Greeks stole Thracian, Macedonian territory

[Petros Houhoulis]

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...47#post4780747

They conducted the test and compared it with Mycenaean populations, not 6th century A.D. populations. Why would they have to prove that those people were explicitly related to 6th century A.D. people in the Peloponesse anyway, when they proved a relation for a much older population?

[Petros Houhoulis]

Indians called you Yavana (Ionians) Persians Yauna, Hebrews Yevenia.

Yes, but the Ionians were not Greeks, they were Hellenized Pelasgians.

Ionians are Greeks while Thracians for example didn’t even used Greek language yet Greece have somehow put claims on those people as “Greeks” which is ridiculous

Both the Ionians and the Thracians were Hellenized folks, the only difference is that the first group was not IndoEuropean and was Hellenized early on, while the second group was IndoEuropean and was Hellenized much later, mostly after the conquests of Macedonia in Thrace.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wvwvw]

They had to fabricate cause even Greeks themselves are invented nation. For 2000 years without interruption they were called Romans. Modern Greeks are nothing but Greek speaking populace of Roman Empire who are in fact mixture of ancient nations like Macedonia, Epirus, Thrace etc. When we talk about Ancient Greeks we think of Ionians and Ionians descended from Javan son of Japheth, while Macedonians and Thracians descended from Tiras (Thrax) son of Japheth.

Ancient Greeks were well aware of that difference and they never claimed descendants of Tiras as their own, but just distant cousins.

They would be ridiculed by 10th century people for something like that, but modern xx century doesn’t care about such things, every populist leader is free to claim anything nowadays.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In the biblcal line of decent form Japheth, Rhodus, Thrakos, and Elisa (Aeolians) who are the sons of Javan or Ion. In other words the Thracians were Aigialean Ionian Greeks who are of the same decent as the Pelasgians.

The Thracians of 1400 BC descended from Ion and the Bible states they were brothers of Aeolians, Cretans and Rhodians, all Greek tribes. Pelasgains were descended from the same common ancestors as the Thracians, Cretans and Rhodians.

The Pelasgians and Aigialeans were part of the Inachid line which was part of the Oceanid and originated from the Peloponnese which was originally named after them Pelasgia and Aigialea.

Zeus was part of the Cronid line and even the name of Crete or Kriti is a corruption of Zeus's title Kronidis.

Deukalion was part of the Iapetid line and he came from Phthiotis. Phthiotis gets its name from Iapetus which in the bible is spelled Japheth hence Phthio-tis.

Macedonians were descended from Macedon the brother of Megarus and grandson of Deukalion and were a Dorian tribe. Macedonian was a tribal identity. The national identity was Greek.

"The inhabitants of this area (Macedonians) were one of the most ancient Greek tribes. Their closest relatives were the Thessalians and particularly the Magnesians, with whom they shared Aeolian ancestry. The language they spoke was among the oldest forms of Greek, and it had affinities with the Aeolian, Arcado-Cypriot and Mycenean dialects. The religion of the Madeconians was that of the other Greeks, and their myths and traditions were those found throughout the Greek world" (Wells, The Outline of History, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Glimpses of World History).

[wvwvw]

Yes, but the Ionians were not Greeks, they were Hellenized Pelasgians.Both the Ionians and the Thracians were Hellenized folks, the only difference is that the first group was not IndoEuropean and was Hellenized early on, while the second group was IndoEuropean and was Hellenized much later, mostly after the conquests of Macedonia in Thrace.

The Ionians were not Greeks? rofl what are you smoking? The Pelasgians were a Greek speaking tribe, the Cronids were another Greek speaking tribe and the Hellenes were another Greek speaking who was excessively immigratory and gave its name to all all other Greek tribes.

Pelasgians were descended from Pelasgus the grandfather of Greacus.

Hellenes were descended from Hellene.

Both Pelasgus and Hellene spoke Greek dialects.

Dionysus of Halicarnassus clearly states that the 
Aboriginals "from whom the Romans are originally descended" were Arcadian 
Pelasgians.

"the Aborigines can be a colony of no other people but of those who are now 
called Arcadians; 2 for these were the first of all the Greeks to cross the 
Ionian Gulf, under the leadership of Oenotrus, the son of Lycaon, and to 
settle in Italy. This Oenotrus was the fifth from Aezeius and Phoroneus, who 
were the first kings in the Peloponnesus. For Niobe was the daughter of 
Phoroneus, and Pelasgus was the son of Niobe and Zeus"

The Pelasgians did not exist before 1600 BC at the earliest so anything 
before that time cannot possible in any way be called Pelasgian. Nor can it 
be called pre-Greek since the Greeks were already in the Greek peninsular by 
2200 BC and had reached Mycenae by 1600 BC and that is exactly when the 
Pelasgians first appear in the historical record being Argive Greeks who 
migrated to Arcadia and then moved to Thessaly in 1450 BC as well as 
founding colonies in Italy at the same time.

The genealogy and pattern of migration is well known to all historians.

1606 Pelasgus (son of Niobe daughter of Phoroneus the founder of Argos)

1685 Aezeius

1560 Lycaon

1507 Pelasgus + Deianira (daughter of Lycaon)

1488 Lycaon II

1455 Calisto

1420 Arcas (founder of Arcadia)
1507 Pelasgus

1472 Haemon (king of Thessaly)

1430 Thessalus

1405 Graecus (after whom the Greeks were so called)

The name Greeks was coined by the Romans from Graecus the son the Thessalus king of Thessaly the son of Haemon the son of Pelasgus king of Arcadia since the Pelasgians were the first people from Greece that the Romans encounterd since the Pelasgians colonised Italy in Mycenean times (1500-1200 BC). The language of Graecus was the same language as Pelasgus and was Arcado-Cypriot otherwise known as Mycenaean Greek. Palesgians also colonized Palestine and Philistine (Pelast ie. Pelasgians) inscriptions from Palestine also show they used Greek names.

When the Romans later encountered the Hellenes who were the descendants of Hellene king of Hellas the son of Deucalion king of Pthiotis when they colonised Italy from about the time of the first Olympiad (776 BC) and the foundation of Rome by Romulus i(753 BC) they were also called Greeks since they spoke the same language as the Pelasgian tribes that still lived in Italy at the time some of whom who came with Evander in 1250 BC had become Roman citizens.

[wvwvw]

The invented nation are the Bosniaks who created an identity out of Islam. The Greeks were not called Romans for 2.000 years, in fact the gap in the Greek identity was short lived, it lasted only a few centuries, somewhere between the 7th and 11th centuries.Who happened to be Greek speaking long before the Romans arrived, except for the Thracians who became Hellenized over time.I think that you are an idiot. In fact Herodotus claims that the Ionians were not Greeks but Pelasgians:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorians#Herodotus



In this short passage you learn that:

The Athenians, an Ionian people, were of Pelasgian origin and (as explained in the next passage) did not speak Greek.
The Spartans were Greek invaders who descended from the Macedonians, were named Dorians along the way south and reached as far as the Peloponesse where they occupied Sparta.

Therefore your claim that the "Yunan" or "Ionians" were Greek is actually false, because they were Hellenized Pelasgians!!!Yeah, sure, you can also claim to be "cousins" of Tiras and his Thracians, but neither the Greeks nor the Illyrians were actually Thracians. They were just "cousins". The 10th century A.D. was the time when every idiot claimed whatever he liked. Only modern historiography is a serious business.

The Pelasgians were an Arcadian tribe. Herodotus says that both the Dorians and Ionians were originally Pelasgians. The Dorian-Pelasgi came to Greece in 2200 BC and later in 1900 BC the Ionians came along and put a wedge between those in the north and those in the Peloponnese. The Dorian-Pelasgi in North-Western Greece became Dorians. Those in the Peloponnese and Thessaly became Pelasgi. The Dorian's were nomadic whereas the Pelasgi were City Dwellers hence their name Polis-gi.

[Voskos]

i think all north balkanites(known today as south slavs) are retarded, which explains why so many people occupied you.do you agree bosniensis?

[Mingle]

The actual problem is that we don't have that many Thracian words, but those which we have, are very close to Baltic:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thraci..._Indo-European

Just cause it has some cognates with Baltic languages doesn't make it Baltic. It could have been a third branch in the Balto-Slavic language family or not in the BS language family entirely. Both Lithuanian and Thracian are IE languages, so it makes sense that they have cognates. Since Lithuanian is the language closest to PIE, it would be more likely to find cognates in Lithuanian than in other languages. If things were that simply, then linguists would have accepted it as a Baltic language but only a minority have. There are more cognates between Turkic and Mongolic, but nobody accepts that language family. There are also a lot of cognates between Turkic and Amerindian languages. I'm not ruling out the possibility of it being a Baltic language, but the amount of scholars that support that theory are a tiny fringe minority.

There is no actual proof that the Serbs descend from the Triballians, but some Byzantine authors used the misnomer Triballians for them, just as they confused the Bulgarians for Scythians.

Furthermore, the Triballians were not pure Thracians. They had some Illyrian and Celtic admixture.

The Moesians were also pure Thracians, they were somewhere between the Thracians and the Dacians, and I still doubt that they had some relation with the Serbs.

Since the migrations of the 6th century A.D. and later happened from the north-east towards the south-west, it is very unlikely that the Triballians migrated north. Most probably they were pushed south. Simultaneously it is more likely that Illyrians were pushed south into Serbia.

Triballians are shown on maps to have lived around the Serbia-Bulgaria-Romania border region. Serbs are descended from the Moesians, Triballians, and Treres people in addition to the Slavs and Celts (Scordisci, Taurisci). Illyrians also lived in southwest Serbia but the majority of it Thracian with a bit of Slavic. Also, the Geto-Dacians were a Thracian tribe. They are just distinguished sometimes from other Thracians since they were more significant than all other Thracians combined.

There is no such thing as a "pure Thracian". It was just an ethnolinguistic group.

Illyrians were recorded to have been the pre-Celtic peoples of Noricum before the Noric Celts became the majority in modern day southern Austria. So yes, they were pushed south since they have recorded settlements in Central Europe. The Illyrians and Triballians lived in different places so I'm not sure what connection you're making there anyways.

[Tauromachos]

577 posts of blablablaablaaaablabla

[Mingle]

The Ionians were not Greeks? rofl what are you smoking? The Pelasgians were a Greek speaking tribe, the Cronids were another Greek speaking tribe and the Hellenes were another Greek speaking who was excessively immigratory and gave its name to all all other Greek tribes.

I think Petros is referring to the Pelasgian Ionians ("Aegialian Pelasgians").

The Pelasgians are said to be the pre-IE people of Greece, so they couldn't have been Greek-speaking. Here is what Herodotus says about the Pelasgians:

I am unable to state with certainty what language the Pelasgians spoke, but we could consider the speech of the Pelasgians who still exist in settlements above Tyrrhenia in the city of Kreston, formerly neighbors to the Dorians who at that time lived in the land now called Thessaliotis; also the Pelasgians who once lived with the Athenians and then settled Plakia and Skylake in the Hellespont; and along with those who lived with all the other communities and were once Pelasgian but changed their names. If one can judge by this evidence, the Pelasgians spoke a barbarian language. And so, if the Pelasgian language was spoken in all these places, the people of Attica being originally Pelasgian, must have learned a new language when they became Hellenes. As a matter of fact, the people of Krestonia and Plakia no longer speak the same language, which shows that they continue to use the dialect they brought with them when they migrated to those lands.

So he seems to uncertain about their language, but if he had to guess based on the evidence, then he thinks they spoke a "barbarian" (i.e. non-Greek) language. If they spoke Greek, then he would have mentioned it.

Who are the Cronids? Are you referring to the Cranai?

[Tauromachos]

I think Petros is referring to the Pelasgian Ionians ("Aegialian Pelasgians").

The Pelasgians are said to be the pre-IE people of Greece, so they couldn't have been Greek-speaking. Here is what Herodotus says about the Pelasgians:



So he seems to uncertain about their language, but if he had to guess based on the evidence, then he thinks they spoke a "barbarian" (i.e. non-Greek) language. If they spoke Greek, then he would have mentioned it.

Who are the Cronids? Are you referring to the Cranai?

Whatever they were they were no Semites or Turks