Re: [tied] Re: continuity ( it was slavic "dalto")

From: alex_lycos
Message: 20702
Date: 2003-04-02

george knysh wrote:
> --- alex_lycos <altamix@...> wrote:
> when you will demonstrate how some poor scatered
>> romanians will
>> asimilate the big masses of Slavs in the North of
>> Danube we can talk
>> about any location South of Danube of the Romanians
> *****GK: The Rumanians who assimilated Slavs north of
> the Danube were not exactly poor or scattered, and the
> Slavs not exactly "big masses". The historical
> evidence for Rumanians south of the Danube is
> overwhelming. What is your evidence for large masses
> of Rumanians north of the Danube before the 12th-14th
> centuries? ******
1) what makes you be so sure the Slavs have been not too many and the
Romanians have been a lot? I am sure you will try to explain trough a
migration from South of Danube in North. Why this migration? For
escaping the Slavs? It seems unlike. Evryone knows the Slavs are coming
from north, but the Proto-Romanians should be so crazy to migrate in the
direction where the Slavs are coming from. It looks like a game "let us
chaneg the teritories" for making fun 1000 year later.

2) the historical evidence of Romanians or Aromanians? I still do not
renounce of a big mass of Romanians migrating in the South of Danube as
the Hungarians arrived. The arguments fits too well for thinking this is
just a simple thought.

3) for me the evidence for Romanians in the North of Danube should be
enough if this is probed just trough only one thing. And because there
are the Rãcãtau toponyms of old dacians Racatenses _ is more as enough

4) George, I don't like to write this point 4 but I feel it must be
done. Please see it just as my thoughts about a very complexe situation
an I hope this what follows in this point, will don't be need to be
repeated once again. Pleae keep in mind that on this list none speaks
here about political or territorial claims , so please let me explain
how I see the things. It doesn't matter if romanised or not, the
Romanians _are_ the thracians. Therefore, beginning with Homer, we know
their ancestors have been north and south of Danube. They are home
there. It is a illusion to come in the 6 or 9 century and to say : from
this year is the year 0 where we can speak about territorial claims. One
thing is sure. The Romanians and Albanians -it doesn't matter which is
finally their root because their root is in the region of Danube, North
and South are the more autochthonous from all actual populations of the
Balkan and North of Danube. In so far, in the senseless dispute about
"which land belong to whom" we reach the paradox that the Romanians and
Albanians shouldn't have any country because of later emigrants ( just
theoretically, of course). So we can see how funny a such idea should
be. And who are the people who making such senseless assumptions? The
later emigrants, Slavs and Hungarians. I don't want to hurt anyone here.
Facts are facts. Slavs in Balkan are emigrants as well as Hungarians.
None contests them the lands where they live now. They could profited in
the history, they have it now, this is the reality. But when some
ideologists of this people are trying to show that Romanians and
Albanians have no rights for a portion of land _in Thracia and Dacia_ in
this case there is nothing more to dispute. They can do it if they show
that these people, Albanians and Romanians are more later emigrants as
themselves AND, a very big AND , they are coming _not from Blakan or
In the moment when they will show it, I agree, they could have any
territorial claims they could have.

5) for 4) I consider no Romanian or Albanian needs to demonstrate
anything about continuity or not in the places where they lives. The
only one discussion which can be made is the linguistic discussion and
nothing more. I hope this is no need anymore that someone will ask about
the continuity of Romanians or Albanians. It was the big Land of ours,
of Balkanic people. Some people have been coming and they are now too
Balkanic people. Me as Romanian or me as Albanian, maybe I don't have
anymore the house in the place where my father and fore-fathers have
had. But I have it still in _our Thracian and Dacian land _. And in that
old lands there was place for other people to make their houses too..
There fore none has the right co come to me and to tell me to show any

6) I excuse myself if I offended someone with my words.

Best regards,