy

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

I do see nothing about slavs in reference to the boii.

The slavs have a tendency to absorb another peoples/tribal history and make it there own, like the illyrians, thracian, baltic and many other areas

----------


## zanipolo

interesting how the basques also have something with thracian dna

http://dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2009-08-29.pdf

----------


## how yes no 2

> being confused on this boii issue, i found this
> 
> http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...0italy&f=false
> 
> The town of Lodi sits between Milan and Verona in Italy
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boii
> 
> I do see nothing about slavs in reference to the boii.
> ...



ethnic and language groups of Europe have very mixed history and many influences...
thus, going back from any ethnic or linguistic group of today leads to many different tribes of past....


there are few facts regarding Slavs to consider
1) their genetics is clearly European which indicates living in Europe for many thousand years - e.g. look at autosomal testing results
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/04...eurasians.html

2) their first appearances in history describe them as populous race living in large areas....

thus, if they were not known as Slavs they were known under other tribal names...
but what tribal names?

historic sources suggest origin from race of Veneti...in my opinion Boii were part of this race... but I have no data to support such a claim....

worth nothing is that in historic times there are several seemingly unrelated tribes throughout Europe with same tribal name Veneti....

I argue that tribal names cannot be the same by accident ... I claim that in more distant past there was single tribe and that original tribe was split through perhaps 1000 or few thousand years process into several tribes with same tribal name...throughout the time through interaction with people among whom they lived those tribes developed different languages... 

what I claim is that original genetic basis of this Veneti race was I2a haplogroup (with passage of time through process of mixing with other people this genetic base might lost some of its frequency)....reason I claim this is that so far we find I2a* only on 2 places in Europe and those places match exactly the locations of seemingly unrelated ancient Veneti tribes in Britanny and in north Italy....thus, relation is there... and if early Slavs are of Veneti race, I2a2 that matches fairly well spread of early Slavs is indeed logical continuation of I2a* Veneti race....

another Veneti tribe were Paphlagonia Eneti...they disappeared from Paphlagonia but we know they were related to Cimmerians (waging wars together, and Paphlagonians originating in Hebrew world from Riphat who is son of Gomer from whom Cimmerians origin...both Gomer and Ripath are also located north of Black sea where we find both I2a2 and archeological findings of Cimmerians)...thing that Cimmerians are thought to have settled Cappadocia is reflected in island of I2a among Kurds in Cappadocia... this further confirms assumption that race of Veneti is originally about I2a people.... we also know that Cimmerians are related to archeological remains throughout Europe


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thraco-Cimmerian

we can see that those archeological finding match very well spread of I2a

another thing is they match well supposed spread of early Slavs....
Cappodocians who origin from Cimmerians are in time of Strabo called white Syrians...
Serbs of Balkan origin from white Serbs who came from land of Boiki that only matches Bohemia...
according to manuscript of Bavarian geographer state of Zeruiani was so big that all Slavs come from it...
Seneca speaks of Serians who live in Europe around Danube, in Caspian higlands among Sarmatians, in Serica (south Siberia/north west China) and on Red sea (?) 
Ptolemy maps Serboi tribe in Caspian highlands in Asian Sarmatia

in my opinion Serians = (white) Syrians = Zeruiani = Cimmerians and were dominantly I2a people same as related Veneti originally were I2a people....


anyway, while historic Veneti of north Italy might be different in language and culture from later early Slavs of Venetic race, they are related by sharing some I2a and same tribal name....

a clue that Boii falls into this Venetic race is that Serbs settle Balkan from land of Boii and Serbia and Bohemia are locations with highest I2a2 variance....

I explained my view about Slavs in thread of Slavs.... perhaps I can add there some more explanations...



here, I will add that Thracians were probably people of different IE origin...in my opinion, they were originally R1a same as Pelasgians throughout Balkan, Minoans on Crete and Scythians north of them.... R1b settled passing from Asia minor to Europe and carrying copper based culture... they settled in Thrace and spread from there to west...I think that J2 and E-V13 settled from Greece and Asia minor and mainly along sea coasts.. ..I2a2 spread not in Thrace proper but along Danube as Cimmerians (see map above) who later gave Trivalians and Celtic Scordisci/Serdi/Boii.... as Russian primary chronicle speaks of early Slavs moving out from those areas and going north due to expansion of Roman empire... I2a2 also spread later to Balkan as Serbs, who are perhaps same people as Tribalians and/or Celtic Scordisci/Serdi/Boii....

perhaps both various Thracian/Scythian R1a and Cimmerian/Veneti I2a spoke similar IE languages, so ancient Greek writers didnot distinguish them as they claimed Thracians were most populous race, and as they also believed that Thracians were related to Cimmerians... 

Illyrians were in my opinion dominantly E-V13 people + J2 people, same as Greeks...
Dardanians were E-V13 people mixed with R1b....
Both Illyrians and Dardanians had some R1a from Thracians, Pelasgians and ancient Macedonians....
btw. those people being R1a doesnot make them = pre-Slavic... we need to distinguish language/cultural origin from genetic origin... R1a was in my opinion originally not even IE speaking... I think that R1a in region originally spoke language like one of Minoans and Etruscans... Pelasgians are result of these R1a people mixing with IE people... from Pelasgians sprang out IE speaking R1a Scythians who spread throughout Euroasia, also in Iran...
however, on Balkan the Pelasgians were assimilated into newly arrived Greeks, Illyrians, Dardanians...

----------


## iapetoc

> interesting how the basques also have something with thracian dna
> 
> http://dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2009-08-29.pdf



Zaniolo plz it doesn'y open the PDF, can you copy paste plz,

----------


## zanipolo

> ethnic and language groups of Europe have very mixed history and many influences...
> thus, going back from any ethnic or linguistic group of today leads to many different tribes of past....
> 
> 
> there are few facts regarding Slavs to consider
> 1) their genetics is clearly European which indicates living in Europe for many thousand years - e.g. look at autosomal testing results
> http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/04...eurasians.html
> 
> 2) their first appearances in history describe them as populous race living in large areas....


I do not care for history after christ in Europe ..at this time. I am after tribal history in the BC times. 
You know that the venetic in the adriatic did not exist after christ and they where not slavs.
the Baltic venedi where either finnic or suebi in race and again where not slavic.



> thus, if they were not known as Slavs they were known under other tribal names...
> but what tribal names?


Just because slavs took a tribal name that they migrated to does not give the slavs the right to own this name. The slavs migrated into celtic boii lands and declared that they where boii, is this a justification for hereditary claim, I think not.

You fail to realise that name association is no base for legitamcy, No ancient language had a full vocabulary. The romans used greek words, german words etc etc




> historic sources suggest origin from race of Veneti...in my opinion Boii were part of this race... but I have no data to support such a claim...


which sources? and do not bring up jordanes as he was referring to 600AD and not BC.




> worth nothing is that in historic times there are several seemingly unrelated tribes throughout Europe with same tribal name Veneti....


with the link I provided, it states that they where a finnic people who migrated/traded in the baltic and north sea like the Phoencins did in the meditteraen sea.
Again, they where not slavic in the BC times





> I argue that tribal names cannot be the same by accident ... I claim that in more distant past there was single tribe and that original tribe was split through perhaps 1000 or few thousand years process into several tribes with same tribal name...throughout the time through interaction with people among whom they lived those tribes developed different languages...


well, its a fact that slavic people take the tribal name that they conquered, this is based only to legitimise there conquests




> what I claim is that original genetic basis of this Veneti race was I2a haplogroup (with passage of time through process of mixing with other people this genetic base might lost some of its frequency)....reason I claim this is that so far we find I2a* only on 2 places in Europe and those places match exactly the locations of seemingly unrelated ancient Veneti tribes in Britanny and in north Italy....thus, relation is there... and if early Slavs are of Veneti race, I2a2 that matches fairly well spread of early Slavs is indeed logical continuation of I2a* Veneti race...


link please.




> another Veneti tribe were Paphlagonia Eneti...they disappeared from Paphlagonia but we know they were related to Cimmerians (waging wars together, and Paphlagonians originating in Hebrew world from Riphat who is son of Gomer from whom Cimmerians origin...both Gomer and Ripath are also located north of Black sea where we find both I2a2 and archeological findings of Cimmerians)...thing that Cimmerians are thought to have settled Cappadocia is reflected in island of I2a among Kurds in Cappadocia... this further confirms assumption that race of Veneti is originally about I2a people.... we also know that Cimmerians are related to archeological remains throughout Europe
> 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thraco-Cimmerian
> 
> we can see that those archeological finding match very well spread of I2a


You also stated the cimbri of denmark where cimmerians, since cimbri are also ( still ) in the adriatic veneti area ( veneto) does that make these Veneti , danish?




> another thing is they match well supposed spread of early Slavs....
> Cappodocians who origin from Cimmerians are in time of Strabo called white Syrians...
> Serbs of Balkan origin from white Serbs who came from land of Boiki that only matches Bohemia...
> according to manuscript of Bavarian geographer state of Zeruiani was so big that all Slavs come from it...
> Seneca speaks of Serians who live in Europe around Danube, in Caspian higlands among Sarmatians, in Serica (soth Siberia/north west China) and on Red sea (?) 
> Ptolemy maps Serboi tribe in Caspian highlands in Asian Sarmatia


what is the year you are talking about ?





> anyway, while historic Veneti of north Italy might be different in language and culture from later early Slavs of Venetic race, they are related by sharing some I2a and same tribal name....
> 
> a clue that Boii falls into this Venetic race is that Serbs settle Balkan from land of Boii and Serbia and Bohemia are locations with highest I2a2 variance....
> 
> I explained my view about Slavs in thread of Slavs.... perhaps I can add there some more explanations...


the only link of the boii in relation with the veneti was what I provided, they settled in Lodi in lombardia, near the veneto. if they brought the I2a2 with them , i do not know





> here, I will add that Thracians were probably people of different IE origin...in my opinion, they were originally R1a same as Pelasgians throughout Balkan, Minoans on Crete and Scythians north of them.... R1b settled passing from Asia minor to Europe and carrying copper based culture... they settled in Thrace and spread from there to west...I think that J2 and E-V13 settled from Greece and Asia minor and mainly along sea coasts.. ..I2a2 spread not in Thrace proper but along Danube as Cimmerians (see map above) who later gave Trivalians and Celtic Scordisci/Serdi/Boii.... as Russian primary chronicle speaks of early Slavs moving out from those areas and going north due to expansion of Roman empire... I2a2 also spread later to Balkan as Serbs, who are perhaps same people as Tribalians and/or Celtic Scordisci/Serdi/Boii....
> 
> perhaps both various Thracian/Scythian R1a and Cimmerian/Veneti I2a spoke similar IE languages, so ancient Greek writers didnot distinguish them as they claimed Thracians were most populous race, and as they also believed that Thracians were related to Cimmerians...


the thracians , where related to the trojans in the troad and the thracian tribes in anatolia where the thyni

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




> Illyrians were in my opinion dominantly E-V13 people + J2 people, same as Greeks...
> Dardanians were E-V13 people mixed with R1b....
> Both Illyrians and Dardanians had some R1a from Thracians, Pelasgians and ancient Macedonians....
> btw. those people being R1a doesnot make them = pre-Slavic... we need to distinguish language/cultural origin from genetic origin... R1a was in my opinion originally not even IE speaking... I think that R1a in region originally spoke language like one of Minoans and Etruscans... Pelasgians are result of these R1a people mixing with IE people... from Pelasgians sprang out IE speaking R1a Scythians who spread throughout Euroasia, also in Iran...
> however, on Balkan the Pelasgians were assimilated into newly arrived Greeks, Illyrians, Dardanians...


I already provided you the haplogroup link that the J2 people where also the veneti, who sent immigrants to crete in the 13th century.
If illyrians have J2 and the veneti have J2 are they the same?

----------


## zanipolo

> Zaniolo plz it doesn'y open the PDF, can you copy paste plz,



hmm, works for me, i just tested it

----------


## zanipolo

Iapetoc, maybe this site is of use to you

http://home.exetel.com.au/thrace/tribes.htm

----------


## Thrace

iapetoc how could it be determined if the Pomak R1a is in indeed Slavic and not Central Asian R1a? Was the clade determined? 

regards

----------


## iapetoc

> iapetoc how could it be determined if the Pomak R1a is in indeed Slavic and not Central Asian R1a? Was the clade determined? 
> 
> regards





> iapetoc how could it be determined if the Pomak R1a is in indeed Slavic and not Central Asian R1a? Was the clade determined? 
> 
> regards


 
i have not said that pomaks are R1a Y-DNA,
I have n'y found any connection,

I said that pomaks Gorani Torbesi, are isolated comnunities, 
a gennetical search proves that all pomaks in Greece share a unique Dna Characteristic,

The R1a of Thracians is from ancient Tombs,
I don't know about Y-DNA of pomaks,

but as isolated for more than 1000 (better estimation 1500 -2500 years) means that these people, especially the Pomaks in north Greece, did not marry easily foreigners,
they live there at least before 1000 AD average after 100 AD, 
that make pomaks possible to be origins of a thracian tribe,
on the other hand their language, is the less latin slavic language, 
that case leads to a conclusion that either Thracians were proto-slavic or near-slavic speakers,
either pomaks are pure Slavic or Balkars that invade at 6 century AD,
the possibilty of a small inavders familly tribe that habited mountains.

their connections with Turkey is just a propaganda pushed by Turkish cause every muslim in Balkans must be a Turkish,
*the situation muslim = Turk, christian = Greek or Slavic is over in balkans,*

in fact the language of pomaks could a tool for propaganda for modern Bulgarians, that ancient Thracians spoke a Slavic-relative language,
so Odryssai Thracians was the starting point of Thracian expansion

pomaks are a tribe a sub-nation either ancient Thracian either Slavic or Balkars (the real ones) 


I don't know about DYS or pomaks DNA, 
I read about R1a of ancient tombs in posts by Macciamo and Julia.
about Pomaks i know a lot of them from University times, (west-Greek Thrace)

Ferata Storti fundation made a blood (Αιματολογια) search in Pomaks and found HbO -Arab in Greek pomaks, that is not that much spread in rest named pomaks,

Pomaks are mainly small patrias (familly tribes) which many of them are not even connected,
simply all muslim slavic-speaking are consider pomaks and that is mistake, or propapaganda pushed by some,

Pomaks of Greece are not connected with pomaks of Albania (torbesi) for example, they have tottaly different characteristics,
but politician name all slavic speaking muslims as pomaks,

pomaks tribe are considered 

the pomaks of Rodope Echinos (original pomaks, with typical and standard characteristics)
pomaks of Pazardix area BG (slavic speaking muslims, kazanlak people could be Turkish not pomaks or turned to turkish before centuries)

Torbesi are not Pomaks but slavic speaking muslim, their acceptance as Pomaks is to categorize them as nation or a minority,
Torbesi could be slaviciced tribe,

Gorani are considered relatives of BG pomaks (pazardix area), also could be Serbs, that later accept islam,

the Burgass pomaks is a strange sittuation since are also the majority of Turkish pomaks

mainly these 5 tribes live in balkans,

there is another tribe the karadjova pomaks but immigrated to turkey at 1920 when Greek-Turkish exchange pop was done,

Pomak is consider every Muslim that speak slavic, 
they are not a nation but mostly tribes that share culture of islam and Slavic language,

exept some areas in Turkey or Kazanlak in BG which could be Turkish origin, the rest of them are Slavic people or pre pre-slavic that slavicised and then Muslimized

the pomaks of Greece Rodopa is the special occasion that could originated from Thracian or purely early Slavic, that accept Islam,

the rest mainly Local Balkan people that first accepted slavic language and then islam religion,

that is why Gorani Torbesi and Pomaks speak dialects with other elements than primary slavic

the gennetical interest is in the about 30 villages of blonde Pomaks in Rodope mostly in the Greek area estimation of 20-30 000 people in GR and BG, since they are the most isolated and surely the most homogenous. And not to all that share the word Pomaks.

as an example All muslims of west Thrace in Greece are not real POMAKS,
but they use that inner name or an exonym,


the case of Koprulu Mehmet pasa is still under discusion and still mention everytime on how Pomaks islamization starts 

many histories, like their origin was from Phillipolis and took mountains for avoid genocide,
Gulem kamen, Momtsi kamen momin kamen etc
or a beutifull woman that in order to marry Vizier all familly should accept islam 
or they knew to rose oil secret, etc, 
some even connect Rodope Pomaks with Alaric 1 of Visigoths
All the above could be just fake propaganda or science fiction or true
exept the case of Alaric 1 that some soldiers took mountains and left his army
but has no prove

the rest tribes of pomaks don't have that much interest since are considered Balkan people who either slavicised or were slavic and accept islam,

exept the other tribes the area of Ωacha valley - Κομοτηνη and the Area Echinos Ξανθη Tribes have gennetical interest, with priority the Echinos, the most isolated,

for Turkish goverment all Gorani Torbesi Pomaks are Turkish nation !!!!
For Bulgarian are Bulgarians who accept islam,

for Greeks exept the Echinos area all the rest could be Balkan people, Thracians Romans Cinquaroi, Serbs Bulgarians Egyptians Indians Greeks Roma that 1rst accept Slavic language, (or were slavic) and 2nd became muslims
in case of kazanlak BG pomaks could be Turks immigrants that accepted slavic language
the case of Echinos area pomaks as also the vacha valley could be Ancient Thracian origin 
or the original Slavic invaders or the real Balkars invaders,
the case of Visigoths has no Historical evidence. but is a possible scenario,
as also the case that are original Cumans

if you have any new but scientific and not science fiction link plz help.

I repeat that if pomaks of Greek Echinos are ancient Thracians then surely the connection of Ancient Thracian to be a pre -south slavic is obvious, something among Greco-Slavic Thracian and not the Illyro-Daci Thracian branch

the 500 years of islamization of pomaks did not change their language to Turkish than the last 50 years,
the case of Pomaks being Turks from Anadolia that dwell balkans and accept slavic is Funny,
only in case of Kazanluk could be true, but not in isolated mountains 
since they already knew Turkish and lived in mountains isolated and at ottomans empire time, changed language to Slavic with Greek influence  :Petrified: 

 :Laughing:   :Laughing:   :Laughing:  
is more than funny

----------


## zanipolo

Where the thracians and trojans the same people?, both spoke luwian.

Thrace had the european lands plus anatolian lands
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bithynia


As for the map of the hittite peoples and allies provided by yes and no
Wilusa = Ilios = city of troy
Taurisa = Troad = Land of the trojans
Taurusci = People of the lands of troy

With treviso also having people called Taurusci
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treviso


with taurisci being celti and of venetic nature, does it make sense that these peoples migrated from the troad to the adriatic, if so, then are the trojans a thracian tribe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taurisci

Anyone have a link to thracian dna? ot mtdna

----------


## Thrace

To put the question in other persepective and more simple terms, what would be the sources stating that tested Thracian tombs resuled as R1a and what would make them proto-Slavic? Regarding Pomaks only time and objective wide-scale genetic testing will tell their ancient migratory patterns. For sure these constitute an isolated and a separate ethnic entity in the Balkans, which needs additiona research. Also if some researchers have suggested Turkic connection such as a Cuman or Pecheneg that is also plausable, the Bulgars have also adopted a Slavic language instead of their native Turkic (or by some recent speculators Persian) so anything is possible, no need for funny faces. Just look at the several million of Albanians that these days pass for modern day Greeks...language is not everything, even now we communicate in English, the ancients were no different, they adapted.

----------


## how yes no 2

> I do not care for history after christ in Europe ..at this time. I am after tribal history in the BC times. 
> You know that the venetic in the adriatic did not exist after christ and they where not slavs.





> I already provided you the haplogroup link that the J2 people where also the veneti, who sent immigrants to crete in the 13th century.
> If illyrians have J2 and the veneti have J2 are they the same?



lol, you do not care for mentions of Veneti after Christ because ancient Veneti do not exist in that time, and than you do not have problem to identify ancient Veneti with Venetians from 13th century :)


Illyrians and Adriatic Veneti could have been dominant or strong in J2... that is quite possible...

But Adriatic Veneti have tribal name that origins from earlier Veneti tribe.... my point is not about how much J2 did Adriatic Veneti have, but that I2a seems to be what connects different branches of Veneti... that doesnot mean that Adriatic Veneti couldnot have lot of J2 ..it means that their tribal name likely origins from some I2a people.....

when I say Veneti I do not speak of Adriatic Veneti but of all tribes with tribal name Veneti...as it is likely that there is some common source for tribes sharing same tribal name... I am convinced this common point for Veneti is I2a... my clues are I2a* found only in areas of Celtic Veneti and in area of Adriatic Veneti, I2a2 in Slavic people said to be of Venetic race, I2a2 in Cappadocia where Cimmerians who were related to Paphlagonia Veneti settled...





> the Baltic venedi where either finnic or suebi in race and again where not slavic.
> Just because slavs took a tribal name that they migrated to does not give the slavs the right to own this name. The slavs migrated into celtic boii lands and declared that they where boii, is this a justification for hereditary claim, I think not.


Slavs never declared they are Boii...
I have indicated that it is possible (donot know how likely) that Balkan Serbs are related to Boii and I did give few indications for that...

what is the basis for your claim that there is no way that Baltic Venedi could have been Slav related people? you state it very strongly...let me hear the arguments, if any...




> You fail to realise that name association is no base for legitamcy, No ancient language had a full vocabulary. The romans used greek words, german words etc etc


I speak of tribal names...those mostly have no preserved menaning in nations, but are condensed identity of nations that are transferred from one generation to another... e.g. let's assume that you are Albanian, it is likely that your kids will see themselves as Albanians, and their kids, and kids of their kids...it will not happen that every few generations invent new word and say from now on instead of Albanians the name is Zanipolianians or Taranianians,,, will it? it may happen that instead of Albanians changes in languages over honderds of years cause shift to Arbanians, Arbers and similar...





> well, its a fact that slavic people take the tribal name that they conquered, this is based only to legitimise there conquests


this is not about language...
it is about genetics...
my claim is that I2a is what connects all different branches of Veneti...
so the origin of Veneti tribal identity was I2a...
if you can't stand idea that today I2a is most present in Slavic people, that is your problem...





> link please.


I have already linked few posts before... and in zillion other occasions... read my posts...
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...x?section=ymap




> You also stated the cimbri of denmark where cimmerians, since cimbri are also ( still ) in the adriatic veneti area ( veneto) does that make these Veneti , danish?


I have no clue what you want to say here...





> the only link of the boii in relation with the veneti was what I provided, they settled in Lodi in lombardia, near the veneto. if they brought the I2a2 with them , i do not know


Boii didnot stay there...they moved away...so, not much genetic trace can be there due to them...

----------


## zanipolo

> when I say Veneti I do not speak of Adriatic Veneti but of all tribes with tribal name Veneti...as it is likely that there is some common source for tribes sharing same tribal name... I am convinced this common point for Veneti is I2a... my clues are I2a* found only in areas of Celtic Veneti and in area of Adriatic Veneti, I2a2 in Slavic people said to be of Venetic race, I2a2 in Cappadocia where Cimmerians who were related to Paphlagonia Veneti settled...
> 
> 
> 
> what is the basis for your claim that there is no way that Baltic Venedi could have been Slav related people? you state it very strongly...let me hear the arguments, if any...
> 
> 
> I
> 
> ...


you give me a link which has only 1 person as I2a ............what does this indicate?

You keep quoting eneti from the anatolia. Have you read homers books, the passage refers to Pylaemedes and the Paphalgonians from the lands of the eneti. It does not say eneti people moved anywhere, they did not even fight at troy. Did they ( the eneti) exist?
.
Its like Tito and the croatians from the lands of the istria

Homer also has pylaemedes dying in 2 different chapters by 2 different people, how many pylaemedes where there. Which one is related to the "eneti" if any?

In regards to slavic I2a....the true slavic diagontic would be I1b1 

-In india there is a city called Ayodhya and the area of this city is called Vendhia. the venets of india where called the carriers.

-In latin, Vendes means a seller of goods a merchant, trader 

- Where the adriatc veneti just a trading people of mixed tribal races, did they make the 2 amber roads for trade . Are the venetians who where great merchants and traders have these genes from ancient times.

What about this theory - The Venedi from the suebi/finnic language migrated to the adriatic then marched up to jutland as per 1 of the amber roads , then sail to brittany to colonise armonica

take your pick



*A

-yodhya**Ayodhya*

----------


## how yes no 2

Zanipolo, I will move give answer to your question about Veneti and Trojan war to sea peoples topic..it fits well there...




> In regards to slavic I2a....the true slavic diagontic would be I1b1


if you do not even know that I1b1 was renamed to I2a2 long time ago than better do not write about genetics...it seems even I2a2 is outdated name now...




> -In india there is a city called Ayodhya and the area of this city is called Vendhia. the venets of india where called the carriers.
> 
> -In latin, Vendes means a seller of goods a merchant, trader 
> - Where the adriatc veneti just a trading people of mixed tribal races, did they make the 2 amber roads for trade . Are the venetians who where great merchants and traders have these genes from ancient times.


I guess your argument is that proto-Slavs were not merchants so they could not have carried tribal name Veneti..




> What about this theory - The Venedi from the suebi/finnic language migrated to the adriatic then marched up to jutland as per 1 of the amber roads , then sail to brittany to colonise armonica


what about theory they came from Mars? it is not enough to have "theory"one needs to have arguments... I have relatively solid arguments about I2a being original haplogroup of Veneti.... this doesn't make Slavic in language or culture the original Veneti tribe from which all Venetic people origin, but it shows that early Slavic people were indeed from race of Veneti as claimed by Jordanes...

----------


## mihaitzateo

Well nobody knows what thracians were.
I think they were some kind of vikings or something like that.
(When I am talking about thracians I am refering to those ppl who had Troy as their capital.)
I do not think the thracians were same with dinarid people,which seems to define the I2 bearers and not same with dacians,which seems to be some kind of south swedes if you look at the description (blond hair,blue eyes,taller than other barbarians),more exactly like Jordandes told,goths/geats.
I2 people seems to be a peacefull group of people who had main activies agriculture and hearding,for Romania sheep hearding is traditional and here you find a large percentage of I2 on paternal line,in Yugoslavia in Bulgaria agriculture is traditional,in Sardinia where you find another branch of I2,sheepherding and agriculture are traditional also.
If you look at popular costumes and popular songs from Serbia/Croatia/Romania and Sardinia those are looking very close.I did not included bosnians because muslim religion changed traditional costumes of serbians of muslim religion,which are the now called bosnians.And in Bulgaria,the bulgars came,which were a population of warriors (something like vikings or so) and maybe those changed also folklore in Bulgaria.
What you can see in Romania and Serbo-Croatia is the the fact that in Romania 35% of the population belong to dinaric type while in Serbo-Croatia 70% or so belongs to this type,also most common color for hair is brown,most common color for eyes is brown which is no way how the thracians were looking - red hair and blue eyes or how dacians were looking - blonde hair and blue eyes.
In Bulgaria,because of the Bulgars a lot more people have the eyes light,and not the usual brown,as it is in Romania/Sardinia/Serbo-Croatia.But if you go in north Romania/some areas of Transilvania,about 30% of the people,if not more have light eyes.Think that is the influence of goths.

----------


## uguner

In Balkans, Pomaks are showing different physical and cultural characteristics and appearances. Their languages are more or less same but obviously in different dialects. While there are many differences among all these people why do they call themselves as Pomaks? Are the Pomaks from all regions having similar genetic character?




> i have not said that pomaks are R1a Y-DNA,
> I have n'y found any connection,
> 
> I said that pomaks Gorani Torbesi, are isolated comnunities, 
> a gennetical search proves that all pomaks in Greece share a unique Dna Characteristic,
> 
> The R1a of Thracians is from ancient Tombs,
> I don't know about Y-DNA of pomaks,
> 
> ...

----------


## olivoil

Thracians (who r pelasgian tribes) are E1B group, as the DNA of their bones proof.

----------


## Pelasgi97

Can you send me where you saw this

----------

