OK, there is maybe a failure, but which one?

Hello together,

I made a supposition that in the south of europe , excepting some
enclaves, the people spoked all a lexicaly similar language
with latin.Please keep in mind I do not speak about literar ,
ciceronian latin but I mean with "latin" that "lingua barbara"
in the meaning of which the romans meant it.

Here we have several statements of ancient writers regarding
the "almost identity" of these languages.

Some example:


for Iberia:
Enninus ( 239-169 BC) affirm the people spoken a kind of latin
there .Because the romans just went there at that time, we
cannot speak about an romanised folk at that time.

for galia:
strabon tells us that Iulius have had to crypt his letters to his
generals in Greece because of the similarity of the celtic
dialects spoken in Galia with the latin language.

for balcan:
strabon tells us the folks from balcan excepting greek spoked all the
same language. I mean trough balcan the ancient
thrace, moesia, dacia, panonia, respectively actualy part of european
turky, bulgaria, ex-yugoslavien,rumania,hungary.

Velleius Paterculus tells us in Pannonia was spoken a kind of latin.

Priscus informs us that at the Court of Attila the ausonic language
was too spoked ( ausonic=latin dialect)

Just for these a few informations I would say this is enough and this
is why in these places could be born the neo romance languages. So I
should like to think, there were a multitude of folks which spoke a
language close to latin and because of this the latin language could
penetrate very easy and in time, it took for every place of today the
form of the new languages we know about.
But it seems I make somewhere, somehow a mistake. I dont know if this
is a logical mistake or an another one.
I will high appreciate to show me where this failure is.
I will kindly appreciate your oppinions.

Best Regards


A. Moeller