[Piotr]
I am only trying to say that popular beliefs are not reliable
historical evidence. "Vox populi, vox dei" in politics, perhaps, but
not in science.
>
> Piotr
[Moeller]
Piotr, i will invite you in a summer to come with me into
Carpathians. I heard there from people, simple peasants and old mine
workers a lot of stories . About a fight for a girl betwen a roman
official and a simple dacian guy, about the "haiduci" ( borrowed from
slav of course) who was killing the imperial employes, a lot of such
stuf.. I want to say with this there are such stories they never have
been writen somewhere, there is no romanian book with such stories.
Just on the oral way, storied from old to young.. In this case, where
from they got these stories? Certanly, the people must have a big
phantasie, but without a bit of truth there is no story..For such
stories there was no gux politicly interested or what ever. In a way
i dont want to go on the mythic aspect of this one. In the folklore,
old traditions, thier national suites and so on. As I seen them in
their natinal suites i was really just amazed, and i tought too they
should be trough magic from the Traian Columns into real life over
night.. Just for the folkloric factor, you win a lot if you see it..
so, enough about this aspect.. What I want to ask is something else:
mmmm.. and what does speak against a common language in balkan
until on the scene apears the slavs?I mean, not folk myths ,
but "reliable historical evidences" ? Nothing, so far i know.
At least for a common language we have some ancient text(and folk
myths). For a multitude of languages is just what we suppose to have
been at that time. I am wrong?
Best Regards
A. Moeller