S & L wrote:
>The gagauz are listed as bulgarians.
But they are (Christian) Turks, speaking Turkish.
(Gagauz is a probable reflex of Oguz.)
>>There is no evidence of a mass or
>>continuous influx of carriers of the material culture
>>of the Roman Dacias northward after 602 AD.
>
>It is very difficult to give "ethnicity" to archeological findings.
I myself would be eager to know how the ethnicity can be
determined for such Christian rural and/or pastoralist
populaces, esp. since their scarce pottery have preserved
(up to our days) some of the characteristics of the ancient
autochtonous earthenware (and esp. since the speakers
of the Romance idiom over there so much adapted to their
dominant South-Slavic & slavicized Alanid and Prototurk
neighbors in most aspects of life -- the links to "Romania"
in the East and to Rome having been severed so drastically).
George