Talk:Morlachs

message: Where exactly is this Stara Vlaška region of Croatia? The only Stara Vlaška I know is a street in Zagreb :)
: Well, this region was really, really small: it was kept in a box in a shop of that Zagreb street. :) 
My googling shows that it would be either be in Macedonia and Thessaly, or in the interior of "old Servia", or in Bosnia, which are all similarly ambiguous. The EB1911 goes into a bit more detail saying how Morlacchia came to be applied to pretty much all of modern Dalmatia, Bosnia and Slavonia, but that doesn't help the confusion... --Joy [shallot] 20:49, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears that it was indeed in Bosnia, not Croatia. BTW, searching for this I also found some interesting stuff on the Timok Vlachs of Serbia.   Bogdan | Talk 21:20, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Stara Vlaška

message: what's wrong with this inforbox? Can anyone tell me why is reverted? --Preacher, or Princelet 13:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Erm, what's the source for the population figure? I'd say that Morlachs are practically extinct, i.e. assimilated into Slavic peoples around. For God's sake, only 22 people in Croatia assert the Morlach ethnicity, and I doubt anyone speaks the language anymore. Duja 07:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're talking to Bonaparte, Duja. ;-) —Khoikhoi 03:18, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

text: 250,000 estimated Morlachs? LOL. Only a fraction of one percent (about 20) are Morlachs, unless someone is fooling around in wikipedia by posting fake demographic information. I can only guess a quarter of a million Croatians may have Morlachian ancestry, genetics or even live in the former province. But they are not Morlachians, don't speak any Morlach and only self-identify as Croatians or other South Slavic ethnicity. Good thing the estimation entry was long removed, doesn't contribute a cent's worth in the article. + 71.102.2.206 (talk) 03:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: infobox

message: From the article:
The first phase of that proactive assimilation of Morlachs took place in Herzegovina and Montenegro where they not only were accepting the language of the local Slavs (now identified Serbs), but also turning it into a new Slavic language "novoshtokavian" which would later serve as the base for Serbo-Croatian. But the fact that the Morlachs in the Western Balkan never reached the level of a nation, and had not given it their proper name resulted in recent disintegration of the Serbo-Croatian into Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian language.
Are you saying that Morlachs were responsible for generation of neo-shtokavian??? OMG! Morlachs are also responsible for disintegration of Serbo-Croatian??? That should better be backed up with some reliable sources. Otherwise, it doesn't belong to the article. Duja 10:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He/she hasn't provided any sources, that is original research and the information can't be accepted in the article. Now if the anonymous IP is right in some way, the article must be rewritten on the "extinct" Morlachs are "revived" in the early 2000's. To be truthful, Novo-Shtokavian is a Croatian dialect, not a separate Romance language and doesn't count as a by-product of Morlachian. + 71.102.2.206 (talk) 03:32, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious assertion 

message: hr:Morlaci
--kliker 02:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added link to Croatian Wikipedia 

message: Part of the article says that "eventually most Morlachs linguistically assimilated the local Slavs." This statement is unclear, does it mean that the Slavs were assimilated into the Morlach population, or the Morlachs were assimilated into the Slav population? Later in the article it says the latter, but that happened much later. This should probably be cleared up.Rcduggan (talk) 13:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Morlachs were assimilated into the Slav population. Zenanarh (talk) 06:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assimilation 

message: I copy-pasted this from the article:
:"Furthermore the Vlach or Vlasi are descendents of the Italic peoples of Latio, who were Romanized; but they were related to the Slavs in the first place or more correctly to the Proto-Slavs who lived on the Italic and Balkan peninsulas much before the sixth century AD, as it has been assumed wrongly since the middle of the 19th century. According to Slav historians whose passed on the tradition and knowledge from their predecessors, the Slavs were one of the indigenous peoples of the region around the Black Sea, the Balkans and spreading out towards Western Europe, into the Italic Peninsula, and further on to Sicily where a tribe from Dalmatia called the Sikuli settled. The Italic Proto-Slavs-like the Etrurians or Raseni, as they called themselves-came under the strong colonial and cultural influence of the Greeks and were later merged into the Roman Republic and nation."
What is the source for this? It looks like extravagant text and also it is mostly off-topic. A is putting the smack down (talk) 11:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: What is the source for this text

message: There is confusion in the article between speakers of Dalmatian language/Vegliot on one hand and speakers of Eastern Romance on the other. This confusion has been in the article for years and I brought it to attention on this talk page back in 2006. For example, the references to Morlachs on the island of Krk (also called Veglia), where Dalmatian speakers were settled leads me to conclude that the reference is to Dalmatian-speakers. Was the term Vlach and Maurovlach used for Dalmatian speakers and Easteern Romance speakers? This may be the case, for example Italians have also been referred to as Vlachs (by Poles, etc.). A is putting the smack down (talk) 19:08, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Vlachs and Morlachs were differently used by different sources. It's possible that Vegliot speakers used Morlachs for the shephards, settlers of the Dalmatian inland, remains of the Romanized Illyrians, while in the same time the Venetian or Croatian speakers could have used it for isolated groups of Vegliot speakers, who were also nothing but Romanized pre-Roman natives. It's very important to notice that Dalmatian language (probably dialect closer to Ragusan than Vegliot) almost completely disappeared in Zadar during 14th century, completely replaced by Croatian, while the documents were always written in Latin. And one of the first writings about the Morlachs came from Zadar in 14th century. There's a lot of mess with these ethnonyms - its meaning range from ethnos to profession, depending on the source, author and period. Zenanarh (talk) 14:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dalmatian speakers and Vlachs

message: The number of Morlachs are very low, perhaps full-blooded or self-designated members of the ethnic group are gone. They paid a heavy toll of cultural assimilation into Croatian/Yugoslavian and/or Italian society. Some ethnological sources continued to portray Morlachs in the Balkans and perhaps a subgroup of Croatian-Italians a "dormant ethnicity" who have living descendants living at the present, but none of them to our knowledge are observing Morlachian customs such as learning to speak the ancestral language. The 20 Morlachs of Croatia in the 21st century are in it's end.  
I doubt any "born again Morlachian" is around to create a neo-Morlachian or "Balkan Morlach Revival" movement, unlike the current Celtic revival movements of "born again Celts" in late 20th century England with the issue of Cornish people and the lloegr or "lost land people" in Great Britain; and the Celtic nationalists of Galicians or Cantabricans in northern Spain. The Morlachs were a missing piece of European history, the Romanized peoples of what later became Yugoslavia after the Slavic peoples resettled the land. + 71.102.2.206 (talk) 03:20, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL you don't understand. Real Morlachs are really extinct, probably already from the 15th century. All those Morlachs later were people of "Morlachian proffession" - sheep shephards in the Dinaric Alps. Just because they were not some educated people they probably equalized their ethnicity to their proffession - remains of Medieval social class separation. I doubt these "Neo-Morlachs" have anything special to say - except why they have decided to use "Morlach" as ethnicity. BTW Morlach descendents are Croats today. If you want to know something about "Morlachian culture" you just need to ask any Croat from inland Dalmatia and Herzegovina ;-) Zenanarh (talk) 13:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Aha in Istria, that's something else, it's interesting if they use "Morlachs" since they were using rather "Rumani" or "Vlasi" per records in the past. Yes there is small Istro-Romanian community there, but not 2.000 yrs old for sure, in the same place. 1st record of them was in the 12th century. It's not certain whether they were emigrants from Romania or the last remains of the inland Dalmatian language speeakers (in this case they would be 2.000 yrs old in the same place). It seems that Dalmatian language dialects in the inland (not in the islands and littoral cities) were more close to Romanian. Zenanarh (talk) 09:10, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Slavonia, the Eastern part of Croatia was named Little Valachia meaning today little Romania (former Pokrac and Pojega sanjaks) . There was a large number of local Vlachs and Vlachs brought from eastern or southern parts of Serbia. Some Croats historians  called them Morlachs. So the discussion is very long...
Riadder (talk) 09:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extinct ethnic group 

message: It says in this article that "Black" might mean "Northern" according to Turkish name of the cardinal points, there might be some other explanations, for example this alternative explanation using the old-Slavonic cardinal points names (which is actually reversed)
"The ethnographic explanation that the term was applied from the old-Slavonic use of colours for the cardinal points on the compass. The ancient totem-god Svitovyd had four faces. The northern face of this totem was white (hence White Russia), the western face red (hence Chervona (Red) Rus'), the southern black and the eastern green (hence Zelenyj klyn). This, however, makes the placement of Black Ruthenia problematic." from White Russia . - signed by anon IP
So, which one is the correct (or most likely) explanation? -- man with one red shoe 15:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I contend the term "black" is more attributed to geographical locations, like the "Black mountain" of Montenegro or in their language Crna Gora. The Dalmatian coasts have several mountains noted for their dark color, close to "black" and the inhabitants are beige or tanned due to the high amount of sunlight in a warmer climate of the Adriatic. But there were some tales of descendants of brown-skinned peoples known as the Balkan Egyptians whom are identified as ethnological relatives to the Romani people, and that the Morlachs are probably an autochtonous people in the Balkans before any other present-day Indo-European linguistic races appeared in southeastern Europe about 5000 years ago. But the terms "Moors" are commonly found in areas where Islam ruled parts of southern Europe and/or were settled by Moors, Arabs, Turks and even a miniscule number of West African slaves brought over to Europe in waves either by the Romans, Greeks, Byzantines and Ottomans, or western European traders. 71.102.1.101 (talk) 07:34, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Zenanarh: The anon has a point. See Cardinal direction#Cardinal directions in world cultures (which says nothing about Iranian). --Florian Blaschke (talk) 12:09, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of "Black" 

message: "This however is denied by the Abbé Fortis who hath published a volume of travels into that country. He informs us that the origin of the Morlacchi is involved in the darkness of barbarous ages .... 
With regard to the etymology of the name the Abbé observes that the Morlacchi generally call them selves in their own language Vlassi a national term of which no vestige is found in the records of Dalmatia till the 13th century. It signifies powerful men or men of authority and the denomination of Moro Vlassi, corruptly, Morlacchi as they are now called may perhaps point out the original of the nation. This word may posibly signify the conquerors that came from the sea Moor in all the dialects of the Sclavonian language signifying the sea. " 
The Morlacchi are so different from the inhabitants of the sea-coasts in dialect, dress, dispositions, that they seem clearly to be of a different original, or at least the colonies must have settled distant periods from each other, that they have had time to alter in a great measure their national character. There is also a remarkable diversity among the Morlacchi themselves in several districts on account of the different countries from whence they came. 
source:  "Encyclopedia Britannica", EDINBURGH PRINTED FOR A. BELL AND C. MACFARQUHAR MDCCXCVII   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.223.163.182 (talk) 18:32, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morlacchi = Vlassi of the sea