army as a military command (due to the resemblance with the Latin military command). Iorga considers the army to have been composed of both auxiliary () Romanised Thracians—speaking (the “language of the country”/“language of their parents/of the natives”) —and of Byzantines (a mélange of ethnicities using Byzantine words of Latin origin as official command terms, as attested in the Strategikon). This view was later supported by the Greek historian A. Keramopoulos (1939), as well as by Alexandru Philippide (1925), who considered that the word should not be understood as a solely military command term, because it was, as supported by chronicles, a word “of the country”, as by the year 600, the bulk of the Byzantine army was raised from barbarian mercenaries and the Romanic population of the Balkan Peninsula. Starting from the second half of the 20th century, many Romanian scholars consider it a sample of early Romanian language, a view with supporters such as Al. Rosetti (1960), Petre Ș. Năsturel (1956) and I. Glodariu (1964). In regards to the Latin term (an imperative form of the verb torno), in modern Romanian, the corresponding or descendant term now means "pour" (a conjugated form of the verb – "to pour"). However, in older or early Romanian, the verb also had the sense of "to return or come back", and this sense is also still preserved in the modern Aromanian verb . See also Eastern Romance languages Daco-Roman Thraco-Roman History of Romanian Romanian language Albanian–Romanian linguistic relationship Notes Eastern Romance languages Romanian Languages attested from the 6th century