Re: [tied] Re: Ukrainian words from Carpathians

From: george knysh
Message: 22028
Date: 2003-05-17

--- tolgs001 <gs001ns@...> wrote:
> >GK: Alex, it has been known for a very long
> time
> >that the "Jus Valachorum" ("Voloshs'ke Pravo") in
> >Galicia in the 14th and 15th century was
> overwhelmingly
> >used by local peasants, not by Romanian colonists.
> Yeah, but why on earth would those local Slavic
> peasants have adopted a way of life of another
> nation, so to speak, out of the blue?

*****GK: Because it was "free-er" than the "kholop"
way of life in the main agricultural areas. Some
peasants opted for the "Jus Valachicum" in the
mountain and near-mountain territories, and some moved
east (many more actually, esp. in the 15th and 16th
cs.) and adopted the Kozak way of life. There the main
influence was Turko-Tatar (with many Tartar words
adopted into the military vocabulary) but we well know
that the Kozaks of the Dnipro were preponderantly of
Ukrainian descent (though many also came from Moldavia

> migrations aren't after all *un*documented for
> the 14th and 15th century.

*****GK: I'm not questioning this at all. Of course
there were true Valachians in the area at the time
(after all someone had to exemplify the "Jus
Valachicum"). What I'm saying is that most of the
villages which practiced this "Jus" in Galicia were
founded by local peasants.*****

As I mentioned, many
> of those Romanians were immigrants from Hungary,
> i.e. from the provinces Banate, Transylvania and
> the MaramaroS/MaramureS (whose Norther part belongs
> now to the Ukraine and was always the western
> neighbor to Galitia). The ius valachicum and the
> vocabulary (even with Hungarian influences) are
> eloquent traces. Those Romanians were assimilated
> becoming Ukrainians, Poles, Slovaks and Czechs.

*****GK: I have no objection to this scenario. The
assimilation occurred because many "locals" imitated
this way of life, constituting a majority with which
the Valachians blended.*****

> (The latter even try to exploit their "vala$ske"
> localities and museum(s) for touristic purposes.)
> >The Romanian (actually Moldavian) influence is
> >clear, but this is a borrowed system, not
> >evidence of colonization. [GK: I should say
"massive" colonization]
> Actually an influence by Transylvanian Romanians.
> Moldavia, as a Romanian principality, was founded
> __twice__ by Transylvanian voyvodes from Maramuresh
> (some of them coming from localities North of the
> river of Tisza, i.e. which are today Ukrainian).
> The first founders acted as delegates of the
> Hungarian king, the second ones acted as rebels
> against the Hungarian king. Some members of their
> clans settled down in Poland later on and had
> lineages in the Polish Szlachta. Historically and
> linguistically, Moldavia isn't (from the Romanian
> point of view) nothing else but an extension of
> Transylvania. Even in territories which lay outside
> Moldova, in way inside of the Ukraine, there are
> Moldavians who bear family names of Hungarian
> origin or influence. ;)

******GK: That is true. Though most do bear Romanian
names. (Historical curiosity): the Register of the
Ukrainian Kozak nobility of 1649 indicates that
approximately 10% of these warriors were of Moldavian
descent. And everybody knows the tremendous
contribution to Ukrainian culture made by Metropolitan
Petro Mohyla (Moghila). One of the best contemporary
Ukrainian universities in Kyiv is named after
> George

Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.