Diurpaneus
Banned
- Messages
- 249
- Reaction score
- 21
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Bărăgan
- Ethnic group
- Thraco-Roman
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- Argeș(~SER+MAC)
- mtDNA haplogroup
- Walati(Vlachs)
The Aromuns,like all Vlachs and Romanians,had lived in "Bulgaria",Aromanian has Slavo-Bulgarian loans,plus the composite word "untulemnu"(oil),Romanian "untdelemn",literally "butter-of-wood", who is just a translation of the Bulgarian "darveno maslo".
The Aromuns(or at least their "Bessi" part) surely knew of Thessaloniki,preserving it in the form of Saruna(the rhotacization of Salona),they have also exclusively kept some southern-type vocabulary,hic(latin ficus),caroari(heat;latin calorem).
After the Slavic invasion/settlement the Latin speakers had withdrawn into the highlands forming scattered groups that had kept strong ties between each other through transhumance/pastoralism.
Kekaumenos view of Vlach's ancestors corresponds with this:they were "Dacians" and "Bessi", two geographically-separated communities.
The "Bessi"'s origin was diverse:from the citymen or farmers of Roman,Thracian and Thraco-Dardano-(and Macedonian?) origin ,who lived in towns like Scupi(Skopje), Naissus(Nis) and along the Upper Vardar or the Southern Morava valleys,
to the highland herdsmen of real Bessian stock,that had been Christianized by Nicetas of Remesiana .
The (southern part) of the "Dacians" dwelled along the Danube,especially in the lands situated east of Morava river,in eastern Serbia and north-western Bulgaria.They were of legionary tradition,the genetic base would have been the Roman soldiers detached along the Danube limes and,somehow coincidentally, the autochthonous Thraco-Dacians.
"Dacian" toponyms:
Latin-derived toponymy from the above-mentioned area:Timok(Timacus),Florentin(Florentiana),Archar(Ratiaria),Motru(Amutriam,Amutria),Ogosta(Augusta),Vidin-Budin(Bonomia),Cibrica(Cebrus).
Toponymy inherited from the Roman Age:Osam(Asamus),Vit(Utus),Lom(Almus),Iantra(Iatrus),Iskar(Oescus)
In the case of Motru,Archar and Ogosta,the terms initially designated settlements,which had been later abandoned by their inhabitants,but they didn't left the areas,passing them to the nearby rivers.
"Florentin BUL (Florentiana): possible fort (B-L, 227; Iv, 481; GMs, 28a)."
There are clear phonetical discrepancies between certain Latin elements of Romanian,Aromanian and Albanian,suggesting pre-Slavic differentiation,even if the Albanians had also received Latin influence of Romanian type before the arrival of the Slavs.
However,all the Vlachs dialects plus Romanian share a considerable higher number of innovations within Latin,than,let's say the entire Italian dialects.
"(d) The kw => p change in front of all vowels except a (a phenomenon of delabialization) in Vulgar Latin is seen in inscriptions and mentioned by grammars:
conda instead of quondam; coquens non cocens, etc. In front of a this phenomenon occurred in Sardinian and in East Latin only in the following words:
This phenomenon is not found in Albanian: Latin quattuor => Alb. katre, quadragesima => kreshme."
"Latin cl corresponds to Northern Rumanian ch: Lat. clavis => N.Rum. cheie.
Istrorumanian and Arumanian have the intermediary consonant group kl:
e.g., Arumanian klem. According to Densusianu,
this seems to have been the case in Balkan Romance when it was separated from Italian.
Italian has chiave, French cle."(Eastern Romance-Orbis Latinus)
"The disappearance of the
Late Roman and Early Byzantine urban centres in Dalmatia and Illyricum
was not related only to the arrival of the Slavs, but rather it was a process
that had already been taking place for at least 50 years (approximately),
since ca. 548 when the Slavs had made their first major incursion south of
the Danube River.21 Therefore, the economic decline of the cities in
Illyricum and Dalmatia was among the main reasons why these cities were
doomed to disappear.22 The last onslaught of invaders, which took place
during the first years of Heraclius’ reign, just dealt the final, fatal blow; it
was the closing act of a long, ongoing process. However, the rural population
did not entirely disappear.
To the contrary, the Romanized population survived the arrival of the Slavs,
and in a far greater number than was previously
thought.23 It was merely a shift of political power which marked
the profound changes in the former Praefectura Illyricum – from the
Romans/Byzantines to the Slavs."
"The cities of the Praefectura Illyricum had been in the state of constant
decline since the mid-fifth century; see: P. Lemerle, Invasions et migrations
dans les Balkans depuis la fin de l’epoque romain jusqu’au VIII siècle, Revue
historique 211 (1954) 281; Zivkovic, Juzni Sloveni, 55-56. However, during
the rule of Justinian I (527 – 565), a number of fortresses and towns in what
is today modern Serbia were either rebuilt or constructed (after 540); Cf.
Procopii De aedif. IV, 4, 116.6-117.10; 122.15-129.4. "
"The population density in Dalmatia or the Praefectura Illyricum
was not equally distributed. Neither had the Roman population lived in all
of its different regions in equal numbers, nor did the Slavs settle in vast
numbers all the areas exposed to their arrival. It can be assumed that the
survival of a long-standing name of some particular Roman settlement is a
proof that Roman population did persist in the area;79 on the other hand if
the name of the settlement became Slavic, the indigenous population must
have fled from the particular area"
"It is also evident that many terms related to the Christian rites in Serbian
(as well as in Croatian) derive from Latin:
oleum – ulje, acetum – ocat, arca – raka, paganus – paganin, altare – oltar,
sanctus – sveti, vinum – vino, crux – krst, calendae – koleda, compater –
kum, panis – panja.81 This terminology is the definite proof that there was
contact between the Slavs/Serbs and the indigenous population with their
Latin Christian rites in the Early Middle Ages;
this also proves the existence
of an earlier ecclesiastical organization (which was established in the
ninth century, if not before)"
"This would mean that the Slavs settled in the
cities or fortified places along the main Roman roads, taking control of the
most fertile and arable land."
"On the linguistic side of the matter, terms related to agriculture, which
were borrowed from the Slavs, make regular appearance in Hungarian,
Romanian, Albanian, and even Greek languages, while the Slavs adopted
the terminology for animal husbandry and products related to it from the
indigenous population."
"The Slavs (Croats, Serbs, and others) settled in the areas around the
main routes and in the most fertile areas of Dalmatia and Praefectura
Illyricum, by using the network of ancient Roman communications"
"The Fortifications of the Late Antiquity and Early Byzantine Period"(Serbia)
"The social crisis that struck the Roman Empire caused striking
pauperization of the population, while the continuous flood of settlers,
various peoples and looters made the difficult situation even worse. These
groups benefited from the proximity of the frontier and the well-branched
road network to reach their loot in the flatland settlements and towns. The
Hunnic wrath caused destrucion of some important towns, such as Singidunum,
Viminatium, Margum and Naissus. It took plenty of time for these towns
to recover. The horrible times were exacerbated by the natural disasters
that befell certain parts of the Empire. The catastrophic earthquake struck
Dardania in 518,548 followed by a plague epidemic that decimated the
population and weakened the defences of the Empire.549
Insecure times called for construction of fortifications. Some of
these fortified sites were regional centres with military crews and a still
functioning ecclesiastical organization. Besides these, the imperial
authorities strived to build smaller fortifications on important strategic
points along the roads, so as to defend and oversee the communication and
supply systems. These fortified sites also served as refuge centres that
provided safe haven to the populations fleeing the endangered lowland
settlements. Parallel to the construction of these fortifications, smaller
ones were built by rural communities, to provide them with safer
positions. Although their positions changed by moving into locations on
higher altitudes, they carried on with their economic activities on earlier
agricultural fields with a shift towards pastoralism.
These measures created a new defensive system, born out of
necessity and reflecting how weak the Empire had become. The aim was
to reduce the influx of refugees that sought shelters in the south, since the
refuges were built in every part of the Empire; but also put to a heavy test
the barbarians’ ability to lay siege and to maintain their supply chain; in
addition, the barbarians were rather unaccomplished besiegers of
fortifications, which by then had no riches left to loot. In any event, the
smaller hordes roaming the roads of the Empire did not even pose a threat
to the villagers any longer, unless they carried out sudden attacks. But the
remains of fire on some fortifications, together with numismatic material
and relevant archaeological horizons of hoards confirm that settlements
were played havoc with, and speak of volatile times.550 This concept,
adapted for the precarious sixth century, reached its culmination during
the reign of Justinian, as was corroborated by the writings of Procopius,
but also by the plentiful material finds from throughout the Empire."
(from Tibor Zivkovic,"The World of the Slavs")
It is possible that Kekaumenos' sources of inspiration were the authors of confusion;these sources could've referred to
events that happened during the rule of Simeon of Bulgaria,when Serbia and some parts of Greece(where the Vlachs live today) were included in Bulgaria.
If this thing didn't happened,he could've misinterpreted them.
And,of course,there's a third option,where everybody(or more than one) is guilty,distorting things,but we can only legitimize it by referring to Simeon I.
Alternatively,Kekaumenos mentions the north-eastern end of Serbia( the parts "along the Danube and Sava"), not Zeta,he or his sources knew something about
a far-northern Vlach homeland,these were the "Dacians", harder to be localized because they lived beyond "Bessi".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Serbian_Kingdom_under_King_Constantine_Bodin-sr.svg
EDIT:
Apologies for the chaotic text,this is not intentional.
EDIT2:
clarification:"ch" corresponds to ALL the Romanian dialects
EDIT3:
Kekaumenos' text contains some errors,one of them surely big,but it's definitely not a reason to absolutize the conclusions ,
the "Bessi"'s location matches almost perfectly the archaeological reality,the fragmentation of this group("Dacians"-"Bessi")
was also recorded,the Danube remains a logical location,but it was not among Serbs.
The Aromuns(or at least their "Bessi" part) surely knew of Thessaloniki,preserving it in the form of Saruna(the rhotacization of Salona),they have also exclusively kept some southern-type vocabulary,hic(latin ficus),caroari(heat;latin calorem).
After the Slavic invasion/settlement the Latin speakers had withdrawn into the highlands forming scattered groups that had kept strong ties between each other through transhumance/pastoralism.
Kekaumenos view of Vlach's ancestors corresponds with this:they were "Dacians" and "Bessi", two geographically-separated communities.
The "Bessi"'s origin was diverse:from the citymen or farmers of Roman,Thracian and Thraco-Dardano-(and Macedonian?) origin ,who lived in towns like Scupi(Skopje), Naissus(Nis) and along the Upper Vardar or the Southern Morava valleys,
to the highland herdsmen of real Bessian stock,that had been Christianized by Nicetas of Remesiana .
The (southern part) of the "Dacians" dwelled along the Danube,especially in the lands situated east of Morava river,in eastern Serbia and north-western Bulgaria.They were of legionary tradition,the genetic base would have been the Roman soldiers detached along the Danube limes and,somehow coincidentally, the autochthonous Thraco-Dacians.
"Dacian" toponyms:
Latin-derived toponymy from the above-mentioned area:Timok(Timacus),Florentin(Florentiana),Archar(Ratiaria),Motru(Amutriam,Amutria),Ogosta(Augusta),Vidin-Budin(Bonomia),Cibrica(Cebrus).
Toponymy inherited from the Roman Age:Osam(Asamus),Vit(Utus),Lom(Almus),Iantra(Iatrus),Iskar(Oescus)
In the case of Motru,Archar and Ogosta,the terms initially designated settlements,which had been later abandoned by their inhabitants,but they didn't left the areas,passing them to the nearby rivers.
"Florentin BUL (Florentiana): possible fort (B-L, 227; Iv, 481; GMs, 28a)."
There are clear phonetical discrepancies between certain Latin elements of Romanian,Aromanian and Albanian,suggesting pre-Slavic differentiation,even if the Albanians had also received Latin influence of Romanian type before the arrival of the Slavs.
However,all the Vlachs dialects plus Romanian share a considerable higher number of innovations within Latin,than,let's say the entire Italian dialects.
"(d) The kw => p change in front of all vowels except a (a phenomenon of delabialization) in Vulgar Latin is seen in inscriptions and mentioned by grammars:
conda instead of quondam; coquens non cocens, etc. In front of a this phenomenon occurred in Sardinian and in East Latin only in the following words:
This phenomenon is not found in Albanian: Latin quattuor => Alb. katre, quadragesima => kreshme."
"Latin cl corresponds to Northern Rumanian ch: Lat. clavis => N.Rum. cheie.
Istrorumanian and Arumanian have the intermediary consonant group kl:
e.g., Arumanian klem. According to Densusianu,
this seems to have been the case in Balkan Romance when it was separated from Italian.
Italian has chiave, French cle."(Eastern Romance-Orbis Latinus)
"The disappearance of the
Late Roman and Early Byzantine urban centres in Dalmatia and Illyricum
was not related only to the arrival of the Slavs, but rather it was a process
that had already been taking place for at least 50 years (approximately),
since ca. 548 when the Slavs had made their first major incursion south of
the Danube River.21 Therefore, the economic decline of the cities in
Illyricum and Dalmatia was among the main reasons why these cities were
doomed to disappear.22 The last onslaught of invaders, which took place
during the first years of Heraclius’ reign, just dealt the final, fatal blow; it
was the closing act of a long, ongoing process. However, the rural population
did not entirely disappear.
To the contrary, the Romanized population survived the arrival of the Slavs,
and in a far greater number than was previously
thought.23 It was merely a shift of political power which marked
the profound changes in the former Praefectura Illyricum – from the
Romans/Byzantines to the Slavs."
"The cities of the Praefectura Illyricum had been in the state of constant
decline since the mid-fifth century; see: P. Lemerle, Invasions et migrations
dans les Balkans depuis la fin de l’epoque romain jusqu’au VIII siècle, Revue
historique 211 (1954) 281; Zivkovic, Juzni Sloveni, 55-56. However, during
the rule of Justinian I (527 – 565), a number of fortresses and towns in what
is today modern Serbia were either rebuilt or constructed (after 540); Cf.
Procopii De aedif. IV, 4, 116.6-117.10; 122.15-129.4. "
"The population density in Dalmatia or the Praefectura Illyricum
was not equally distributed. Neither had the Roman population lived in all
of its different regions in equal numbers, nor did the Slavs settle in vast
numbers all the areas exposed to their arrival. It can be assumed that the
survival of a long-standing name of some particular Roman settlement is a
proof that Roman population did persist in the area;79 on the other hand if
the name of the settlement became Slavic, the indigenous population must
have fled from the particular area"
"It is also evident that many terms related to the Christian rites in Serbian
(as well as in Croatian) derive from Latin:
oleum – ulje, acetum – ocat, arca – raka, paganus – paganin, altare – oltar,
sanctus – sveti, vinum – vino, crux – krst, calendae – koleda, compater –
kum, panis – panja.81 This terminology is the definite proof that there was
contact between the Slavs/Serbs and the indigenous population with their
Latin Christian rites in the Early Middle Ages;
this also proves the existence
of an earlier ecclesiastical organization (which was established in the
ninth century, if not before)"
"This would mean that the Slavs settled in the
cities or fortified places along the main Roman roads, taking control of the
most fertile and arable land."
"On the linguistic side of the matter, terms related to agriculture, which
were borrowed from the Slavs, make regular appearance in Hungarian,
Romanian, Albanian, and even Greek languages, while the Slavs adopted
the terminology for animal husbandry and products related to it from the
indigenous population."
"The Slavs (Croats, Serbs, and others) settled in the areas around the
main routes and in the most fertile areas of Dalmatia and Praefectura
Illyricum, by using the network of ancient Roman communications"
"The Fortifications of the Late Antiquity and Early Byzantine Period"(Serbia)
"The social crisis that struck the Roman Empire caused striking
pauperization of the population, while the continuous flood of settlers,
various peoples and looters made the difficult situation even worse. These
groups benefited from the proximity of the frontier and the well-branched
road network to reach their loot in the flatland settlements and towns. The
Hunnic wrath caused destrucion of some important towns, such as Singidunum,
Viminatium, Margum and Naissus. It took plenty of time for these towns
to recover. The horrible times were exacerbated by the natural disasters
that befell certain parts of the Empire. The catastrophic earthquake struck
Dardania in 518,548 followed by a plague epidemic that decimated the
population and weakened the defences of the Empire.549
Insecure times called for construction of fortifications. Some of
these fortified sites were regional centres with military crews and a still
functioning ecclesiastical organization. Besides these, the imperial
authorities strived to build smaller fortifications on important strategic
points along the roads, so as to defend and oversee the communication and
supply systems. These fortified sites also served as refuge centres that
provided safe haven to the populations fleeing the endangered lowland
settlements. Parallel to the construction of these fortifications, smaller
ones were built by rural communities, to provide them with safer
positions. Although their positions changed by moving into locations on
higher altitudes, they carried on with their economic activities on earlier
agricultural fields with a shift towards pastoralism.
These measures created a new defensive system, born out of
necessity and reflecting how weak the Empire had become. The aim was
to reduce the influx of refugees that sought shelters in the south, since the
refuges were built in every part of the Empire; but also put to a heavy test
the barbarians’ ability to lay siege and to maintain their supply chain; in
addition, the barbarians were rather unaccomplished besiegers of
fortifications, which by then had no riches left to loot. In any event, the
smaller hordes roaming the roads of the Empire did not even pose a threat
to the villagers any longer, unless they carried out sudden attacks. But the
remains of fire on some fortifications, together with numismatic material
and relevant archaeological horizons of hoards confirm that settlements
were played havoc with, and speak of volatile times.550 This concept,
adapted for the precarious sixth century, reached its culmination during
the reign of Justinian, as was corroborated by the writings of Procopius,
but also by the plentiful material finds from throughout the Empire."
(from Tibor Zivkovic,"The World of the Slavs")
It is possible that Kekaumenos' sources of inspiration were the authors of confusion;these sources could've referred to
events that happened during the rule of Simeon of Bulgaria,when Serbia and some parts of Greece(where the Vlachs live today) were included in Bulgaria.
If this thing didn't happened,he could've misinterpreted them.
And,of course,there's a third option,where everybody(or more than one) is guilty,distorting things,but we can only legitimize it by referring to Simeon I.
Alternatively,Kekaumenos mentions the north-eastern end of Serbia( the parts "along the Danube and Sava"), not Zeta,he or his sources knew something about
a far-northern Vlach homeland,these were the "Dacians", harder to be localized because they lived beyond "Bessi".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Serbian_Kingdom_under_King_Constantine_Bodin-sr.svg
EDIT:
Apologies for the chaotic text,this is not intentional.
EDIT2:
clarification:"ch" corresponds to ALL the Romanian dialects
EDIT3:
Kekaumenos' text contains some errors,one of them surely big,but it's definitely not a reason to absolutize the conclusions ,
the "Bessi"'s location matches almost perfectly the archaeological reality,the fragmentation of this group("Dacians"-"Bessi")
was also recorded,the Danube remains a logical location,but it was not among Serbs.
Last edited: