Re: [tied] Thrace

--- "Rex H. McTyeire" <rexbo@...> wrote:

>
> But Tyragetae were there,

*****GK: There is no record of Tyragetae in the period
prior to 800 BC and none in Herodotus. He only knows
of Tyritae who were Greeks. You can postulate all you
like about Getae, but you will not find a single
classical source which holds that they lived in
Thrace, except those south of the Danube.*****

and you at least concede

> they were Getae, who
> are called Thracian, and speaking Thracian,
> definitely in (your)
> Thrace..and on the Tyra? ...sounds like Thrace to
> me.

*****GK: Even if we asssumed an absolute identity of
language between Getae and Thracians (and we
cannot)that still does not entitle us to call the
country of the Getae "Thrace". Not all Englishmen live
in England.*****

The record,

> however, < does > exist for Thrace applied to areas
> west of that point,
> and N. the Danube.

*****GK: I know of no such record. One doubtful map
won't do the trick. And dialectical somersaults which
ignore the clear evidence and unanimity of classical
sources won't either. Sorry.******

>
> *****GK We COULD
> O-: refer to them by names given to archaeological
> O-: cultures (the "Bilozerans", the "Chornolissians"
> O-: etc.).
>
> Why would we want to do that? If we have people
> there called Thracians,

****GK: That's just it. We have no record of a people
north of the Danube called "Thracians"*****

> speaking Thracian..doesn't seem to be a really large
> challenge to logic
> to suggest an eastern extension of a known
> Thrace..which was named but
> never a State.

*****GK: Seems as though this "logic" escaped all our
sources.******

>
> *****GK Herodotus didn't know these peoples' names
> O-: either, and so he chose to call them "Ancient"
> (or
> O-: "Old"-- no diff) "Scythians", since their
> descendants
> O-: had consolidated with the Paralata-Skolota into
> a
> O-: single "nation". It's as if, in the absence of
> any
> O-: information about Gaul someone were to call Gaul
> "Old
> O-: France".******
>
> I 'm obviously missing the relevance you are reading
> into H.'s use of
> "old/ancient/any variant" here as relevant to Thrace
> N. the Danube?

****GK: Yes you are, Pay attention. ready?*****

It

> is a sliver of Black Sea coast, as he defines it.

*****GK: Nope. Pay attention. He says that "Ancient
Scythia" begins north of the Danube and runs eastward,
with the Black Sea as its southern boundary. It
doesn't take much logic to figure out that it also has
a northern boundary does it? And a western one too.
The eastern one is defined: Carcinitis. The northern
and western ones are not. But since in the West
"Ancient Scythia" begins where the Scythia of ca. 450
BC does (Herodotus says so himself a few lines
earlier)he doesn't have to repeat himself.*****

> O-: *****GK: My point is that nothing NORTH of
> O-: the Danube was CALLED "Thrace", even if it can
> be
> O-: shown that many of the populations north of the
> Danube
> O-: actually spoke a language and had customs very
> close
> O-: to those of the "Thracian" populations south of
> the
> O-: Danube.
>
> Hmmm. The map I am looking at..does not exist?

*****GK: Your map is of little use compared to the
written sources, none of which confirm it.*****

I'm

> sorry.. Calling a
> people < and > their language Thracian, and placing
> them geographically
> across a number of times and chroniclers.. seems a
> fair equation to
> Thrace to me.

*****GK: Bad logic. This is usually called a
non-sequitur. Even if the North Getae were
Thracian,(and the admission need not be made as
closely as you would wish) it does not follow that
they lived in Thrace.****


Map labels reading: {insert Place

> name of choice},
> usually mean either: 1) error..2) a combining of
> known with unknown..or
> 3) the place under the label is known per the label.
> Now which is it?
> The only other possibility is I made it up. (My
> heart made me do it? )

*****GK: I have no idea what made and makes you do
it.*****

>
> O-: just as Dacia/Getia is not Thrace.*******
>
> Of course they were:

*****GK: Sorry. I prefer to follow the unanimity of
classical authors on this rather than your
concoctions.*****

>
> O-: ******GK [NEW]***: All other evidence? Certainly
> not
> O-: that of any classical historians and geographers
> known
> O-: to me... ******
>
> There are numerous references to < all > of Europe
> North and west of
> the Aegean called Thrace. Then a breakdown into
> three elements including
> Thracia; then much more detail incrementally in
> named groups areas in a
> rather reasonable chronological sequence. H. calls
> Geto-Daci Thracian,
> whether you choose to read it so or no.

****GK: No. He calls the Getae south of the Danube
Thracian. There is no choice involved here. It's clear
as rainwater.*****


Strabo says

> Daci and Getae both
> speak the same dialect of Thracian; .but it can't be
> Thrace? Why?

*****GK: Because all written sources known to us deny
it. That's why.*******

> Because you choose to apply a later set of political
> definitions while
> accusing me of mixing disciplines?

*****GK The difference between us is that I choose to
follow the sources, while you follow your "idee
fixe".*****

My cat is a

> better linguist than I:
> My interest < is > ethnic and historical. None
> which has kah kah pooh
> to do with the name Thrace applied to regions North
> the Danube, and west
> of Scythia on the Dniester.

******GK: Cats, kah kah and pooh. Now there's a solid
argument for you.******

(RMcT) The

> demise of classical
> Scythia was directly due to Phillip and Son,

*****GK: Philip checked their attempt at a southward
expansion, but it didn't do him much good since he
lost much of his booty to the Triballians. As for his
son Alexander he was smart enough not to try to
confront them, and chose easier pickings. But his
Viceroy in Thracia Zopirion wasn't quite as smart. He
tried it in 331 BC with a huge army. 30,000. They were
annihilated. So think again about "direct" causes of
Scythian decline.*****

>
>
>
> O-: *****GK [NEW]: I think you should read Strabo on
> this,
> O-: His view of the extent of Thrace was similar to
> O-: Herodotus, and he (Strabo) specifically
> mentioned that
> O-: Thracian power had drastically declined in his
> O-: time.******
>
> I have read Strabo on this, and to focus the
> point..I have added a few
> clips at bottom..save you some time: Herodotus and
> your interpretation
> of Herodotus..do not seem to agree, nor your Strabo.
> Perhaps you could
> add a little Cassius Dio as well.

****GK: No need to discuss your "flatus vocis". You
obviously don't have a clue, I'm sad to say.******

>
> O-: *****GK [NEW]: Why should I dismiss the
> Tyragetae?
> O-: They were Getae of the Tyras area.
>
>

=== message truncated ===

******GK: I'll deal with the rest of your points
separately since yahoo seems tired of long
messages.*****


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Greetings - Send FREE e-cards for every occasion!
http://greetings.yahoo.com