@gunnasintern I searched up his channel a few months ago and saw he last posted two years ago I thought he quit RU-vid I was upset but yesterday I searched up his channel again to know about the Armenians and saw he's posting again then remembered that he stopped posting and realising he started again made me happy
@@LurkerAnonymous Thracians, Scythians, Dacians, Macedonians and so on are the same ppl but different tribes. Thrace, Dacia, Macedonia, Moesie weren't countries but territories of that one nation! Alexander the Great is also thracian. Macedonia was named after the thracian princess Maceda! It already has been proved - the same language, the same gods, the same culture with few diffrences here and there. And btw, the name of the scythians is explainable only on Bulgarian language! All greek gods are actually thracian gods. The ellens were named after the thracian god Ellen! There are lot's of common words between thracian and Bulgarian. And i don't know how ppl still believe that Bulgarian is turk language mixed with "slavic". Georgi S. Rakovski was the 1st eurpean who made translation from sanskrit to old bulgarian (around 150 years ago). He proves the connection between both languages! Pius PP. II says that moesians later were known as bulgarians. The same thing with the myrmidons (trojans), later they were called also Bulgarians! There are very Old Bulgarian songs about the Trojans. Is there any other nation that has songs about the rTojans? This means all that one nation with diffrent tribes spreaded around Eurasia. Later the ones who came from Asia to Europe they actually came back to their homelands!
One of the main reasons for the successful incursions of the Slavs south of the Danube was the fact that the local population, i.e. the Thracians, were not inclined to oppose the invaders. Moreover, having been politically and culturally oppressed by the foreign administration for many generations, burdened with taxes and levies, the Thracians tended in some cases to support the newcomers from the north. The Byzantine historian Procopius who witnessed the events testifies that many of the inhabitants of the Balkan Peninsula chose to abandon their homes and seek asylum with the barbarians. This was not accidental as the majority of Thracians were in a rather unenviableisituation in their native lands, being for the most part coloni or slaves. At the same time the Slavs were still at the stage of communaisocial system and slavery existed in milder forms.
Not only were they not inclined to oppose the invaders, the Bulgars and the local population got along very very well and collaborated right from the start, they fought with the Bulgars against the Byzantine Empire straight from the beginning. Which is also one of the reasons I suspect the Bulgars were actually culturally closer to the Indo-Europeans and not Turkic.
@@Wind_FalconComplete nonsense. Bulgaria has always been in these lands and there is enough information that rejects the Asian/Mongolian theory that you love so much.
There were barely any Thracians to begin with. Thrace had been largely hellenized by the 7th century. The language went extinct at that point. The narrative spun here, that the Thracians still had a separate non-Greek identity and were "oppressed" (which is historically unproven) is misleading at best and anti-Greek propaganda at worst.
Why don't you quote the Herodotes words? "The thracians was the most large people after the hindus" The Dacians was part of thracians tribes. The most of them can be found in actual Romanians/Aroumanians. But they constitued also the substrat for Bulgarians or Serbs.
And Thracian Greeks who inhabited most of their land. Greeks had lived in Thrace for the longest time of all modern groups, they are largely responsible for replacing the Thracian language and culture through Hellenization. When the Slavs came, their language was almiost extinct, so the Greeks had shaped this region more than the Slavs ever did.
@@Michael_the_Drunkard It is not like that. The language that prevailed was the one that had meanwhile become church, but the layer that genetically absorbed both the Slavs and the Turkish Bulgarians decimated by Vasile Bulgaroctonul, was that of the Thracian-Geto-Romanians under their new form of Vlachs. Bulgarians are the same as the Franks. For this reason, Bulgarians and Macedonians are genetically closer to Romanians and Serbs than to Russians or Poles, for example.
10:12 Imbros was not majority Greek, it was totality Greek, not a single Turk lived on the island before 1923. And Turkey didn't capture it during wartime, it was ceded according to the Lausanne Treaty
You can say that to all of Eastern Thrace. The region was majority Greek and ceded to the Turks without a fight. Britain and Italy were worse enemies to Greece than Ataturk. So dishonorable!
Glad you’re back, and happy you made a video about the Thracians; love from Bulgaria! Come visit some time, we value people like you, and we have much for you to see (ie: Solnitsa).
Turdaş - Vinča culture. 5,500-3,500 BC Thousands of years before the pyramids were built in Egypt... somewhere between the 5th and 3rd millennia BC, there was a European culture that spread around the Danube River, on the territory of Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria and Macedonia, but obvious traces of it being found throughout the Balkan Peninsula. It is about the Turdaș - Vinča culture. The name of the culture comes from the locality of Turdaș located in the central-eastern part of Transilvani in Romania. Vinča, from Serbia. The famous "Tăblițe de la Tărtăria" from Romania with the first pictographic writing in the world are attributed to this culture. 7500 years.
Българите са автохтонното коренно население на Балканите и първите обитатели на планетата,които са се разпространявали в различни посоки и са се завръщали в родината МАЙКА България, хилядолетия преди да дойдеш на наша територия.Провери корените си когато идвате ВИЕ на Балканите от АЗИЯ или АФРИКА!!!@@ionbrad6753
Ever thought of doing a version of this with food? Like how the tomato was cultivated and then spread throughout the world then how we now think of tomato sauce as Italian food lol.
There are no evidences that "Ancient Macedonian" language ever existed but the contrary, there are evidences that it was an Ancient Greek dialect as Doric, Ionic, Aeolian. In 0:50 the diagram shows falsely that it was a separate indoeuropean language.
Lemme guess, you are Greece? I love this nationalist obsession about ancient Macedonia, that nobody outside Macedonia and Greece cares about. It's just so petty.
@@mobo7420It is very important for the Greeks to appropriate everything Macedonian and Thracian. Thanks to this deception, they managed to steal lands that were never Greek. We are talking about half of Greece. Look at the old maps and you will understand what we are talking about. Ok, they have deceived the world with their mythology, but trying to get some mongolian aliens to us is more to me.
@@michaeltnk1135they may been have victims of an ethnocide, however culture and memory is more than just customs and history. And they are still here regardless
Interesting topic, but you only looked at the modern region of Thrace which is based after the Roman province, Thracians also inhabited northern Bulgaria, parts of Romania and Serbia as well. And new genetic testing of Thracian burials actually shows that modern Bulgarians and other Balkan people have more Thracian in them as previously believed, the population wasn't completely destroyed by the Slavs but assimilated into their culture, same findings for the Bulgars who were thought to be a small minority in a sea of Slavs, making 45% of the population during the First Bulgarian Empire. Also a lot of traditions here in Bulgaria are coming from the Thracians.
Bulgarians are 55% Mediterranean on average. If you look at them they dont look anything like regular "slavs" for example if you look up Lazar Angelov who is a pure Bulgarian. That 55% Mediterranean are Thracian genes, there were so many thracians living here and in romania so its almost impossible for the entire population to be wiped out just by mixing with slavic peoples. @@CocoSon-zj5oj
I was just thinking about this the other day. Like when did the people of Thrace stop being Thracian? I was thinking more culturally than ethnically but still.
@@ionelghiorghita688 How could Macedo-Romanian be their old language if it predates both modern Macedonian and Romanian? And old Macedonian was a Greek dialect?
Greek language itself was based on the Thracians language. The linguists are saying that about 50%of the Greek language words are from the substrate language which was the Thracian language. So the Macedonians living in the area were not too different to the Thracians. The Greeks were actually as the today jews, living in the "polis" making money from the goods trade, controling them neighbours by smaller or bigger conflicts, paying other peoples to protect their commercial routes, and ending controlling big armies and conquering new territories. They also borrowed a lot of culture from the Thracians. Everywhere in the world happened the same. The so called Indo-Europeans were a similar population as the Greeks and the Jews, patriarchy, warriors, authoritarian, possesion oriented, opposite to the previous cultures found in Europe. The Minoan and the Mycenaean cultures, as the Cucuteni - Trypillian culture were matriarchy, free people, no authority, no war weapons found, the land was in a common possession.... The Indo-Europeans didcin Germany/north West Europe first what the Greeks did in Greece few thousands of years later and the Romans did to the Ethruscans even later. Before all of this, the so called "old Europe" was pretty much a place of peace with people speaking languages pretty similar which split due to the conflicts much later. The conflicts were generated to keep people away of each other in terms of controlling them. Check this video. Is not so stupid as you can believe :ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ICuK_y_hJm4.htmlsi=2t3YNw72dqoeZBqo
I still cant believe Greece was under Turkish rule. They survived battling each other for centuries, won The Trojan War, rocked the Persians, been part of local like empires, etc. Its almost unbelievable.
Honestly dealing with territories rather than people when trying to figure out where are the thracians, is kind of wrong. If you want to know where the thracians are...just look at bulgarians. Genetic studies concluded that from all the nations of the region only bulgarians have the largest amount of thracian DNA markers, and about 40% of the people identifying as bulgarians are marked as direct descendants of thracians(their DNA was direct match of the extracted thracian DNA samples). Linguistically the language of bulgarians and thracians share common traits and even many words. Where some linguists have the opinion that bulgarian is an updated version of thraican. Much like modern english is quite different than old english. In terms of names we also see a strong continuation of recorded names among thracians and bulgarians. And historians use old bulgarian to decipher topological thracian names.
Came for the Ancient Thracians, stayed for the in-depth analysis of the demographic changes that took place in the region throughout the 20th century 🙏Nice video!!!
Hi Masam. Could you start working on your racial map again. I remember you based Brazil's colors on the 2011 census, but since than there has been a census for 2022 and Brazil is even more diverse than 2011. Also could you seriously consider categorizing castizo as Northwest Eurasian or have a separate category for mexican castizos and other castizos. In your original racial map you classified castizos as northwest eurasians
@@talknight2no Celtic tribes as Greek colonies and other ethnicities were living along the Thracian tribes in the Thracian territories. Till the Dacians united their northern tribes in their first centralized state and asked everyone living in their territory to recognize the authority of the Dacian state and the rule of the Dacian king. All the foreigners and foreign cities refused to in order to keep their "privileges" and autonomy. As a result the Dacian king declared war on them, conquered them all and imposed the Dacian state authority over them. During the wars a number of foreign communities (Celtic included) have been destroyed.
@@iskanderaga-ali3353 Apparently, geography is not your strength, Illyria was only in the western part of the Balkans and the most extreme parts (present-day Albania, Serbia, Croatia). The area of Thrace (present-day Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey) is the eastern and southern Balkans. There is no archaeological or historical evidence for Illyrians in Thrace
Why the hell did this become a video about Turkey? There isn't really a special connection between Thracians and Turkey. Sure, maybe the ones in the Thrace region of European Turkey and some random people in northwestern Anatolia where some Thracian tribes settled in antiquity have some connection to them (plus from relocated South Slav janissaries), but overall Turkey is not strongly linked with them. I would say Bulgaria, North Macedonia, southern Romania, parts of Serbia, maybe even northern Greece, are the ones who are the most descended from the ancient Thracians (who were subsequently Romanized or Hellenized and then later Slavicized).
Nikov is the first Bulgarian historian to pay special attention to, and attri bute great significance to, the Turkic components in the Bulgarian ethnogen esis (i.e., after the Bulgars) and among the ruling aristocracy. He elaborated on the issue of the "Turkic element's" influence upon Bulgarian history in a 1928 unpublished manuscript (delivered as a public lecture). Nikov began with the following policy-setting statement: There is no period in our history on which the Turkic element did not exert its strongest influence and did not leave the deepest traces in the development of our people. [...] None of the Balkan peoples has experi enced the Turkic influence so strongly as our people, The Turkic pressure began from Central Asia and had two directions to the northwest through southern Russia, and to the southwest through Persia and Asia Minor. The Bulgarian state was founded due to one of the Turkic peoples, the Bulgars, who themselves joined a number of Turkic tribal alliances (of Huns, Kutrigurs, Utigurs, Avars, and Khazars). During Byzantine rule, the Turkic Pechenegs and Uz came from the north; many of them crossed the Danube and were assimilated by the Bulgarian people. Then came the Cumans, without whose decisive help the uprising of Asenevtsi would hardly have succeeded. Thus, just as the First Bulgarian Kingdom was founded with the help of the Turkic Bulgars, the Second Kingdom was founded with "the decisive collabora tion of the Turkic Cumans."129 Not only did Cumans settle south of the Danube and become assimilated and absorbed by the Slavic-Bulgarian people, but they were also of great significance politically in the Second Kingdom, whose dynas ties all had Cuman blood in them. There were also many Bulgarian boyars of Cuman origin, including Balic in Dobrudzha. It could even be said that the Cumans acquired a dominant position in the political life of the state.
Do not confuse the Jewish - Turkish/Bulgarian elite with the ordinary people who were the Thracians descendants mixed with the slavic people. The Thracians use to live the mountains as shepards and the slavic people use to practice agriculture and live in the fields areas.
Culturally to an extent yes, genetically? you've got European gene clusters showing that's not the case. as with Turks themselves they are mostly Anatolian and Ionian' by blood.
The notion of Greeks being ethnically homogenous and direct descendants of the Hellenes has been a persistent narrative, often used to foster a sense of unity and historical continuity. However, a closer examination reveals the complexity and diversity within the Greek population, challenging the simplistic portrayal of ethnic homogeneity and direct lineage from the ancient Hellenes. To begin with, Greece has been a crossroads of various civilizations throughout history, including interactions with Albanians, Romans, Byzantines, Ottomans, and others. This rich history of cultural exchanges has inevitably left an imprint on the ethnic composition of the region. Genetic studies indicate a diversity of influences, reflecting the historical interactions and migrations that have shaped the genetic makeup of the Greek people. This diversity challenges the notion of a singular, homogeneous ethnic origin. Moreover, the concept of ethnicity itself is complex and dynamic. It is not solely determined by genetic factors but is also influenced by cultural, linguistic, and historical elements. While the Hellenes were indeed one of the ancient tribes in the region, claiming a direct ethnic lineage from them oversimplifies the intricate processes of cultural assimilation, intermixing, and acculturation that have occurred over centuries. Language, often considered a key marker of ethnic identity, also presents complexities. The modern Greeks language belongs to the Indo-European family but is distinct within this linguistic group. While it has roots in the Hellenic language, linguistic evolution and influences from Latin, Slavic, and other languages have contributed to its unique character. This linguistic complexity challenges the notion of a straightforward, unbroken linguistic continuity between ancient Hellenic and modern Greek. Historical records further complicate the narrative of ethnic homogeneity. The region has witnessed migrations, invasions, and changes in political control, all of which have contributed to the diversity within the Greek population. The medieval period, for example, saw the influx of various groups, including Slavs and Normans, leaving lasting cultural and genetic impacts. In conclusion, the idea of Greeks being ethnically homogenous and direct descendants of the Hellenes is a simplistic narrative that does not fully capture the complexity of Greece's history and the diversity within its population. Genetic, linguistic, and historical evidence points to a more nuanced and multifaceted reality, highlighting the need to approach the question of Greek identity with a recognition of the intricate processes of cultural evolution and interaction that have shaped the region over millennia.
Yeah and genocide oof. But to be fair Turks have also been genocided, for example the Crimean Tatars. That's not to say that the fate of the Greeks and Armenians is something you should be happy about
@georgios_5342 I understand that a lot of greeks died back in the 20s but it was mostly civilians acting on their own. The people who started the mass killings of greeks in the black sea were hanged by the ankara government
MASAMAN- Instead of giving an exstensive list like usual, I have one suggestion of a topic that I've only heard scant things about, though a little more about it has come out recently: Why do the people's of Patagonia have DNA links to Aboriginal Australians? *If you do do this topic, I remember hearing that they had found some REALLY old rock paintings that might have been from the first groups of these people in Brazil, WAY older than the other stuff you generally think of there. There are also some cultural traits that were noted with the tradional practices of the indigenous people's of Patagonia. To be clear, I first heard about this idea on a documentary from the Discovery Channel (I believe) in the 1990's or 2000's, and then I hadn't heard about it again until recenly with videos like the one I have listed: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-A1PMingCvxI.html
*Yo Masamam Can you Make a Video About What happened to the Cushites of East Africa* *Nubians were cushite once but their population was steadily subverted*
I love Masaman's channel and I am happy that he's making videos again, but Thrice is not the most south eastern part of Europe, Georgia, well technically Baku is the most South eastern part of Europe. Also you have Byzantium on that map, Byzantium never existed, Byzantium is a derogatory word created almost 100 years after Rome fell in 1453. There was never a Byzantium Empire. It was and always will be Rome.
1:32 you have a map that is every Skopjians wet dream. Μακεδονία macedon is a greek name meaning (roughly) the land of the tall/long men and are of doric stock. The Thracian,Phrygians were genetically linguistically and culturally very close to the Greeks. I haven't seen the rest of the video yet but this map is just so atrocious. You have even given the illyrians the morden day albanians borders plus the Greek island of Kerkyra Κέρκυρα in the south and took from them istria for example.Also the ancient Greek religion starts in thrace by Orpheus Ορφέας/Ορφεύς in his Orphic hymns Ορφικοί ύμνοι wich were written in a very very old greek language so they were one people. And to clarify the ancient Greeks had a lot of dialects and some of them in time became semi unreliable like Phrygian and Thracian. Think of it like latin and the romance languages.
I've got some points of contention here: the first being that Orpheus, having predated Homer by hundreds of years, is almost certainly a mythological figure. The second has to do with linguistic classification. Going by the prevailing theories in the field (though these are by no means certain), it would be more accurate to say that Greek (which did include Macedonian) and Phrygian were closely-related sister languages, while Illyrian, Thracian and Dacian belonged to a separate branch of Indo-European. Of course, just by sheer proximity, there was certainly massive amounts of genetic, cultural and linguistic exchange, but the point of deviation between Graeco-Phrygian and Illyro-Thracian was likely well into prehistory rather than one group branching off of the other (though there are interesting theories regarding both branches belonging to a larger grouping that also includes Armenian, they're very much in contention).
@@snakesmcgee7640 thank you for answering me. I would disagree with you a little bit and explain why. First Orpheus did existed like Dionysus and perceus did and the reason that we think that their existence is mythological is because we haven't find enough evidence to prove that yet.Just like the Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations wich were considered mythical until the archeological sites were found.The ancient Greeks,Thracians and Phrygians before they split to different groups were collectively known as Μινύες Minyans later on as Pelasgians then the Greeks as Èllines ect. Now about the language. The form of ancient greek of the Orphic hymns and the Iliad for example are very ancient (Alexander's dialect is closer to our today than the Homeric) and it is logical that dialects of that language such as Phrygian became at some point a different language. But still especially in the suffixes i can see the common rout. "Macedonian" was a doric based dialect and the southern Greeks (conquered by Phillip at that time) told that they spoke heavy Greek for example the made a lot of "F" to "V" Φερενίκη Ferenìki becomes Βερενίκη Verenìki (this is a girls name btw meaning she who brings victory) or the word for the sea was in doric dialects Σάλασσα Sàlassa in Ionian θάλαττα Thàlatta ect but we can't talk about different languages or people groups at this point because they are mutually intelligible.
@@kostashliopoulos9293 I didn’t,point is is that it doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of the video. It’s just a map,no one cares about the Albanian nationalists and no one cares about the Greek nationalists. Anyone with a brain knows that a decent amount of Albanians are mixed with Greeks and Slavs anyways and all the the Bs that they try and claim are always achievements from other groups cause they’re ethnic mutts. Just leave it at that
Getting accurate religious figures can be very difficult, not only because beliefs and attitudes are subject to the vicissitudes of the mind (What does this person really believe? Are they just nominally religious?), but also because of Taqiyya and the restrictive atmosphere on belief in many Islamic areas. Because of this and the “avalanche of apostasy” with many Muslims becoming non-religious or Christian, I suspect the number of actual Muslims in Turkey is even lower than you suggested.
I don't really understand how the Turkish history part was relevant to the topic. It might have been more beneficial to take a deeper look at the period of early medieval migrations to the Balkans. After the Romans conquered them the Thracians were latinized or hellenized. Most of them lived in the Roman cities or in the mountains, because of the frequent barbarian raids. After the creation of the First Bulgarian Empire, what was left of them was assimilated into the Bulgarian ethnicity.
Fact 1 : Thrace was a geographical entity, not a specific nation Fact 2 : When Herodotus says that "Thraecian tribes would collectively form the world's biggest nation" he also adds the caveat "... if they ever had a common ethnic consciousness". Which is a sign that the tribes that resided in the geography of Thrace did not have a common ethnic consciousness. Remember : this is said by a Greek who wrote at a time when Greeks were living in independent mini-states and massacring each other, but still had a collective common ethnic consciousness, they knew they belong to one and the same nation. Fact 3 : All Thraecian tribes south of Rhodope mountain range (i.e. the Aegean part of Thrace) are now proved, beyond the slightest of doubt, to had been ethnically Greeks. Not just Greek-speaking out of any alledged "hellenisation" but ethnically Greek since the Bronze Age when the Hellenic identity formed. Fact 4 : Even tribes above the Rhodope mountain wrote the 100% of their stuff in Greek which today should be raising eyebrows : had these tribes been something radically different to Greeks, their insistence on writing in Greek and absolutely noting on their own language (not even adding any translation) is kinda perplexing. Fact 4 : Tribes which historians were swearing to gods and demons that they were Thraecian, such as Phrygians have actually written in their language and, surprise-surprise : it is Greek. I.e. Phrygians who as per Greek writers, they were descendants of a western Aegean-Thraecian tribe that invaded into Minor Asia and established in the center long before the Trojan War (i.e at latest by mid-Bronze Age), after staying there and mixing with the locals and producing a hybrid culture, still more than a 1000 years later wrote down their language in an archaic Greek alphabet and it is evident that this was a language very close to Greek that could even permit some intelligibility from Phrygian to Greek, showing that those early Phrygians (i.e. a Thraecian tribe), they were ethnically Greeks back in the Bronze Age. Fact 5: Thrace is not one geography. Aegean Thrace is totally divided by a massive mountain range which even as late as in WWII when it was defended by 7000 Greeks it caused several divisions of overall more than a 100,000 Germans failing to pass through (so you get the idea of what mountain range we talk about...) and it was of course populated by Greek-only tribes. Then you had so-called north-Thrace where local tribes such as the Bessoi and the Oddysians showed "hellenisation patterns" before even the Greeks got there, LOL! Not to mention that there was never any installation of Greeks from Greece into North Thrace. Funny how things are, isn't it? There was hellenisation, without Greeks going there, except from the Black Sea coastline. And then you had the region north of North Thrace which is also Thrace for some (LOL! what kind of lunacy is this) and this included the Danubian region and even north of it, to include completely unrelated tribes such as the Dacians. The idea that there were ever a sort of people that included tribes such as the Dacians and the Paeonians (a Thraecian tribe that actually participated in the Olympic Games... i.e. they were 100% ethnic Greeks, otherwise they could not do so) is not only patently false, it is a criminal-level propaganda and ties to very modern propagandas of nations that wanted access to the Aegean Sea at the expense of the indigenous Greeks. All Balkanic nations (note Greeks are not Balkanic even if sometimes mentioned as such) are into pseudohistory precisely because all Balkanic people have absorbed some of northern Greece's lands and their populations which they de-hellenised, and hence today they have a massive complex as per that, thus demand for history to be re-written. Anyone thinking he knows better, let him bring here and now archaeological evidence of existence of Thraecians.
There is a geographical region called Thrace and historical people called Thracians and this should not be confused. The historical Thracians inhabited enormous territory up to Ukraine and the Carpathian mountains, the Aegan . The proof who they were is their language, that was old Bulgarian. But this fact to be made official is not convenient so they made the language "lost" and in exactly the same 6th century it got "lost" "Slavic" appeared? Does it sound like a fraud , it does to many people. Some migrated as Aryans. Thrace was Aria .The remaining are to be found on the Balkans, mostly Bulgaria and Romania. Claims on them how they were "assimilated" and lost their identity is just not true. Nobody assimilated the Aryans, they imposed their culture , also in Greece. There would be no Greek civilization without them, but this is not easy to swallow for too many people! All the lies how they were barbarians and not strong or had no unique identity come from greek sources. This was simply not true. They were advanced also in state building as it is proved by the fact Bulgaria is the oldest European state! The Dacians were Thracians yes. So this is Bulgarian heritage shared with Romanians. Greeks have absolutely nothing to do with Thrace and Thracian territory by birth right. Thrace belongs to Bulgaria.
Time to stop the horrible Greek propaganda!! The Thracians are the proto- indo- Europeans and the Balkan neolitic cultures are the proof. From Karanovo, Hamangia, Varna, Provadia, Stara Zagora, Ohoden, Cucuteni,Vinca is all about Thrace. Just they didn't call themselves that. Bulgarians speak the oldest language that spread to India as Sanskrit and to Europe as Baltic and Slavic. Don't ever mention Greek at all here!Our identity is 4000 years older than anything greek. It's pathetic to push this Greek nonsense. If it's ancient it's not Greek. If people speak the same language, worship the same Gods, have exactly the same culture it means there was a separate identity , today called Bulgarian. You say that the Greek tribes fighting among each other had the same identity but the Thracians fighting among each other did not. How? Why the double standard here? Talking there was not an own identity and coming yourself from the background of a state established first in the 18th century (Greece) to people who established a state in the 7th century (Bulgaria) is out of place. Greeks are really funny. You think we had advanced civilization and our own identity for around 4000 years and just waited for some Africans that had absolutely no civilization to show up in order to "hellenize"us?😂 If I was Greek I would question the Greek educational system and why do they brainwash you so much to think you are something special and superior to all Europeans when you don't even invented anything European. I would question corrupt academia that made you in what you have become. Narcissistic people who think the rest of the world is barbaric and everything ancient must be "Greek". You get shocked when Balkan people speak out because you are not used to that. But until the 18th century there was no "ancient Greece". History was real. So, better think about it.
"to include completely unrelated tribes like the Dacians". Why do you fault the ancient authors? 1."Before reaching the Istra, [the king of the Persians, Darius], first defeated the Getae, who believe themselves to be immortal. For the Thracians, the inhabitants of Salmydessos and those who occupy the land above the cities of Apollonia and Mesambria - called Scyrmians and Nipsians - surrendered to Darius without a fight. The Getae, however, because they behaved recklessly, were immediately enslaved, even though they are the bravest and most righteous of the Thracians".Herodotus, Histories, IV, 93, Ibidem, p. 47 - 49 2. 2."And the Dacians are an offshoot of the Getae."Trogus Pompeius, History of Philip, XXXII, 3, 16, p. 359
@@ds-on4sm You are into pseudohistory trying to promote very 20th century nationalistic Bulgarian aspirations, e x a c t l y as I noted above. You are just verifying exactly what I said. The idea that Thrace is a vague geographical term exactly like Illyria was is very clear throughout historical texts as well as in more modern ones when nobody can pinpoint exact bounaries and ending up including completely unrelated regions and tribes and ethnic groups. Herodotus clearly and unequivocally states that "Thraecian tribes had absolutely no hint of common belonging to any same nation adding that if they did they would be the largest nation in the world". But of course they could never had been so precisely because exactly as he says, they did not have the slightest notion of belonging in the same ethnic group? Why? Because precisely they were not one specific ethnic group but belonged to different ones. We have positive, absolute, irrefutable proof for several Thraecian tribes south of Rhodope that they were Greek. Not just Greek-speaking but ethnically Greek just like any other Greek tribes. Paeonians for example, whom Macedonians often treated as "barbarians" (just like Demosthenes treated Philip II as "barbarian"), were particiating in the Olympic Games which is absolute proof of their Greek identity as much as it was for Macedonians. Both of them participated in the Olympics at times they were powerless poor insignificant states and as such there can be absolutely no doubt. Then you have the Bisaltians whose king was a nationalist Greek that barred his son to collaborate with Xerxes to attack other Greeks and when his sons did so, he returned after war and blinded them all for their betrayal. Then you have the Edonians from whom we have written records, again all in Greek including placenames and peolpes' names. And then we even have Bronze Age era Thraecian tribes such as the Phrygians who moved into Minor Asia and in spite of mixing there with local indigenous non-Greek people they maintained a 1000 years later a Greek language (a very distant dialect of Greek or a cousin-to-Greek language, depending how one sees it). Until a 100 years ago of course Bulgarian nationalists considered Phrygians as Thraecian - and indeed they were Thraecian - but now as news of their actual language tie them with Greeks they reject them as Thraecians. LOL! How convenient isn't it? Propagandist pseudohistory works that way. Your claim that a certain "Thraecian nation" lived all the way from Ukraine till the Aegean is so ridiculous as to claim that a single nation lived from Ukraine to Japan. There are, overland, more geographical boundaries from Ukraine to Aegean than from Ukraine to Japan - the very reason of the expansion of the Russian nation afterall. And of course, archaeologically there is absolutely nothing to state that all these numerous small tribes living from Ukraine till Aegean were belonging to one nation. No they did not. Aegean Thraecians were Greeks. Thraecians of North Thrace left the 100% of their written record in Greek and one should start wondering what type of language did they speak really to not bother at all writing it down and just go straight to Greek. And then pseudo-Thraecians north of Haemus mountains in the "north-of-North-Thrace" Thrace-by-extension, or false-Thrace if you like, were unrelated tribes. Dacian were not etthnically related to Oddryssians and most certainly not at all related to the Greek Edonian and Paeonian tribes. You coming here and speaking of what? "Old Bulgarian"? Are you nuts? Bulgarians were a mix the Turkomongolic Bulgars as leaders and Slavic underlings whose language persisted thus producing the Slavic mix of Bulgarians. The Bulgarian language, an archetypal Slavic language and quite very close to Russian to even permit some mutual intelligibility has absolutely nothing to do with whichever of the languages were spoken either in Thrace proper, certainly nothing to do with Greek spoken by Aegean Thraecians and then again nothing to do with the unrelated languages of Getae and Dacian of the paradanubian region in the north. If you want to say something, you better come back with archaeologically-based arguments.
@@dinos9607According to P. Haranis, the Phrygian language was spoken at least until the 10th century - "The Phrygians, for instance, as we may infer from what we know of the background of Michael II, seem to have been only semi-Hellenized as late as the beginning of the ninth century. Michael, who is described as coarse, ill-educated, and contemptuous of Hellenic culture, was no doubt typical of the natives of Phrygia, many of whom may not have known any Greek at all. "
They turned into ancestors of Romanians, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Aromanians, Serbs, Montenegrins, Kosovars, Albanians, Bosnians, Croats, Hungarians, Greeks, Austrians, Ukrainians, mmm... Turks and many others.
There followed the influence of the Mongol Tartars, who even supplied one Bulgarian king, Chaka. But of greatest importance were the Ottoman and Seljuk Turks, who conquered the Balkans from Asia Minor. Concerning the Cumans, Nikov considers the "transfusion of blood" from Turkic "elements" an asset, a means of rejuvenating and strengthening the "race" and enhancing the vitality of the Bulgarian people (in contrast with the conquering Turks).
"What happened to the Thracians?" Proceeds to talk about the Ottoman Empire Edit: I'm still watching and it only gets worse Edit 2: Got some hope there with Bulgaria Edit 3: Talking about demographics in Thrace now... not bad but somehow managed to talk about Kurds and force me watch another map of Turkey. Come on!!!! Edit 4: Another map of Turkey, but about religion now. You know Thracians lived in a much larger area than that small Eastern Balkan region right?
Turkish influence on Thrace is quite important in understanding Thrace… Majority of people who live in Thrace today live in turkey. And the beginning of the 20th century rapidly changed the demographics of the region, along with migrations of peoples and deportations etc
@abloodorange5233 the problem lies in the map of Thrace. The title of the video was: What happened to the Thracian People, not "The history of Thrace". The Thracian people lived far and beyond the region of Thrace, such as Anatolia or North of the Danube. His analysis is too limited, narrow and way too Turkish centric to even relate the video with the Thracian people.
You are a troll or plain ignorant. Thrace is the whole identity of the Bulgarians and our ancient history can prove that. Nobody else is more Thracian.
Thracians we’re Greeks from Alexander’s time and onwards so that’s like 1-2 thousand years… then the Slavs and Bulgars invaded the peninsula way later in Medieval Era and conquered Balkan regions such as Thrace and extended Macedonia (Macedonia Secunda / Ancient Paeonia) and now these slavs and Bulgars claim to be Thracians and Macedonians which is nothing but a complete joke as Macedonians and Thracians were and are Greeks and the Slavs and Bulgars not even being natives to the Balkans.
The Bulgarians, the Macedonians, the Serbs and even the Greeks are undoubtedly the descendants of the Thracians on the Vlach branch. In the 19th century in the Peninsula, they were like the others in one place. That the Greeks passed them into their heritage is another dirty thing. Do not judge the Thracians as living only on the territory of Bulgaria and the former Yugoslavia. Herodotus said that after the Indians they are the most numerous. The Geto-Dacians were also Thracians, the peoples of the North. Feedback
Great video. Thank you. As to what happened? genocide. What happened to Illyrians? What happened to Egyptian, to East Romans? All the same. Just my 2 cents.
this could explain why i have not just Turkish, but also iraqi & austrian listed on both my, and my dad's, DNA reports..? i couldn't personally understand the connection but i guess i just didn't realize how massive the empire was
Thank you for this video! 15:03 You have mistakes on the map and in the ranking of cities. The Slavs in Thrace were mostly regarded as Bulgarians as they had common church, schools and revolutionary movement as the Bulgarians in Moesia(North Bulgaria) and Macedonia during 19 and early 20th century. You could have mentioned the cultural heritage of the ancient Thracians, as they have left us many burial sites, ancient ruins and treasures. Also, the theory that Bulgarians in the Balkans have Turkic origin is old and has been disproven (even I'm not sure what is the origin of my ethnicity). My personal theory about the Thracians were numerous decentralized tribes with very rich belief system that has influenced the Greeks, not the other way. Etymologically, I think the Greek exonym Thracians simply means farmers and applied to an area much bigger than the modern geographical region of Thrace.
Most of people in the Balkan area are genetically Thracians. The new came were a few but very aggressive, usually warriors (except the slavic people). The turks, the Bulgarians, the Hungarians imposed them authority and the language but the culture and most of the people are Thracians descendants. Them language is still alive and is spoken by the Macedo-romanians in north of Greece, Muntenegru, Macedonia, Romania and a few in Bulgaria.
The Greeks are the only ones culturally, in civilisation and in legacy of Thracian heritage and bondage. The Bulgarians and Turks are of an entirely different culture ethnos civilisation and historical past.
but basically Thracians were Romanized, and later some incorporated in medieval Bulgarian nation, others obviously stayed Hellenised in the Roman Empire under the New Rome, but Hellenic religion and culture itself was pretty much based on older Thracian before the Christianization so...
8:30 I can say maybe about 20% of Turkey’s Muslim population might be barely practicing and the rest is culturally Muslim. I would also guess the non Muslim as Atheists, Agnostics, Theists, Tengrist, Shamans, etc. at least of 12%.
Senin inançsız bir insan olduğunu varsayarak söylemek istiyorum. İnançsız ya da İslamı terk etmis Türkler dünyadaki en aşşağılık komplekse sahip. Avrupa ülkelerindeki hiçbir inançsız insan, kültürünün sahip olduğu inancı dışlamaz.
For short: The real descendents of Thracians are Bulgarians and Romanians. The funniest part is that we can say that by just looking in the average body structure of those two nations. However guys remember that we are who we are, because of our ancestors from max 3 generation before us and not, because of the 100th one and etc.
Thracian’s , makedonians , Dacian , Illyrians were people of the same stock . I see some Greeks commenting otherwise. Just because they used Greek language to a degree, it never made them Greek . Philip and Aleksander occupied Greek cities , and they wrote their story in Greek as lingua franka at the time , so stupid making naive claims !
Why would he occupy the greek language and forget their own, you should stop making silly claims, greek became powerful after or during alexander's regime, especially the hellenistic period. If macedonians had a different language they would've preserved their own and this language would have been powerful and they would have been assimilators and romans and the byzantines would have used that instead of greek.
Europe's ancient history should be re-written! Long before Rome came into existence and before Greece flourished, the Thracian stirpes have populated vast areas of the European continent and they left their mark on its whole history. The Thracians had an advanced culture and that they were sophisticated art creators; also, that the Greek world was strongly influenced by the Thracian one, the Greeks borrowing traditions and deities from the Thracians. Concurrently, into the ancient Thracian-Geto-Dacian world will bring to you a close-up of the amazing gold and silver ancient treasures and the remarkable personalities of certain Thracian heroes that have remained deeply carved into humanity's memory. Last but not least, you will discover that Thracian-Geto-Dacians ( actual Romanians )have even reached as far as the rule of the Roman Empire themselves, a fact that was clearly mentioned and beyond any doubt by the Roman ancient historic sources themselves...See here on you tube video "The Thracians, a Hidden History".
It should be re-written but who has interest in that? Better treat us like idiots. You see they declared the Thracians vanished or "assimilated" and the language "extinct". Basically they say we don't exist.
Who and what happened to Thracians: Thracians were a unique tribe a bit similar to Greeks who later got Hellenized, Romanized, and later Bulgarized too. Now part of Thrace rightfully belongs in Greece, while the northern part belongs to Bulgaria.
In Turkey, persons from the provinces of Edirne, Tekirdağ, and Kırklareli, basically the European part of Turkey, except İstanbul are called #Trakyalı Thracian.
@@Dinosaur315yes and no. It’s possible that a lot of people in these locations are descendants of thracians due to the expanse of the Ottoman Empire. My grandparents migrated down from East Bulgaria into Istanbul Turkey inheriting Turkish culture despite having a Bulgarian origin. It’s quite mixed.
@@Jaanikins I see. I'm asking because many turks in eastern thrace arent locals but from different regions or countries, like Greece thessaloniki or Crete or balkans in general.
I also have some thracian ancestry from my grandfather, who's from eastern thrace and Spileo, which was most likely built by greeks from north thrace. Dont know which thracian tribes I descend from though lol, but considering my great grandmother was from Kirklareli I probably have heritage from the thynoi
I have come across suggestions that Ancient Macedonian (the language of Alexander the Great) was a dialect of Greek, presumably similar to Doric, and also suggestions that it was a different language but closely related to Greek. I haven't heard that it was an isolate before, so I presume that that was a mistake. [The language of the modern state of North Macedon is different; it is a South Slavic language that some people regard as a dialect of Bulgarian.]
@@richardlee653 Linguists have concluded that it was a Doric Greek dialect. But the vocabulary seems to be somewhat divergent, with Thracian and Illyrian loan words. The language isn't very well documented however as in writing they only used Attic Greek, which was the standard written form of Greek throughout the Hellenic states of the Mediterranean
@@richardlee653it is not presumed it is a known fact that Macedonian was essentially Dorian. They are about 184 inscriptions found in Macedonian soil that were written in Macedonian and not in the Attic dialect.
