Where do slavs come from?

[Dr Strangelove]

I'm questioning that claim. Is there substantial proof? Are there ancient Dacian records to support this claim? I would think that the ancient Dacians might have some sort of relationship with the Greeks or Illyrians.

What I'm trying to say is that when an invader comes into an area and their language replaces the old one it doesn't mean that the previous peoples were eradicated, it means at least that the invader had the will and the means to obtain the submission of the natives. Likewise when an invader takes over an area and his original language is lost that generally implies that the original culture was so enticing that the invader willingly sacrificed his old ways in order to aspire to leadership of the conquered land.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
I'm questioning that claim. Is there substantial proof? Are there ancient Dacian records to support this claim?

No, there's only lotm's vibes. IIRC, it's supposed to be kind of Thracian, but also Albanian is named as a possible relative.

What I'm trying to say is that when an invader comes into an area and their language replaces the old one it doesn't mean that the previous peoples were eradicated, it means at least that the invader had the will and the means to obtain the submission of the natives. Likewise when an invader takes over an area and his original language is lost that generally implies that the original culture was so enticing that the invader willingly sacrificed his old ways in order to aspire to leadership of the conquered land.

That's about how I see the things too - in a nutshell.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Attilla was basically a land pirate.

Regarding the idea that Romania was resettled by Latin speakers from south of the Danube - when was this event supposed to have taken place? The area north of the Danube was crawling with Huns and Goths in the 5th century, this would have made a rather poor time to resettle. In the 6th century plagues devastated the Balkans, then the Bulgars grabbed the land south of the Danube presumably wiping out the natives or at least forcing them to adopt the Bulgar language. Finally at some point the peoples of the Byzantine empire reverted to speaking Greek.

The Huns empire died shortly after Atilla's death in 453. Circa 480, I don't recall the exact date, the Weatern Empire had no Augustus and the Eastern Emperor invited the Ostrogoths to move to Italy to take over from the usurper Duke who was now running things. Obviously, this did leave the area of Dacia somewhat vacant of hostile barbarians and possibly a lot more attractive than Italy, the object of the Ostrogoth "invasion" for all those loyal to Duke.

Also, the Ostrogoths were already considered very pro-Roman. They had adopted Christianity and were otherwise very civilized. It is quite possible that when they took over Dacia in 271 that they did not destroy the existing Roman culture, but simply ruled over them like they later ruled over Italy.

[Dr. A. Cula]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
I'm questioning that claim. Is there substantial proof? Are there ancient Dacian records to support this claim? I would think that the ancient Dacians might have some sort of relationship with the Greeks or Illyrians.

What I'm trying to say is that when an invader comes into an area and their language replaces the old one it doesn't mean that the previous peoples were eradicated, it means at least that the invader had the will and the means to obtain the submission of the natives. Likewise when an invader takes over an area and his original language is lost that generally implies that the original culture was so enticing that the invader willingly sacrificed his old ways in order to aspire to leadership of the conquered land.

That claim is just a theory and proof would be very difficult to come by, especially since there's a chance it may be false. You do realise any effort put into clearing this matter will be sabotaged by romanian nationalists.

As for where the dacians went after Trajan, the history books I had back in school are even more ridiculous: they seem to support the idea that, with less than 1/4 of their country under roman occupation, free dacians abandoned their daily lives and fled to the roman towns to enlist in intensive classes of latin language and culture, follwed by a huge wave of mixed weddings that gave birth to a bunch of little romanians. What makes matters worse is that all serious romanian historians seem to support this version.