루마니아 민족의 기원에 대한 문헌학적 고찰

A Philological Study on the Ethnologic Origin of the Romanians

This article aims at a philological study on the ethnologic origin of the Romanians and their Language. It must be very difficult to specify the populations the languages which almost disappeared after the occupation by the Roman Empire around during the first century B.C. and A.D. respectively. Indeed, we only possess very poor materials to become acquainted with the ancient populations and their native languges in this part of Eastern and Balkan Europe. Among the materials given at our disposal there is, first of all, a ring found at Ezerevo in Bulgaria, although attempted by thracologists like Kretschmer, Dečev, Georgiev, Hirt etc., it offers no satisfactory interpretation as yet. Besides it, there are about 70～80 words(names of plants and persons) preserved by the ancient Greek lexicographers. These words are also no use except partially even though many etymologists and comparatists of the Indo-European languages investigated very carefully. Nevertheless, by virtue of the ancient Greek historians like Herodotus and Strabo etc. we get the informations about the indigenes and their vernacular languages although sporadically in the Balkan and Carpathians areas. The great Greek historian Herodotus reports in his in the Ionian dialect written work that the Thracians had vast tribes as the Indians but they were split too many to take effect, and that they however had similar manners and customs in all the areas excepts some tribes like the Gathians(V, 3). According to Herodotus, hundreds of Thracian tribes inhabited in the Balakn and Southeast European areas as well as on the Grecian islands like 'Thaos', 'Samothrake', 'Lemnos' etc.(I, 28; III, 90). So far as Thraco-Dacian concerned, the Romanian thracologist, whose works Limba traco-dacilor(1959) and Elemente autohtone în limba română(1970) are fundamental to the investigation of the substratum of Romanian, called attention to the fact that the Tenus(p, t, k) as well as the Mediae(b, d, g) of Proto Indo-European are preserved in Thraco-Dacian, while the Bulgarian comparagist of Indo-European language, Georgiev is of opinion that the consonant shift didn't occur in Dacian but in Thracian showed various examples of the consonants shift. For example, the name of Dacian plant kinouboila is derived from Proto Indo-European kun-ābōlo- in which also originates the Thracian name din-upula. Given another example, The Thracian word utus which means 'water', came from Indo-European udo(r) from which is derived the Dacian toponym Salmor-ude. As a result of the given two examples, one can find out that the Indo-European Mediae(b, d) are preserverd in Dacain, while they are changed in Thracian into Tenues(p, t) respectively. According to the Bulgarian linguist, Georgiev, besides above mentioned differences between Thracian and Dacian, considered the toponyms, in the Dacian province are founded the words ended in -dava(or -deva), while in the Thracian province in -bria(or -para). Because of the invasion of the germanic tribe the Goths, the Roman Emperor Aurelian abandoned in 271 A.D. the province Dacia Trajana, created in 107 A.D. by emperor Trajan. Aurelian placed the Roman power in the middle of Moesia which was called as Dacia Aureliana. As far as the extant historical informations about the abandonment of Dacia Trajana, exist in total six reports excepts the Byzantine reports which are unauthentic in veracity. Among the six reports Aurelius Victor and Orosius informed only about the evacuation under emperor Gallien. However, it is beyond doubt that the main abandonment by the Romans took place under emperor Aurelian. Therefore, four reports hold the key to the question.