Talk:Piperi (tribe)

THIS WIKIPEDIA ADMIN NEEDS TO BE BANNED FOR DESTRUCTING ALL ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA ARTICLES WITH POLITICAL ALBANIAN PROPAGADA.

PIPERI ARE MONTENEGRIN TRIBE FOR THE PAST 7 CENTURIES WITH MAJORITY OF THEM IDENTIFYING AS ETHNIC SERBS, ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS, AND THEY DO NOT IDENTIFY THEMSELVES WITH ALBANIANS.

THERE ARE DEFINITELY NOT ALBANIANS!!!!!!!!!!!! FOR CENTURIES!!!!!

NO NEED TO PUT WORD 'ALBANIAN' IN EACH CHUNK OF TEXT!!!!!!!!!

DISGUSTING ALBANIAN WIKIPEDIA PROPAGANDA!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A06:5B00:40A:5A00:D28A:7860:7C5B:1DC8 (talk) 07:31, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

I change and they do it again. We are not albaninas!!!! They dream! Shame on wikipedia! 46.33.220.209 (talk) 14:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Sources

Outdated and/or POV sources should be used with caution or not used at all. That being said the argument of that 1900 work that the Piperi wanted to become/were part of Serbia becomes even more senseless, considering that less than 20 years later that tribe would oppose its annexation to Serbia.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 14:12, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Source written by modern scholar who is member of academy is not outdated. Please stop disruptive tendentious editing and stop disputing reliability of apparently good sources and deleting cited additions of others--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

It's a book that was written to dispute the existence of the Montenegrins i.e not RS. Vujovic despite his possible fame in Serbia is not a reliable author because a)analysis was based on the premises of Marxist historiography b)portrayed the Whites as progressive because they advocated unification with Serbia and all of these views c)aimed at reinforcing the dominant discourse about the Yugoslav Communist Party's decisive role in solving the country's national question. When I removed Vujovic I did so because I had first researched his career, so Antid. please stick to the sources.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 10:01, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

He was a member of Montenegrin Academy of Science and Arts [1]. That certanly provides high degree of source reliability. If you believe that he is not RS you are free to bring this issue on RSN.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:43, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Albanian Origin

@Boki As per MOS:LEAD, the fact that the tribe is of Albanian origin (which is very clearly explained and described in the article) is integral to their existence and an important contextual fact. As such, it should be included within the first line of the lead. Botushali (talk) 15:37, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I don't agree that the tribe is of Albanian origin: it is of mixed Albanian, Slavic and Vlach origin. It is quite obious if you check the names from the 1485 defter. The 1497 saw an influx of Albanian names (not the majority though) because thses were refugees from northern Albania (especially in Bushati and Bukumiri katuns but there again, a lot of Slavic names are present). The famous Franciscan report which is copy-pasted on each tribe's page clearly states that the Piperi look like Albanians because of their bravery and so one, nothing more. It does not says that they are Albanians. Boki (talk) 15:47, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

What you agree to holds no bearing on Wikipedia; what matters is academic consensus. Also, in regards to the defters, Slavic names are not necessarily an indication of Slav origins, it simply indicates that the bearers belonged to the Orthodox church. There are many examples in the defter where a son with an orthodox name has a father with a characteristically Albanian name, and since an Albanian state nor an Albanian-language church was not in power at the time, several reputable scholars see this as a strong indication of Albanian origin - since you profess to be an expert medievalist, you should be aware of that (particularly if you study the defters). Nonetheless, this is just an example as to why Slavic names do not necessarily indicate Slavic origin. Back to the original point, the article quite clearly states that the tribe is of Albanian origin with a multitude of sources that meet WP:RS backing this up. As such, it is the reality, and your personal feelings on the matter should not restrict us from applying the fact that they are of Albanian origin to the lead. Is it integral to their existence, and is in line with MOS:LEAD. Botushali (talk) 16:13, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

"what matters is academic consensus." Well, thanks for pointing this out, because there is absolutely no academic debate regarding Piperi origin. There origins are quite clear, there were most probably a slavicized Vlach clan (Piper is a Latin name) upon Slavs arrival, this has been said by scholars ages ago, in the 19th century, then at the beginning of the 20th (Cvijić for example does write about this), and it has never been questioned since then. That they were a Vlach clan which was slavicized over time was so obvious that nobody could even think of questioning it. For your information, Montenegro has a lot of Vlach toponyms (Durmitor, Visitor, Krisitor...) Branisav Đurđev, who was quite an expert regarding tribes from Montenegro, never doubt about Piperi origins. Also, based on Dečani's chrysobulls and Pulaha’s defter translation, Mitar Pešikan clearly established the linguistic border between Albanians and Slavs in the 14th and 15th century and again, the only (modern) Montenegrin "tribe" that was not in an entire Slavic-speaking aera was that of the Kuči. And even in this nahiya, Pešikan showed that a neat boundary could be made between Albanian village, Slavic villages and mixed Slavic/Albanian villages.

Now, who are the "multitude of sources that meet WP:RS backing this up."? I ask you, because absolutely none of the scholar mentioned in this Wikipedia article is an expert regarding Montenegrin tribes. Where is your Albanian equivalent of Cvijić, Đurđev, or so one here? Certainly not Egro nor Kola. They just say that Piperi are of Albanian origin, without any primary source supporting it. Well, at first glance, except the Fransiscan report, but I've already written about that: this Fransiscan monk didn't assert that Piperi, nor Kuči, Bjelopavlići or Bratonožići, were Albanians. He only says that they look like, and act like, Albanians, but that they shouldn't be called as such since they spoke Slavic and were Orthodox. And they were already, mostly Slavic and mostly Orthodox in the Middle Ages, that has been proven ages ago. And of course, you will find "many examples in the defter where a son with an orthodox name has a father with a characteristically Albanian name", but in the overall mass of names, they are quite a minority. As I said, most Albanians from Piperi were newcomers in 1497, this has been documented, by academics. And they were mostly located in the katuns of Bushati and Bukumiri, which were in the Bratonožići aera. And even there, villages were mixed. That does not mean that they were no Albanian in Piperi before the Ottoman conquest, but that they were a minority among a largely Slavic and slavicized Vlach population. Again, this has been documented, check Pešikan. For more information on Vlachs, you can check Kurtović (a very respectable Bosniak historian), he’s only focused on Vlach clans from Herzegovina, but he never questioned the fact that they were already slavicized in the 14th century, so before the Ottoman conquest. Regarding Piperi, you can even check Curtis, the only Western reference in the WP article, he does say that: "in the time of close cultural contact, it is known that certain clans (e.g. Piperi and Kuči) have switched from having a mixed composition of Albanian and Slavic speakers to being only Slavic" (p. 38 of his PhD thesis). He never says that Piperi were purely Albanian. Nor were they purely Slavic. Because they were of mixed origin, as any serious scholar would admit.

Finally, the way you put a warning on my Talk page is far from being courteous. What's the point of opening this discussion after blaming me? I always wrote the reasons behind my reverts, and they were always supported by arguments. I'm not here to start edit warring, but to improve articles. Boki (talk) 20:58, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

The Franciscan monk from 1652 did in fact maintain or believe that the Piperi - alongside other Montenegrin tribes - were of Albanian origin (sangue Albanese), however, it is true that he based a portion of his belief on the fact that the aforementioned tribes were warlike and effective in combat - a trait that was typically attributed to the Albanians. Despite this, I do believe that his assertion that the tribes would "soon... be called Slavs, rather than Albanians" does indicate that there was some kind of shift or symbiosis among at least some of those tribes.

As for the Dečani chrysobulls of 1321-31 and the defter of 1497, I think we would all agree that anthroponyms (particularly folk or Christian Slavic personal names) alone are usually not enough to determine the ethno-linguistic origins or identities of communities without first addressing the historical context. It is rather well established that Albanian-speaking communities adhering to or under the influence of the Serbian Orthodox Church used personal names typical of that cultural and religious sphere alongside (sometimes even over) typical Albanian ones (folk and Christian). The Albanians, on the other hand, had no real state or religious apparatus to impose their cultural characteristics (e.g., anthroponyms) in a similar fashion, although I do think that non-Albanian communities inhabiting border regions of intense contact or Albanian social dominance certainly did adopt Albanian personal names to a degree. However, this was more of an exception to the rule.

Regarding the Piperi themselves, in the above-mentioned Ottoman tax register it is abundantly clear that there was a prevalence of personal names from the Slavic or Serbian sphere and that a portion of the Albanian anthroponyms can be attributed to the katuns of Bushati and Bukumiri, however, Albanian names also appear in the core settlements of Piperi itself (e.g., Luška Župa, Drezga, Dobriko) and judging by kinship ties, it does not seem as if this Albanian element was all that small or insignificant. These individuals also bore positions of chieftains in their respective communities. As for the Vlach element, the register itself does not attest to a substantial presence of Vlach anthroponyms, although I would not entirely rule out that there was a historical presence of Vlachs in the region and that they were assimilated by 1497. I also would not disagree with the assertion that the area was mixed in an ethno-linguistic sense and not entirely Albanian. It is also worth noting that Piperi appears in the Venetian cadastre of 1416-7 as a surname in the lowlands of northern Albania.

Anyhow, I am curious as to the boundaries delineated by Mitar Pešikan, could you please share some excerpts on this?

And for those interested in the genetic origins of the Piperi in the light of tested patrilineages, it has been established that the core of the tribe belong to Y-DNA haplogroup R1b-FT49714 and that they share a common ancestor who lived in ca. 1422 CE. This lineage itself is a branch of R1b-Z2705 which, judging by phylogeny, distribution, and diversity, is easily identifiable with the Proto-Albanians and later Albanian movements. Upstream there is a related cluster which is currently represented by Albanians from eastern Montenegro (Gruda and Trieshi) as well as a couple from southern Albania (Lushnjë and Vlorë). Though I should mention that the relation between this group with the Piperi dates back to ca. 1072 CE. There is a more closely related patrilineage (ca. 1372 CE) found in Crmnica and one of the brotherhoods belonging to his group has oral traditions of having arrived from Malësia as well as a patronym of Albanian etymology: Lekovići. Lezhjani1444 (talk) 23:24, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

R1b-Z2705 diversity stems from the 6th century and there is no branch that goes beyond that level in the whole of the Balkans. Meaning that the descendants of R1b-Z2705 all come from this one person that settled in the Balkans in between 500-600 CE, most probably from Eastern Europe where you will find parallel R1b-BY611-Z2705 branches. It is unnecessary to explain that the whole of the Proto-Albanian language and culture most certainly didn't derive from one person that lived in the 6th century, therefore R1b-Z2705 by scientific fact cannot be connected to Proto-Albanians whatsoever. Furthermore there are R1b-Z705 branches that do not exist among the Albanian population, and are only located in Montenegro and southwestern Serbia. Source: [2]https://www.yfull.com/sc/tree/R-Z2705/ 188.23.40.45 (talk) 09:56, 12 November 2022 (UTC)