Vlach haplogroups & deep ancestry?

The red dots represent exclusive Vlach settlements. They are predominantly located in the mountanous regions of Albania.

In contrast to the exclusive Vlach settlements located in the highlands, Vlach communities that are further away from their traditional location at elevation are more diverse and have developed in recent years.
5da900a57195e08adf4f1ab5982bdad6.jpg


Sent from my BND-L21 using Tapatalk

First of all i must tell you that i personally do not have a very good report with this myriad of mape circulating on the internet. For example, here you show us a map that can not truly be considered a map. Not a link, not a legend that explains this map, for example, what are these yellow dots?
Secondly, i do not understand what you are trying to explain with this map. This map does not prove that:
in Albania they are viewed as Albanian highlanders
Let me repeat, we don`t see them as Albanian higlanders.
And third, i do not want to offend you, but on Vlachs, at least those who live in Albania, you know nothing, but nothing at all.
 
LABERIA,

I explained what the red dots depict.

Red = Aromanians are the exclusive population in the settlement.

Yellow = Aromanians form a substantial minority in the settlement.

Source:

Data gathered from The Albanian Aromanians´ Awakening: Identity Politics and Conflicts in Post-Communist Albania by Thede Kahl 1999.



Sent from my BND-L21 using Tapatalk
 
LABERIA,

I explained what the red dots depict.

Red = Aromanians are the exclusive population in the settlement.

Yellow = Aromanians form a substantial minority in the settlement.

Source:

Data gathered from The Albanian Aromanians´ Awakening: Identity Politics and Conflicts in Post-Communist Albania by Thede Kahl 1999.



Sent from my BND-L21 using Tapatalk
The only book that i could find with the tittle cited by you was was this:
[h=2]#03: The Albanian Aromanians' Awakening: Identity Politics and Conflicts in Post-Communist Albania.[/h]
03-the-albanian-aromanians-awakening-identity-politics-and-conflicts-in-post-communist-albania-192
Author
Schwandner-Sievers, Stephanie
Pages19
Release Date01-03-1999

https://www.ecmi.de/publications/de...-and-conflicts-in-post-communist-albania-192/
But the author is not Thede Kahl but Schwandner-Sievers, Stephanie. I will not suggest to read this book. Just look what i found in the references:
SEVASTIANOS, Metropolitan of Dryinoupolis, Pogoniani and Konitsa (1986):
Northern Epirus Crucified. Athens: Kaphouros.
SEBASTIANOS,
Mitropoliti i Dropullit (1992): Vorio Epiri i Greqise. Athens: Lidhje Panhelenike.
And i don`t see the map that you have posted.
 
The article was authored by Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers (1999).

REFERENCES
The map „Most important settlements of the Aromanians in Albania“ has been graciously provided by
Mr. Thede Kahl (Institut für Geographie, Universität Münster) and is based on the author’s original
fieldwork in Albania in 1995-6 and the following sources:

BURILEANU, Constantin N. (1906): De la Românii din Albania (About the Romanians of Albania;
Romanian). Bucharest.

CAPIDAN, Theodor (1928): Românii din Albania (The Romanians of Albania; Romanian). In: Graiul
Românesc 2, Nr. 11, Bucharest, pp. 195-209.

CAPIDAN, Theodor (1930): Farserotii (The Farsherotes; Romanian). in: Dacoromania 6, Cluj,
Bucharest, pp. 1-210.
MAIER, Radu O. (1964): Asezarile de calive la Aromînii din Albania (Hut settlements of the
Aromanians
in Albania; Romanian). in: Revista de Etnografie si Folclor 9, Nr. 2, Bucharest, pp. 183-189.

NEIESCU, Petru (1997): Mic atlas al dialectului aromân din Albania si din Fosta Republica Iugoslava
Macedonia (Small Atlas of the Aromanian Dialect of Albania and the Former Yugoslav
Republic
of Macedonia; Romanian). Bucharest.

PAPAHAGI, Tache (1920): La Românii din Albania (The Romanians of Albania; Romanian).
Bucharest.

SCHWANDNER-SIEVERS, Stephanie (1998/99): References.

URBAN, Martin (1938): Die Siedlungen Südalbaniens (The settlements of South Albania; German).
Tübinger geographische und geologische Abhandlungen, Reihe II, Bd. 4, Öhringen.

VEREMIS, Thános, Theódoros Kulumpís and Ilías Nikolakópulos (The Greeks of
Albania; Greek). Athens.

WEIGAND, Gustav: Die Walachen in Musakié (The Vlachs of Musakié; German). In: Romänische
Revue 8, Nr. 1 und 2/3, Viena, Budapest 1892, pp. 19-22 (in 1), pp. 109-112 (in 2/3).

WEIGAND, Gustav (1892): Von Berat über Muskopolje nach Gjordscha (From Berat via Muskopolje to
Gjorscha; German). In: Globus 61, Nr. 24, Braunschweig, pp. 369-376.

WINNIFRITH, Tom (1995): Shattered Eagles. Balkan Fragments. London: Duckworth.

This article was published by:

EUROPEAN CENTRE FOR MINORITY ISSUES (ECMI) Schiffbruecke 12 (Kompagnietor Building) D-24939 Flensburg . Germany
+49-(0)461-14 14 9-0 fax +49-(0)461-14 14 9-19 e-mail: [email protected] internet: http://www.ecmi.de

Sent from my BND-L21 using Tapatalk
 
The article concludes with the following remarks:

The evidence strongly suggests that Albanian Aromanians’ globalising
identity confers an advantage to them over non-Aromanian Albanians. By renouncing a
local identification in favour of one associated with more powerful States (Romania and
Greece), that is, associated with ideas distant in space and time and therefore mystical
and unchallengeable, they create access to scarce social, economic, political and cultural
resources while profiting from new opportunities in the Albanian transition process.
Besides creating a sense of exclusivity, they are able to shift identities: they can choose
between different modes of identification, or they can attribute distinct significance to
different identities in various situations, referring to their pre-communist situation if
opportune. This flexibility is an efficient and profitable strategy of adjustment to
different circumstances. It is undoubtedly not unique to the Albanian case. In contrast
to essentialist assumptions, I want to stress that it is the flexibility of identities that makes
people strong everywhere.

Sent from my BND-L21 using Tapatalk
 
Vlachs should be related to Wallons from Belgium and to Welsh people from Wales, becos names are resembling :) .
Or actually this is how the Germanic speakers are calling Celto-Italic speakers. (Keltoi word from Greek gave the name to this group of ethnicities, Celts.
From Latin it comes Gauls. A group of IE people, more ethnicities. The larger ethnicity, is Italo-Celtic people to which Thracians seems to have been part of it.)
I have a good mate which is half Aromanian.
He never calls himself Vlach.
Aroman.
Or Machedon. :)
You can use Google Translate to verify the veracity of what I have written above:
https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromâni
(veracity is a more rare word in English, which comes from Latin and means truthfulness:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/veracity)
 
I agree. The most of the admixture must have happened during the early middle ages, probably during the Second Bulgarian Empire.
Yes, we are a mix of Slavs with Dacians, this is why most Romanians do not want to practice agriculture and calling someone a "peasant" ( băi țărane) was and is a great insult in Romania.
:)
Also calling someone a porcar (person which raises pigs) is not something nice in Romania. Goths and Slavs should have brought the raising of pigs in Romania which became very popular. We also have a word, which is used to say about something that greatly sucks , porcărie - something related to a pig , which is porc in Romania.

No, we are not a mix of Slavs with Dacians, we are a mix of Dacian tribes, mostly and we also have some Celtic blood (more than Gothic, it seems) and most Romanians should also have some Goths blood. Some Romanians are also having strong ancestry from Slavs, but most of their ancestry comes from Dacians, also.
Stephan the Great brought like 100.000 peasants of Ukraine with their families and settled them in Moldavia plains, giving them land and also, money so they could build houses.
They were taken as free peasants not as Serfs. That was around 1450 AD and in those times, 100.000 people were a lot of people.
I am supposing that some Goths and Slavs also settled in Romania plains and started to practice agriculture during the Gothic migrations and during the Slavic migrations.
 
Yes, we are a mix of Slavs with Dacians, this is why most Romanians do not want to practice agriculture and calling someone a "peasant" ( băi țărane) was and is a great insult in Romania.
:)
Also calling someone a porcar (person which raises pigs) is not something nice in Romania. Goths and Slavs should have brought the raising of pigs in Romania which became very popular. We also have a word, which is used to say about something that greatly sucks , porcărie - something related to a pig , which is porc in Romania.

(You just reminded me to a nice Romanian film I watched. It was about living under communistic regime. People were hungry most of time. A family of a city policeman got a bribe from a village man in a form of a living pig. They had to kill the pig somehow in their flat, in secrecy. So they got an idea to kill the animal with gas. They sucessfully did it in their kitchen. But when a man started to burn the skin, the pig exploded… I like Romanian films.)

No, we are not a mix of Slavs with Dacians, we are a mix of Dacian tribes, mostly and we also have some Celtic blood (more than Gothic, it seems) and most Romanians should also have some Goths blood. Some Romanians are also having strong ancestry from Slavs, but most of their ancestry comes from Dacians, also.

Let’s take look into some data:

https://www.frontiersin.org/files/A...09-00551-HTML/image_m/fgene-09-00551-g003.jpg

Obviously, a dark green component has something to do with the Roman times in south eastern Europe. It gets its maximum is in Greeks and Sicilians (probably in Albanians too). Italians also have a lot of it. It is not a surprise that a Romanian sample (ROM) has a lot of dark green component. Other nations have only a small proportion of it.

Second significant color in Romanians is dark blue. It is related to peoples who eventually came from the north-east, and historical records mention only Slavs.

A light blue component can be roughly associated with Celto-Germanic folks. It is indicating that Romanians do not have more of it then e. g. Belarus, but less then South Slavs do.

It is impossible to identify Dacians as we don’t have any reference point like an ancient autosomal Dacian sample, nor a single haplogroup. Therefore we can’t state that Romanians are “mostly Dacians”. We simply don’t know.

IMO, the spread of Romanian language north of the former Roman borders can mean only one thing, and that is – a migration from the south. As we have seen, the autosomal data (dark green component) strongly supports that scenario.
 
Let’s take look into some data:

https://www.frontiersin.org/files/A...09-00551-HTML/image_m/fgene-09-00551-g003.jpg

Obviously, a dark green component has something to do with the Roman times in south eastern Europe. It gets its maximum is in Greeks and Sicilians (probably in Albanians too). Italians also have a lot of it. It is not a surprise that a Romanian sample (ROM) has a lot of dark green component. Other nations have only a small proportion of it.

Second significant color in Romanians is dark blue. It is related to peoples who eventually came from the north-east, and historical records mention only Slavs.

A light blue component can be roughly associated with Celto-Germanic folks. It is indicating that Romanians do not have more of it then e. g. Belarus, but less then South Slavs do.

It is impossible to identify Dacians as we don’t have any reference point like an ancient autosomal Dacian sample, nor a single haplogroup. Therefore we can’t state that Romanians are “mostly Dacians”. We simply don’t know.

IMO, the spread of Romanian language north of the former Roman borders can mean only one thing, and that is – a migration from the south. As we have seen, the autosomal data (dark green component) strongly supports that scenario.

I think is quite clear that the dark green component which is also very present at Greeks and at Italians is actually from Thracians (and is lots of it at Albanians,also).
If the dark blue is Slavs only, how come that Orcadians got it also?
Slavs mixed to early Vikings?
That dark blue component is also present at French people. French people are not mentioned to have mixed to Slavs or Vikings.
So, the dark blue component which is very clearly related to Slavs and BaltoSlavs, also, could also be related to the Goths/East Germanic tribes.
Regarding the Goths and other East Germanic tribes,are mentioned in the written history from Greeks and Roman historians any conflicts between Slavs and East Germanics?
I do not think so. Even more, in some writings Slavs that migrated to ex-Yugo are called also "Goths".
Also, it was said in the history that East Germanics came with Sarmatians and that Sarmatians were allies to East Germanics.
There is a tradition at Poles that their nobility is of Sarmatians origins.
So it seems it was quite an overlapping between early Slavs and East Germanic speakers and it seems even more, that these people were living together.
Goths brought in Spain R1A paternal lines :) .
Now related the light blue component and the Celts/Gauls - Basque people do not have such a component.
So I would be really curious to see some Irish people autosomal DNA tests, with these components and also some Scottish highlanders autosomal DNA testing, with this components.
What I think is that the light green component it seems to have been related to Gauls/Keltoi.
Sure the light blue component should also be related to Keltoi/Gauls but light blue is clearly related to Norwegians which should be mostly North Germanic not Celtic.
Some autosomal DNA from Finland, Sweden, Iceland, Republic of Ireland , Scottish Highlands, Welsh, French highlanders, Swiss highlanders will greatly help.
 
I think is quite clear that the dark green component which is also very present at Greeks and at Italians is actually from Thracians (and is lots of it at Albanians,also).

Yes, it is likely that ancient Thracians (or proto Thracians) made up a significant part of the dark green component.

If the dark blue is Slavs only, how come that Orcadians got it also?

The same question goes for “Sardinians”. It is perhaps something very ancient, or it came with Norvegians, a result of a slave trade, or just a statistical error. Anyway, nobody expects that the dark blue component came to Romania from Orcadia rather then from e. g. Belarus so we should just ignore it.

Slavs mixed to early Vikings?

Rather to East Germans like Goths. Chernyakov zone would be a good candidate as a place where that admixture could have occurred. It could be also a trace of the Central Europe substrate.

That dark blue component is also present at French people. French people are not mentioned to have mixed to Slavs or Vikings

A significant number of Poles settled to France in the past, but the dark blue component could have come with East Germanic peoples. We see the traces in Spain too (Goths and Vandals?).

So, the dark blue component which is very clearly related to Slavs and BaltoSlavs, also, could also be related to the Goths/East Germanic tribes.

It is possible that some of the Germanic genes ended up in the dark blue component and some Slavic genes in the light blue. No method is perfect. However, it is clear that the dark blue dominates in Balto-Slavs and is not significant in Germanic nations.

Regarding the Goths and other East Germanic tribes,are mentioned in the written history from Greeks and Roman historians any conflict between Slavs and East Germanics?
I do not think so. Even more, in some writings Slavs that migrated to ex-Yugo are called also "Goths".
Also, it was said in the history that East Germanics came with Sarmatians and that Sarmatians were allies to East Germanics.

Exactly, especially Croats were called Goths in ancient texts. There are different explanations for that. Culturally they were Slavs, no doubt.

There is a tradition at Poles that their nobility is of Sarmatians origins.

Probably not founded in reality...
 
The word Romanian doesn't come along,even if associated with the shepherdry,domn is the ruler present also south of the Danube,while S,erb(Sherb) is serf,betacism from the Latin servus,with the Megleno-Romanian sirbiri,to serf,there are clear social structures.


https://ro.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limba_meglenoromână


Serb,Serban(Sherban) is a ruler's name,it means (Lord's,God's) Servant,attested extremely early in the Wallachian state core(Carpatii Meridionalii,Southern Carpathians).


John Hunyadi's grandfather was named S,erb,he and his son Mattias Corvinus had Wallachian ancestry.
 
Last edited:
Romanian genetics, if it is taken fine grained is East Balkanic, which is different from both Greek genetics and Italian genetics, on that graph that Wonomyro uploaded.
One of the differences between Dacians and Roman Empire was that Dacians did not kept people as slaves.
 
I agree. The most of the admixture must have happened during the early middle ages, probably during the Second Bulgarian Empire.


The Romanians-Vlachs have gained a lot of power after the disintegration of Samuil's state,the so-called Western Bulgarian Empire,it was the Byzantines decision for protecting strategic places like mountain passes and so on,with many sources, such as the Crusaders, who speak about the Terra Blacti(Vlach Land) ,located in dessertum Bulgariae,while the Asens had a castle and estate in the higher places,Nichetas says.



These descriptions are very clear,entire regions were granted to the Romanians and they were "empty" ,because there was nobody else there;since the Romanians practiced transhumance these lands must've been large,but the shepherds were not seen often, because they were with the sheeps or defending the post,fort,they took the women and children with them.



Kekaumenos speaks about two groups of Vlachs, Dacians and Bessi,who defended the area along the Danube and Sava(the Hungarian frontier),for the Byzantines,where now the Serbs are posted.These Vlachs were brought from Romania("their king,Decebal"),it means that the frontier was even more northwards,north of the Danube,and,as expected, the Greeks took all of the land from the Bulgarians.



https://books.google.ro/books?id=S9...QAQ#v=onepage&q=terra blacti desertum&f=false



https://books.google.ro/books?id=YI...age&q=kekaumenos vlachs dacians bessi&f=false
 
Last edited:
Kekaumenos also refers to Romanians'isolation, they lived in "inaccessible and inhospitable places",and the two clusters,the Aromanians and Daco-Romanians have a thing in common, the following semantic shift Latin civitatem(city)--->Daco-Romanian cetate,Aromanian tsitati,both used only for fortress;but the Istro-Romanian,Albanian or Dalmatian have preserved the Latin sense.


It means that,Kekaumenos, who was a general ,speaks about the Romanians only from a military perspective-if they are/were not in the Byzantine service,they don't exist.



https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/civitas#Latin
 
He called the Vlachs "depraved", only because they practiced transhumance,the same meaning for the Crusaders," semi-barbarous Vlachs",who used this expression when they described the people, encountered in the Balkans, both very clear terms that demonstrate differentiation.


And ,for the "mixing in the Second Bulgarian Empire", the Romanians from Serbia are recorded by the Crusaders fighting en-masse for the Byzantines,in the period of the Asens' revolt.


Even the Vlachs from Bulgaria didn't have only one ruling group,see the confrontation between the Asens and Ivanko.

In reality, the Romanians have entered the Slavic or Byzantine bigger structures based on their own interests, the best proof is Dobromir Chrysos who alternatively sided with both the Greeks and Bulgarians.


An interesting character, beside the warrior stance,he must have had a lot of charisma*,because somehow escaped from the wrath of the Byzantine Emperor ,three times,after his constant betrayals,in one situation,he managed to convince him to be released from prison.

*man's charisma



https://books.google.ro/books?id=S9...QAQ#v=onepage&q=semi barbarous vlachs&f=false
 
Sorry! I admit I missed from the history classes or ... I had totally forgotten.
The Byzantine Empire was known to its inhabitants as the "Roman Empire", the "Empire of the Romans" (Latin: Imperium Romanum, Imperium Romanorum; Greek: Βασιλεία τῶν Ῥωμαίων Basileia tōn Rhōmaiōn, Ἀρχὴ τῶν Ῥωμαίων Archē tōn Rhōmaiōn), "Romania" (Latin: Romania; Greek: Ῥωμανία Rhōmania)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire
It seems that we all knew we were living in Romania here in Balkans and we were Romans (Romani-Rumâni-romaioi...), for almost a thousand years...:grin: That was until about 550 years ago? But some of them still remember until today.
 
The Albanians had the same problem, firstly recorded even a bit later,apart from the Byzantine-Greek ignorance, the real reason was that the Bulgarians had a strong state and they definitely weren't willing to share their power.


The contacts between the Albanians and Romanians with the Bulgarians-Slavs must've been really tough,but on equal positions, the common elements that these groups were willing to share(on their meetings) were status and fashion,both the Slavs and the Romans,Paleo-Balkanics appreciated these things for hundreds or even thousands of years.


The prof of this,is that the Albanians and Romanians have developed the same words,with the same meanings,for the contacts
with the Slavs.


These senses are highly ceremonial,such as
R. gata(ready)
R gati(to cook a speciality for a celebration, to dress nice,to prepare oneself)
R pregati(to prepare,a special food,or,for people,for a special event)


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ct4C_cXmu90


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KR7DXirrVP8


https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/gata
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 482152 times.

Back
Top