Old Europe (Vinca) language and culture in early layers of Serbian and Irish language

Status
Not open for further replies.
What we are saying is that you don't have the evidence, and what you presenting as proof is just your fantazy.

There are more open minded people here, on this web site, than in general population. So if no one here can see your connections and your truth, it is not from lack of good will and trying to see through your eyes. It rather means it is not there, it means that you are wrong. It means that your mind is playing tricks on you, believing in connections and patterns that don't exist.
 
Dublin, what if I told you that Slavic languages were spoken only in a relatively small area in Eastern Europe as late as the 400s AD

Taranis just one more thing: from you question it is obvious that you did not bother actually reading what i wrote. Because if you did, you would have seen that i have said in one of the first posts that South Slavs were Slavicised, and that what i have discovered is the pre-Slavic layer in the Serbian (South Slavic) languages and culture. If you did read what i wrote here you would have seen that again and again there is common cultural and linguistic link between south Slavic, Germanic and Gaelic people which does not exists between south Slavs and other Slavs. This link goes all the way to prehistory and is, I believe, based on common genes, namely I2 gene.

LeBrock


What we are saying is that you don't have the evidence, and what you presenting as proof is just your fantazy.

Please show me on concrete example from what i wrote which fantasy have i interpreted as evidence. All i am hearing from you is general negativity and not one proof that what i am saying here is wrong.

There are more open minded people here, on this web site, than in general population. So if no one here can see your connections and your truth, it is not from lack of good will and trying to see through your eyes. It rather means it is not there, it means that you are wrong. It means that your mind is playing tricks on you, believing in connections and patterns that don't exist.

I don't see anyone else calling this a fantasy??? And don't think that everything thinks like you or Taranis. That would be a fantasy...
 
Taranis

I would say great, i respect this view and anyone who supports it. They must have a great amount of evidence to support their view, which would allow them to quickly show that everything i said here is wrong. I would like to see that evidence. Thanks.

Plenty of evidence? Yes, see, I know this. You probably also know this. It's not my duty (even though more than once, I have labeled as doing just that) to uphold orthodoxy. It's not my duty here to defend orthodoxy, as it can very well defend itself. The question that I would like to ask is: do you understand the mainstream point of view? If that answer is 'no', I would like to ask you if you actually have ever genuinely bothered trying to understand it, or trying to understand the methods? If I had to guess, I would say that the answer to that would be also 'no', as you seem to be under the impression that it is a monolithic dogma that you have to memorize from A to Z, which it isn't.

You see taranis, you think that i do this from some inferiority complex point of view or maybe superiority complex point of view. You think that i am trying to prove that Serbians are older or Better or more important then the mainstream view says. Maybe this is how you approach history, like a tool for making your nation look better and others worse.

You can't understand that anyone would spend time investigating history because they are just interested in history??? You can't understand that there are people who don't care what the latest party line is and are just interested in finding the truth??? You can't understand that some people just enjoy investigative work more that learning official mainstream views by heart.

See, what I am missing is that at no point in you are stating why exactly you believe the mainstream opinion to be wrong. It appears to be a foregone conclusion you already did before even starting this thread. Haven't you wondered how people get to that view. Why and how, according to you, are entire generations of scientists so wrong?

I hope this answers your questions. And i hope that you guys allow me to present my finds to the end this time and not close this thread just because you don't agree with what i am saying?

Actually, it doesn't. I would like to ask another question here indead: do you think I would react any differently if you were trying disprove Einstein's theory of relativity or the theory of evolution?
 
Plenty of evidence? Yes, see, I know this. You probably also know this. It's not my duty (even though more than once, I have labeled as doing just that) to uphold orthodoxy. It's not my duty here to defend orthodoxy, as it can very well defend itself. The question that I would like to ask is: do you understand the mainstream point of view? If that answer is 'no', I would like to ask you if you actually have ever genuinely bothered trying to understand it, or trying to understand the methods? If I had to guess, I would say that the answer to that would be also 'no', as you seem to be under the impression that it is a monolithic dogma that you have to memorize from A to Z, which it isn't.



See, what I am missing is that at no point in you are stating why exactly you believe the mainstream opinion to be wrong. It appears to be a foregone conclusion you already did before even starting this thread. Haven't you wondered how people get to that view. Why and how, according to you, are entire generations of scientists so wrong?



Actually, it doesn't. I would like to ask another question here indead: do you think I would react any differently if you were trying disprove Einstein's theory of relativity or the theory of evolution?

From what I can see, it appears that the linkages that Dublin presents are tenuous at best. The overwhelming majority of Atlantic commercial and cultural exchange took place in the Atlantic facade. However, the "Atlanteans" also apparently had some considerable contact with what is now Italy and the Eastern Mediterranean.
 
Proto gaelic in the balkans, based on what?
You are linking all of Europe with Serbia in this thread, are you proposing Serbia as a womb of European nations?
 
I don't doubt your Serbian Irish connection, but it was from a Dacian retreat (Eastern Serbia). If you follow the trail of I2a2a1 (M284) it becomes clear. M233 into Germany and Sweden probably came from Dacian migration caused by Scythian and Celtic migration into the area. These groups mixed to some extant, and is why there is British Isle myths about Scythian origins. The Celts come from the same stock as Italics (Celto-Italic), and were probably very accompanying to other cultural and religious ideas as the later Italic/Latin Romans. It was this mix of Dacian,Celts, and Germanic peoples where you see your similarities. These similarities happened before the Roman conquest of Brittan, but no earlier than the Indo-European Dacian. There was probably some remote religious connections from the neolithic I2 Vinca incorporated into specific Dacian tribes, that mixed with Celts and Germans who carried it to Brittan during the Belgic expansion in southern Brittan, then to Ireland in the 6th century AD.
 
From what I can see, it appears that the linkages that Dublin presents are tenuous at best. The overwhelming majority of Atlantic commercial and cultural exchange took place in the Atlantic facade. However, the "Atlanteans" also apparently had some considerable contact with what is now Italy and the Eastern Mediterranean.

Minoan Cretans merchants, trade or gather tin from Britain before 1500 BC as show in ship wreckage,
I even heard about dates 1800 to 2300 years BC from some extreme searches.
 
Proto gaelic in the balkans, based on what?
You are linking all of Europe with Serbia in this thread, are you proposing Serbia as a womb of European nations?

Danube Basin and Pannoni Basin are basic for the whole IE theories, especially for the west and North Europe, as express by IE that support the North of Black sea origin (like Gibutas)
Yamnaa-Cotofeni-Vatin-Vucocar-Alps is a road/passage with trails of earlier copper and later Bronze (Rudna Glava).
the other is Yamnaa-rivers-Baltic/Pommerania-Alps (Cotofeni maybe include or exclude) a road later know backwards as amber road of Varrangians
 
I don't doubt your Serbian Irish connection, but it was from a Dacian retreat (Eastern Serbia). If you follow the trail of I2a2a1 (M284) it becomes clear. M233 into Germany and Sweden probably came from Dacian migration caused by Scythian and Celtic migration into the area. These groups mixed to some extant, and is why there is British Isle myths about Scythian origins. The Celts come from the same stock as Italics (Celto-Italic), and were probably very accompanying to other cultural and religious ideas as the later Italic/Latin Romans. It was this mix of Dacian,Celts, and Germanic peoples where you see your similarities. These similarities happened before the Roman conquest of Brittan, but no earlier than the Indo-European Dacian. There was probably some remote religious connections from the neolithic I2 Vinca incorporated into specific Dacian tribes, that mixed with Celts and Germans who carried it to Brittan during the Belgic expansion in southern Brittan, then to Ireland in the 6th century AD.

Scythia is linked to Noahs son Japheth so by having an origin story linked with Scythia you are giving yourself a biblical link, very attarctive to a region that has just adopted christianity. I'm sure Japheth and the Vincans can be linked also.
 
Danube Basin and Pannoni Basin are basic for the whole IE theories, especially for the west and North Europe, as express by IE that support the North of Black sea origin (like Gibutas)
Yamnaa-Cotofeni-Vatin-Vucocar-Alps is a road/passage with trails of earlier copper and later Bronze (Rudna Glava).
the other is Yamnaa-rivers-Baltic-Alps (Cotofeni maybe include or exclude) a road later know backwards as amber road of Varrangians

So is it certain that the Vinca culture played a central role in the spread of the Indo European language to most of Europe?
This thead is like dna/linguistics/tribes hopscotch covering a period from about about 5,000 bc to 800 AD.
 
So is it certain that the Vinca culture played a central role in the spread of the Indo European language to most of Europe?

No definitely not,
on the other hand it has been established (Beyond All Doubt - there never actually was a doubt) that Vinca was a Pre-Indo-European culture and has nothing to do with Indo-Europeans other than being destroyed by them.

More info on Posts #11 & #24 on page 1 of this thread

Reading other posts from other users on this thread,
I have a feeling that this is turning from a discussion, into an intervention for Dublin.
 
Please show me on concrete example from what i wrote which fantasy have i interpreted as evidence. All i am hearing from you is general negativity and not one proof that what i am saying here is wrong.
It is your hypothesis, therefore your duty to prove it, and without the proof all you say is wrong. So far I don't see it here, as well as I didn't see it in your Baltic Slavs-Viking connection with Ireland. All I see here is that you strongly want this to be true, making yourself see things that don't exist. You are a Serb who lives in Ireland. It would be so nice, for you, if these two nations were more related, isn't it?




I don't see anyone else calling this a fantasy??? And don't think that everything thinks like you or Taranis. That would be a fantasy...
From last 8 posters I don't see much of agreement with you. Do you see the pattern?

Don't you think that if you had something valid here, some logical and open minded people wouldn't agree with you?
 
Dublin, I appreciate the hard work you've put into your theories-- you've sourced your information and have cogent thought processes. I think you're biting off too big off a chunk here though.

Ask most anyone on this site, I'm all for the unorthodox approach. As a suggestion, it may help if you pick two or three major points and stick/defend those; it may then be easier to convince some of those in the mainstream. The scattershot method with an enormous amount of examples becomes difficult to follow... try the laser beam deployment instead.

What is rather interesting about your idea is that I've noticed CODIS DNA testing does seem to pick up on an Ireland/Serbian/Croatian link (at least in my own family's apparent travels).

Of course I realize that CODIS (used by Family Tree DNA) is controversial when used to trace genetic histories... but often where there's smoke there's fire.

**EDIT**
Awaiting a second autosomal test that uses a more accepted approach (23 and me)-- if this also shows an Irish-Serbian-Croatian link then I may help pull your wagon. Please remember though, sometimes less is more when citing examples.
 
Last edited:
No definitely not,
on the other hand it has been established (Beyond All Doubt - there never actually was a doubt) that Vinca was a Pre-Indo-European culture and has nothing to do with Indo-Europeans other than being destroyed by them.

More info on Posts #11 & #24 on page 1 of this thread

Reading other posts from other users on this thread,
I have a feeling that this is turning from a discussion, into an intervention for Dublin.

Indeed, Vinca is a pre IE culture,
But Vinca seems to pass a lot of habbitts and technology to IE far more east than Eurasian steppes before destroyed, like Gold metallurgy, burrial with arms, early kurgans,
and after the entrance of arsenic bronze carriers we also see 3 major IE cultures to be developed there before expand to WEST,

the problem is Celts went from Pomerania/Baltic to Alps or from Pannoni Basin/Danube to Alps?

(yet personally I am still fan of minor Asian origin)
 
Taranis


It's not my duty (even though more than once, I have labeled as doing just that) to uphold orthodoxy. It's not my duty here to defend orthodoxy, as it can very well defend itself.

Yet you seem to be there to remind me that the orthodoxy exists and should not be questioned, but can not actually speak for it and defend it? Are you a believer or knower?

The question that I would like to ask is: do you understand the mainstream point of view? If that answer is 'no', I would like to ask you if you actually have ever genuinely bothered trying to understand it, or trying to understand the methods?

I did look at the mainstream theories (because they are theories).

See, what I am missing is that at no point in you are stating why exactly you believe the mainstream opinion to be wrong.


It is because of so many things which i have found and which can not be explained by the mainstream theories, that i decided to propose my theory. Now if you think that my arguments that i am presenting to support my theory are week, please give me an alternative explanation for anything i said here which would explain it better. This is the reason why i started posting this here, to validate my theory. Now you can help me by actually putting forward arguments or counter arguments, but not by giving speeches. This is just a waste of everyone's time. Sorry.


I would like to ask another question here indead: do you think I would react any differently if you were trying disprove Einstein's theory of relativity or the theory of evolution?

I am not. So let's not go there. And don't try to compare history and exact measurable sciences. The level of measurability and verifiability is completely different.


Cambrius

From what I can see, it appears that the linkages that Dublin presents are tenuous at best. The overwhelming majority of Atlantic commercial and cultural exchange took place in the Atlantic facade. However, the "Atlanteans" also apparently had some considerable contact with what is now Italy and the Eastern Mediterranean.

If by Atlantic facade you mean from north west africa to baltic then you are right. Atlantic facade doesn't stop in the lowlands...

Please read the origin of the Irish race by Mallory. You will see that there were two major cultural exchange routs into British Isles: Mediterranean - Iberian and Balkan - Baltic one. Both equally important.

Inver

Proto gaelic in the balkans, based on what?
You are linking all of Europe with Serbia in this thread, are you proposing Serbia as a womb of European nations?

Actually yes. Because today's Serbia coincides with the old Lepenski vir, Starcevo and Vinca land and old Kelto Ilirian land. It is not strictly speaking Serbia but originally Lower Danube and later the area between Balkan and Baltic.

So is it certain that the Vinca culture played a central role in the spread of the Indo European language tomost of Europe?
I am talking about pre Indo European language layer as well as Indo European language layer. And i think that they are linked. I support one of the two mainstream theories which places the birthplace of the Indo Europeans in Central Europe. They are partially Vincans who went up north and mixed with the stepe people.


This thead is like dna/linguistics/tribes hopscotch covering a period from about about 5,000 bc to 800 AD.

This is because this is the period of the cultural mixing.

abAmerican

I don't doubt your Serbian Irish connection, but it was from a Dacian retreat (Eastern Serbia).

You are actually very close to the truth. The area is correct (lower Carpathian mountains) but the contact time started much earlier. It continues even today. The same mountain people still live in the central European mountains. Just no one bothered to investigate them until recently.

The Celts come from the same stock as Italics (Celto-Italic), and were probably very accompanying to other cultural and religious ideas as the later Italic/Latin Romans.

You are right here in that you can trace Sabine (Early Roman) culture straight to lower Carpathian mountains. I am planning to write about this in detail. It is exactly that connection that led me to Vinca.

It was this mix of Dacian,Celts, and Germanic peoples where you see your similarities. These similarities happened before the Roman conquest of Brittan, but no earlier than the Indo-European Dacian.

There are, as i said in my very first post on this thread, many layers of connection, because this connection lasted so long. One period of intense connection is end of second and beginning of the first millennium bc, the start of iron age in the Balkans which predates the migration of the Ilyrian tribes from balkans to Italy. As i said it is the link between Rome, Ilyria, Arcadia, Thessaly, Thrakia that lead me to Gaia and then to Vinca.

There was probably some remote religious connections from the neolithic I2 Vinca incorporated into specific Dacian tribes, that mixed with Celts and Germans who carried it to Brittan during the Belgic expansion in southern Brittan, then to Ireland in the 6th century AD.There was probably some remote religious connections from the neolithic I2 Vinca incorporated into specific Dacian tribes, that mixed with Celts and Germans who carried it to Brittan during the Belgic expansion in southern Brittan, then to Ireland in the 6th century AD.

This would be fine except you find Irish (gaelic, Ilyrian, vincan???) roots in Minoan, archaic Greek, Ilyrian, Roman toponimes, town names, god names...The only explanation is that someone speaking (gaelic???) was in the Balkans a very long time ago...

Example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crete (Κρήτη)

he current name of Crete first appears in Mycenaean Greek as ke-re-si-jo "Cretan" in Linear B texts. In Ancient Greek, the name Crete (Κρήτη) first appears in Homer's Odyssey.[4] Its etymology is unknown. One speculative proposal derives it from a hypothetical Luvianword *kursatta (cf. kursawar "island", kursattar "cutting, sliver").[5] In Latin, it became Creta.

http://www.ceantar.org/Dicts/MB2/mb11.html#crith

crith - shake, quiver, Irish, Early Irish crith, Welsh cryd, Old Welsh crit, *kritu-; Anglo-Saxon hriða, fever, German ritten, fever. See crath, to which crith has been suggested as cognate (root [email protected], krot,kret.

Now i don't know which etymology is better? What do you think?


Yetos thank you for your support. Balkan Baltic rout existed as a trading route in the second millennium bc as can be seen from this Micenian style fortress from Slovakia which dates to 1500 bc. The style of the fortress is the same like in Mycenae. The complete absence of any tools and agricultural material suggests that the fortress was a guard post on the balkan baltic trade route:

http://www.spisskystvrtok.sk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5&Itemid=16
http://www.hradiska.sk/2010/06/spissky-stvrtok-slovenske-mykeny.html

Both texts are in Slovakian. If anyone can find anything in English please post it here.

leBrock

You are a Serb who lives in Ireland. It would be so nice, for you, if these two nations were more related, isn't it?

Have a look at this. When I was I kid I remember seeing an old wooden cross standing in the middle of a field just outside my dad’s village. It was at the edge of the village land, the same like in Ireland and other Celtic lands where holly land is the land that separates tribes. It was a place where village "slava" or the ancestral celebration was celebrated every year. It was always covered in flowers and people used to bring food and drink to it and light candles in front of it. This is still a living tradition in Serbia...


Imagine my surprise when later in life i discovered "celtic" crosses...


http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/3010/dscn3999.jpg
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/420/copyofzapisdobardesktop.jpg
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/186/leskovacstarisrpskikrstbl6.th.jpg
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/5314/copy4ofvlasotince4.jpg
http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/211/copy3ofvlasotince4.jpg
http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/7742/copy2ofvlasotince4.jpg
http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/5350/copyofvlasotince4.jpg
http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/3842/copyofspomenicileksovac.jpg

So for me going to Ireland was like going to my second home in a way...

You will not find any mention of this in any Serbian history books. No one cares. As if these people and their culture doesn't exist. The only work ever written on this is an obscure little book written by a local school teacher come historian. Any explanations?

By the way the same culture exists in the east Baltic, the land of Pruteni (Prussians). I am about to talk about this if I ever get a chance....

Also did you know that the first "Celtic" crosses came to Ireland from England and were based on earlier wooden crosses and that the oldest wooden "celtic" cross was found in Viking dublin?


The same area of Serbia has a peculiar grammatical construct. They use "na" to express belonging:


Q: "na koga je ovo kuče" (of or on whom is this hound) whose hound is this? This implies belonging or owning being equaled to having the thing in question on one person. This construct is used only for material goods and animals and not for members of the family. This construct is ancient and comes from the time when everything you owned was on you.


A: na petra. (of or on peter)


ovo je kuče na petra (this is the hound on or of petar)

This construct exists in Irish and in this dialect of Serbian which is spoken in my birth place. Any explanation?

nordicwabler

Dublin, I appreciate the hard work you've put into your theories-- you've sourced your information and have cogent thought processes.

Thank you.

I think you're biting off too big off a chunk here though.

Don't you think i know this? This is why i am posting all this here. Lets have it all out on paper, and then we can take what ever bit you want and go into as much detail as you want. This is the idea of this exercise. I can't do this all on my own.
 
Last edited:
You still didn’t explain why you think proto gaelic originated in the Balkans, from what I’ve read gaelic and the British p celtic langauge went their separate ways about 2,000 to 3,000 years ago making Ireland the birth of proto gaelic. It’s not as if you’re the first person to look for language similarities and this would have been recognized ages ago, this thread is confirmation bias at its finest.
 
You still didn’t explain why you think proto gaelic originated in the Balkans, from what I’ve read gaelic and the British p celtic langauge went their separate ways about 2,000 to 3,000 years ago making Ireland the birth of proto gaelic. It’s not as if you’re the first person to look for language similarities and this would have been recognized ages ago

I spoke to some Irish linguists about exactly this. Their answer is no one bothered comparing Irish and South Slavic languages before.
And I do put big question mark when i say Gaelic. I believe, and i have said this many times before, that Gaelic is just one component of Irish language. The component i am talking about is probably not Gaelic. Or maybe it is. I don't know. All I know is that there are many toponimes from the Balkans from the earliest times which can only be explained in Irish.

Like Sar mountain, with no etymology in Slavic, means Highest (It is) mountain it that region.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Šar_Mountains
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scordisci

Or all the rocky mountain tops with "Tor" in their name, like Durmitor. Tor means tall rock in Irish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durmitor

I have no explanation for this except that someone speaking some language which later influenced Irish lived in the Balkans when these mountains were named. Maybe you have a better explanation.

this thread is confirmation bias at its finest.

This is why you should present some counter arguments which would make the discussion more balanced. but not "it can't be, someone would have thought of it before" kind of arguments...
 
Opanak


Opanak (Serbian Cyrillic: Опанак; Macedonian: Опинок; Bulgarian: цървул[a]) are traditional peasant shoes worn in Southeastern Europe (specifically Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, Serbia). The attributes of the Opanci (name in plural) are: a construction of leather, lack of laces, durable, and various ending on toes. In Serbia, the design of the horn-like ending on toes indicates the region of origin. The concept, and the word, exists in Romania (as opincă) which is borrowed from Slavic. The Opanci are considered a national symbol of Serbia, and the traditional peasant footwear for people in the Balkan region.


Official Etymology


Serbo-Croatian "opanak", and Bulgarian and Macedonian "опинок", all ultimately derive from Proto-Slavic *opьnъkъ, which itself is a compound of the prepositional *o(b)- "around, on, etc." with final *b assimilated and the resulting greminated consonant cluster *pp being simplified to *p, and the vrddhi-lenghthened root vowel of the verb *pęti, originally meaning "to strain, move" (cf. modern standard Serbo-Croatian verbs conveying the same notion such as nàpēti/на̀пе̄ти, pròpēti/про̀пе̄ти, ràspēti/ра̀спе̄ти, pòpēti/по̀пе̄ти..), but subsequently coming to mean "to climb" (whence the meaning of modern standard Serbo-Croatian pȇti/пе̑ти, pènjati/пѐњати). So literally, opanak would roughly mean "climbing footwear".[1]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opanak


Here is an excellent web site on European peasant footwear:


http://www.eliznik.org.uk/EastEurope/Costume/opinci.htm



The oldest mention of a footwear that looks like Opanak is found in Azerbaijan. In Sanscrit, the footwear similar to opanak is called upanah (upana). Official etymology is that it comes from upa - to tie up, and nat to bend. It is still worn in certain parts of India as part of Ceremonial dress. We can find depictions of opanak in Iran, Afghanistan, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, and in Europe from Balkans to Baltic and in Ireland.


In the Balkans only male opanak has the "beak", the front part that curls upwards. It is a symbol of a male genitalia.


Now interestingly enough one culture where we see opanak everywhere are Hittites.




Hittit opanak


Seal of Muwattalli I, depicted in the embrace of the Storm God of Heaven. His Hittite name ‘Muwattalli’ is written on the left, while his Hurrian name, ‘Šarri-Teššup’, is written on the right.


http://www.hittites.info/Images/muwattalli_1_seal_1.gif




Rock inscription of Muwattalli I at Fraktin


http://www.hittites.info/Images/muwattalli_1_fraktin.gif




Yazılıkaya (Hatusha)


http://www.atamanhotel.com/whc/hattusa-yazilikaya-relief.html


http://www.hattuscha.de/02-135_42ff-345x256.jpg
http://www.hattuscha.de/02-135_64-250x346.jpg
http://www.hattuscha.de/02-143_81-300x361.jpg


Various rock carvings


http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/9490/3100408082c9526a6846.jpg
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/1126/0038ji.jpg
http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/2857/38738766mimg2803zf7.jpg
http://antique.mrugala.net/Mesopotamie/Images/Hittites - offrande.jpg
http://www.hittitemonuments.com/bor/bor05.jpg
http://i41.tinypic.com/21j4toi.jpg




Ilirian Opanak


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/HallstattIllyrianCeltic.jpg


The Oldest Known Well-Preserved Leather Shoe from Armenia


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Areni-1_shoe#cite_note-2


Irih early medieval leather shoe


http://www.alia.ie/tirnanog/sochis/xviii136.jpg
http://www.alia.ie/tirnanog/sochis/xviiib.html




Now here is the best bit:


In Irish we again have a word opanak and the word for sole of the foot taban identical to the corresponding words in Serbian. We also have the complete etymology of these words:


bonn - base, sole of the foot
tob - quick, instant
tobaine - quickness, suddenness
tobann - sudden, hasty, quick
obann - swift (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobelar)


obann probably comes from o+bonn, on sole of the foot, what we put on sole of the foot, on the base and which makes us swift.


ach - an ending for making a noun from an adjective


oban + ack = obannach = opanak = what makes us swift


in Serbian a word taban means sole of the foot. Tabanati means to run, to go quickly.


Tobann = T+obann = Taban - Sole of the foot, Quick

In Serbian there is also a word "opa!" exclamation which people say when they are jumping and which also means to jump. "opati" means to jump.


How did these two words get to be in Serbian, other south Slavic languages and Irish? I think that it has to be second millennium BC at the time when Mushki went to Asia minor to form Hittite empire. Mushki, the manly solders with opanak which has a beak pointing up to show that they are Mushki (men)? Or maybe even earlier? Any ideas?
 
Papuča (plural: Papuče pronounced papuche)


Papuča is a word which in Serbian today means slipper but is actually just another word for the same type of simple leather sole footwear of type opanak.




Here is the official etymology:


From Ottoman Turkish پابوج (pâbûc), from Persian پاپوش (pā-puš).


http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/papuča




Now what is the word for slipper in various languages:


Albanian - heqël
Afrikaans - pantoffel
Arabic - something that sounds like shimsam


Here is a discussion on various words for shoes used in Arabic languages, just to make sure the word did not come from Arabic languages:


http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1272771


Armenian - hoghat’ap’
Azerbaijani - otaq ayaqqabısı
Basque - eskarpia (Sout), eskarpiña (old B) n. ‘slipper’.
Berber - bálgha
Belorussian - Тапачкі (tapachki)
Bosnian - papuča
Bulgarian - чехъл (chehl)
Catalan - sabatilla
Croatian - papuča
Czech - pantofel
Danish - tøffel
Dutch - pantoffel
English - slipper
Estonian - suss
Finnish - tohveli
French - pantoufle, babouche (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babouche)
Galician - chinelos
German - Pantoffel
Greek - pantófla
Gujarati - Campala
Hindi - Slipara
Hungarian - papucs
Italian - pantofola
Latin - CREPIDA
Latvian - tupele or Čības
Lithuanian - šlepetė or šliurė
Macedonian - пантофли (pantofli)
Maltese - krepiduli, papoċċ
Norwegian - tøffel
Persian - pāpoosh (پاپوش), from pa "foot" + poosh "covering."
Polish - pantofel
Portugese - chinelo
Romaian - papuc
Russian - тапочка (tapuchka)
Serbian - папуча (papucha)
Slovak - pantofel
Spanish - zapatilla, pantufla, babucha (clearly showing influence from many languages)
Swedish - toffel
Turkish - terlik
Ukrainian - Гапочка (gapochka)
Yiddish - Ştʻqşwk




Here is a discussion on Iberian words for slipper and shoe:


Iberian Peninsula and recorded also north of the Pyrenees: Hispano-Arabic pargha ~ bargha ‘sandals’, sg. parghat (mod. Arabic and Berber bálgha ‘slipper, shoe’), Mozarabic probable *parca, Portuguese alparca ‘sandal’, an apparent Old Cast. alparga ‘sandal’, Arag. and SE Spain albarca id., Valencia abarca {avarca}, Bearn. abarque id. Cast. alpargata id. derives from the same ult. source via Arabic...


http://www.blogseitb.us/basque_bois...2012/12/Etymological-Dictionary-of-Basque.pdf


From the above we can see that the word "Papuča" or a similar word is used for a footwear in Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, Persian, Ottoman Turkish, French, Spanish but not in Arabic languages, Latin, Greek nor in eastern Slavic and Germanic languages.


Why am i boring you with this?


Because of this:


Pampooties are raw-hide shoes, which were formerly made and worn on the Aran Islands of County Galway, Ireland. They are formed of a single piece of untanned hide folded around the foot and stitched with twine or a leather strap.[1]
Hide from the buttocks was most often used. The hair was usually left and this improved the shoe's grip.[2] The raw hide is kept flexible by use and the constant damp conditions of Western Ireland. However the shoes are not made to last. They are prone to rot and were usually kept for as little as a month or less.[3]
Pampooties are similar to the Scottish cuaran shoes, and are the precursors to ghillies, Celtic dance shoes. They are also similar in appearance to American moccasins.[2] Ancient shoes found preserved from Stone Age Europe have a similar design.[4]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pampootie


These early shoes (slippers) were being worn in Ireland as early as the late iron age and early medieval period. This is confirmed by the examples found in Irish bogs and which can be seen in the Irish national museum. They were still made and worn in 1950 in exactly the same way in Aran Islands, the most remote and westernmost Island off the coast of Ireland. They were probably worn in Ireland even earlier as they represent the the most rudimentary type of leather footwear and are almost identical to the Armenian prehistoric shoe. Here is an instruction how to make the Pampooties and how to wear them:


http://www.rosieandglenn.co.uk/TheLibrary/Costume/CnTGuides/HowtoMake/EarlyASCostume/EarlyShoes.htm


Here is an article about 18th century Scottish highland shoes. In the article you can among other find this:


Just like the Native American, the Highlander lived in a society where hunting and limited migration formed a large part of daily life. The practicality of the bag-shoe, like the Native American moccasin, was hard to improve upon.


http://www.appins.org/pampooties.htm


What this is saying is that up until 20th century peasants did not have fashion. What worked was made and was used and was worn unchanged for thousands of years. These shoes are a perfect example. Because there is no change in the object, there is certainly no change in the name of the object. So we can assume that the name for these Irish and Scottish shoes was pampootie (paputie, papuche) at least as far back as the early medieval time.


Ron Pinhasi, the man who found the Armenian prehistoric shoe and a lecturer in archaeology at the University College Cork in Cork, Ireland said:


Interestingly, the Armenian shoe is very similar to the “pampooties” worn in the Aran Islands on Ireland’s west coast up to the 1950s. “In fact, enormous similarities exist between the manufacturing technique and style of the [Armenian] shoe and those found across Europe at later periods, suggesting that this type of shoe was worn for thousands of years across a large and environmentally diverse region.”




http://today.ucla.edu/portal/ut/PRN-2-world-s-oldest-shoe-160052.aspx




In England we find this old word:


Babouche - Etymology: from French babouche and Arabic بابوش, from Persian pāpoosh (پاپوش), from pa "foot" + poosh "covering." a chiefly oriental slipper made without heel or quarters.[2][3]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Persian_origin




Now can anyone here explain to me how is it possible that if the origin of the word pampootie (paputie, papuche, Papuče) is indeed Persian, we find pampootie in Iron Age Ireland?


Unless the origin of the word is not Persian but it actually comes from the prehistoric Balkans again.


What if word pampootie (paputie, papuche, Papuče) originated in the Balkans and was brought to Ireland at some stage of the Vinca or some later bronze or iron age migration? And what if word was brought to Persia and north Africa from the Balkans during Ottoman time when Ottoman Turkish was hugely influenced by the South Slavic languages?


The Slavic influence


One of the unexpected results of the Ottoman expansion was an active penetration of Slavic ethnics into the Ottoman armed forces (Janissaries) and even into the ruling elite. Serbians were particularly numerous and the Serbian language could be heard in the Ottoman court; it was used in official documents alongside with Turkish. The Italian historian Paolo Giovio who compiled a book on Turkish history, wrote: “At the court [of Suleyman The Magnificent] several languages are spoken. Turkish is the language of the ruler; Arabic is the language of the Muslim Law, Koran; Slavic (sclavonica) is mostly used by the Janissaries, and Greek is the language of the populace of the capital and other cities of Greece.”
The Polish traveller Strijkowskij wrote that in 1574, when he was in Istanbul, he heard with his own ears kobzari (bards) singing songs in Serbian in the streets and in the taverns about victories of valiant Muslims over the Christians.
Bassano, an Italian visitor to Suleyman’s court, claimed that “he [the sultan] respected and highly valued his wife [Roxolana] and understood her native language to some extent.” One of the sultan’s viziers was Rustem-pasha, a Serb or a Croat.
Ukraine, except for some areas and not for long, was never conquered by the Ottomans but it became a steady source of supplies of white slaves to the empire. The Crimean Tartars were the main suppliers. Mykhailo Lytvyn, a Ukrainian diplomat in the service of the Lithuanian government, wrote in his memoirs dating to 1548–1551 that the krymchaky (Crimean Tartars) engaged only in two trades — cattle-breeding and capturing Ukrainians to be sold to the Ottomans as slaves. “The ships that often come to their ports from across the sea, bring weapons, clothes and horses which are exchanged for slaves who are loaded into these ships. And all the Ottoman bazaars are full of these slaves who are sold and bought to be used in the households, to be resold, to be given as presents… There was one Jew, amazed at the great numbers of these slaves to be seen at the slave markets, who asked whether there were any people left in the land where these slaves are brought from.”


http://www.wumag.kiev.ua/index2.php?param=pgs20044/74


If the footwear and its name pampootie (paputie, papuche, Papuče) originate in the Balkans, that would explain the distribution of this word and the type of footwear much better i think. But is there anything else that could prove that pampootie and Papuče are one and the same and that they come from some old proto Irish-Serbian language? There is:




Pampooties are similar to the Scottish cuaran shoes, and are the precursors to ghillies, Celtic dance shoes


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pampootie


Ghillies are specially designed shoes used for several types of dance. They are soft shoes, similar to ballet shoes. They are used by women in Irish dance, by men in Scottish country dance, and by men and women in Highland dance.
Ghillies are also sometimes known by a variety of other names that include: light shoes, pomps, pumps, and soft shoes.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghillies


The following is a brief outline of regional Scottish footwear forms in the first half of the 18th century. The terms "pampootie" (Hebridean and Outer Isles), "cuaran" (Highland Gaelic or Erse), and "ghillie" (or "gillie," a misnomer derived from the Gaelic for servant or attendant) all denote one specific form of footwear ‹ the primitive bag-shoe or European moccasin fashioned from hairy rawhide ‹ generally known as "rivelin." Examples of this form of footwear go back to the early Bronze Age in Northern Europe...


http://www.appins.org/pampooties.htm




This is the important bit: "ghillie" (or "gillie," a misnomer derived from the Gaelic for servant or attendant)...


In Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian (Dinaric languages) there is a word "gilje" which is a word for shoes. "giljati" is a word for walking. In Gaelic we have gillie a servant, someone who you send to walk for you and do errands and "ghillie" for poor people's papuche or opanke shoes.


This again shows the connection between Irish and Serbian culture and language which does not exist in other European languages and which i believe points to their coexistence in a very distant past, probably in the Balkans during Vinca time or even earlier.

Interestingly the Armenia (Georgia), Ireland and England and the Balkans are again the same area where we find mushki and bregians...




If anyone has a better explanation for this i would like to hear it...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 85900 times.

Back
Top