P&G wrote:
>> If not, tell me what you dislike or why you don not agree with the
>> way I gone
>
> (a) Distinguish fiction from fact
> (b) Can you think of any reason why a Greek work, such as Homer, would
> pretend Greeks and Trojans were able to speak to each other? It
> wouldn't make much sense to Greek listeners, if the Trojan speech was
> given in something foreign. We cannot take this as historical
> evidence (c) You suggested Trojans spoke Thracian because of the
> Thracian toponyms Now you are suggesting the Thracian names arrived
> later
>
> What's wrong with it? Try reading previous emails
>
> Peter
I see where is your problem. In fact I am the one who made you to react
this way. I said the Latins are thracians because they are descendants
of the Trojans and I said the Trojans are thracians because the topon. &
hydron. are the same in Troy and Thrace. I am sure you took it as
demonstrated 100% . OK, is ma fault, I should have had formulated in
another way the idea.
a) in what Virgil said, is nothing to distinguish ( fiction or fact).
One can believes it or not. If one do not believe is ok, if yes, he has
to see if there is something more which can demonstrate it.
b)does it pretend it? It was you the one who said there seems there have
been not comunication's trouble between Greek and Trojans. And I showed
there seems too there is no communication's trouble between Thracian and
Greek and Trojans.
Homer's work is poetry, he gives a story with big details but he does
not mention anything about translators as if all the people there
spooked the same language. We have to agree at least greek-thracians
spooked not the same language or greek-trojans spooked not the same
language. Being poetry, Homer spooked not about the languages but he
described the dialogs between different folks , and that was important
for the Greek listeners , not in which language it was spooked. We are
on the same position here. From what Homer say, it is not possible to
know anything about the language of the Trojans or other folks which
appear in Iliada.
3) I do not suggest. I assume there _could be_ a second explanation of
the similarities for toponyms and hydronyms in Thrace and Troj. And this
explanation is the fact that the regions of Troj have been inhabited
after fall of Troj for almost 1000 years by thracians. This is a fact.
And if I keep sustaining that " there are similar topnonyms" one will
show me the second possibility. They are _maybe_ because these 1000
years of thracians inhabiting old places and not because of the
eventually similarities of the both languages. Here one should bring
arguments pro and contra of both possibilities.
4) If one will show the possible /imposibile relationship of Trojans
with Thracians then the possibility that Vergilius said the truth is
bigger but still not demonstrated. There should be more work to do for
showing it.
5) the need and presence of translators for comunication between Greek
and Thracians is given by Xenophon. We know for sure, the Thracians
_needed_ translators when comunicated with Greeks. See the episode where
Seuthes ( a thracian leader ) has Xenophon in his army.