willemvermeer wrote:
>
> Put differently, starting with the eighth century there were good
> reasons for people, and particularly for people specialized in
> mountain pastoralism, to migrate into areas that had become
> attractive as a consequence of the weakening of the Avars and the
> strengthening of the First Bulgarian State.
>
>
> I would like to stress again that I regard the matter as basically
> open, although it would be disingenuous to hide my conviction that an
> Urheimat in the Ohrid area has better credentials than one in
> Transylvania. But if we seriously want to clinch the matter (and I
> for one am not sure it can be clinched) we should stop relying on the
> type of smokescreen reasoning that projects ninth-century condition
> back to the middle of the first millennium.
>
>
>
>
> Willem
I agree with this point of view. For completing the image, one has to call
the geographic map for his eyes. Let us see the mountains in the whole
Balkan-Carpathian region. Assuming one has the Urheimat of Rom. somewhere in
the mountains around Orchid, they need to cross the big plains and the
Danube for arriving in the mountain of Carpathian. What I want to underline
here? Comparative with the late expansion of the Valahs _on the mountains_
until Slovakia and Poland, we don't have a continous mountain area which
will allow them to migrate unseen and unfeelt. Or maybe the Slavs allowed
them to cross their region , did they? I mean, when herds are moving, they
are not on the train and they are in a copule of hours in another region.
They are moving slowly, they are eating, they need time. Does someone think
the Slavs have been hapy having the Vlachs on their plains occuping the
pastures? I think a such happening is seen as an attack in the existence of
every peasant area, even today in the modern times. That is: -either the
Slavs have been forced the let them cross their regions, in some couple of
years, or the Slavs have been very weak and they could not do anything
against them. That for the migrating scenario.
What I wonder is something else. In the XIV century, as we have more
informations, there is no reference, but no reference about any Slavs in
actualy Romania. There are mentioned Hungarians, Szekely, Germans (Saxons),
but no Slavs at all. That is the question which is interesting and I pointed
several times to this. Where have been the Slavs? Was there a big empty
space between South Slavs and North Slavs? The usually answer is that there
has been no empty place, but the Slavs got assimilated by Romanians. Well...
seems in that region everyone was ready to be assimilated. The Dacians by
Colonists, the colonists by Slavs, the Slavs by Romanians.
Or this is just a paper scenario, to weak to be true..
Alex