... on Chatroulette :lol:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sherdog.net%2Fforums%2Fattachments%2Ff7%2F43579d1268932581-you-laugh-you-lose-3-0-nazi.jpg&hash=64c130777d77550e2cfbdc543595941d72d7c5b6)
OK, now that's funny.
:lol:
Too many cocks on Chatroulette.
Speaking of which, Tamas showed me yesterday recently-resurfaced (about 3-4 year old) pictures of a now-former high ranking member of the Hungarian extreme right-wing/neonazi party (Jobbik), embracing a black drag queen during some gay pride march.
European closet nazi gays: not getting it since 1934? :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on March 19, 2010, 06:20:29 AM
Speaking of which, Tamas showed me yesterday recently-resurfaced (about 3-4 year old) pictures of a now-former high ranking member of the Hungarian extreme right-wing/neonazi party (Jobbik), embracing a black drag queen during some gay pride march.
European closet nazi gays: not getting it since 1934? :lol:
MUST you gay up every thread with a gay mention? MUST YOU?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 19, 2010, 06:30:43 AM
Quote from: Martinus on March 19, 2010, 06:20:29 AM
Speaking of which, Tamas showed me yesterday recently-resurfaced (about 3-4 year old) pictures of a now-former high ranking member of the Hungarian extreme right-wing/neonazi party (Jobbik), embracing a black drag queen during some gay pride march.
European closet nazi gays: not getting it since 1934? :lol:
MUST you gay up every thread with a gay mention? MUST YOU?
It's my special power. :cool:
Quote from: Martinus on March 19, 2010, 06:32:01 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 19, 2010, 06:30:43 AM
Quote from: Martinus on March 19, 2010, 06:20:29 AM
Speaking of which, Tamas showed me yesterday recently-resurfaced (about 3-4 year old) pictures of a now-former high ranking member of the Hungarian extreme right-wing/neonazi party (Jobbik), embracing a black drag queen during some gay pride march.
European closet nazi gays: not getting it since 1934? :lol:
MUST you gay up every thread with a gay mention? MUST YOU?
It's my special power. :cool:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages1.cafepress.com%2Fproduct%2F45291731v1_225x225_Front.jpg&hash=9d2b4506a841d526d9e6b2737f9b9dcb40ea2b90)
I've never heard of this site but that is great.
Looks so good its setup, spread it across the interwebs now!
Why the Nazi flag though?
Quote from: Tyr on March 19, 2010, 07:01:26 AMWhy the Nazi flag though?
Isn't that the whole point here? I assume it's not the Nazi that is logging off immediately.
Nazi dude looks like a younger, slimmer Honkytonk Man.
Quote from: Zanza on March 19, 2010, 08:04:41 AM
Quote from: Tyr on March 19, 2010, 07:01:26 AMWhy the Nazi flag though?
Isn't that the whole point here? I assume it's not the Nazi that is logging off immediately.
Yeah, I thought the 'you' was Alexandru though, guess its just a random photo then.
That was funny.
Look at that dude's face!
My swastika flag is situated in the back of my computer screen, not in front... :blush:
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 20, 2010, 04:40:17 PM
My swastika flag is situated in the back of my computer screen, not in front... :blush:
So, why do you have a swastika?
Quote from: Siege on March 21, 2010, 12:58:13 PM
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 20, 2010, 04:40:17 PM
My swastika flag is situated in the back of my computer screen, not in front... :blush:
So, why do you have a swastika?
It is the gypsy good luck symbol.
For years I have gone around believing that the infamous cross on the wall was a Christian cross and not a swastika. :Embarrass:
I'm not gonna rest until Alexandru gives me an answer.
Quote from: Siege on March 21, 2010, 01:31:34 PM
I'm not gonna rest until Alexandru gives me an answer.
Twas a joke, Siegy! I love my jewish relatives way too much... well, except for Wiesenthal.
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 21, 2010, 01:54:58 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 21, 2010, 01:31:34 PM
I'm not gonna rest until Alexandru gives me an answer.
Twas a joke, Siegy! I love my jewish relatives way too much... well, except for Wiesenthal.
You will be relieved to hear that Simon Wiesenthal died a couple years ago. You can come to Vienna now.
Quote from: Syt on March 21, 2010, 02:07:16 PM
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 21, 2010, 01:54:58 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 21, 2010, 01:31:34 PM
I'm not gonna rest until Alexandru gives me an answer.
Twas a joke, Siegy! I love my jewish relatives way too much... well, except for Wiesenthal.
You will be relieved to hear that Simon Wiesenthal died a couple years ago. You can come to Vienna now.
Been there, done the necessary Euro trip to expand my horizon. Seen a bunch of pansies then went back...
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 21, 2010, 02:28:32 PM
Seen a bunch of pansies then went back...
You've noticed your compatriots (mangled, with children or otherwise) begging on our streets, then.
Quote from: Syt on March 21, 2010, 02:35:17 PM
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 21, 2010, 02:28:32 PM
Seen a bunch of pansies then went back...
You've noticed your compatriots (mangled, with children or otherwise) begging on our streets, then.
They're not my compatriots as I don't live with them on the streets. In my area, we don't allow such rabble, we have very harsh laws against beggars and vagabonds. If you want to find someone who feels as their brother, look for Southern Romania, Bucharest and the rest of the valachs. I'm not a valach.
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 21, 2010, 02:44:33 PM
Quote from: Syt on March 21, 2010, 02:35:17 PM
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 21, 2010, 02:28:32 PM
Seen a bunch of pansies then went back...
You've noticed your compatriots (mangled, with children or otherwise) begging on our streets, then.
They're not my compatriots as I don't live with them on the streets. In my area, we don't allow such rabble, we have very harsh laws against beggars and vagabonds. If you want to find someone who feels as their brother, look for Southern Romania, Bucharest and the rest of the valachs. I'm not a valach.
No self-respecting Gypsy hangs around with neo-Nazis anyway.
Quote from: Siege on March 21, 2010, 01:31:34 PM
I'm not gonna rest until Alexandru gives me an answer.
It's a heritage thing. You of all people should appreciate that, Mister My Pipples Are Still In Teh Desert.
Quote from: grumbler on March 21, 2010, 03:05:41 PM
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 21, 2010, 02:44:33 PM
Quote from: Syt on March 21, 2010, 02:35:17 PM
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 21, 2010, 02:28:32 PM
Seen a bunch of pansies then went back...
You've noticed your compatriots (mangled, with children or otherwise) begging on our streets, then.
They're not my compatriots as I don't live with them on the streets. In my area, we don't allow such rabble, we have very harsh laws against beggars and vagabonds. If you want to find someone who feels as their brother, look for Southern Romania, Bucharest and the rest of the valachs. I'm not a valach.
No self-respecting Gypsy hangs around with neo-Nazis anyway.
No Romanian would. It's such a Hungarian thing to do.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 21, 2010, 03:42:53 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 21, 2010, 01:31:34 PM
I'm not gonna rest until Alexandru gives me an answer.
It's a heritage thing. You of all people should appreciate that, Mister My Pipples Are Still In Teh Desert.
Hey, don't take it the wrong way. I just wanted to know the story behind that flag.
I wasn't accusing him of being Nazi.
I have hizbollani flags, Jihad al-Islami flags, Jaysh al-Mahdi flags, etc, etc, and I am not muslim.
Romania sounds sad.
Quote from: Siege on March 22, 2010, 07:40:51 AM
I have hizbollani flags, Jihad al-Islami flags, Jaysh al-Mahdi flags, etc, etc, and I am not muslim.
Ok...
Quote from: Siege on March 22, 2010, 07:40:51 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 21, 2010, 03:42:53 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 21, 2010, 01:31:34 PM
I'm not gonna rest until Alexandru gives me an answer.
It's a heritage thing. You of all people should appreciate that, Mister My Pipples Are Still In Teh Desert.
Hey, don't take it the wrong way. I just wanted to know the story behind that flag.
I wasn't accusing him of being Nazi.
I have hizbollani flags, Jihad al-Islami flags, Jaysh al-Mahdi flags, etc, etc, and I am not muslim.
I doubt he took it from a dead Nazi.
All my family (my grandfather and his three brothers) fought against the Soviets. They entered Odessa, reached Don and saw Stalingrad from a distance. Our german blood meant we had to obey the leader of our race and destroy the inferior slavic blood. The symbols of the great germanic history are sacred to us, despite of what some idiotic inferior slavic individuals say. One more thing: because of the conditions of the place we were stationed in (we left Hermannstadt for Bukovina in the 18th century at the request of our great queen, Maria Tereza), we accepted Jewish persons in our family, thus enriching the german practical spirit with a jewish destiny. In my mountain town, in a secluded valley between the Carpathian Mountains, we are the last of our kind: germanic and jewish. The jewish cemetery is deserted, the community dissapeared right after the war, as well as the other germans, chased away by the soviet hordes. All I see around me are romanians, thankfully not southern Vlachs but northern Moldavians, a more aristocratic breed, descendants of the Roxolani. And, curse of all curses, my mother's side is part Russian, thus making me, for the first time in my family's history, a heir of Slavic inferiority. What more could the Devil ask of me than having in my body the blood of Slavism, the blood of the wild werewolf of the steppes? If I would become homosexual and retarded, people would mistake me for Martinus <_<
bar bar bar bar bar bar! bar , bar bar? bar.
Derka derka.
I still don't have a handle on Alex. Is that a full on troll, or a deeply held belief?
Ask the jesus stains on the wall.
Quote from: Barrister on March 22, 2010, 05:49:32 PM
I still don't have a handle on Alex. Is that a full on troll, or a deeply held belief?
Has to be trolling. Nobody would take pride in Romanian fighting abilities.
Quote from: Barrister on March 22, 2010, 05:49:32 PM
I still don't have a handle on Alex. Is that a full on troll, or a deeply held belief?
I thought he was Christian...now he's Jewish?
How the heck did I miss this thread before now. :lol:
Quote from: Siege on March 22, 2010, 07:40:51 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 21, 2010, 03:42:53 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 21, 2010, 01:31:34 PM
I'm not gonna rest until Alexandru gives me an answer.
It's a heritage thing. You of all people should appreciate that, Mister My Pipples Are Still In Teh Desert.
Hey, don't take it the wrong way. I just wanted to know the story behind that flag.
I wasn't accusing him of being Nazi.
I have hizbollani flags, Jihad al-Islami flags, Jaysh al-Mahdi flags, etc, etc, and I am not muslim.
Why would you have a Jaysh al-Mahdi flag and where on earth could you have possibly gotten it, really?
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 22, 2010, 05:08:53 PM
[Family Histery]
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ficanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F01%2Ffunny-pictures-immigrant-cat-reflects-on-life-with-no-cheeseburgers.jpg&hash=69c20f0d9a0fefd97200ae3064d3e2a3ba140413)
Fortunately, times have changed.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.funnyphotos.net.au%2Fimages%2Fmcdonalds-drive-through-in-romania-horse1.jpg&hash=181b9224a755b49883bee6a68ba7a2d6cb5bcbc5)
Quote from: Alcibiades on March 22, 2010, 09:36:18 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 22, 2010, 07:40:51 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 21, 2010, 03:42:53 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 21, 2010, 01:31:34 PM
I'm not gonna rest until Alexandru gives me an answer.
It's a heritage thing. You of all people should appreciate that, Mister My Pipples Are Still In Teh Desert.
Hey, don't take it the wrong way. I just wanted to know the story behind that flag.
I wasn't accusing him of being Nazi.
I have hizbollani flags, Jihad al-Islami flags, Jaysh al-Mahdi flags, etc, etc, and I am not muslim.
Why would you have a Jaysh al-Mahdi flag and where on earth could you have possibly gotten it, really?
Same place he got that Iraqi head he keeps in his locker.
Quote from: Alcibiades on March 22, 2010, 09:36:18 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 22, 2010, 07:40:51 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 21, 2010, 03:42:53 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 21, 2010, 01:31:34 PM
I'm not gonna rest until Alexandru gives me an answer.
It's a heritage thing. You of all people should appreciate that, Mister My Pipples Are Still In Teh Desert.
Hey, don't take it the wrong way. I just wanted to know the story behind that flag.
I wasn't accusing him of being Nazi.
I have hizbollani flags, Jihad al-Islami flags, Jaysh al-Mahdi flags, etc, etc, and I am not muslim.
Why would you have a Jaysh al-Mahdi flag and where on earth could you have possibly gotten it, really?
What, you didn't get one?
I got one of the green ones with the picture of the Mahdi in it. Their "battle banners" are either green or black, with some chicken scratch in it saying something about the Mahdi coming soon, and how he is going to lead the faithful to conquer the infidels, with a drawing of the face of the mahdi.
You need to raid a few JAM houses to get one. While you conduct SSE (sensitive site exploitation), if you see more than one, put one in your cargo pocket.
So when you join up you already have a flag?
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 22, 2010, 05:08:53 PM
All my family (my grandfather and his three brothers) fought against the Soviets. They entered Odessa, reached Don and saw Stalingrad from a distance. Our german blood meant we had to obey the leader of our race and destroy the inferior slavic blood. The symbols of the great germanic history are sacred to us, despite of what some idiotic inferior slavic individuals say. One more thing: because of the conditions of the place we were stationed in (we left Hermannstadt for Bukovina in the 18th century at the request of our great queen, Maria Tereza), we accepted Jewish persons in our family, thus enriching the german practical spirit with a jewish destiny. In my mountain town, in a secluded valley between the Carpathian Mountains, we are the last of our kind: germanic and jewish. The jewish cemetery is deserted, the community dissapeared right after the war, as well as the other germans, chased away by the soviet hordes. All I see around me are romanians, thankfully not southern Vlachs but northern Moldavians, a more aristocratic breed, descendants of the Roxolani. And, curse of all curses, my mother's side is part Russian, thus making me, for the first time in my family's history, a heir of Slavic inferiority. What more could the Devil ask of me than having in my body the blood of Slavism, the blood of the wild werewolf of the steppes? If I would become homosexual and retarded, people would mistake me for Martinus <_<
Wow, what a mishmash of contradictions.
Also, aren't the Roxolani the teddy bear musketeers that invaded the Earth in that Turtledove short story?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 23, 2010, 05:20:51 PM
---
Also, aren't the Roxolani the teddy bear musketeers that invaded the Earth in that Turtledove short story?
I thought you'd played Total War? :huh: The Roxolani even show up in some of the mods. They're a Sarmatian people who occupied the lands to the east of Roman Dacia after Trajan crushed Decebalus.
Or was that a jest on your part? :)
Quote from: Siege on March 23, 2010, 04:58:44 AM
What, you didn't get one?
I got one of the green ones with the picture of the Mahdi in it. Their "battle banners" are either green or black, with some chicken scratch in it saying something about the Mahdi coming soon, and how he is going to lead the faithful to conquer the infidels, with a drawing of the face of the mahdi.
You need to raid a few JAM houses to get one. While you conduct SSE (sensitive site exploitation), if you see more than one, put one in your cargo pocket.
Seigey, I don't intend to be mean or insulting, but isn't that, you know, stealing?
Quote from: Barrister on March 23, 2010, 05:40:08 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 23, 2010, 04:58:44 AM
What, you didn't get one?
I got one of the green ones with the picture of the Mahdi in it. Their "battle banners" are either green or black, with some chicken scratch in it saying something about the Mahdi coming soon, and how he is going to lead the faithful to conquer the infidels, with a drawing of the face of the mahdi.
You need to raid a few JAM houses to get one. While you conduct SSE (sensitive site exploitation), if you see more than one, put one in your cargo pocket.
Seigey, I don't intend to be mean or insulting, but isn't that, you know, stealing?
War trophies are fair game, mister nitpicky lawyer. :ultra:
Roxolani is just a word Greeks used to refer to some steppe nomads. One might as well talk about being descended from Trojans.
That whole post was just unvarnished Lettowism with an eastern European tinge.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 23, 2010, 06:01:38 PM
Roxolani is just a word Greeks used to refer to some steppe nomads. One might as well talk about being descended from Trojans.
That whole post was just unvarnished Lettowism with an eastern European tinge.
Trojans that broke. ;)
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 23, 2010, 06:01:38 PM
Roxolani is just a word Greeks used to refer to some steppe nomads. One might as well talk about being descended from Trojans.
That whole post was just unvarnished Lettowism with an eastern European tinge.
What is 'mew' in gypsy?
Romanian Funeral Procession. Beautiful:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NPAHChkBqo&NR=1
Quote from: Agelastus on March 23, 2010, 05:39:45 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 23, 2010, 05:20:51 PM
---
Also, aren't the Roxolani the teddy bear musketeers that invaded the Earth in that Turtledove short story?
I thought you'd played Total War? :huh: The Roxolani even show up in some of the mods. They're a Sarmatian people who occupied the lands to the east of Roman Dacia after Trajan crushed Decebalus.
Or was that a jest on your part? :)
I'd forgotten about them.
I only played Total War: Empire
And I was right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_Not_Taken_%28short_story%29
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 23, 2010, 06:58:35 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on March 23, 2010, 05:39:45 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 23, 2010, 05:20:51 PM
---
Also, aren't the Roxolani the teddy bear musketeers that invaded the Earth in that Turtledove short story?
I thought you'd played Total War? :huh: The Roxolani even show up in some of the mods. They're a Sarmatian people who occupied the lands to the east of Roman Dacia after Trajan crushed Decebalus.
Or was that a jest on your part? :)
I'd forgotten about them.
I only played Total War: Empire
And I was right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_Not_Taken_%28short_story%29
I knew
that! As Captain Carrot says in one of the Discworld books, "there's only so many syllables in the world". :D
The Roxolani fought against Trajan. They, together with the Carpians, are the true ancestors of the people around here.
Quote from: Agelastus on March 23, 2010, 07:01:51 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 23, 2010, 06:58:35 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on March 23, 2010, 05:39:45 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 23, 2010, 05:20:51 PM
---
Also, aren't the Roxolani the teddy bear musketeers that invaded the Earth in that Turtledove short story?
I thought you'd played Total War? :huh: The Roxolani even show up in some of the mods. They're a Sarmatian people who occupied the lands to the east of Roman Dacia after Trajan crushed Decebalus.
Or was that a jest on your part? :)
I'd forgotten about them.
I only played Total War: Empire
And I was right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_Not_Taken_%28short_story%29
I knew that! As Captain Carrot says in one of the Discworld books, "there's only so many syllables in the world". :D
I figured that since Turtledove has degree in Byzatine history or some such he purposely picked that name.
Quote from: Martinus on March 19, 2010, 06:32:01 AM
It's my special power. :cool:
Sorry for digging this back up, but I absolutely can't resist:
Mart. Putting the "SUPER!" in "superpower."
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkeysersozeslair.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F08%2FBig.Gay.Al.gif&hash=3d9515add4e48502d096fad4c6f0d2bbb1c62146)
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 23, 2010, 07:23:21 PM
The Roxolani fought against Trajan. They, together with the Carpians, are the true ancestors of the people around here.
Can you not have a .gif as an avatar?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi195.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz133%2Fsbr32%2FGals%2Fnb67i8.gif&hash=952bfc33e1d3d969c9cede321947457582b6f185)
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 23, 2010, 06:06:27 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 23, 2010, 06:01:38 PM
Roxolani is just a word Greeks used to refer to some steppe nomads. One might as well talk about being descended from Trojans.
That whole post was just unvarnished Lettowism with an eastern European tinge.
What is 'mew' in gypsy?
Great avatar! :lol:
Quote from: sbr on March 23, 2010, 10:51:43 PM
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 23, 2010, 07:23:21 PM
The Roxolani fought against Trajan. They, together with the Carpians, are the true ancestors of the people around here.
Can you not have a .gif as an avatar?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi195.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz133%2Fsbr32%2FGals%2Fnb67i8.gif&hash=952bfc33e1d3d969c9cede321947457582b6f185)
Too big <_< Damn Languish!
In other news, a new link about Chatroulette...
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1931005
Quote from: Syt on March 23, 2010, 11:42:07 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 23, 2010, 06:06:27 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 23, 2010, 06:01:38 PM
Roxolani is just a word Greeks used to refer to some steppe nomads. One might as well talk about being descended from Trojans.
That whole post was just unvarnished Lettowism with an eastern European tinge.
What is 'mew' in gypsy?
Great avatar! :lol:
It's obviously his wife's vagina.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 22, 2010, 06:19:02 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 22, 2010, 05:49:32 PM
I still don't have a handle on Alex. Is that a full on troll, or a deeply held belief?
Has to be trolling. Nobody would take pride in Romanian fighting abilities.
Indeed. I admire Romania's historical diplomacy skills, the way you admire a skillful backstabber, but the highpoint of their military prowess was breaking through a Hungarian army which desintegrated before their offensive begun.
Quote from: Tamas on March 24, 2010, 05:36:20 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on March 22, 2010, 06:19:02 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 22, 2010, 05:49:32 PM
I still don't have a handle on Alex. Is that a full on troll, or a deeply held belief?
Has to be trolling. Nobody would take pride in Romanian fighting abilities.
Indeed. I admire Romania's historical diplomacy skills, the way you admire a skillful backstabber, but the highpoint of their military prowess was breaking through a Hungarian army which desintegrated before their offensive begun.
I prefer native Moldavia and ancestor Germany...
Btw, there are other highpoints... like the participation in the Second Balkanic War (1913) when we didn't even shoot any bullets (all our deaths happened because cholera, not enemy fire) and annexed Southern Dobrudja. Or the Crimeean War when Moldavia received part of Russia while being occupied for three years by Russia and later Austria.
Quote from: Barrister on March 23, 2010, 05:40:08 PM
Quote from: Siege on March 23, 2010, 04:58:44 AM
What, you didn't get one?
I got one of the green ones with the picture of the Mahdi in it. Their "battle banners" are either green or black, with some chicken scratch in it saying something about the Mahdi coming soon, and how he is going to lead the faithful to conquer the infidels, with a drawing of the face of the mahdi.
You need to raid a few JAM houses to get one. While you conduct SSE (sensitive site exploitation), if you see more than one, put one in your cargo pocket.
Seigey, I don't intend to be mean or insulting, but isn't that, you know, stealing?
Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges. :contract: ;)
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 23, 2010, 07:23:21 PM
The Roxolani fought against Trajan. They, together with the Carpians, are the true ancestors of the people around here.
In what possible sense are they the "true ancestors" of modern Romanians ??
Roxolani is just a name the Greeks gave to some steppe nomads that fought the King of Pontus. The attribution is from Strabo, who uses terms like Sarmatian and Scythian interchangably, to give an idea about how concerned he was about precisely identifying the cultural distinctions between and among masses of cattle-raiding, tent-dwelling, nomadic barbarians.
Two hundred years later, Trajan is fighting in Dacia and encounters what appear to be fighting bands of steppe nomads. I think it is safe to say that the Romans did not stop to conduct a careful ethographic survey and cultural analysis. Rather being practical Romans, they simply labelled their adversaries with names they pulled from Strabo. Other than the fact of possibly speaking an Indo-Iranian language, riding horses and utilizing tents, is there any reason to believe there is some cultural or political continuity between Strabo's Roxolani and Trajan's Roxolani? No it is pure speculation. Is there any basis for concluding that "Roxolani" refers to some coherent ethnicity or clear separate cultural identity as opposed to simply being a label attached to semi-organized warrior band by its opponents? Again no.
What we do know is that when the Huns arrive on the scene 250 years after Trajan we stop hearing about "Roxolani". So if the Roxolani really were a coherent ethno-political and cultural entity as opposed to a Roman label for intermittant warrior bands arising from a certain area, then they got wiped out over 1600 years ago, and it makes no sense to call them "true ancestors" of anything.
Except balderdash.
My ancestors invented the question mark.
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 24, 2010, 03:38:48 PM
My ancestors invented the question mark.
My ancestors were trolls. They ran the Trolleys.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 24, 2010, 03:32:19 PM
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 23, 2010, 07:23:21 PM
The Roxolani fought against Trajan. They, together with the Carpians, are the true ancestors of the people around here.
In what possible sense are they the "true ancestors" of modern Romanians ??
Roxolani is just a name the Greeks gave to some steppe nomads that fought the King of Pontus. The attribution is from Strabo, who uses terms like Sarmatian and Scythian interchangably, to give an idea about how concerned he was about precisely identifying the cultural distinctions between and among masses of cattle-raiding, tent-dwelling, nomadic barbarians.
Two hundred years later, Trajan is fighting in Dacia and encounters what appear to be fighting bands of steppe nomads. I think it is safe to say that the Romans did not stop to conduct a careful ethographic survey and cultural analysis. Rather being practical Romans, they simply labelled their adversaries with names they pulled from Strabo. Other than the fact of possibly speaking an Indo-Iranian language, riding horses and utilizing tents, is there any reason to believe there is some cultural or political continuity between Strabo's Roxolani and Trajan's Roxolani? No it is pure speculation. Is there any basis for concluding that "Roxolani" refers to some coherent ethnicity or clear separate cultural identity as opposed to simply being a label attached to semi-organized warrior band by its opponents? Again no.
What we do know is that when the Huns arrive on the scene 250 years after Trajan we stop hearing about "Roxolani". So if the Roxolani really were a coherent ethno-political and cultural entity as opposed to a Roman label for intermittant warrior bands arising from a certain area, then they got wiped out over 1600 years ago, and it makes no sense to call them "true ancestors" of anything.
Except balderdash.
Oh, yeah, discussion :menace:
From what I gather reading Tacitus, who refers to the roxolani as the main threat, along the basternae (germanic) and iazyges, against the Roman possesions in Moesia, the roxolani are a Sarmatian branch living in what we call now Bassarabia or Northern Dobrudja. Now, he also identifies the sarmatians living in the area between Danube and Tisa as iazyges. We could say that his identification is shaky: he simply differentiates between the different sarmatian tribes by using the geographical factor.
But it seems that this is not enough. In "Germania", Tacitus explicitly says that the roxolani practice a way of life different of that of the sarmatians, who, as he puts it, are living on horse and in carriage (in plaustro equoque uiuentibus). Of course, as any good Roman historian, he does not explain in what way are they different... :lol: At first glance, I would say that the Romans simply named the Sarmatian tribes that had a direct border to the empire, creating the illusion that the roxolani and the iazyges are something else than sarmatians. Of course, I'm still puzzled by that observation of Tacitus...
Ammianus Marcellinus is even more interesting. He speaks of a conflict between the two branches of the sarmatians in Banat (in which we can easily recognise the classic roxolani-iazyges), ended with the defeat of the roxolani and their flight towards the Moldavian lands, from where they had arrived 100 years prior to the events. Now, the remaining Sarmatians, very close to the political capital of the Huns, must have become allies of Rugila and Attila. The fleeing Roxolani... I'm not so sure. In 334, they were caught between the victorious Yaziges, the Goths in Pannonia and the first waves of the Huns. Their only choice would have been the Carpathians.
Btw, when I say "roxolani are our ancestors", it pretty much means "sarmatians are our ancestors", in the same vein as the Polish claim of the 16th century.
I haven't seen any convincing genetic or linguistic evidence of special Indo-Iranian heritage of the Romanians. I have, however, seen it for the Slavs. Besides, what is far more likely is that the Iranian-speaking nomads mixed with incoming Turkic and Magyar nomads, especially as most of the sources I have read speak of the last remaining Indo-Iranian people of the area, the Jassic people of Hungarian, being counted as allies/kin of the Cumanians, another washed-up Steppe people. Far more likely that most were Turkified, as the Turkic nomads had been assimilating Indo-Iranian nomads for centuries, and the two lifestyles and cultures were very similar. I've seen far more convincing evidence that Christianized Turks were important in the early Bulgarian and Vlach states (in that most of the early rulers have Turkic names, including Basaraba, whose name I can understand with what little Turkish I know) than some fantasy remnant Iranian group.
It is rather hilarious that you are so firm in this belief, though, considering that Romania has probably about as much ethnic diversity as any place in the old world, and that there are probably 10 full-fledged settlements of "Romania" after the practical absorption of the Sarmatians. Also find it funny that, while almost every expert on the Slavic invasions can't tell the difference between Vlach and Slav materially, and there is really no discernible genetic distinction, you seem to think that you belong to two different species.
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 22, 2010, 05:08:53 PM. What more could the Devil ask of me than having in my body the blood of Slavism, the blood of the wild werewolf of the steppes?
So, you think that the Romanians are
magically the descendants of a single ill-defined Indo-Iranian tribal confederacy from the 2nd Century AD, which makes you
different from the Slavs, but the Slavs are bad because they have "the blood of the wild werewolf of the steppe"?
I'd call this bad logic, but you don't really deserve to have the word "logic" in there. This has about the same relationship to logic that the Venus de Milo has to a goddamn baked potato.
EDIT: I think one of the biggest ironies here is that I've seen very convincing evidence that Eastern-Iranian (Scythian, Ossetian, Jassic) stock was of extreme importance to everyone around Romania, but not
Romania in Particular. The Serbs and Croats likely had an Iranian ruling caste for a long while, the Hungarians were always an ethnic confederation of 'Magyars', Turks and Iranian peoples, and the Jassic people later moved in, while there is a ton of material, linguistic and even written evidence of the Ukrainians-Russians mixing with them, but I can't think of any proof for the Romanians. :huh:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 23, 2010, 06:01:38 PM
Roxolani is just a word Greeks used to refer to some steppe nomads. One might as well talk about being descended from Trojans.
The Roman claim of heritage from the Trojans is kind of interesting though, as there is some indication that Anatolian and Italic peoples of the late-Bronze/early-Iron ages had some manner of contact, and there are proven connections between the Pelasgians and Etruscans. I can't think of anything for the Romanians-Roxolani, though.
Actually it's pretty much proven (not in the eyes of nationalists though) that early vlach nobility was actually cumanic at origin. In Wallachia, the strange thing is that the nobility had cumanic family names (Basarab), lived in towns named in cumanic language (Barlad, Teleorman) and employed on regular basis the "white-black" imagery of the steppe people (think of Blakia, the original name of the region); but their surnames were slavic: Litovoi, Tihomir, as well as their language, script, literature and political connections. In this sea of cumanic-slavic customs, the institutions weren't slavic or cumanic at all: the church organization had latin words and greek customs, the political organization was weird (both Wallachia and Moldavia were ruled by dynasties from Transylvania).
Now, I did not say Romanians are the descendants of the Roxolani. In fact, I'm still puzzled about their origins. The way they maintained the latin and greek ways in a slavic sea is clear, for me at least, that they stayed a longer time under the Roman and Byzantine administration. The magyar point of view is still wrong: while it's possible (and there are some good points) that the Vlach population migrated into what we call Romania, this event cannot be set later than the Magyar invasion. Every source I've read indicates that the migrations started from Transylvania towards Moldavia and Wallachia, and not the other way around. If we place this event in the 1180s, we lose the cumanic connection. My own hypothesis states that in 602, the vlachs were divided in two: the southern ones remained in their place and later formed the Vlacho-Bulgarian Empire of the Asen Brothers, the northern ones were forced by the slavic wave to go through Banat and settle in Transylvania and later on in the other two regions. Divided from the Greek world, they began employing slavic language and some institutions, while maintaining the pastoral way of life, under the avars, pechenegs and cumans. When the latter were destroyed by the Mongols, some of them did not join Bela's realm but instead retreated to the mountain fortresses of the Vlachs, creating some independent, basic realms.
I consider the MOLDAVIANS as the descendants of the Sarmatian Roxolani. Now, while most people call them also Romanians, I disagree with this fact on the basis that Medieval Moldavians were quite clearly not Wallachians. For one thing, they had a great cavalry arm. Second of all, they formed a state of their own quite late (the 1350s). The creation legend is actually similar to the other legends of the steppe people, that had to settle and live a sedentary life: a great buffalo drove the hero towards a beautiful land and he decided to settle there, with his companions. Forth of all, their religious make-up was nothing like the Wallachians: if the latter were strict Orthodox, early Medieval Moldavia had on its throne a Catholic prince (Latco), a Lithuanian pagan (Iuga Kariatovici), an Armenian (Ioan the Brave), a Jew (Aron the Tyrant), a Gipsy (Razvan), two Reformed princes (Iancu Sas and Ioan Iacob Heraclid). And this doesn't even take into cosideration that the hussites found refuge and protection in the area.
Another thing to consider: Early Moldavia had only free peasants, grouped in autonomous associations, with no link towards the nobility. This is not a sign of an old society, that sold its freedom in favor of a powerful rule. It's also very aggressive (and the other way around) with Wallachia.
Ok, long post... later on I'll speak about the Roxolani-Moldavian connection in more detail.
Quote from: Alexandru H. on March 24, 2010, 05:55:26 PM
Btw, when I say "roxolani are our ancestors", it pretty much means "sarmatians are our ancestors", in the same vein as the Polish claim of the 16th century.
That is a little more reasonable.
But the reality is that steppe nomads who reached as far as the Danube were probably only a small minority of the local population at any time, even if they formed the core of a armed horde. That was certainly the case for the Huns, a group that we know a lot more about than the "Roxolani". By the time the reached the boundaries of the Roman Empire, the Huns were clearly a multi-ethnic warrior elite ruling over a basically little changed local population, and the steppe nomadic element of even the fighting core was almost certainly a minority, and probably not a very large one.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 25, 2010, 04:32:47 AM
I haven't seen any convincing genetic or linguistic evidence of special Indo-Iranian heritage of the Romanians. I have, however, seen it for the Slavs.
Linguistic evidence is neither here nor there - even if Indo-Iranian words or place names were absorbed by Slavs, that doesn't necessarily imply any kind of ethnic continuity or heritage. I am unaware of any genetic evidence.
The most logical explanation for the Slavs is simply that they were just the people left behind when the Goths, Huns etc cleared out. The most ambitious and violent individuals headed into the Empire, and the "Slavs" are just those who had been living there all along. After the warrior chieftains and their retainers cleared out (along with their Roman subsidy payments) what was left was a simpler, less hierarchical social structure that evolves its own political culture in response to the changed political circumstances.
Quote
Linguistic evidence is neither here nor there - even if Indo-Iranian words or place names were absorbed by Slavs, that doesn't necessarily imply any kind of ethnic continuity or heritage.
Not arguing place names; key words have Indo-Iranian etymologies, as do most of the Deities and many words regarding pastoral lifestyle. The word Bog, God, has clear Indo-Iranian origins, as do words relating to hunting (pjos, dog, interestingly this competes with a Turkic borrowing in Russian, sobaka). The Slavic languages also experienced Satemization, typical of areas with intense exposure to later-ur-Indo-European/early-Indo-Iranian peoples. The Balto-Slavic languages interesting in that it seems simultaneously quite closely related to the Indo-Iranian AND the Germanic branches of the tree.
Quote
I am unaware of any genetic evidence.
Halogroup R1A is generally associated with the Indo-Europeans, and is strongest among Indo-Iranian speakers in former Bactria and the Slavic world. (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Distribution_Haplogroup_R1a_Y-DNA.svg)
Considering that Bactrians and Scytho-Sartmatins are of the same stock, I'd take this as a given.
Quote
The most logical explanation for the Slavs is simply that they were just the people left behind when the Goths, Huns etc cleared out.
I think it is probably more complex than this. Slavs, Goths, Proto-Vlachs and Alans were all running away from the Huns at more or less the same time, and in to the the same general area. Besides the obvious impact of a millennium of Iranian rule followed by a few by the Goths, the Slavs were already a heterogeneous bunch by the time of the Migrations/Invasions. Obviously the migration of the Eastern Germanic peoples made things a lot easier.
I don't believe Alexandru H. is not a troll. He has a relatively good command of English and has an access to the internet - it's impossible for someone to hold so many totally insane views and factually incorrect opinions.
Quote from: Martinus on March 25, 2010, 11:48:24 AM
I don't believe Alexandru H. is not a troll. He has a relatively good command of English and has an access to the internet - it's impossible for someone to hold so many totally insane views and factually incorrect opinions.
You exist however.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 25, 2010, 11:41:37 AM
Not arguing place names; key words have Indo-Iranian etymologies, as do most of the Deities and many words regarding pastoral lifestyle. The word Bog, God, has clear Indo-Iranian origins, as do words relating to hunting (pjos, dog, interestingly this competes with a Turkic borrowing in Russian, sobaka). The Slavic languages also experienced Satemization, typical of areas with intense exposure to later-ur-Indo-European/early-Indo-Iranian peoples. The Balto-Slavic languages interesting in that it seems simultaneously quite closely related to the Indo-Iranian AND the Germanic branches of the tree.
The point here is that loan words can be taken up without there being any substantial direct ethnic connection, or even cultural absorption.
QuoteHalogroup R1A is generally associated with the Indo-Europeans, and is strongest among Indo-Iranian speakers in former Bactria and the Slavic world.[/url]
Considering that Bactrians and Scytho-Sartmatins are of the same stock, I'd take this as a given.
i am in no position to evaluate this claim, but it seems as stated somewhat less than conclusive.
QuoteSlavs, Goths, Proto-Vlachs and Alans were all running away from the Huns at more or less the same time, and in to the the same general area. Besides the obvious impact of a millennium of Iranian rule followed by a few by the Goths, the Slavs were already a heterogeneous bunch by the time of the Migrations/Invasions. Obviously the migration of the Eastern Germanic peoples made things a lot easier.
This claim is anachronistic. The Slavs don't show up in the historical record until the 6th century; the Huns first show up on the scene about 150 years earlier. The Romans -- who naturally dominate all the actual writing about the Huns -- played up their terrible character, but from the point of view of an ordinary farmer or herder, it is not clear that Hunnic dominion was any worse than "Gothic" rule, and thus there would be no particular reason to run. Certainly there is no evidence in the Roman accounts of massive population movements of the kind you are referencing here.
I do agree with the characterization of Slavs as "heterogeneous" -- this is consistent with their origin simply being people on the ground across a large area that happened to share roughly a rudimentary material culture and came to share linguistic affinity.
Quote
The point here is that loan words can be taken up without there being any substantial direct ethnic connection, or even cultural absorption.
The word for God and the entire pantheon and most of the traditional arts? :yeahright:
I fail to understand the reason for your skepticism. I am not claiming that the Scythians
were Slavs. I'm claiming that some of them were absorbed by the Turks, some of them became a part of the conquering Germanic armies, and some of them migrated in to Slavic areas-which they had traditionally dominated anyway. The ones who became Turks ended up having a huge impact on Russia as well. The Slavic urheimat in Western Ukraine-Belarus-Eastern Poland is literally right next to the Pontic-Caspian steppe. The Slavs adopted a ton of Steppe imagery and traditional art, even more than the other Northern European peoples.
Besides that, there is a ton of evidence of Alan-Russian contact going in to the actual historical record anyway. Quite a few of the great Cossack hosts had Ossetian origins.
Quote
This claim is anachronistic. The Slavs don't show up in the historical record until the 6th century; the Huns first show up on the scene about 150 years earlier.
150 years is not a huge amount of time. I was arguing that assimilating/ migrant Germanic/Scytho-Sarmatians were important in the later expansion of the Slavs, as is indicated by the disproportionate number of Indo-Iranian names of peoples/tribes.
Quote
The Romans -- who naturally dominate all the actual writing about the Huns -- played up their terrible character, but from the point of view of an ordinary farmer or herder, it is not clear that Hunnic dominion was any worse than "Gothic" rule, and thus there would be no particular reason to run.
I don't think the archaeological record backs this up. Europe beyond the Roman frontier was materially 'Romanizing' to a certain extent as far as the Ukraine. Far more advanced economies and kingdoms were set up then was known before the establishment of Roman dominance in Western Europe. The Barbarian Germans-previously little more forest-folk, like early Medieval Balts-were baking bread, had developed a taste for wine, and were far more competent metalsmiths by the Late Empire then they were during the Principate, let alone during the Republic.
This is indicated by the vocabulary-much of the Slavic terms relating to reasonably complex societies (bread, king, yard, etc...) are from Germanic languages.
The Huns, however, were a great deal
less advanced materially than many of the previous Steppe people. There is little indication that they were goldsmiths or artists like the Scythians, and their style of warfare was far less metallurgy-dependent than any Steppe people of the last thousand years. Gone were the Cataphracts (which obviously require a great deal of skill and money) of the Sarmatians, replaced in large part by leather, fur and recurve bows.
From what I have read, the Hunnish invasion is associated with a dramatic decline in the level of civilization of most of Eastern and Central Europe, as the Gothic towns were annihilated or abandoned, and the Steppe passed from an older mixed pastoralism to the far purer parasitic nomadism typical of many (though not all) later Altaic and Uralic peoples. The Avars and Magyars a bit later on were in the same mold, though IIRC the Bolgars were quite a bit different. Seems very odd that you'd mention the lands 'emptying', but appear to think that they came to Western Europe out of pure conquest-lust rather than attempt to avoid the very brutal (even by the period's standards) Huns.
Quote
Certainly there is no evidence in the Roman accounts of massive population movements of the kind you are referencing here.
:huh:
All the Eastern Germanic peoples move in to the Roman Empire. So do several other Germanic peoples. That's a ton of people from areas that were presumably nowhere near as densely populated as the Roman Empire.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 25, 2010, 01:45:35 PM
The word for God
Which they also share with modern Americans and Englishmen.
Religious concepts and pantheons are often systems for elite control; the simple peasant cares about his local shrine and the forces of nature, and not much else. If the origin of the Slavs is simply the "negative" event of the flight of a pre-existing warrior elite, it would have left a void of organized religious systems. Would it be conceivable that the reconstruction of such a system would involve a borrowing from the outside? Sure - that is a common phenomenon. Does that imply direct ethnic affiliation? No.
QuoteI fail to understand the reason for your skepticism. I am not claiming that the Scythians were Slavs. I'm claiming that some of them were absorbed by the Turks, some of them became a part of the conquering Germanic armies, and some of them migrated in to Slavic areas-which they had traditionally dominated anyway. The ones who became Turks ended up having a huge impact on Russia as well. The Slavic urheimat in Western Ukraine-Belarus-Eastern Poland is literally right next to the Pontic-Caspian steppe. The Slavs adopted a ton of Steppe imagery and traditional art, even more than the other Northern European peoples.
Almost every word you have written begs the question of what is being referred to. "Scythian" is a just a generic label that Greco-Romans gave to nomads who rode horses. What is "Turk" supposed to be referring to in the 4th century? What does it mean to say "Scythians" were "absorbed" by Turks? What conquering "germanic" armies are being referred to and in what time? (note that "germanic" is a linguistic characterization, not an ethnic one, in this time period). What does it mean to talk about people "migrat[ing] in to Slavic areas" at a time before either written records or archaeology attests to the existence of what later are called Slavs. Where is the evidence for these migrations? How would a mass migration of a large agrarian population even be possible?
I concede that geographically, the Western Ukraine is not far from the steppes. I concede that certain steppe people, being migratory and at times predatory, likely came into contact with peoples living in these areas, certainly in the time frame of late antiquity, and probably later as well. That contact can easily explain the spread of loan words and iconography.
QuoteQuite a few of the great Cossack hosts had Ossetian origins.
More anachronism.
Quote150 years is not a huge amount of time. I was arguing that assimilating/ migrant Germanic/Scytho-Sarmatians were important in the later expansion of the Slavs, as is indicated by the disproportionate number of Indo-Iranian names of peoples/tribes.
150 years is an enormous amount of time. Imagine making a similar argument in the context of late antique Britain.
I have no idea what a "Germanic/Scytho-Sarmatian" is but certainly I have never observed such a chimera.
QuoteI don't think the archaeological record backs this up.
The archaeological record provides no evidence for large mass migrations, period.
Moreover, archaeology can provide only limited evidence about material culture and burial practices, none of which necessarily correlate directly with ethnicity or political cohesion. The dangers of using archaelogy and linguistic evidence like tribal names, place names and loan words to trace movements of people and identify specific "peoples" has now long been an emphasis in the scholarly literature, and there are precious few serious academic historians in the field who make ethno-cultural identifications based on such evidence, without at least carefully pointing out their highly speculative nature.
QuoteEurope beyond the Roman frontier was materially 'Romanizing' to a certain extent as far as the Ukraine. Far more advanced economies and kingdoms were set up then was known before the establishment of Roman dominance in Western Europe. The Barbarian Germans-previously little more forest-folk, like early Medieval Balts-were baking bread, had developed a taste for wine, and were far more competent metalsmiths by the Late Empire then they were during the Principate, let alone during the Republic.
True to a certain extent but exaggerated. The Roman frontiers had a transformative effect on the peoples on the other side. But most of that impact was felt in the area immediately close to the borders, which was integrated into the trading system with the Roman legionary fort-towns (particularly the cattle trade and later of course the insatiable demand for fighting men). But even in the border regions, there is no evidence of "advanced kingdoms". There are warleaders and chieftains and various kingroup alliances but nothing resembling a high medieval kingdom, much less anything like the sophisticated Roman state. That happened only later, when Goths and Franks came into the imperial boundaries and took over the pre-existing adminstrative apparatus.
QuoteFrom what I have read, the Hunnish invasion is associated with a dramatic decline in the level of civilization of most of Eastern and Central Europe, as the Gothic towns were annihilated or abandoned, and the Steppe passed from an older mixed pastoralism to the far purer parasitic nomadism typical of many (though not all) later Altaic and Uralic peoples. The Avars and Magyars a bit later on were in the same mold, though IIRC the Bolgars were quite a bit different. Seems very odd that you'd mention the lands 'emptying', but appear to think that they came to Western Europe out of pure conquest-lust rather than attempt to avoid the very brutal (even by the period's standards) Huns.
See below.
QuoteAll the Eastern Germanic peoples move in to the Roman Empire. So do several other Germanic peoples. That's a ton of people from areas that were presumably nowhere near as densely populated as the Roman Empire.
That is a long discredited myth. There is no evidence of mass migration of peoples. There is evidence of large warbands and associated camp followers and retainers engaging in periodic incursions. The error lies in assuming that (eg) "Goths" refers to a defined group of people like "Russians" or "French". The Goths don't become a ethne in this sense until *after* they settled within the empire and became a new ruling elite. Only then do they acquire a sense of people-hood (or perhaps more accuarately - an ideological need to assert such a sense) and invent a ethnic tradition for themselves.
The 4th century "Goths" are just an amalgam of people who had been gradually transformed by interaction with the Roman economy and military system. The empire generated a powerful demand for warriors (ie mercenaries) and the frontier regions responded by creating a supply. The more successful participants in this system could amass large followings, wealth, prestige and Roman titles. They then could use that power and prestige to create settlements for their followers, and to lord it over the local peasants. What makes one a Goth in this system is neither language, culture, ethnicity nor kinship, but simply a willingness to adopt a warrior lifestyle and a connection to some chief or warband. (even Roman renegades and deserters could and did become "goths") These Goths are not a people nor a kingdom - they are more like a very loose association of condettiere companies and associated families, reatainers, and servants.
The Huns follow the same path. Whatever their steppe origins, by the time they arrive at the borders of the empire, they are just another warband - albeit a large, violent one, and with their key leaders still holding to aspects of the steppe nomad lifestyle. (Indeed - by the time the Huns face off against Aetius in Gaul, the "Hunnic" army is a regular rainbow coalition of Gepids, Goths, Thuriangian, Burgundians etc etc that appears to have fought primarily on foot). The Goths "flee" because the Huns are supplanting their role - the supply of free warriors is growing and the Huns want to monopolize the position. But is there any basis to postulate mass migrations of the subject populations? None that I have seen or know of.
And some Scythians made it all the way back to Mongolia.
Center for the Study of Eurasian Nomads
http://www.csen.org/ (http://www.csen.org/)
QuoteDoes that imply direct ethnic affiliation? No.
How are we defining ethnic affiliation? I'm an American largely of English ancestry, but judging by my appearance and where my family is supposed to be from in England, it is likely that I am in large part of Saxon and Danish stock. Do I have an ethnic affiliation with Denmark and Schleiswig-Holstein? I'm mostly arguing that the relationship between Slav and Scythian would be similar to the relationship between, say, Etruscan and Roman; genetic, material, cultural impact, not 'direct' descent.
Quote
"Scythian" is a just a generic label that Greco-Romans gave to nomads who rode horses.
In a lot of the literature I've read there is a distinction to be made between 'true' Scythians of Classical Antiquity and a general term for Eastern Iranians who spread from Mongolia to Hungary. I'm using it in the latter sense.
Quote
What does it mean to say "Scythians" were "absorbed" by Turks?
During the golden age of the Roman Empire, there is a very massive exodus from the Steppe of Indo-Iranian and Tocharian peoples as the Turkic peoples begin to expand west and south. I mean that the Turkic peoples (I used "Turks" as a generic term for Turkic nomads here, including very distant relatives like Bolgars).
Quote
(note that "germanic" is a linguistic characterization, not an ethnic one, in this time period)
When dealing with pre-history this is of course necessary; we can at best speculate through a combination of later written history, physical archaeology, genetics and linguistic evidence on the ethnic composition of the early Slavs.
Quote
More anachronism.
Alans and Tatars had close relations throughout the prurient period, and the already heterogeneous Tatar population fused with the already heterogeneous Russian population to provide a mixture that is about as heterogeneous as you get outside of Brazil.
Quote
150 years is an enormous amount of time. Imagine making a similar argument in the context of late antique Britain.
Late antique Britain is marginally literate. Western Ukraine isn't at this point.
Quote
I have no idea what a "Germanic/Scytho-Sarmatian" is but certainly I have never observed such a chimera.
I am not suggesting they were the same thing or a fused people, though obviously they mixed quite a bit during this period (IIRC the Vandal kingdom of Spain was half-dominated by Alans). Just speaking of general non-Slavic influences on Slavs.
Quote
Moreover, archaeology can provide only limited evidence about material culture and burial practices, none of which necessarily correlate directly with ethnicity or political cohesion. The dangers of using archaelogy and linguistic evidence like tribal names, place names and loan words to trace movements of people and identify specific "peoples" has now long been an emphasis in the scholarly literature, and there are precious few serious academic historians in the field who make ethno-cultural identifications based on such evidence, without at least carefully pointing out their highly speculative nature.
I agree this is largely based on speculation. I disagree that it somehow manages to flirt with being a-historical as I have, at no point, insisted that the Slavs
were Scythians, or that they have some exclusive claim on the heritage, or that they are the special inheritors of an Indo-Iranian heritage. I am simply arguing that the relationship is there, and that it is more obvious in the case of the Slavs than it is in most non-Indo-Iranian peoples, like, say, Romanians.
Quote
There is no evidence of mass migration of peoples.
:huh:
Over what time frame?
Some elements of the Hunnish horde are described as beardless, with broad, flat faces and pressed noses. Now, the beardlessness might be in part due to ritual scarring, and maybe cranial deformation could change parts of the face I wouldn't think it would, but this would *appear* to be the first time that what was in 19th century physical-anthropology terms called the "mongolian type" moved in to Europe, at least as anything other than a substrate of the most easterly Indo-Iranian peoples.
Go to Eastern Europe today, and you'll see evidence of this phenotype everywhere.
Now,granted, a lot of this was later, and I think there is some really interesting, very convincing evidence that there was initially a greater amount of continuity genetic-physical continuity between the first westerly Turks and the previous Indo-Iranian peoples (several Turkic people are described as blonde, for example). But this is undoubtedly evidence of recent mass migration.
Thus while the Huns were no doubt a confederation of peoples, I think it is important to note that they are the beginning of long-standing trend of westwardly Steppe migration expanding to include people from the Chinese frontier who, while culturally and materially similar, were still very distinctive physically and linguistically.
Similarly, the English are just different from what they were before the Saxons and Danish. I am 6'4 and blonde. How many 6'4 blonde Welshmen are there? How many Danes and Germans fit this description? Why is it that those awful Istanbul bazaaris assume that I'm either Dutch or Norwegian instead of, say, Irish, as a pre-migration period inhabitant of what would become Northumbria might look?
Quote
The 4th century "Goths" are just an amalgam of people who had been gradually transformed by interaction with the Roman economy and military system. The empire generated a powerful demand for warriors (ie mercenaries) and the frontier regions responded by creating a supply. The more successful participants in this system could amass large followings, wealth, prestige and Roman titles. They then could use that power and prestige to create settlements for their followers, and to lord it over the local peasants. What makes one a Goth in this system is neither language, culture, ethnicity nor kinship, but simply a willingness to adopt a warrior lifestyle and a connection to some chief or warband. (even Roman renegades and deserters could and did become "goths") These Goths are not a people nor a kingdom - they are more like a very loose association of condettiere companies and associated families, reatainers, and servants.
I don't disagree with anything here. In fact, it is stated far better than I'd ever likely manage, as I've already argued several times IRL with Turks that before the modern age "Turk" was far more a job description than some kind of national identity.
I state my previous point poorly; what I should have said was that important elements of the Eastern Germanic peoples migrate, leaving the land depopulated enough to make the Slavic migration in to the modern Western Slavic lands relatively easy compared to the expansion South, and resulting in a collapse of authority among the Slavs, both of which I think you yourself have stated previously.
That said, over the last 1700 years Eurasia has seen a ton of war bands come and go, resulting in eventual cultural and genetic change.
Quote from: Queequeg on March 25, 2010, 05:57:50 PM
QuoteDoes that imply direct ethnic affiliation? No.
How are we defining ethnic affiliation? I'm an American largely of English ancestry, but judging by my appearance and where my family is supposed to be from in England, it is likely that I am in large part of Saxon and Danish stock.
We've never met, so I can't really say, but I feel pretty OK in saying you are not a "Saxon". As in- you are neither a cautious Lunebergian burgher, nor are you a wild maritime reaver. If you are tall and have blue eyes that could mean a number of things, but it doesn't really define anything about you than what is entirely superficial. Just as the fact of my grandmother's blue eyes or my own green eyes does not change the fact that I am a Jew.
I won't comment further about your post, b/c I don't think we have any real disagreement other than points of emphasis; if I am cautious in the way I approach ethnic labels it is because of the dubious and fetishistic way these have been used in the past and present.
People come up to me & tell me I look Frisian. I'm usually too polite to tell them I'm nearly pure Angle.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.moillusions.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F11%2Fbsfc4q676v_2_sharbat_gula_450_Natural_Hallucinogen_ish-s450x390-27627-580.gif&hash=7e98c201125742c8b085456e07ed19f9712e4052)
Quote from: derspiess on March 26, 2010, 01:00:16 AM
People come up to me & tell me I look Frisian. I'm usually too polite to tell them I'm nearly pure Angle.
Frisian? What American, asides from an academic would use that term?
Just a tiny nitpicking: altough "scythian" "roxolani" "goth" were surely used as a broad term by the Romans to define people they did not really care about apart from their price on the slave market, surely they did not also pull the names out of their arse, so there had to be a "scythian" tribe for example :P
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 25, 2010, 12:30:16 PM
Quote from: Martinus on March 25, 2010, 11:48:24 AM
I don't believe Alexandru H. is not a troll. He has a relatively good command of English and has an access to the internet - it's impossible for someone to hold so many totally insane views and factually incorrect opinions.
You exist however.
:face:
Quote from: Tamas on March 26, 2010, 02:27:19 AM
Just a tiny nitpicking: altough "scythian" "roxolani" "goth" were surely used as a broad term by the Romans to define people they did not really care about apart from their price on the slave market, surely they did not also pull the names out of their arse, so there had to be a "scythian" tribe for example :P
Taking your example, "Scythian" is not the name of a tribe known to the Romans; the word comes from Herodotus' Histories. It is probably not a tribal name; it appears to be a Hellenization of a Persian word describing nomadic peoples dwelling to the north of the Persian Empire. "Scyth" would quickly become a generic label in the Greco-Roman world for any nomadic people utilizing cavalry, regardless of their precise origin, culture or political identity.
"Goth" I have already discussed above. For centuries, scholars uncritically accepted the history of Jordanes (written in the era of Justinian) as a true history of the Goths, and thus made a spurious connection between the Goths and the Scandinavian Gutae or Gutones of Tacitus. In fact, it is pretty clear that Jordanes' account is myth and invention; Walter Goffart among others has written extensively about the problems with Jordanes' account.
The first clear mention of the people who came to be Goths in the written Roman sources in the late 4th century account of Ammianus Marcellinus, who recounts a incursion into Thrace in 365 AD by the "Gothorum", adding that "who up to that time had never come into collision with us." Later, Ammianus refers to the "Greuthungi" who according to Jordanes are the forebears of the Ostrogoths, a claim still accepted in some degree by some scholars (Herwig Wolfram most notably) but is treated far more skeptically by others. Ammainus also refers to the "Theruingi" -- which is often associated with the later Visigoths, although in Ammianus' account, he seems to distinguish the "nobles of the Goths" who ally with the Theruingi chieftain from the Theruingi themselves. In any event, it is an alliance of "Gothorum", "Greuthingi", and "Theruingi" who fight and defeat Valens at Adrianople. These groups then fight intermittant battles with Roman forces for the next six years until at least some of them are settled within the imperial borders as federates. When Alaric begins to act up about 15 years later or so, there is no more mention of "Theruingi" and "Greuthingi", just Goths. Clearly there is some connection with the Goths as we know them and the various peoples that Ammianus talks about, although whether we are dealing with a people with a distinct ethno-cultural identity is open to question.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 26, 2010, 01:26:14 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 26, 2010, 01:00:16 AM
People come up to me & tell me I look Frisian. I'm usually too polite to tell them I'm nearly pure Angle.
Frisian? What American, asides from an academic would use that term?
:lol:
Ohhhh, Tim...
What's wrong with Frisians? :mad:
Quote from: derspiess on March 26, 2010, 02:45:42 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 26, 2010, 01:26:14 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 26, 2010, 01:00:16 AM
People come up to me & tell me I look Frisian. I'm usually too polite to tell them I'm nearly pure Angle.
Frisian? What American, asides from an academic would use that term?
:lol:
Ohhhh, Tim...
i think the wind actually messed up his hairdue as that one flew over his head :lol: