Re: [tied] Piotr and the Dacians:-)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:30 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Piotr and the Dacians:-)


> One thing is for sure. If some Getic tribes survived the
collapse of Dacia in the northern Carpathians and lingered on
for a while, Romanian originated elsewhere and they did not
contribute to its development.

[Moeller] yes. The romanians generated somewhere in the south
of the Danube ( See Ovid Densusianu, Sulzer, Roessler & Co) or
their home land is Italia ( see Nestor ) or they have been
there where tehy are now in IX -century (see all gestae
Hungarorum and Kekaumenos ).
Problem is that in VI centuries there still have been bessi
and some getic tribes . The question are:
-why we do not find romanians in other places as the places
which once where inhabited by getae
- how could the new commers spread over such a big areal until
ukraine
- how could the new commers get so large in a such shortly
time
- where exactly is in balcan thier home land?
- where exactly is in Italy their hme land?
- this is the only migration which remain undocumentated
- this is the only migration from south to north of danube
- where have they been until X centuries
- why got the Asanenians help from the valahs from the north
of Danube if the most of the valahians were south of danube

about language: see some episodes of Roman Empire like:

Septimus Severus versus Maximus Thrax
- change made by Hadrian in Roman Army
- episode of Caracalla and the wars with the free dacians
- the name of the country. It was Dacia, becam Gothia,
Gepidia, Part of Avarian Kaghanate, Cumania, but remained as a
stamp for everybody in time as "Dacia"

About etonim
- the new name "Romania" appears just after the fall of
Constantinopole

About slavs:
- how did they became so few north of danube when they should
be there at most?
- who deny that the bulgar language is the result of the slavs
mixed with " a population" which was there in south of danube.

Abaut the substratum
- do not compare with albanian and take PIE roots and applay
them to romanian substrate. See what about. Satem?Centum?
Both?
- make clear in which category of languages is this substratum

About dacism of albanians:
- one simple question . The albanians is supposed to be the
dacians. Their language is not latinized, they just have some
latini words and slavic words and romanian words and maybe
some others, but their language is a properly ancient
language. The question:
- why doesnt the plants found at dioscoride match with
albanian plants name?
- vhy doesnt match the words from albanian with wotrds from
dacians like Darsos, Aparia, Aparus, Naparis, Saldapa ( until
I dont find the bloody source for Salapia I dont use this
toponym never ever)


I stop here. All I said here is a part from the sieve I talked
in another mail about. Here are the holes who need to be
reparated. When we do it in a very good way, we can go back in
the time line to restore what we are missing inthe history and
where we do not have any records of these times.

Regards

a. moeller