# Средец/Sredets (Bulgarian city)



## Perseas

Hello,

I wonder about  the etymology of Средец, a Bulgarian city. Has anything to do with "center","middle"? Thanks.


----------



## ahvalj

No, its from Serdica with the regular Bulgarian changes: _er>rě, ik>ĭʦ>eʦ_ and an adaptation of the ending to Slavic city names in _-ĭʦĭ>-eʦ._

P. S. While theoretically possible as a Slavic toponym, it seems to have no counterparts outside Bulgaria (Serbo-Croatian _*Sredac,_ Polish _*Średziec,_ Russian _*Sʲerʲedʲeʦ_) etc., so it must have been named after the Celtic tribe, like in Sofia.


----------



## Perseas

Thank you.
Sredets was also the older name of the capital Sofia. In that case, it's the "middle", as I read in the Greek wikipedia.


> Το σλαβικό όνομα _Σρέντετς_ (СРѢДЄЦЪ), που σχετίζεται με το "μέσο" (среда, «σρέντα»)


----------



## ahvalj

Perseas said:


> Thank you.
> Sredets was also the older name of the capital Sofia. In that case, it's the "middle", as I read in the Greek wikipedia.
> СРѢДЄЦЪ


Yes, but that's folk etymology, though old one. When Slavs invaded Thrace in the 6–7th centuries, the modern _Sredets_ must have sounded as *_Serdiķi_ (compare the coeval Γαρδίκι < *_Gardiķi_, modern Gradec) and thus the ancient _Serdica_ may have been reinterpreted by Slavs as being the same word (though, again, I have failed to find actual matching Slavic toponyms elsewhere).

P. S. Some explanations.
The modern Bulgarian _re _in this homophonous Slavic root is a result of metathesis from _*er_ (this can bee seen from the matching East Slavic _sered-_ with a different development of the same group and from the Lithuanian _šerdis _preserving the original shape of the root).
The modern Bulgarian suffix _-ets_ comes from the Old Bulgarian _-ьʦь,_ which in its turn is the outcome of the older _*-iķi_ (the shape it had in the second third of the first millennium), and even earlier from Proto-Slavic *_-ikas_ (the same suffix as _-ικος_).


----------



## Perseas

@ahvalj 
Thank you for the detailed answer.


----------



## Christo Tamarin

Perseas said:


> Hello,
> 
> I wonder about  the etymology of Средец, a Bulgarian city. Has anything to do with "center","middle"? Thanks.


The question refers to a city whose name definitely has Slavic etymology, Срѣдьць.

Until 1934, that city had the Turkish name *Karabunar*.
In 1934, renamed to Sredec (Срѣдецъ). Arbitrarily selected among some possibilities.
In 1950, renamed to Grudovo.
In 1993, renamed back to Sredec (Срeдец).

Anyway, the ancient name of the city of Sofia probably has nothing in common with the current name of *Karabunar*.

The etymology of the ancient name Serdica is unknown to us, most probably. Slavophones reinterpreted that name, as ahvalj explained.

Also,  the gender was changed. The ancient name Serdica complied to the Greek word πόλις  which is Feminine. The Slavic word Срѣдьць is Masculine thus complying to Slavic градъ.


----------



## ahvalj

My concern is that I can't find matches of _Срѣдьць_ elsewhere: abstractly speaking this word does look Slavic, but was there such a toponym apart from the former _Serdica_? Somehow Slavs didn't call their settlements _Middletown_.


----------



## Christo Tamarin

София – Уикипедия

For me, the etymology of Serdica remains unknown.
A toponym like Срѣдьць apart from the ancient Serdica is not known to me.

Slavs had no problems to call that city Middletown. Predominantly, cities had Hellenophone population. Usually, Greek names were approximated.


----------



## ahvalj

I agree, I just mean that when we call _Срѣдьць_ a toponym with Slavic etymology, we expect that there are other Slavic towns with such a name, which seems not to be the case.


----------



## danielstan

Christo Tamarin said:


> Until 1934, that city had the Turkish name *Karabunar*.


I read sowhere Karabunar is an adaptation of the Turkish _kara pınar_ which means "black fountain".
There is a Tatar Bunar city in Bugeac (Southern Bessarabia, but today in Ukraine) which is derived from _tatar pınar _("Tartar's fountain").

My comments are intended to show that the Turkish name has nothing in common with Serdica or Sredets.


----------



## Christo Tamarin

danielstan said:


> I read sowhere Karabunar is an adaptation of the Turkish _kara pınar_ which means "black fountain".
> There is a Tatar Bunar city in Bugeac (Southern Bessarabia, but today in Ukraine) which is derived from _tatar pınar _("Tartar's fountain").
> 
> My comments are intended to show that the Turkish name has nothing in common with Serdica or Sredets.


Of course, the Turkish name Karabunar has nothing in common with Sredec or Serdica.

In many local Turkish dialects, the _pınar_ is heard as _bunar_. And also _pıc̨ak _is heard as _buc̨ak_. I mean local dialects on the territory of Bulgaria.

According to wiktionary, _bunar_ is the older form.


----------



## Vukabular

From SER-DI to SER-BI is a moment, just a misinterpretation typical of the Greeks and Romans who almost never called peoples with their authentic names because of the inability to pronounce themselves or the tendency to adatrals or translate them with their own language.
It is also interesting to see the TRACI TRIBALLI that in all Greek texts were exclusively synonymous or a sub-name only for Serbs. And they often pointed it out, saying:
 "TRACI TRIBALLI also called SERBI". - Laonicus Chalcondyles (Greek: Λαόνικος Χαλκοκονδύλης)


----------



## thegreathoo

ahvalj said:


> No, its from Serdica with the regular Bulgarian changes: _er>rě, ik>ĭʦ>eʦ_ and an adaptation of the ending to Slavic city names in _-ĭʦĭ>-eʦ._
> 
> P. S. While theoretically possible as a Slavic toponym, it seems to have no counterparts outside Bulgaria (Serbo-Croatian _*Sredac,_ Polish _*Średziec,_ Russian _*Sʲerʲedʲeʦ_) etc., so it must have been named after the Celtic tribe, like in Sofia.



No.  "Ser" is uniquely western slavic.  It appears in many names of tribes such as Serbia, or in ancient times, Seropaeones, Serapilli, Seraetes, Sarmatae, as many Boii tribes in the western Balkans.  It is unique to that region and to the Slavs (or Boii in ancient times, celtic tribes) from Moravia, lake Balaton in Hungary over the rivers Sava and Morava down to Greece, we find "Ser" in names of ancient celtic tribes, in this case the Boii.  And today we have it in Serbia, Zer Boiia.


----------



## ahvalj

thegreathoo said:


> No.  "Ser" is uniquely western slavic.  It appears in many names of tribes such as Serbia, or in ancient times, Seropaeones, Serapilli, Seraetes, Sarmatae, as many Boii tribes in the western Balkans.  It is unique to that region and to the Slavs (or Boii in ancient times, celtic tribes) from Moravia, lake Balaton in Hungary over the rivers Sava and Morava down to Greece, we find "Ser" in names of ancient celtic tribes, in this case the Boii.  And today we have it in Serbia, Zer Boiia.


You've stepped into a minefield since there is an element _ser _that is Common Slavic_ — *serǫ._


----------



## thegreathoo

ahvalj said:


> You've stepped into a minefield since there is an element _ser _that is Common Slavic_ — *serǫ._




I got you!   Mr. Knowitall, please follow Seven Cannons posted at the top of the main page:

*2. Observe history and geography; borrowings are due to actual contact.*

You have failed to do that.  And that's why you do not know.


----------



## ahvalj

Do you assume the element _ser_ to have been Slavic, Celtic or Sarmatian? What do history and geography tell you about _-b-_ in _Serbia_ and _-d-_ in _Serdica_? Are Sarmatians and Serboi uniquely western Slavic?


----------



## Christo Tamarin

thegreathoo said:


> I got you!   Mr. Knowitall, please follow Seven Cannons posted at the top of the main page:
> 
> *2. Observe history and geography; borrowings are due to actual contact.*
> 
> You have failed to do that.  And that's why you do not know.



Yes, ..* Observe history and geography; borrowings are due to actual contact.*

Actually, in both history and geography, during several long centuries, both Serbia and Bulgaria were integral parts of the Roman Empire.

So, both ethnonyms Serbs and Bulgarians were borrowed from Latin.

Latin _Servi _=> *Serbs* (directly).
Latin _Vulgares_ => Greek Βούλγαροι => *Bulgarians*.

_I am very sorry for the off-topic._

Anyway, please let me continue the off-topic.

There were three words capable to embrace all the Slavophonia. Neither succeeded. Those three words were: Slovene, Serbs, and Bulgarians. Only the first one has Slavic etymology. Serbs and Bulgarians are borrowings from Latin.


----------



## thegreathoo

I am not mixing -b and -d.  Someone else did that.  The only thing Serdica and Serbia have in common is Ser-.   You said that Serdica is not Slavic.  However, historically, for that period and geography, it is uniquely western Slavic.  Go look at the list of Celtic tribes in that area, and you will find a bunch of tribe names starting with Ser-, or its varation, and you will not find them anywhere else.

You must follow the evidence -- history and geography for the period.  You are not doing that.  It's not enough to go by PIE roots and invent things, dismiss some options, accept others, just because you feel like it.


----------



## thegreathoo

Christo Tamarin said:


> So, both ethnonyms Serbs and Bulgarians were borrowed from Latin.
> 
> Latin _Servi _=> *Serbs* (directly).
> Latin _Vulgares_ => Greek Βούλγαροι => *Bulgarians*.
> 
> _I am very sorry for the off-topic._



No, this is not off topic.  

And no, that is not true.  Serbs does not come from that.  It was explained by the Roman emperor Porphyrogenitus in De Administrando Imperio.


----------



## Vukabular

ahvalj said:


> When Slavs invaded Thrace in the 6–7th centuries


Nonsence! The data on the invasion of the Slavs into the Balkans was written by the 10th-century Eastern Roman Emperor Constantine Profirogenite in his book _De Administrando Imperio_ ("On the Governance of the Empire") in which he describes events that happened 300-400 years earlier without citing a single source but he knows that the Slavs crossed the Danube by walking along the bottom and breathing on the reeds. According to modern military strategists, such migration was impossible because, in addition to crossing large rivers, the journey would take more than a year, the row would be about 100 kilometers long, it would be necessary to provide food for humans and domestic animals not only for travel but also when they settled to have supplies until new crops arrive, etc. Not to mention passing through the territories of other nations that probably would not welcome them peacefully ...


----------



## Christo Tamarin

thegreathoo said:


> No, this is not off topic.
> 
> And no, that is not true.  Serbs does not come from that.  It was explained by the Roman emperor Porphyrogenitus in De Administrando Imperio.





> .. Σέρβλοι δὲ τη̃ͺ τω̃ν ҅Ρωμαίων διαλέκτωͺ δου̃λοι προσαγορεύονται ..
> ..
> .. Ταύτην δὲ τὴν ҄επωνυμίαν ҄έσχον ҅οι Σέρβλοι διὰ τὸ δου̃λοι γενέσθαι του̃ βασιλέως  ҅Ρωμαίων ..


Yes, it is well explained.

Note:  ҅Η διάλεκτος τω̃ν  ҅Ρωμαίων means Latin.

Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio


----------



## thegreathoo

Christo Tamarin said:


> Yes, it is well explained.
> 
> Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio




No.  That's not how it is.  The emperor explains this:

BEFORE a group of Serbs came to Greece to seek protection of emperor Heraclius, there was already Serbia.  It already existed.  They came from Serbia.
AFTER they were granted that protection, they were called Servi by the Romans.
Therefore, Serbia existed before the nickname Servi.

Second, the emperor clearly spells Serbs as Serbloi, and not as Servi.  No one in their right mind would claim that Serbloi means servi in Latin.

That's how it is.  One has nothing to do with the other, except that the Romans invented a derogatory term.


----------



## ahvalj

thegreathoo said:


> I am not mixing -b and -d.  Someone else did that.  The only thing Serdica and Serbia have in common is Ser-.   You said that Serdica is not Slavic.  However, historically, for that period and geography, it is uniquely western Slavic.  Go look at the list of Celtic tribes in that area, and you will find a bunch of tribe names starting with Ser-, or its varation, and you will not find them anywhere else.
> 
> You must follow the evidence -- history and geography for the period.  You are not doing that.  It's not enough to go by PIE roots and invent things, dismiss some options, accept others, just because you feel like it.


What is the relationship between western Slavic and Celtic?


----------



## thegreathoo

ahvalj said:


> What is the relationship between western Slavic and Celtic?



Boii.  They are the Slavs and at the same time the Celts who occupied the area.


----------



## ahvalj

thegreathoo said:


> Boii.  They are the Slavs and at the same time the Celts who occupied the area.


What's the evidence of Boii being Slavs? By the way, why do you regard _Seropaeones, Serapilli _and _Seraetes_ as Celts?


----------



## Vukabular

thegreathoo said:


> Second, the emperor clearly spells Serbs as Serbloi, and not as Servi.


*Σέρβος*  (Sérvos) - Serb, Serbian


----------



## Christo Tamarin

thegreathoo said:


> Second, the emperor clearly spells Serbs as Serbloi, and not as Servi.  No one in their right mind would claim that Serbloi means servi in Latin.


Constantine Porphyrogenetus clearly says that in Latin, Serbloi (Σέρβλοι) meant *δου̃λοι*. So, one has just to check a dictionary of Latin.



thegreathoo said:


> BEFORE a group of Serbs came to Greece to seek protection of emperor Heraclius, there was already Serbia.  It already existed.  They came from Serbia.
> AFTER they were granted that protection, they were called Servi by the Romans.
> Therefore, Serbia existed before the nickname Servi.


Please read the text of Constantine the Emperor carefully. Note_1: Τουρκία means Hungary. Note_2: Ethnonyms as all the other words could have very different meaning in the past.

As I have already written, there were three words each one capable to denote all the Slavophones, Serbs being one of them. In the first sentences, Constantine means just Slavophones.

And yes, it is true that Slavophone migrants were admitted to Romania - to the Roman Empire - to the Balkans - at the time of Heraclius the Emperor. This as at that time when Slavophonia was established on the territory of Bulgaria, for instance.


----------



## thegreathoo

ahvalj said:


> What's the evidence of Boii being Slavs? By the way, why do you regard _Seropaeones, Serapilli _and _Seraetes_ as Celts?



Seropaeones are Paeones, in the same historic area (time and geography) of ancient Paeonia, which means that Ser- is common part of compound name.  Similarly the ancient Greeks used to call nations north of them HyperBoreans, it's a common compund, for the time period and the geographic area, for the Celts.
Same goes for the others, Seraetes are Raetes, or Rettes.

Ancient times
Boii are here Pannonian Boii, they are Celts in Western Balkans.   The Seraetes, Serapilli are in the same time and place where Boii are, they are just a part, a tribe, of the greater Boii group.  In one of the ancient history books it is explained that the Greeks call Pannonians, Paeonians.  They are of the same stock.   Therefore, Seropaeones are of the same stock.

Late Roman Period
Boii call their country Boiika, Boiicus in latin spelling, refering to Boii in Roman Gaul.    It's in the medieval definitions.  In De Administrando Imperio, it is explained that the Serbs who came to seek protection of the emperor call their country Boiika as well.
Serbs are Slavs, Serbs call their country Boiika just like Boii.  Therefore Boii are Slavs.  In addition, the Czechs are Slavs and they as well call their country Boiihum.

Gothic period
Both Czechs and Serbs are part of Great Moravia, and even today there are Moravia regions in Czechia and Serbia.   In De Administrando Imperio it is explained that the area west of Belgrade (Pannonia) and south of Belgrade (where Serdica is) is Great Moravia, right there where we find Boii in the previous period going back to ancient times.

Therefore, to summarize, from ancient times, from Czech mountains over lake Balaton, over the Pannonian basin, river Sava, down the Morava river, all the way to Paeonia. Macedonia we find Celtic tribes which are Slavic.
Ser- is common compound part in tribe names of those Celts, later Slavs, in the Pannonian basin, and it is unique to them.


----------



## thegreathoo

Christo Tamarin said:


> Constantine Porphyrogenetus clearly says that in Latin, Serbloi (Σέρβλοι) meant *δου̃λοι*. So, one has just to check a dictionary of Latin.
> 
> 
> Please read the text of Constantine the Emperor carefully. Note_1: Τουρκία means Hungary. Note_2: Ethnonyms as all the other words could have very different meaning in the past.



No, he does not say that.  You read the text.  He clearly says that the Romans call the Serbs their word for duloi, and not that the word Serbs comes from that.  Furthermore, he struggles with the meaning as he explaines that some think that it comes from the greek name for some shoes.   Moreover, the word Serbia existed long before that group of Serbs sought protection of the emperor, and before Romans started calling them Servi.  That is explained as well.


----------



## ahvalj

There is also Bavaria from the same Boii. Therefore Boii are Germans or Bavarians are Slavs, you choose.


----------



## thegreathoo

ahvalj said:


> There is also Bavaria from the same Boii. Therefore Boii are Germans or Bavarians are Slavs, you choose.



Boii are Slavs.  They are Celts.  They are not Germans.


----------



## ahvalj

thegreathoo said:


> Boii are Slavs.  They are Celts.  They are not Germans.


I just followed the logic of your explanation.


----------



## Perseas

Christo Tamarin said:


> Note:  ҅Η διάλεκτος τω̃ν  ҅Ρωμαίων means Latin.


In Byzantine context " ҅Ρωμαίοι" are the Byzantine Greeks. Maybe in the context you refer it's meant Latin.

Wikipedia: _During most of the Middle Ages, the Byzantine Greeks self-identified as Rhōmaîoi (Ῥωμαῖοι, "Romans", meaning citizens of the Roman Empire), a term which in the Greek language had become synonymous with Christian Greeks._


----------



## thegreathoo

ahvalj said:


> I just followed the logic of your explanation.



It's not logic.  It's history.  It's written.  Boii are Celts, not Germans, in history, and they are associated with Czechs and Serbs, and Slovenes, today, their central location in history being the Pannonian basin.


----------



## ahvalj

thegreathoo said:


> It's not logic.  It's history.  It's written.  Boii are Celts, not Germans, in history, and they are associated with Czechs and Serbs, and Slovenes, today, their central location in history being the Pannonian basin.


Boii were assimilated to both Germans and Slavs, so Bavarians and Czechs and perhaps western South Slavs are biological descendants of Boii to some extent. But you began from linguistic matters. And there is no evidence that the initial elements _ser-_ in the tribal names you mentioned belonged to the same language or had a common meaning since we simply don't know anything about this.


----------



## Vukabular

ahvalj said:


> There is also Bavaria from the same Boii. Therefore Boii are Germans or Bavarians are Slavs, you choose.


There are two statues at the entrance to the "Providebtle Memor" Cathedral in Dresden, which represent the guards of the city of Dresden (every tourist guide will tell you this when visiting this city). However, what no one will tell you, and will not even show you, is that on the shield of one of the guards of Dresden there is a Serbian coat of arms (four letters S in Cyrillic).
The old name for Bradenburg was Branibor. Brandenburg originated in the Northern March in the 900s AD from areas conquered from the Wends. 
*Wends* (Old English: _Winedas_; Old Norse: _Vindr_; German: _Wenden, Winden_; Danish: _vendere_; Swedish: _vender_; Polish: _Wendowie_) is a historical name for Slavs living near Germanic settlement areas.


----------



## Vukabular

Frankfurt is a town in Brandenburg, Germany, located on the west side of the Oder River, on the Germany-Poland border, about 80 kilometres (50 mi) east of Berlin. Until the end of Second World War (1945), the city of Słubice, Poland, was a part of Frankfurt. The city's recorded history began in the 13th century as a Polish settlement. Throughout its history it was part of Poland .


----------



## Christo Tamarin

Perseas said:


> In Byzantine context " ҅Ρωμαίοι" are the Byzantine Greeks. Maybe in the context you refer it's meant Latin.
> 
> Wikipedia: _During most of the Middle Ages, the Byzantine Greeks self-identified as Rhōmaîoi (Ῥωμαῖοι, "Romans", meaning citizens of the Roman Empire), a term which in the Greek language had become synonymous with Christian Greeks._


In "Byzantine" context, " ҅Ρωμαίοι" are the Christian citizens of the Roman Empire. Most of them were Hellenophones, of course. In "Byzantine" context, Christians speaking Armenian or Syriac or Romance would not be excluded from " ҅Ρωμαίοι", if they were citizens of the Roman Empire.


----------



## bearded

ahvalj said:


> Boii were assimilated to both Germans and Slavs, so Bavarians and Czechs and perhaps western South Slavs are biological descendants of Boii to some extent.


Boii were also assimilated to Etruscans and Romans.  My hometown Bologna (Latin name: Bononia) received its name from Boii (ancient 'Boionia' from Boi + Latin ending -onia). Formerly, the city was Etruscan and was called Felsina, and at the time the Boii came the population was Etruscan.. So I am also ''a biological descendant of Boii to some extent'' (besides having Etruscan and Roman - and some Jewish - blood in my veins).  Boii seem to have been everywhere.


----------



## Perseas

Christo Tamarin said:


> In "Byzantine" context, " ҅Ρωμαίοι" are the Christian citizens of the Roman Empire. Most of them were Hellenophones, of course. In "Byzantine" context, Christians speaking Armenian or Syriac or Romance would not be excluded from " ҅Ρωμαίοι", if they were citizens of the Roman Empire.


Sorry I didn't make myself clear, I don't claim the opposite of your statement. I just want to say that in the East Roman Empire after the 7th century, Greek became an official language whereas Latin were loosing ground.
Moreover "Rhomaioi/Romioi (Ῥωμαῖοι/Ῥωμηοί/Ρωμιοί, "Romans")" is an ethnonym of Greeks. It is the name by which the Greeks self-identified in the Middle Ages and during Ottoman rule. Until today you may hear modern Greeks calling themselves "Romioi" (though it's a bit dated) . In many Byzantine-Greek  sources "γλώσσα των Ρωμαίων" means "Greek".


----------



## Vukabular

*White Serbia* (Serbian: Бела Србија; Sorbian: _*Biеło* Srbsko_), called also *Boiki* (Serbian: *Bojka*; Sorbian: _*Boika*_), is the name applied to the assumed homeland of the *White Serbs*, a tribal subgroup of *Wends*, who were the westernmost group of Early Slavs. They are the ancestors of the modern Serbs and Sorbs. 

*Wend* (_plural_ *Wends*) A member of a Slavic people from the borders of Germany and Poland; A term used for Slavic peoples living anywhere in the vicinity of German-speaking areas. From German _Wende_, from Old High German _Winida_, from Proto-Germanic _*winidaz_, Celtic_*windos_ (“*white*”), same source as Old English _Winedas_ (“Wends”).

Constantine VII in _De Administrando Imperio_ recounts in 32nd chapter "_It should be known that the Serbs are descended from the unbaptized Serbs, also called *‘white’*, who live beyond Turkey, in a region called by them *Boïki*"_


----------



## Vukabular

thegreathoo said:


> It's not logic.  It's history.  It's written.  Boii are Celts, not Germans, in history, and they are associated with Czechs and Serbs, and Slovenes, today, their central location in history being the Pannonian basin.


Boii /ˈboj.jiː/ 
In Serbia, the common personal names are Bojan /bǒjan/  and Bojana  and there is also the river Bojana. We also have personal names Srba, Srbislav, Srboljub as well as toponyms Srb, Srbica, Srbani and many many more.


----------

