Re: [tied] The "lost" Slavic homeland

george knysh wrote:

> The huge expansion of
> Slavdom which began in the later 5th c. was due
> neither to Goths nor to Huns. We talk about migration,
> but perhaps the just mentioned "expansion" is a better
> word, since Slavs continued to hold the areas whence
> they "expanded".

Beside the Romania and Albania.

> Perhaps a similar scenario would work
> for the Romanians, viz., expansion rather than
> "migration" (except for those actually involved in the
> move). BTW Mommsen has been quite superseded by a host
> of 20th c. investigators.******

it wont work because of the slavs. We expect in North of Danube as the
first valahian states have been created, the Slavic element. And not in
the upper clas as knez and prister but in the lower class of simply
peasants, being numerous enough for playing the same role as the
valahians played in south of Danuber, in both countries Serbia and
Bulgaria. Such mentions are not to find. And this will make stronger the
assumption there was no migration of the valachs north of danube and
most of the Slavs crossed Danube and settled in South. Not only that
they crossed, but they went deep in the Byzantine teritory. The proof is
to find in Timoc.

Alex