Europe against GMO crops! Please, sign the Avaaz petition! I already did.
It's us who decide, not Monsanto!!!

Monday, 23 March 2009

Slavs vs. Thracians-are they telling us all?

A long awaited post, that I will continue with time.

What's so special about Slavs and Thracians or spelled in the correct way the Traki.? Well, on first place, they both are important part of Bulgarian history. But what's more important, 1/3 of European population are Slavs. It's clearly important to know more/all about them. As for the Traki-they crafted the MOST beautiful and professional gold treasuries of their time. If you see those marvelous little golden leafs and stunning decorations, you will know what I'm talking about. They were amazing! What's even more interesting about them is that so little is know about their history. The only information we have is thanks to Greek sources. And obviously, they had the respect of the Greeks. You can see some of their golden stuff here.

What provoked me was the great inconsistency I found in wikipedia about that two groups. The popular story is that the Traki inhabited the Balkans until the Slavians/Slavs came at some point and melted the local population. The tricky part is that according to recent genetical studies, Bulgarians are 15% Slavs and 49% Tracians (Traki)! (The actual numbers come from this site and are:Bulgaria: 49%Thraker, 11%macedonian, 15%slavs,15%hellenen,5% pheonician). It looks like we're less Slavs than Greeks are! And that's a hell of a difference. That's why, I started digging. People often don't understand why I'm obsessed with ancient history. Well, the answer is very very simple-I think that are genes encode our Past into our blood and by re-living the past, we implement the lessons our ancestors learnt to the fullest. In simple words, if we don't know who we were, we're not making the maximum of our current life. So, back to the Past.

The Slavs in brief:

The Slavic Peoples are an ethnic and linguistic branch of Indo-European peoples, living mainly in eastern Europe. From the early 6th century they spread from their original homeland (most commonly thought to be in Eastern Europe) to inhabit most of eastern Central Europe, Eastern Europe and the Balkans. Over half of Europe is, territorially and demographically speaking, inhabited by Slavic-speaking communities.

According to a 2007 genetic study based on Y-chromosome male haplogroups, Slavic men cluster into two main groups; one encompasses all Western-Slavic, Eastern-Slavic, and two Southern-Slavic male populations (western Croats, Slovenes), whilst the other group encompasses all remaining Southern Slavic men (including Bosniaks, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Montenegrins, Serbs) .

  1. Two genetically distant groups of Slavic populations were revealed: One encompassing all Western-Slavic, Eastern-Slavic, and two Southern-Slavic populations (north-western Croats, Slovenes), and one encompassing all remaining Southern Slavs. According to the authors most Slavic populations have similar Y chromosome pools - R1a, and this similarity can be traced to an origin in middle Dnieper basin of Ukraine.
  2. However, some southern Slavic populations such as Serbs, Bosniaks, Montenegrins, Macedonians, and Bulgarians are clearly separated from the tight DNA cluster of the rest of Slavic populations. According to the authors this phenomenon is explained by "...contribution to the Y chromosomes of peoples who settled in the Balkan region before the Slavic expansion to the genetic heritage of Southern Slavs..."
Origin:The Slavs emerged from obscurity when the westward movement of Germans in the 5th and 6th centuries AD (thought to be in conjunction with movement of peoples from Siberia and Eastern Europe: Huns, and later Avars and Bulgars) started the great migration of the Slavs.

Around the 6th century, Slavs appeared on Byzantine borders in great numbers. The Byzantine records note that after they marched through grass wouldn't regrow under their footprints.

The First Bulgarian Empire, ruled by a core of Bulgars, was founded on the Balkans in AD 681. After their subsequent Slavicisation, it was instrumental in the spread of Slavic literacy and Christianity to the rest of the Slavic world.

Throughout their history, Slavs came into contact with non-Slavic groups. After their subsequent spread, they began assimilating non-Slavic peoples. For example, in the Balkans, there were Paleo-Balkan peoples, such as Thracians, Illyrians and Greeks. Having lost their indigenous language due to persistent Hellenisation and the Roman conquest, what remained of the Thracians and Illyrians were completely absorbed into the Slavic tribes. Later invaders such as Bulgars and even Cumans mingled with the Slavs also, particularly in eastern parts (ie Bulgaria). source

So, imagine my surprise when I read the iGENEA website and their research results according to which Bulgarians are not Slavs but Thracians! After all my posts about the great Bulgars to find out that Bulgarians are actually Thracians (Traki)! Well, to tell the truth this was absolutely shocking for me and I couldn't sleep that night. To briefly remind you the history, Bulgars came from somewhere in Asia, most probably they were Turks or Iranian tribes (favored by me), had very sophisticated rulers culture (very good in building cities, for example), they were great warriors and believed in Tangra or in English "The sky". Very nice people. Nice as they are, there is absolutely no trace from their genes in our blood. And that was very odd, because they came and conquered the land, along with the presumably Slavic tribes on it, declared a new country, named it, ruled it, fought with Byzantine Empire and all this, being so few in numbers, that they cannot be found in our blood! This is so illogical, it is simply outrageous.

So it dawned me, the only reason to have such a percentage of Thracian genes in our blood is that the Slavs never melted Thracians, quite the opposite, the Thracians outnumbered the Slavs/which doesn't sounds so weird, since Greek sources called Thracians the most numerous people after the Hindus/. The second important fact that seems to elude people is that Bulgars NEVER fought the local population on the Balkans. They came, they settled and then, they started fighting with Byzantium. Isn't this odd? They come to a new place and the local population just welcomes them?! Well, not if they were actually a part of that population. And the only way that to happen is if they were either Slavs or Thracians! It is interesting to note that Southern Slavs have very distinct halogroups than other Slavs. Are those the markers of Bulgars-if they are, why they are common throughout the Balkans-a region that wasn't entirely dominated by Bulgarian Empires and anyway, that would tell us, Bulgars was actually quite many-something, I'm not ready to admit. The second possibility is that Bulgars were Thracians (Thraki). That possibility is very probable, since Bulgars come from the region of Iran and Afghanistan and a copy of one of the symbols of the Thracians (Traki)-the Rider of Madara was found in Afghanistan. Now this is obviously odd! Also, there are many similarities between the religions of the Thracians /Thraki/ and the Bulgars. Check the info on Thracians I copied from wikipedia:

"The ancient Thracians were a group of Indo-European tribes who spoke the Thracian language - a scarcely attested branch of the Indo-European language family. Those peoples inhabited the Eastern, Central and Southern part of the Balkan peninsula, as well as the adjacent parts of Central-Eastern Europe.

The origins of the Thracians remain obscure, in absence of written historical records. Proto-Thracian tombs can be found dating back to 3000 BC, when what can be termed as 'proto-Thracian' culture began to form.

The first historical record about the Thracians is found in the Iliad, where they appear as allies of the Trojans, hailing from Thrace.

By the 5th century BC, the Thracian presence was pervasive enough to have made Herodotus (book 5) call them the second-most numerous people in the part of the world known by him (after the Indians), and potentially the most powerful, if not for their disunity.

In the 6th century, some Thraco-Roman and Thraco-Hellenic descendants of Thracian tribes south of the Danube river made contacts with the invading Slavs and were later Slavicised. Thus they became one of the main ethnic elements in the consolidation of the Bulgarian nation in 8-9th century.

The Iliad records that the Thracians from around the Hellespont and also the Thracian Cicones fought on the side of the Trojans. Many mythical figures, such as the god Dionysus, princess Europa and the hero Orpheus were borrowed by the Greeks from their Thracian neighbours.

Josephus claims the founder of the Thracians was the biblical character Tiras, son of Japheth:

"Thiras also called those whom he ruled over Thirasians; but the Greeks changed the name into Thracians." - AotJ I:6 /?is this a reference that Thracians had something to do with the city of Tyre?/

The Thracian warriors were described as "Large, powerfully built men, mostly red- or lighthaired and bearded, with grey or blue eyes. They had delicate white skin and tendency to put on flesh. The women were often red haired just like the man, tattoos were quite common, and mostly for women.

Thracians like the modern Bulgarians belonged mainly to the Atlanto-mediteranean anthropological type.

Orpheus was a figure describes as a chief among poets and musicians, king of the Thracian tribe of Cicones. source
Now, because I realise this post became quite long, I will leave the religion for another post. I would like to point out few things.

First, the Traki/Thracians were many. If even the Greek admit it, they really were. How this relates to the number of Slavs. Obviously, genetically the two groups are not similar, but then, how come this numerous people of fierce warriors could be melted by the meek Slavs. There certainly is something odd here. Also, notice the similarities in the names-like Traki/Iraqi. Of course, I'm not claiming a relationship, just a similarity. Third, Bulgarian obviously have pheonician genes, could we claim a connection between the ancient city of Tyre (notorious with its marine-fare) and the Thirasians /Trakians/ who Greek sometimes call Talasocrates-masters of the sea? This is a very curious connection. But it leaves one very interesting option open-some people suggested to me that Thracians/Trakians passed to Asia trough modern Istanbul to evade climate changes, what if the Traki went to Asia and after centuries they returned back to Bulgaria from the North?! Isn't this fun! What's even more, nobody knows where the Traki comes from, what if they or/as well as the Bulgars come from Tyre/current Lebanon/. Because we all know about the famous sea maps of Marinos of Tyre. Isn't it interesting? Also, the main question remains-how come the Thracians could be the masters of sea, if there are no remaining evidences of their sea capabilities?!

Bottom line for now, Thracians are a mystery. They tell us that Bulgarians are Slavs, but genetically, we are not. Spiritually we are not. If you think about it, the very Slavic alphabet comes from Thrakia and the land of the Traki, how could we know who influenced who, if it's already obvious the the Thracians outnumbered the Slavs. I think now you can see my point. Our history was so heavily manipulated, it's hard to differ what is reasonable and what not. And why, I ask, nobody ever talks about the Thracians, their language, their culture. Who were the Traki, that's what I want to know. A last note- the Bulgars according to Wikipedia were referred as "the people with mixed blood". This name evokes few associations. First-the Biblical one-we know the story how the Nephilims started breeding with ordinary people and the Gods got very angry and destroyed humans. Second-we know that Bulgars loved to mix themselves, to the point that from red-haired and bearded people, they became slightly mongoloid. Third, we know the Thraki / Thracians were crazy about noble blood, could it be that they found the Bulgars for mixed-blood. But then, they accepted the Bulgars as brothers, so it doesn't look very logical to consider them somewhat unclean.

It's a weird world. Anyway, I'm finishing for now and I hope my 5 readers will try to understand why I bothered to write all that. Thracians are important for our global history. People keep on looking for both the Atlants and the Nephilims. I continue to think that the last two were enemies, but it's somewhat hard to figure to which one the Thracians belonged. Of course, I'd love to say that they were Atlants (or some their obscure kins ) and most of the evidences point in that direction, but still, the Truth remains to be unveiled. And national feeling aside, I think this is important. Thracians culture was very deep and resembled in its profoundness the Indian ones. Their spirituality and rituals were not on society level, but on soul level. Their gold crafting was stunning. And their some evidences, that I will discuss when I form my opinion, that Thracians influenced Egyptian culture. And that would really mean global importance, because as much as archaeologist like to pretend they know everything, they don't know it all. In fact, they manipulated evidences to make it look like everything fit the context, but as I obviously show, often discoveries doesn't fit the box neither the context. There is more to the mankind to discover and precisely that is why, I dig history and not physics in my free time. I hope you appreciate it, but in any case, the Truth is above all and it will eventually come out. With or without me, you or whoever else.

P.S. I'm not sure but I think I already made some links between Orphic religion and Pythagoreanism. I'll have to check, but until then, wikipedia is very useful source of information. What's even more interesting is that Orphic traditions are very VERY similar to early Christianity. But on that, later.

1 comment:

mart said...

This post is overlapping all of my discoveries and my personal opinion ,i hope for more info in near future ! Please share your knowledge about it , because even as a nation we need to be enlighten with our true history
not the political version of it !lingua dominanta /in this case Slavic language/ does not change the fact ,that Bulgarians are not a Slavic nation ,neither genetically nor culturally . our music and classic traditions are closer to the people of the Middle east than to any Slavic nation ! due to different political manipulations in the near past ,historians wrote the history books that make no sense ,but brainwashed the whole nation for 50+ years ! to be able to go for a better future ,we need to find our true selves and stop linking the national identity to one political 'friend' or another !Traki are the core of our identity culture ,genetics ,Slavians give their language ,Bulgars left their legacy by uniting the tribes and forming the Bulgarian nation .
We do not need a new history book to be written ,just to find and prove the real historical facts behind our past .