[2] A comprehensive list can be found in Eric Feichter’s PhD work –having the translated title “Decrease of population in the Romanian Banat”– published in 1942 at Timişoara by the “G. Matheiu Institute for Graphic Arts”, 152 pages.

[3] See Ion & Rodica Munteanu’s study, "The evolution of the population of the historical Banat at the beginning of the XX century", in the Analele Banatului’s review, Archeology-History new series, no. VI, 1998, pg. 494.

[5] Having the intention to diagnose this problem as exactly as possible, we found ourselves in the situation to chose between two different, sometimes antagonist, analyzing methods. On one hand we could perform a quantitative valuation, which would have implied an enormous volume of work for avoiding the statistical weaknesses. Inevitably, we were forced to perform a punctual and qualitative valuation of those elements, which we considered to be relevant for the purpose of this work.

Regarding the type of scientific research, out of the different methods, we chose to perform a content analysis. The method’s infallibility can be questioned only if our findings would result in generalizations based not on the observed facts, but to illustrate one theory or another or to support our preconceived ideas. Being aware of this risk, we did not divert from K.R. Popper’s position, who, in his essay "Public opinion and liberal principles", offers a relevant methodological principle (law of evidence): knowledge should not aim to facts, which would only confirm our preconceived ideas, but first of all to facts, which trespass our hypotheses. As research type, we had to chose between the two extreme types and namely:

Due to the fact that there is a strong connection between the research method and type, we chose the experimental deductive study, because according to the Dutch authors the " studies regarding content analysis have an experimental character and they confirm the initial hypothesis” [J.J. Van Cuilenburg, O. Scholten, G.W. Noomen in “Ştiinţa comunicării”, ed. Humanitas, 1998, pg. 184].

[6] This is the summary of a different chapter of a future work, for the time being called: "Donauschwaben, only two centuries. A genealogical point of view".

[7] "Monographie der Gemeinde Lovrin", by Dr. Nikolaus Koch, Periam, ed. 1929.

[8] See "Délmagyarországi telepitések törté nete és hatása a mai közállopotokra", by Dr. Bodor Antal, Budapest, 1914.

[9] Idem [2], pg. 47.

[10] It is very important to underline that in some regions in Germany the youngest child used to inherit everything, while in Banat we speak –before 1849- about the eldest child. It is not very clear, how it came to this fundamental change and the only explanation found until now – in Peter Jung’s book "Du meine Heimat, mein Banat", Ed. Marineasa, Timişoara, 2001- refers to an imperial decision [which could not be identify yet].

[11] “Civilizaţia occidentului medieval”, ed. Ştiinţifică, Bucuresti, 1970, pg. 365-390 / "La civilisation de l'Occident Médiéval", Flammarion, 1997 or the English translation "The Civilization of Medieval Europe", Blackwell Publishers, October 1988, ISBN: 0631155120].

[12] Between 1780 [when Francesco Griselini’s statistic was published in his monograph on Banat] and 1840, the number of Romanians increased from 181639 up to 576000. This means, that in less than 3 generations the increase was of over 317%.

[13] Due to the family relationships – see Jacques Le Goff’s conception on the parents and "amis charenel" in his book "La civilisation de l'Occident Médiéval"– we are witnessing a "chain migration" [for the concept of chain migration; see "A Century of European Migration 1830-1930", Vecoli R. J. and Sinke, S.M., Eds., 1991, University of Illinois Press., Michigan, USA].

[14] Many of those who left – most of them dayworkers [see “Contribuţii la istoria agriculturii din Banat; sec. XVIII-XIX” by Lajos Kakucs, ed. Mirton, Timişoara, 1998, pg. 240-242] were hoping to return to Banat with sufficient money for buying some land only emigrants from Variaş sent home over one million crowns – old currency]. Between 1905-1914 a number of 31265 emigrants returned to Banat [16637 Swabians, 5901 Romanians, 1824 Hungarians; 597 Serbs, 1287 others]. In fact, there was a continuous “coming and going" between Banat and their destination country [especially the United States] and this phenomenon, which nobody studied until now, inevitably distorts the statistics.

There were also some particular cases, like Jamu Mare, where the phylloxera from 1884 destroyed large surfaces of vineyards, which determined over 600 inhabitants to emigrate [out of 2810 inhabitants in 1886] between 1890-1910.

[15] We know that in the contractual villages the migration phenomenon started much earlier, so that between 1872-1912 the population of Uihei village decreased with 6,3%. In case of the Breştea village, we assist at a decrease with 11,4% and in case of Sânmihaiului German even with 30,1% [see also Lajos Kakucs’s book “Contribuţii la istoria agriculturii din Banat; sec. XVIII-XIX", editura Mirton, Timisoara, 1998, 276 pg., ISBN 973-578-448-3].

[16] See dr. Friedrich Burgdörfer’s book "Volk ohne Jugend", Heidelberg-Berlin, 1937.

[17] Indeed, very few children were born in the second half of the XIX century, but more of them survived in comparison to the previous century, and this decrease in the number of new-born children has no relation with the sole child phenomenon.

[18] S. Manuilă, “Mişcarea populaţiei în România”, 1929.

[19] Those, which cover also the XX century [i.e. Familienbuch for Periam, Billed, Şandra, Iecea Mica, Iecea Mare].

[21] We speak here about Dr. Fritz Klinger’s brochure "Stirbt der Schwabe. Sonderabdruck a. d. Sufbau. Heft ¾" issued in 1934 in Sibiu.

[22] This phenomenon was also encouraged by another Swabian tradition related to the support offered for building houses.