- May 2016
If you are trying to imitate deaf tuner’s joke, you are almost succeeding, but you need more practice.
If you are serious, then… I don’t know… if is embarrassing how you think that quote, if existed (you didn’t provide a link, but probably this is your first non-false quote), from some user in Historum, can be a source for your claim. That sentence is a pure salad of languages.
Well: “In vino veritas”! (the true is in the wine... or it was in the drunk... something like that...)
That question “how is it not?” is related to what of my statements? You quoted several.How is it not? It clearly says that parts of thessaly had been populated by thracians, not only macedonia.
Do you mean why “Browse around” is not a source?
Or that the end of the post #1 is not a source for your statnenebt “Thessalians have partially been thracian as well”
By the way a source stating that there were Thracians in Thessalia doesn’t have the same implications that Thessalians have been Thracian as well.
There were Greeks in the Iberian Peninsula, and yet we cannot say that the Iberians were Greeks. Or that the Iberians have partially been Greeks as well.
Anyway it is odd to see you changing your quotes. You begun to quote Hammond and Borza (and other scholars), then Wikipedia, then when we saw that all those quotes couldn’t be proved, you quoted “bilbil” (and without a link to the quoted sentence, and probably your first true quote).
Again, I send you this link several times, I hope someday you can read it: https://historum.com/pages/content-guidelines/#citing-sources
This can also be of interest to you:
Following those rules will avoid you to make false claims, quoting sources that don’t exist, and to seem you suspiciously intellectually dishonest.