That doesn't make them Lithuanians LoL. If they were why would they be called vlach/ Olah in the same sourceQuote:
Originally Posted by AnthrogenicaRefugee
Printable View
That doesn't make them Lithuanians LoL. If they were why would they be called vlach/ Olah in the same sourceQuote:
Originally Posted by AnthrogenicaRefugee
Did you see the source?Quote:
Originally Posted by sage
"kenezatus Lytuoy, qui Olacis dominatur”
Not qui Olac est, but qui Olacis dominatur. Also kenezatus...
Bulgars also ruled over Slavs in Bulgaria. Look which language people there are speaking now. Litvoi was most likely a Slav who ruled over Vlachs. His dynasty died and Vlachs continued the administration of the territory.
As the vlachs had itQuote:
Originally Posted by AnthrogenicaRefugee
conferimis sibi et per eum dicte domui totam terram de Zeurino cum alpibus ad ipsam pertinentibus et aliis attinentiis omnibus pariter cum kenazatibus Joannis et Farcasii usque ad fluvium Olth, except terra kenazatus Lytuoy woiauode, quam Olatis relinquimus, prout iidem hactenus tenuerunt, ita tamen, quod medietatem omnium utilitatum et reddituum ac servitiorum de tota terra Zeurini memorata et kenazatibus supranominatis provenentium nobis et successoribus nostris reservamu
Also name don't always mean ethnicity
Hey man I am going to end it here because I don't want to derail this thread any longer. Also nice work on collecting all those romianian and Moldovan dna!
Nowadays it doesn't, but then it very much did.
But it doesn't really matter, because as I said earlier, people then were very mixed. Sardinians are closest to ancient Thracians, and Central-Southern Italians to ancient Getae and Dacians. You need significant Slavic admixture to arrive at the genetic profile of even the most Southern of Romanians.
Vlachs appeared from that mixing of romanised locals and the Slavs.
I agree they are a mix and most of our popular names are Slavic which not a bad thing!Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthrogenicaRefugee
It's neither good nor bad, it's how the history unfolded.
Before mid 14th century on the territory of Moldova didn't existed any romance speaking population, Vlachs came here entirely when the Hungarians expanded their influence east of the Carpathians after the power crisis in the Golden Horde. To speak about an romance population here, on an territory heavily affected by constant migrations and outside of the former Roman territory, is just ridiculous. Oldest communities of Csangos are from the same time (mid 14th century), especially those from Bacău county.
What about the church of cumania and the papal document of 1234 which was around southern Moldova and Eastern WallachiaQuote:
Originally Posted by Aspirin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_...ese_of_Cumania
https://tiparituriromanesti.wordpres...opia-cumaniei/
This was far south on the territory of Buzău and Vrancea counties, on the Carpathian foothills. And this was before Mongolian invasion who killed everything on this side of Carpathians. Is absolutely irrelevant. The name "Cumania" shows who were the main population at that time in Moldova. Moldova was established by conquest and heavy colonisations, both from Transylvania/Maramureş and from Galicia. Vrancea is a territory incorporated into Moldavian state quite late in the second half of 15th century, as a result of Wallachian-Moldavian conflicts during the reign of Stephen the Great.Quote:
Originally Posted by sage