Re: [tied] Keeping up, barely :-)

----- Original Message -----
From: "George S t a n a" <gs001ns@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:40 AM
Subject: [tied] Keeping up, barely :-)


>
> >[Moeller]From the _historic_ point of wiev the romanians
means
> >they are the dacians .What they do today?Well, I guess they
> >feel very prety beeing the descendants of "two men":-)) lol
> >Trajan & Decebal.
>
> But how about the other... parents, such as Atilla (aka
Attila),
> Bortz-Membrok, Nogay (Mr McTyeire's allusion, I suppose) as
well
> as some Borislavs, Svetozars and Tzvetans. Hm? :))
>
> >It is pretty hard for John Normalbuyer
>
> Oh boy, you translate more and more German idiomatics into
> English. Soon, you'll post entire "Filserbriefe". :)
>
> g

[Moeller] do I understand wrong? I never try to assume a
purity of any race or so. When I speak about romanians I see
it as a big conglomerat where the mamjirity aer the old
autochtons. And is hard to belive that itr should be in an
another way. Even the thracian were a mixed folk with
iranians, scytians, celtic and so on. There is no purity
because the nature dont want it so. If the nature should
wanted it, it have should composed a chemical thingie and
never should have been a intermingling. .But is not the case
and it is good so.:-)