AHC: Have the Romanians and Yugoslavs switch places geographically

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
That's the challenge, have romance-speaking Aromanians/Romanians be the perpetual majority population of what was Yugoslavia in the 20th century from the dark ages onward and have the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes be the dominant inhabitants of what is today Romania, from the the dark ages onward.
 
Honestly, it would make historically more sense if that were the case. Its weird how Romanians weren't assimilated to other cultures like other Romance peoples in the former Empire. And the fact that its isolated from all the other Romance languages is strange too.
 
Last edited:
You'd have to have the Romanized and Latin speaking Dacians retreat to Illyria and Pannonia with the Roman troops when they get pulled out of Dacia and the province gets left to be overrun. Then probably avoid the Avars taking control of the area and they will be better able to resist the Slavs and absorb any that actually get into Dacian populated territories.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
What was with the high-correlation of shepherding with speaking an Aromanian language in the medieval Balkans? Sheep-raising just was not as much a thing for the native Thracians, Illyrians, and the Slavs and Turkic and Finno-Ugric nomads living around the place? Why was that? Were nomads all about horses and slavs all about pig raising?

Also, are Moldavia, Wallachia and Transylvania much more suitable sheep country rather than other forms of animal husbandry or agriculture? I mean 19th and 20th century Romania was really big on grain exports.

....and what's with this Vlachs and Judaism thing that's started to pop up in the discussion forum lately?

And finally, I've seen the linguistic boundary between classical Greek speakers and Romance -speakers drawn east-west across the Balkans, with Epirus, Macedonia and Thrace being more Greek influenced, but points north on the Balkans being more Romance-influenced. Why did Romance languages take over instead of Greek, and why did they last through the increased linguistic hellenization of the Byzantine empire?
 
....and what's with this Vlachs and Judaism thing that's started to pop up in the discussion forum lately?

Why did Romance languages take over instead of Greek, and why did they last through the increased linguistic hellenization of the Byzantine empire?

Someone made a thread about converting Romanians and Aromanians to Judaism.

And, because the Aromanian and Romanians speakers are descended from Roman veterans and other Romanized population groups: Dacians, Illyrians, Albanians, etc. that never adopted Greek after the split
 
Honestly, it would make historically more sense if that were the case. Its weird how Romanians weren't assimilated to other cultures like other Romance peoples in the former Empire. And the fact that its isolated from all the other Romance languages is strange too.

Particularly since the current Romania was part of the Roman area for a relatively short time.
 
Particularly since the current Romania was part of the Roman area for a relatively short time.

"The Roman authorities undertook a massive and organized colonization of Dacia. New mines were opened and ore extraction intensified, while agriculture, stock breeding, and commerce flourished in the province. Dacia began to supply grain not only to the military personnel stationed in the province but also to the rest of the Balkan area. It became an urban province, with about 10 cities known, 8 of which held the highest rank of colonia, though the number of cities was fewer than in the region's other provinces. All the cities developed from old military camps. Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, the seat of the imperial procurator (finance officer) for all the three subdivisions was the financial, religious, and legislative center of the province. Apulum, where the military governor of the three subdivisions had his headquarters, was not simply the greatest city within the province, but one of the biggest across the whole Danubian frontier."

From Roman Dacia article
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
And, because the Aromanian and Romanians speakers are descended from Roman veterans and other Romanized population groups: Dacians, Illyrians, Albanians, etc. that never adopted Greek after the split

Got your point - but Albanian is not a romance language at all, is it?
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
I wonder if in the age of nationalism the Aromanians of the Adriatic, Save, Morava and Vardar valleys in the ATL, will form one nationality or several, of if they would become subsumed under Italian identity.
 

Abhakhazia

Banned
That's the challenge, have romance-speaking Aromanians/Romanians be the perpetual majority population of what was Yugoslavia in the 20th century from the dark ages onward and have the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes be the dominant inhabitants of what is today Romania, from the the dark ages onward.

Something like Old Ragusan or Dalmatian rather than Romanian proper is your best chance for this.
 
Top