Who were the Thracians?

julia90

Passione Mediterranea
Messages
1,152
Reaction score
65
Points
48
Location
Florence-Lucca
Ethnic group
Tuscan-Italian-(European)
mtDNA haplogroup
H5b
WHO WERE THE THRACIANS?

I'm curious of their origins... from where they came? What physical aspects did they have? were they similar to other mediterranean-balkanic populations such as greeks, illyrians?
Where are their ancestors today?
It's true that they were very tall?

from wikipedia

The ancient Thracians (Ancient Greek: Θρᾷκες, Latin: Thraci) were a group of Indo-European tribes inhabiting areas in Southeastern Europe.[1] They spoke the Thracian language – a scarcely attested branch of the Indo-European language family. The study of Thracians and Thracian culture is known as Thracology.

The first historical record about the Thracians is found in the Iliad, where they are described as allies of the Trojans in the Trojan War against the Greeks.[2] The ethnonym Thracian comes from Ancient Greek Θρᾷξ (pl. Θρᾷκες) (Thrax, Thrakes pl.) or Θρᾴκιος (Ionic: Θρηίκιος) (Thrakios, Ion. Thrēikios), and the toponym Thrace comes from Θρᾴκη (Ion. Θρῄκη) (En. Thrakē, Ion. Threkē).[3] Both names are exonyms developed by the Greeks

n Greek mythology, Thrax (by his name simply the quintessential Thracian) was regarded as one of the reputed sons of the god Ares.[5] In the Alcestis, Euripides mentions that one of the names of Ares himself was Thrax since he was regarded as the patron of Thrace (his golden or gilded shield was kept in his temple at Bistonia in Thrace).

The origins of the Thracians remain obscure, in absence of written historical records. Evidence of proto-Thracians in the prehistoric period depends on remains of material culture. It is generally proposed that a proto-Thracian people developed from a mixture of indigenous peoples and Indo-Europeans from the time of Proto-Indo-European expansion in the Early Bronze Age[7] when the latter, around 1500 BC, conquered the indigenous peoples.[8] We speak of proto-Thracians from which during the Iron Age[9] (about 1000 BC) Dacians and Thracians begin developing

Divided into separate tribes, the Thracians did not manage to form a lasting political organization until the Odrysian state was founded in the 5th century BC. Like the Illyrians, the mountainous regions were home to various warlike and ferocious Thracian tribes, while the plains peoples were apparently more peaceable.[citation needed]
Thracians inhabited parts of the ancient provinces: Thrace, Moesia, Macedonia, Dacia, Scythia Minor, Sarmatia, Bithynia, Mysia, Pannonia, and other regions on the Balkans and Anatolia. This area extends over most of the Balkans region, and the Getae north of the Danube as far as beyond the Bug.

Several Thracian graves or tombstones have the name Rufus inscribed on them, meaning "redhead" – a common name given to people with red hair.[37] Ancient Greek artwork often depicts Thracians as redheads.[38] Rhesus of Thrace, a mythological Thracian King, derived his name because of his red hair and is depicted on Greek pottery as having red hair and beard.[38] Ancient Greek writers also described the Thracians as red haired. A fragment by the Greek poet Xenophanes describes the Thracians as blue-eyed and red haired:
...Men make gods in their own image; those of the Ethiopians are black and snub-nosed, those of the Thracians have blue eyes and red hair.[39]
Bacchylides described Theseus as wearing a hat with red hair, which classicists believe was Thracian in origin.[40] Other ancient writers who described the hair of the Thracians as red include Hecataeus of Miletus,[41]Galen,[42] Clement of Alexandria,[43] and Julius Firmicus Maternus.[44]
Nevertheless academic studies have concluded that Thracians had physical characteristics typical of European Mediterraneans. According to Dr. Beth Cohen, Thracians had "the same dark hair and the same facial features as the Ancient Greeks."[45] Recent genetic analysis comparing DNA samples of ancient Thracian fossil material from southeastern Romania with individuals from modern ethnicities place Italian, Albanian and Greek individuals in closer genetic kinship with the Thracians than Romanian and Bulgarian individuals.[46] On the other hand, Dr. Aris N. Poulianos states that Thracians like modern Bulgarians belong mainly to the Aegean athropological type.
 
Thracian civilization geographically coincides predominantly with modern Bulgaria and it's quite popular to hold that Bulgarians are the overwhelming descendants of the Thracians. What I found odd is that iGenea seemed to assign a rather significant portion of Thracian heritage to Bosnians, moreso then Serbs who you would expect more of based on a closer geographic proximity. The genetic analysis referred to in your cut & paste though would seem to disagree with anything I've just said in a traditional historic interpretation since it would seem to associate them mostly with Italian, Greek & Albanian heritage in contrast to the slavic influenced Bulgarian & Bosnian identities.
 
indeed i was in Herzegovina two months ago (visiting Medjugorje).. the people seemed mosly similar to albanian illirian types.. althought there in Herzegovina, people are very tall.. it could confirm that tharcians-dacians-illirians are the same family and that people inhabitated all the south balkans and some part of italy too..because many italians have that look too.

well, i think bosnia and bulgaria have some slavic influence but for what i saw.. the people aren't for the most slavic looking.. there is a high dominat pre-slavic substratum of look..

anyway Herzegovina has very good-looking people... :-)
 
As far as I'm aware modern day Bulgarians descend from Proto-bulgarians who swamped the Balkans around Vth century A.D. from their place of origin which is modern day Turkey (that being the period in which they are mentioned for the first time). They eventually build up an organized state by the VIIth century, and by the XIIth century they were already mixed with the Slavs. Regarding Thracians we are led to believe by studies that they are a Bronze-age population, consequently an IE population, and in a way I do not see their historical correlation with the Bulgarians. Also genetically one can tell the pronounced asiatic element in Bulgarians' physical appearance (this goes for the modern day Macedonians as well, but that is another topic).
All in all one tends to have the logical assumption that there could have been eventual mixing with the native population, in this case being the Thracians (or descendants of Thracians), but that is a long way from being proved.
 
Bulgars never come from Turkey you are completely wrong. Bulgars come first from what is today Tajikistan and Uzbekistan,then they settled in European Russia and finally in the 4-7 century they come to the Balkan.They mixed with the South Slavs which were mix of Slavic R1a,I2a people and local J2b,E(V13) people. The Bulgars themselves were R1a,J2 and G2a people with probably some R1b!
So there is the propaganda that Bulgars were Turkic,but I do not believe this and there is no prove!In Bulgarians Turkic genes such as C,D,O are non existing and Q is 1% even though I have never seen a research with a Q in it!
Bulgarians are mix of Bulgar,Slavic and Thracian!
Albanians are mix of Iliriyan, Thracian and some Slavic!
It is so funny how Albanians try to privatized the right to be the only indigenous people to the Balkan and haplogorup E(V13)
Just like some crazy Croat here forced the moderator to change the Bulgarians values for I2a(between 28%-38%,here it was 33%,so the moderator was forced to change them to 20% ,because the Croat was unhappy!
Guys it does not work like this!
 
Bulgars never come from Turkey you are completely wrong. Bulgars come first from what is today Tajikistan and Uzbekistan,then they settled in European Russia and finally in the 4-7 century they come to the Balkan.They mixed with the South Slavs which were mix of Slavic R1a,I2a people and local J2b,E(V13) people. The Bulgars themselves were R1a,J2 and G2a people with probably some R1b!

Right, Bulgars did not come from Turkey, but along the northern shores of the Black sea. Many people also always confuse turkic speakers with turks. On the other hand, Turks from turkey genetically are also not quite representative of original turkic speakers.
Regarding the Proto-Bulgar origin there is an old dispute between two camps, one believed the Proto-Bulgars (not Bulgarians!) being asiatic-turkic speaking people, and others believed them to be indo-iranians. Seems you belong to the second party, and modern genetics seems to prove you right. One historian (Georgiev?) made an interesting claim that "Khan Asparukh" was misread as asiatic "Khan", but it actually was "Kana", something entirely different. Also the name "Aspa" itself is not turkic but iranian, meaning "horse". Still today Tajiks are indo-iranian speakers.
 
Yes. Asparuh means like the White Horsemen.And the title was kanasubigi or something like this. I think they were R1a,J2 and G2a people.
There is now a really big research on Bulgarian genes with 860 sample,the MT dna is already ready and published. It say Bulgarians are Slavic and Med on the Mt side,the Y dna is yet to be published,but I expect more R1a,I2a then published up to now!
 
well my infos give 2 origins of Balkars but none of them as IE

1 is already said the central asian steppes
2 is an around Georgia area,

according my infos Balkars were Turkish speaking
By that I do not mean ottomans or Seljuk but the North corridor the one is connected with Avars Huns Tatars khazars Oghur etc

Balkars although their movement -invasion is known as also their primary settlements in an area that limits Zagora V Tyrnovo Burgas(pyrgos) Varna, meaning that the primary genes should gather there and is not that ancient,

The Bulgarian question
in each Balkanic countries all have questions about linguistic origin etc,
the Bulgarian paradox is since Balkars were not IE why modern Bulgarians speak of Slavic Language, a clear IE language,
Georgiev answers that, with Tracian = proto Slavic but for me that is not correct.

At least for me it seems like Local Nobles when Balkars got Christianity they also accepted Kyrillos and Methodios
(Cyrillic) old Slavonic since might be familiar from times of Russian residence or Slavic invasion in Balkans,
by gennetics seems like Balkars although they manage to settle were minority, and the population is mostly same from roman times till today,
 
You seem to be confused my friend.
1.It was Bulgars,not Bulgars
2. The theories are Iranic and Turkic
3. Turkic is not Turkish
4. Bulgars might have speak a Turkic language,not Turkish
5. Bulgarians are mix of Slavic,Thracian and Bulgar, just like Greeks are mix of Hellenic,Trachian and Slavic
6. Bulgarians, not Bulgars speak a Slavic language,because when the Bulgarian nation formed 7-9 century this is the language that was chosen
7. Why French speak French(coming from Germanic Francs) which is actually Latin
8. Why Russian speak Russian(coming from the Viking tribe Rus) which is Slavic
9/ Bulgar were not minority,but were less then the South Slavs(Thracian- Slavic)
10. Kiril and Methodi created the alphabet,but the alphabet we use today was developed in Bulgaria from Bulgarian
11. Kiril and Methodi were either 100% Bulgarian or 50% Bulgarian
There is no Russian in Balkan history,when we were spreading the Slavic culture the mix between Slavic-Finnic- Viking was not done yet and they were not Christian yet!
 
You seem to be confused my friend.
1.It was Bulgars,not Bulgars
2. The theories are Iranic and Turkic
3. Turkic is not Turkish
4. Bulgars might have speak a Turkic language,not Turkish
5. Bulgarians are mix of Slavic,Thracian and Bulgar, just like Greeks are mix of Hellenic,Trachian and Slavic
6. Bulgarians, not Bulgars speak a Slavic language,because when the Bulgarian nation formed 7-9 century this is the language that was chosen
7. Why French speak French(coming from Germanic Francs) which is actually Latin
8. Why Russian speak Russian(coming from the Viking tribe Rus) which is Slavic
9/ Bulgar were not minority,but were less then the South Slavs(Thracian- Slavic)
10. Kiril and Methodi created the alphabet,but the alphabet we use today was developed in Bulgaria from Bulgarian
11. Kiril and Methodi were either 100% Bulgarian or 50% Bulgarian
There is no Russian in Balkan history,when we were spreading the Slavic culture the mix between Slavic-Finnic- Viking was not done yet and they were not Christian yet!

you are totally out,

it is another point Balkars and another Bulgaria,
besides only the fact that you consider Kyrillos and Methodios Bulgarians seems like your History view is after nationalistic propaganda at scholl.

Better ead again who where they? not even 0% Balkars,

READ AGAIN MY POST
I clear say Turkish and I know what I am writing,
I clearly say not ottoman neither Seljuk
so next time watch what you read,

Balkars were minority that is why the asian element is so little at modern Bulgaria,
Do not Confuse modern Bulgaria with Balkars and ancient Thrace,

your 6 point is true, at least for me, for modern Bulgaria.

watch your 8

Vikings were Slavic speaking?


your 11 you say that, not me,

I say that Balkars were not Slavic so not Russians, but came from Russia-Ucraine. before Balkans they were settled there,

your nine,

yes indeed they were, but they gain followers, and they cooperate with Slavic tribes (seven tribes union), so they got Slaviziced, when christianity came,
by the way I doubt even if kaloyan was Balkar, but of Slavic tribes origin,

the population of modern Bulgaria proves that most of it synthesis is after roman times, and not after Balkar movements, so indeed asparuch people were minority,

It seems like Severi predate the Balkars,
I also believe that kaloyan was Severi.
 
Balkars are people from the Kavkaz, Bulgars are something different!There were never Balkars in the Balkan!
Turkish is different then Turkic it is like I say Russians are Slovenian!
 
Viking did not speak Slavic!
 
Balkars are people from the Kavkaz, Bulgars are something different!There were never Balkars in the Balkan!
Turkish is different then Turkic it is like I say Russians are Slovenian!

That is what you do not understand,
when we say Slavic we mean all slavic languages and dialects
when we say German we mainly speak of Deutch but when we speak Germanic we also mean Austrian Dutc etc


Viking did not speak Slavic!
8. Why Russian speak Russian(coming from the Viking tribe Rus) which is Slavic

cause there is a word Ρως Ros that means North compare Greek Βορας (Vo)RAS

Rus mean read Ros means North
 
Why is Russian different then Norwegian and why is french different then Danish?
 
If you answer this you will understand why Bulgarian is a Slavic language!
 
Why is Russian different then Norwegian and why is french different then Danish?
I will answer you if you answer me which is the capital of Ros and which is capital of Rus

to help you more more Novgorod was not Ros
 
What has this to do with my ancestors the Thracians?
My point is that everybody is a mixture of something and you do not know nothing about Bulgarians and Bulgars, Balkars are people from Kavkaz, Bulgarians never come from Turkey! Learn Bulgarian History if you want to discus it !
 
What has this to do with my ancestors the Thracians?
My point is that everybody is a mixture of something and you do not know nothing about Bulgarians and Bulgars, Balkars are people from Kavkaz, Bulgarians never come from Turkey! Learn Bulgarian History if you want to discus it !

Plz stop putting words in my mouth,
I never said things, that you say I did,

School history is not always the real one.

I am not claiming of any clear and pure race or nation

better read your post again and who claims what instead of provoke,
 
So we speak about Bulgar not Balkar, and non of them are Turkish speaking,but Turkic speaking

according my infos Balkars were Turkish speaking

Balkars although their movement -invasion is known as also their primary settlements in an area that limits Zagora V Tyrnovo Burgas(pyrgos) Varna, meaning that the primary genes should gather there and is not that ancient,

The Bulgarian question
in each Balkanic countries all have questions about linguistic origin etc,
the Bulgarian paradox is since Balkars were not IE why modern Bulgarians speak of Slavic Language, a clear IE language,
Georgiev answers that, with Tracian = proto Slavic but for me that is not correct.


At least for me it seems like Local Nobles when Balkars got Christianity they also accepted Kyrillos and Methodios
(Cyrillic) old Slavonic since might be familiar from times of Russian residence or Slavic invasion in Balkans,
by gennetics seems like Balkars although they manage to settle were minority, and the population is mostly same from roman times till today,[/QUOTE]

There we never Russian in settlement in the Balkan, Slavic s completely different!Church Slavonic is Bulgarian!
 
So we speak about Bulgar not Balkar, and non of them are Turkish speaking,but Turkic speaking

according my infos Balkars were Turkish speaking

Balkars although their movement -invasion is known as also their primary settlements in an area that limits Zagora V Tyrnovo Burgas(pyrgos) Varna, meaning that the primary genes should gather there and is not that ancient,

The Bulgarian question
in each Balkanic countries all have questions about linguistic origin etc,
the Bulgarian paradox is since Balkars were not IE why modern Bulgarians speak of Slavic Language, a clear IE language,
Georgiev answers that, with Tracian = proto Slavic but for me that is not correct.


At least for me it seems like Local Nobles when Balkars got Christianity they also accepted Kyrillos and Methodios
(Cyrillic) old Slavonic since might be familiar from times of Russian residence or Slavic invasion in Balkans,
by gennetics seems like Balkars although they manage to settle were minority, and the population is mostly same from roman times till today,

There we never Russian in settlement in the Balkan, Slavic s completely different!Church Slavonic is Bulgarian!

I SAY CLEAR RUSSIAN RESIDENCE
MEANING FROM THE TIME BALKARS WERE SETTLED AT UCRAINE AND RUSSIA
MUCH BEFORE ASPARUCH AND THEIR ENTRANCE AT BALAKANS



CHURCH SLAVONIC AND CYRILLIC IS THE FORM THAT WAS GIVEN BY KYRILLOS AT GREAT MORAVIA

SLAVONIC PROTO FORMATION IS FROM GREAT MORAVIA,
MUCH LATER EACH COUNTRY TRANSFORM IT TO ITS OWN WILL AND NEEDS
So modern Bulgarian at least the official form that were accepted from Christianity times is the Great Moravian,
and change with time later according the needs of BUlgarians

told the history you learn in school is not always complete or correct

Deutch is Germanic
Austrian is Germanic etc

Turkish and Turkic
Balkar (original) is Turkic
Ottoman is Turkic
Seljuk is Turkic
Tatar is Turkic

your problem is that by Turkish you mean modern Turkey
Although I mean the Linguistic family
if you like then ok Balkar was a Turkic language which is part of Turkic languages relative of Turkish

sory but in my language Turkic is female gender and Turkish is neutral gender
but if I use Turkish as Female I mean The family of languages,
 
Back
Top