Romanian Military History Forum - Part of Romanian Army in the Second World War Website



Pages: (4) 1 [2] 3 4   ( Go to first unread post ) Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Sources about Vlachs, Written sources about vlachs before 10 c
Radub
Posted: April 28, 2011 07:00 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1670
Member No.: 476
Joined: January 23, 2005



QUOTE (21 inf @ April 28, 2011 06:15 pm)
I still wonder why the dog skin was so valued in the era.

Vellum is a type of paper made from animal skin. It is durable and lasts longer than paper.
Radu
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Valium
Posted: April 29, 2011 05:39 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 45
Member No.: 3047
Joined: April 13, 2011



QUOTE
There are sources before Anonymus. Constantin Porfirogenetul wrote about the teritories from north of Danube

I know, but i think is not clear if CP mentioned about vlachs, or rather daco-latin leftovers, from which vlachs nation sprung.
QUOTE
I often saw that some people said that there are no sources about wallachians in a certain period: are the wallachians the only case, especially on early Middle Ages? I believe not, but we didnt compared the number of sources for other nations from the same period. Maybe if we look to others also, we'll see they also dont have many writings to remind about them

Sure, but when is about Bizantine Empire, the poorness of sources is suspicious.
The first mention of the bizantines was Anna Comnena, and Benjamin of Tudela, with his "No man can go up and battle against them and no king can rule over them".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Wallachia
Probably in the time of Anna Comnena, they appeared in large number in Northern Greece-since then being much norther.
And after Asens revolt, probably a great split between vlachs was produced, forming the future romanians and aromanians. Neverthenless, in 12 cnt, vlachs were still in large number in Thessaly, since the army of John I Doukas, was formed mainly of vlachs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_I_Doukas
PMEmail Poster
Top
21 inf
Posted: April 29, 2011 06:32 am
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Retired
Posts: 1512
Member No.: 1232
Joined: January 05, 2007



A probabile split of vlachs from south and north of Danube, after Assan revolt, is just a hypothesis with no proof. Anyway, even if it existed, it is imposible that from that point on the formation of future romanians and aromanians started. By that time, the process of romanian formation was already started for many centuries. It is apreciated that the process of formation of what will be future romanians started sometime around VIIth ot VIIIth century, when the slav tribes arrived north of Danube. Assans are living 3 or 4 centuries after this moment. The fact that after the Assan revolt, a part of vlach population from south of Danube might migrate north of Danube or farther south of Balkans, it is posible, but almost sure cannot be linked with romanian and aromanian genesis.

Even the language of nowadays aromanians show that their language developed diferent than romanian, showing an earlier split, having archaic features that are not present in romanian language (for this, search the phenomenon of "rotacism").
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Valium
Posted: April 29, 2011 08:02 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 45
Member No.: 3047
Joined: April 13, 2011



QUOTE (21 inf @ April 29, 2011 09:32 am)
A probabile split of vlachs from south and north of Danube, after Assan revolt, is just a hypothesis with no proof. Anyway, even if it existed, it is imposible that from that point on the formation of future romanians and aromanians started. By that time, the process of romanian formation was already started for many centuries. It is apreciated that the process of formation of what will be future romanians started sometime around VIIth ot VIIIth century, when the slav tribes arrived north of Danube. Assans are living 3 or 4 centuries after this moment. The fact that after the Assan revolt, a part of vlach population from south of Danube might migrate north of Danube or farther south of Balkans, it is posible, but almost sure cannot be linked with romanian and aromanian genesis.

Even the language of nowadays aromanians show that their language developed diferent than romanian, showing an earlier split, having archaic features that are not present in romanian language (for this, search the phenomenon of "rotacism").

I didn't say they were all south Danube- in fact I believe the majority was faraway from Bizantines, that meaning north danube either. Anyway, i think they lived in highlands, from Tatra to pindus, while lowlands were populated by slavs, pechenegs, avars...The Asens revolt, and consequential split of vlachs, signified the beggining of substantial settlement of the vlachs in lowlands, mixing, relegating, asimilating slavs, cumans, pechenegs...
regarding the difference between romanian and aromanian, I'm not quite sure the differences are such big for almost a thousand years of isolation: as I know, the english from 15-16 cnt hardly could be understand by today english. On the other hand, partial groups of romanians could had different features from others: moldavians use even today "bini-ghini", "mari", "zbura=vorbi"(tendence to transform P in C, or B in G, etc)..., exactly like aromanians.

This post has been edited by Valium on April 29, 2011 08:04 am
PMEmail Poster
Top
Radub
Posted: April 29, 2011 08:43 am
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1670
Member No.: 476
Joined: January 23, 2005



QUOTE (Valium @ April 29, 2011 08:02 am)

regarding the difference between romanian and aromanian, I'm not quite sure the differences are such big for almost a thousand years of isolation: as I know, the english from 15-16 cnt hardly could be understand by today english.

Medieval Romanian is the same - in fact is extremely similar to Aromanian. Try this: http://www.scribd.com/doc/49321826/Miron-C...-Tarii-Moldovei

Modern Romanian was finally standardised when Cuza initiated his education reform.
Here is some interesting reading http://altmarius.ning.com/profiles/blog/sh...source=activity

HTH
Radu
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Valium
Posted: April 29, 2011 09:12 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 45
Member No.: 3047
Joined: April 13, 2011



I could understand Letopisetul tarii moldovei, even the phrases are archaic-is right you have to read it slowly, and carefully
PMEmail Poster
Top
Radub
Posted: April 29, 2011 09:42 am
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1670
Member No.: 476
Joined: January 23, 2005



QUOTE (Valium @ April 29, 2011 09:12 am)
I could understand Letopisetul tarii moldovei, even the phrases are archaic-is right you have to read it slowly, and carefully

:D I serioulsy doubt that you read all 2oo+ pages :lol:
Read more, go deeper. You will go across entire paragraphs where you will have no idea what is being said. Of course you can deduce the gist of it, but you have to admit that the language used is not al all like modern Romanian. You will not be able to buy a loaf of bread using that kind of language.

But even so, what you are reading there is a version of the text in Latin alphabet. Try to read the original in Cyrillic. (Google it, there are photos on the net).

Old Romanian is almost a completely different language. Try to go to Stefan cel Mare's grave and try to read what is carved into his grave stone. Go to any old church and try to read the text carved. Are you in Bucharest? Go to Biserica Stavropoleos and try to read the many inscriptions there. You will get a good glimpse of the language spoken in the heart of Bucharest in medieval times.

HTH
Radu
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Valium
Posted: April 29, 2011 10:08 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 45
Member No.: 3047
Joined: April 13, 2011



QUOTE (Radub @ April 29, 2011 12:42 pm)
QUOTE (Valium @ April 29, 2011 09:12 am)
I could understand Letopisetul tarii moldovei, even the phrases are archaic-is right you have to read it slowly, and carefully

:D I serioulsy doubt that you read all 2oo+ pages :lol:
Read more, go deeper. You will go across entire paragraphs where you will have no idea what is being said. Of course you can deduce the gist of it, but you have to admit that the language used is not al all like modern Romanian. You will not be able to buy a loaf of bread using that kind of language.

But even so, what you are reading there is a version of the text in Latin alphabet. Try to read the original in Cyrillic. (Google it, there are photos on the net).

Old Romanian is almost a completely different language. Try to go to Stefan cel Mare's grave and try to read what is carved into his grave stone. Go to any old church and try to read the text carved. Are you in Bucharest? Go to Biserica Stavropoleos and try to read the many inscriptions there. You will get a good glimpse of the language spoken in the heart of Bucharest in medieval times.

HTH
Radu

I am from Pitesti. Piece of cake:you could give me an example in kirilic, and bellow replacing kirilic with latin characters-i don't know kirilic
PMEmail Poster
Top
Radub
Posted: April 29, 2011 10:25 am
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1670
Member No.: 476
Joined: January 23, 2005



QUOTE (Valium @ April 29, 2011 10:08 am)
I am from Pitesti. Piece of cake:you could give me an example in kirilic, and bellow replacing kirilic with latin characters-i don't know kirilic

But you see... I have nothing to "prove" to you. This is not a whim (moft ;-) ) of my own. You can do your own research and find on your own old Romanian texts and try to read them for yourself. You do not need my help or guidance. You must find for yourself whether old Romanian is the same as modern Romanian. A visit to your local history museum is a good start.
Radu
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Valium
Posted: April 29, 2011 10:42 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 45
Member No.: 3047
Joined: April 13, 2011



QUOTE (Radub @ April 29, 2011 01:25 pm)
QUOTE (Valium @ April 29, 2011 10:08 am)
I am from Pitesti. Piece of cake:you could give me an example in kirilic, and bellow replacing kirilic with latin characters-i don't know kirilic

But you see... I have nothing to "prove" to you. This is not a whim (moft ;-) ) of my own. You can do your own research and find on your own old Romanian texts and try to read them for yourself. You do not need my help or guidance. You must find for yourself whether old Romanian is the same as modern Romanian. A visit to your local history museum is a good start.
Radu

In fact I red some: practically there were pure slavonic, or a mixture of romanian and slavonic, due to the fact the author didn't know well slavonic, and improvised with romanian, or he wished to "enrich", to "literilize" the romanian with slavonic words(It was been told to me, of course). So, what's your point? To make me find romanian was more slavonic that I knew? Why don't you make your point public, here, so everybody could see?

This post has been edited by Valium on April 29, 2011 10:43 am
PMEmail Poster
Top
Radub
Posted: April 29, 2011 11:08 am
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1670
Member No.: 476
Joined: January 23, 2005



QUOTE (Valium @ April 29, 2011 10:42 am)
So, what's your point? To make me find romanian was more slavonic that I knew? Why don't you make your point public, here, so everybody could see?

I made my point in public. Here it is again: "Go and try to read old Romanian texts and see for yourself whether it is the same as current Romanian".

You stated in an earlier post that a current English speaker would not be able to read middle English. You stated that the situation is completely opposite when it comes to Romanian, i.e. that any current Romanian speaker must be able to read old Romanian. So, go and find an old original Romanian text and try to read it. :roll:

Radu
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Valium
Posted: April 29, 2011 11:17 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 45
Member No.: 3047
Joined: April 13, 2011



QUOTE (Radub @ April 29, 2011 02:08 pm)
QUOTE (Valium @ April 29, 2011 10:42 am)
So, what's your point? To make me find romanian was more slavonic that I knew? Why don't you make your point public, here, so everybody could see?

I made my point in public. Here it is again: "Go and try to read old Romanian texts and see for yourself whether it is the same as current Romanian".

You stated in an earlier post that a current English speaker would not be able to read middle English. You stated that the situation is completely opposite when it comes to Romanian, i.e. that any current Romanian speaker must be able to read old Romanian. So, go and find an old original Romanian text and try to read it. :roll:

Radu

I understand this:

<i]i pa(k) dau tire do(m)netale za lukru(l) tučilo kum amĭ auzi(t) u kŭ ĩpŭratu(l) au i(t) de(n) sofę i aimi(n)trě nue i sěu du(s) ĩ su(s) pre dunŭre i pa(k) sŭ ti do(m)njata kŭ au veni(t) u(n) ω(m) de la nikopoe de me mě(u) spu(s) kŭ au vŭzu(t) ku ωki loi kŭ au treku(t) čěle korabi če ti i do(m)njata pr dunŭre ĩ su(s) i pak sŭ ti kŭ bagŭ den tote ωraele kŭte [50] de ωmi(n) sŭ ę fe ĩn auto ĩ korabi i pak sŭ ti kumu sěu prinsŭ nete me()te de(n) c[a]ri gra(d) ku(m) vorĭ trěče ačěle korabi la loku(l) čela (st)rimtu(l) če tti i do(m)njata i pa(k) spui do(m)netale de lukru(l) lu mahame(t) be(g) ku(m)u amĭ auzit de boęri če sŭntĭ medja() i de denere mu negre kumu ęu da(t) ĩpŭratu(l) sloboze lu mahame(t) beg pre iu iωi va fi voę pren cěra rumŭněskŭ jarŭ lĭ sŭ trěkŭ i pa(k) sŭ ti do(m)njata kŭ are frikŭ mare i bŭsŭrab de ače(l) lotru de mahame(t) be(g) ma(i) vŭrto(s) de do(m)nele vo(s)tre i pa(k) spui do(m)netale ka ma(i) marele mu de če amĭ ĩcele(s) eu eu spui do(m)netale jarŭ do(m)njata eti ĩceleptĭ i ačěste kuvi(n)te sŭ ci do(m)njata la tine sŭ nu te umi(n) mulci i do(m)nele vo(s)tre sŭ vŭ pŭzici ku(m) tici ma(i) bine i b[og]ĭ te ve(s)[e]li(t) am(n)ŭ[/i]

Of course, is not an easy lecture, but the oral message could be better

This post has been edited by Valium on April 29, 2011 11:21 am
PMEmail Poster
Top
Radub
Posted: April 29, 2011 11:50 am
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1670
Member No.: 476
Joined: January 23, 2005



Can you read this?

(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/Neac%C5%9Fu%27s_letter.jpg)

This is possibly one of the most important Romanian documents. According to you, a current speaker of Romanian should have no problems reading it.
Radu
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Valium
Posted: April 29, 2011 11:55 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 45
Member No.: 3047
Joined: April 13, 2011



QUOTE (Radub @ April 29, 2011 02:50 pm)
Can you read this?

(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/Neac%C5%9Fu%27s_letter.jpg)

This is possibly one of the most important Romanian documents. According to you, a current speaker of Romanian should have no problems reading it.
Radu

Thanks! It is exactly what I've asked for :blink:
PMEmail Poster
Top
Radub
Posted: April 29, 2011 03:26 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1670
Member No.: 476
Joined: January 23, 2005



And here is the explanation ;)

http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrisoarea_lui_Neac%C8%99u

Radu

This post has been edited by Radub on April 29, 2011 03:56 pm
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Pages: (4) 1 [2] 3 4  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.0418 ]   [ 14 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]