Population of Macedonia and Adjacent Areas

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Vangelovski

This sounds like a load of crap to me.

I disagree with that suggestion also.

What peoples do you claim were settled in the Balkans after the 11th century, seeing as you claim the "genetic pool" off the existing populations are post 1000's?

Good question. The most obvious peoples that spring to mind who had a serious impact on the East Roman Empire from that point onwards (aside from the Western Christians, Crusaders, etc) were the Turkic tribes from Asia. Is that where you were going with your suggestion, Onur?

[Carlin]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

That is such a simplistic take on things that it doesn't even begin to address a range of other factors. What evidence is there to support what you've written above, about the Balkan peoples retreating to mountains?

There is plenty of evidence from historical sources, although things are never black and white. What other factors did you have in mind?

Don't forget that Vlach-speakers also lived in the mountainous areas/inaccessible valleys, etc. of Bosnia, Montenegro, and Serbia - not just Albania, Macedonia, Greece.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Carlin

There is plenty of evidence from historical sources........

Name some that refer to Balkan peoples retreating to the mountains. And while you're at it, name some that speak of their 'return' from the mountains centuries later.

[Carlin]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

Name some that refer to Balkan peoples retreating to the mountains. And while you're at it, name some that speak of their 'return' from the mountains centuries later.

Based on what credible sources do you deny this hypothesis?

What I stated is not my opinion but an accepted framework given by most scholars based on an analysis of medieval documents and texts.

[Vangelovski]

Originally Posted by Carlin

Based on what credible sources do you deny this hypothesis?

What I stated is not my opinion but an accepted framework given by most scholars based on an analysis of medieval documents and texts.

If what you stated is the 'accepted framework' for most scholars, then you should be able to easily provide some sources, along with references to the medieval documents and texts.

Seeing as you are making the claim, the onus is on you to provide the evidence. The opposite is a perversion of the scholarly system of investigation and debate which you claim to be relying on.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Vangelovski

If what you stated is the 'accepted framework' for most scholars, then you should be able to easily provide some sources, along with references to the medieval documents and texts.

Seeing as you are making the claim, the onus is on you to provide the evidence. The opposite is a perversion of the scholarly system of investigation and debate which you claim to be relying on.

Exactly. I know where he is heading with this anyway, it's the same story one hears of "Illyrians" disappearing into the mountains for half a millenia and then returning as 'Albanians'. Fanciful stuff. I know some western scholars even support such a thesis, but I don't recall seeing a contemporary source ever mentioning such a phenomena, not when they left, nor when they returned.

[Carlin]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

Exactly. I know where he is heading with this anyway, it's the same story one hears of "Illyrians" disappearing into the mountains for half a millenia and then returning as 'Albanians'. Fanciful stuff. I know some western scholars even support such a thesis, but I don't recall seeing a contemporary source ever mentioning such a phenomena, not when they left, nor when they returned.

The 'story' with the Illyrians doesn't rest on firm ground. The 'story' with the Vlachs is different as these Latin-speakers do have a clear connection with the pre-6th/7th c. Roman civilization and culture.

Most retreated to the mountains, but some stayed back (mostly in walled towns, protected by the Roman army), others were carried away as captives by the Slavs or Avars, others fled to the islands, etc. As I said, it's not a black and white issue where other scenarios didn't occur - but the main point is the majority of those who survived fled to higher ground and they emerge from these regions as Vlach/Latin-speakers a few centuries later.

The process of migration/returning was not a one time event, but occurred over a period of many decades, if not a couple of centuries. Modern historians find it difficult to explain relatively recent migrations, much less fix a specific time and date for something that happened almost 1500 years ago.

The best proof is Byzantine writers which make mention of various 'Wallachias' starting in the 11th century (i.e. Anna Komnene, first mention of Vlachs in Thessaly; Frantzis: Little Wallachia in Aetolia, Acarnania, Upper Wallachia in Epirus; Benjamin of Tudela: Great Wallachia/Wallachian Thessaly). By this time there were actually Slavs living in the plains of these regions (Epirus, Thessaly and further south; Macedonia was mostly 'Slavic'-speaking already), so Slavs and Vlachs likely intermingled eventually. The first mention of Vlachs is in roughly 976, when Kedrenos writes about the murder of Samuel’s brother by certain Vlach wayfarers (but that's about it..).

In 1221 AD the bishop of Nafpaktos John Apokafk notes the existence in Acarnania a rather significant number of "Roman colonists", now called Vlachs. This is a 'quote' (actually one of many) which the proponents of the Illyrian-Albanian hypothesis do not have at all.

Anyway, do you think terms such as 'Stari Vlah' in southwestern Serbia are a coincidence?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stari_Vlah

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Carlin

The 'story' with the Vlachs is different as these Latin-speakers do have a clear connection with the pre-6th/7th c. Roman civilization and culture.

I don't doubt that, but their language is closely related to Romanian, and eastern Romance only became distinct from Vulgar Latin some time after the 6th century, and probably even as late as the 9th century. It seems unlikely that the Latin spoken near the Carpathians underwent practically the same sound changes as the Latin supposedly spoken in distant lands like Macedonia, Greece and Albania (the last of which fell within the sphere of western Romance, like Dalmatian) during the same period. It is more likely that Vlachs moved south of the Danube from what became Romania after eastern Romance came to be distinct from Vulgar Latin. That is not to say that Latin-speaking peoples weren't in other Balkan regions also, but the language of the Vlachs is too similar to Romanian to be coincidental.

........main point is the majority of those who survived fled to higher ground and they emerge from these regions as Vlach/Latin-speakers a few centuries later.

Carlin, you can keep repeating it all you want. Until you show us a contemporary source of this happening, it is little more than your own fantasy.

The best proof is Byzantine writers which make mention of various 'Wallachias' starting in the 11th century (i.e. Anna Komnene, first mention of Vlachs in Thessaly; Frantzis: Little Wallachia in Aetolia, Acarnania, Upper Wallachia in Epirus; Benjamin of Tudela: Great Wallachia/Wallachian Thessaly). By this time there were actually Slavs living in the plains of these regions (Epirus, Thessaly and further south; Macedonia was mostly 'Slavic'-speaking already), so Slavs and Vlachs likely intermingled eventually. The first mention of Vlachs is in roughly 976, when Kedrenos writes about the murder of Samuel’s brother by certain Vlach wayfarers (but that's about it..).

None of which speak about disappearing into mountains and returning centuries later.

In 1221 AD the bishop of Nafpaktos John Apokafk notes the existence in Acarnania a rather significant number of "Roman colonists", now called Vlachs.

Please provide the full quote and a link if possible.

Anyway, do you think terms such as 'Stari Vlah' in southwestern Serbia are a coincidence?

That doesn't prove anything. There are many placenames in the Balkans that start with the word 'stari'.

[Carlin]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

I don't doubt that, but their language is closely related to Romanian, and eastern Romance only became distinct from Vulgar Latin some time after the 6th century, and probably even as late as the 9th century. It seems unlikely that the Latin spoken near the Carpathians underwent practically the same sound changes as the Latin supposedly spoken in distant lands like Macedonia, Greece and Albania (the last of which fell within the sphere of western Romance, like Dalmatian) during the same period. It is more likely that Vlachs moved south of the Danube from what became Romania after eastern Romance came to be distinct from Vulgar Latin. That is not to say that Latin-speaking peoples weren't in other Balkan regions also, but the language of the Vlachs is too similar to Romanian to be coincidental.

Carlin, you can keep repeating it all you want. Until you show us a contemporary source of this happening, it is little more than your own fantasy.

None of which speak about disappearing into mountains and returning centuries later.

Please provide the full quote and a link if possible.

That doesn't prove anything. There are many placenames in the Balkans that start with the word 'stari'.

Chronicle of Monemvasia.

If this manuscript is somehow proven to be a forgery, it stands as valid evidence.

According to the manuscript, the Avars and Slavs conquered Thessaly, Epirus, Attica. Many natives retreated to other areas: the nearby islands or elsewhere. The city of Monemvasia, specifically, was built at the time on the coast in an inaccessible region of the Peloponnese by groups that would later be known collectively as Tzakones. As I have already stated, Tzakones were later on identified as Vlachs.

The following video specifically mentions that both Tzakones and Maniotes were Vlachs (it's in Greek though).
http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...ead.php?t=6633

[Voltron]

Carlin, what exactly is a real Hellene ? Greeks in antiquity were not immune to intermarriage (Carians for example). Civilised nations usually have contact with other peoples and their contact sometimes can result in a marriage and offspring. This notion of purity is practically nonexistant. Except maybe the eskimos or other isolated amazonian tribes.

According to the manuscript it was only for 200 odd years. Not to mention it was not an extermination spree like the ovens in Auschwitz, but more of an apartheid type of dominance. There is no archeological evidence of destruction during those years either, something Fallemeyer had a hard time explaining. I also disagree with the impact of Vlachs in Tsakonia, that also doesnt make a lot of sense.

Originally Posted by Onur

Genetics wise, most of the ancient Balkan population (Thracians, Illyrians, Macedonians, Greeks etc.) has been disappeared between 5-11th century AD because of the dark plague, famine, wars, eastern Roman settlement policies against invading tribes/groups and other causes. So, today`s genetic pool of the Balkans is largely the heritage of post 11th century. Ofc the ancient people surely left their genes too but it`s faint.

Genetics wise the foreign invaders were absorbed by the locals. A genetic impact did happen but not to the point to erase their anthropoligical characteristics or origins.