6
   

Are Spaniards, the Portuguese, the French, Italians seen as Germanic in America?

 
 
literarypoland
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 10:38 am
As to Russians, they believe in their Viking/Germanic roots, in their Sarmatian/Antae/Slav roots, but also in their Greek roots, because of all the Greek colonies on the banks of the Black Sea in the Ukraine. Plus add the Mongol period, important for the formation of central administration - and you have a state with a very complex, 4-sided heritage.
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 10:45 am
@literarypoland,
The modern nation you called Iran has been so-named ONLY since 1935. That area of the world, until 1935, had been called Persia. Those people from that area were called Aryans.
literarypoland
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 10:58 am
@Ragman,
"Iranians" are steppe people, in Antiquity nomads, roaming in the area between China, Persia, Scandinavia. Our eyes are not slanting, like in Huns and Mongols further east.
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 11:00 am
@literarypoland,
...and? How does this connect?
0 Replies
 
literarypoland
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 11:13 am
The example of China shows that unification can come about only by conquest. Nowadays China seems a monolith, but its early history is full of civil wars, chaos, invasions by Mongols.
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 11:16 am
@literarypoland,
Sorry, but I'm not a following a thing that you're saying. I see no example that you cite. Good luck finding whatever info it is you're seeking.

However, if you're interested the follwing excerpt may help you understand the people you wrote about and their language roots:

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

As for your question in the title, in USA those nations you name comprise those that spoke Romance languages. "The Romance languages (sometimes referred to as Romanic languages, Latin languages or Neolatin languages) are a branch of the Indo-European language family comprising all the languages that descend from Latin, the language of ancient Rome."
0 Replies
 
literarypoland
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 11:23 am
Bye
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 11:25 am
@literarypoland,
yes, you're welcome.
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 11:39 am
Also, if you seek more info on Sarmatians, check out this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatians
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 12:53 pm
Something to read. Poland at one time had an oriental/muslim connection.
http://www.muslimheritage.com/topics/default.cfm?TaxonomyTypeID=2&TaxonomySubTypeID=18&TaxonomyThirdLevelID=3&ArticleID=936
saab
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 01:02 pm
@literarypoland,
How can they roam between China, Persia and Scandinavia???? There is a lot of land between Persia and Scandinavia. Did they get up there on camels ?
Did they use horses or elks by the time their poor camels died out? Or what happened to the camels?
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 01:06 pm
@Foofie,
Arabic architectural style was quite common during the neo-gothic period:

this ...

http://i39.tinypic.com/2s14um9.jpg

... is not a mosque but (origianally) a cigarette/tabacco factory in Dresden, Germany.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 04:21 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Yenidze on the building there refers to a specific type of strong, red turkish tobacco, very popular in Europe, and grown mostly in Bulgaria, if memory serves . . .
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 09:09 pm
What is this crap with dividing up the world into ancient nationalities. O.K. I give up; I will research all Polish jokes to see if there is any credence to them.
0 Replies
 
literarypoland
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jan, 2009 08:32 am
@saab,
Horses and wagons.
0 Replies
 
literarypoland
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jan, 2009 08:47 am
@Foofie,
Maybe you mean that our economy is at the Turkish/Egyptian/Arabic level.
Only because those countries have had capitalism for the whole time after WW2, without Communist experiments.
Sarmatian doesn't mean Asian. Especially Poles were Sarmatians/Slavs who went far westwards and mixed into the western world.
I imagine that Poles were those Sarmatians who had more of the entrepreneur spirit. Probably we wanted to earn money on the amber trade with southern Europe.
The Slavs who entered the Balkans had as their aim pillage in the Byzantine territories.
And Russians - they remained where they were - they were those averse to risk and travel. Huns went west, Avars went west, and perished. However, Russians didn't predict one danger from the far east - the Mongols (which was to come centuries later).
And that steppe spirit is in us somehow - the spirit of unrestrained liberty.
Poland and Turkey? From what I read Turks and Mongols are close cousins. Turks not always lived in Turkey - earlier close to Mongolia. We had wars, but later Turkey understood that Russia was a stronger enemy than the now partitioned Poland and started to support our independence - to weaken Russia. For example our greatest romantic poet Mickiewicz organised a Polish legion in Turkey around 1850.
But some Oriental influences - let's not exaggerate. Maybe in the garb of the nobility, but not in buildings. Polish nobility was deep into Latin, many spoke a strange mixture of Polish and Latin, into ancient Roman texts, maybe because of closeness to the Vatican, and Latin was the language used in churches - this changed only around 1960. In Russia they still have Greek in tserkevs.
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jan, 2009 02:55 pm
@literarypoland,
Once again...there's still some confusion. How is the title of your thread connected to what you are posting? This seems to be a total non sequitur.
0 Replies
 
literarypoland
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jan, 2009 04:13 pm
Just some new horizons.
You know, if those Celts, and Greeks, fit well into NATO and the EU, so will Slavs and Hungarians, and Bulgarians. Hungarians and Bulgarians also didn't always live where they live, they came from the east, though they are not Slavs.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jan, 2009 04:15 pm
I'm sure some of them have a place for everything, and everything in its place. I'm equally certain that a good many of them are unrepentant Slobs. You just can't resist broad generalizations, can you, LP?
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jan, 2009 05:39 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

I'm sure some of them have a place for everything, and everything in its place. I'm equally certain that a good many of them are unrepentant Slobs. You just can't resist broad generalizations, can you, LP?


He doesn't seem able to do so. Still the ideas he puts forward do have some merit, and they are interesting - if not particularly meaningful in today's world.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

THE BRITISH THREAD II - Discussion by jespah
FOLLOWING THE EUROPEAN UNION - Discussion by Mapleleaf
The United Kingdom's bye bye to Europe - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
Sinti and Roma: History repeating - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
[B]THE RED ROSE COUNTY[/B] - Discussion by Mathos
Leaving today for Europe - Discussion by cicerone imposter
So you think you know Europe? - Discussion by nimh
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/05/2022 at 11:24:11