| Thumbs Up |
| Received: 2,070 Given: 899 |
Pro-tip: If you really wanna put me in difficulty, ask me why we don't have Gothic words in our vocabulary. Because Goths settled in Dacia and stayed for a long long time.Originally Posted by Stears
| Thumbs Up |
| Received: 4,654 Given: 661 |
Grish-nack !You couldn't refute single claims in about your Vlach nomad ancestors:
VLACHS (Romanians) WERE THE LATEST NOMADIC ETHNIC GROUP IN EUROPE, the vast majority of Romanian population preserved its nomadic lifestyle and heritage until the end of 16th century. They were known as late - nomadic people in medieval chronicles. The first romanian vlach churches were built only around the turn of the 13th and 14th century. No known archiutecture existed before that period. The romanian literacy and their earliest chronicles appeared only in the early 17th century (Grigore Ureche's chronicle). USE Google books! (The word's largest digitalized library, the largest collection of printed books) See the google book results (search the british american candian authors about medieval romanians Vlachs):
Link to the book:
https://books.google.com/books?id=bR...-gypsy&f=false
B. Fowkes (2002) : Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflict in the Post-Communist World -PAGE: 12
"That curious minority, the Vlachs of the Balkans, for example, were on the face of it Romanians ('Wallachians') but in fact the name was also applied to Slavs who shared the same pastoral, nomadic life as the Romanian shepherds."
Link to the book:
https://books.google.com/books?id=_q...lvania&f=false
Norman Berdichevsky (2004): Nations, Language and Citizenship -page: 181.
"The “true Romanians” are held to be interlopers who were nomadic shepherds that migrated into Transylvania from the ... then transferred to “Wallachia,” the traditional core area of the Romanian state located east and south of Transylvania."
Link to the book:
https://books.google.com/books?id=Xo...-gypsy&f=false
Victor Roudometof (2002): Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict: Greece, Bulgaria, and the Macedonian Question - PAGE: 128
"The Vlachs are mainly pastoral nomads dispersed among the states of Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Greece, Albania, and Romania. Since they are Orthodox Christians, they have mostly become part of the predominantly Eastern Orthodox ..."
Link to the book:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...-gypsy&f=false
Roumen Daskalov, ?Alexander Vezenkov - 2015: Entangled Histories of the Balkans - Volume Three: Shared Pasts, Disputed Legacies PAGE: 309
"Zlatarski adds an a priori statement that the very thought of an uprising could occur only to Bulgarian local notables or voivods, not to the nomadic Vlachs, who he says were at a low level of cultural development"
Link to the book:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...0-roma&f=false
Rob Humphreys, ?Susie Lunt, ?Tim Nollen - 2002 : Rough Guide to the Czech & Slovak Republics - Page 408
"Wallachian culture As far as anybody can make out, the Wallachs or Vlachs were semi-nomadic sheep and goat farmers who settled the mountainous areas of eastern Moravia and western Slovakia in the fifteenth century."
Link to the book:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...EED8gQ6AEILzAE
Marek Koter, ?Krystian Heffner - 1999 : Multicultural regions and cities - Page 164
"Nomadic shepherds from the Balkan Peninsula (Wallachians) were moving along the bow of the Carpathians in search of new pastures. "
Link to the book:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...dnCLgQ6AEIHDAA
Marek S. Szczepański Wydawn. Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, Jan 1, 1997 - Ethnic Minorities & Ethnic Majority: Sociological Studies of Ethnic Relations in Poland -PAGE: 325
"They were just the Wallachian people (nomadic tribes from the present Romania) from who contemporary Lemks descended; it should be testified by both the elements of material culture, similarities of customs and languages"
Link to the book:
https://books.google.com/books?id=ow...tains.&f=false
Normal J. G. Pounds - 1976 - : An Historical Geography of Europe 450 B.C.-A.D. 1330, Part 1330 -PAGE: 251
"The chief importance of the Vlachs lies, however, in the possible relationship to the Romanians. ... Ages, crossed the Danube into Walachia and continued their pastoral and semi-nomadic life in Transylvania and the Carpathian Mountains."
So calm down, and learn history from Western (not Romanian ultra nationalist) historians.
| Thumbs Up |
| Received: 2,070 Given: 899 |
Ste-ars! I don't refute your claims because I'm not really sure about what happened in that period. You may very well be right, as there are no solid evidence to counter the balance, in a way or another. Or, both hypotheses may be correct, who knows?
| Thumbs Up |
| Received: 4,654 Given: 661 |
Grishnack is still young, so he can learn truth about his ancestors.... Good EDucational text for Romanians:
The full text is here: http://www.imninalu.net/myths-Vlach.htm
In the reality, the late-nomad Vlach shepherd tribesmen (the ancestors of romanians) migrated from Bulgaria and South-Eastern Serbia to the present-day territory of Romania in the 13th century. The chauvinist daco-romanian continuity myth & state propaganda (which is the compulsory curriculum for children in romania since the communist Gheorghiu-Dej, and especially under Ceausescu's directives , this national belief/religion became the central part of Romanian identity) Fortunately it is not generally accepted by western academic scholars. That's why all major Western Encyclopedias (E.Encarta, E. Britannica, E.Americana, German Brockhaus, French Larousse etc...) mention the romanian state-supported daco-romanian myth, but they are also mention the reality: the Vlach nomad migration from the Balkans in the 13th century.
Vlachs (medieval romanians) were the latest people who introduced the literacy in Europe, and they were one of the latest shepherd nomadic people in Europe. There were no orthodox bishopry in medieval Vallachia & Moldavia, even most of the monks and priests had to be „imported” from Serbia. Due to the lack of medieval literacy and own romanian history writing/chronicles - (until the Grigore Ureche's chronicle in the early 17th century - who wrote about the balkan migration of his Vlach people) - The poor romanians had to built up a so-called "speculative history-writting" (or fabricated history), where speculations based on earlier speculations and fictions etc..
There are no material proofs (cemetries cultic places) which can support the romanian (vlach) existence in present-day territory of romania before the 1200s. There are no CONTEMPORARY written documents about the existence Vlachs (neo-latino speaking population) in the territory of later Vallachia Moldavia Transylvania before the 1200s.
WERE WERE YOU HIDING for 900 years dear "daco"-romans?
The neo-latin elements in Romanian language remain the best proof agaist daco-roman theory. Unlike other neo-latin languages, there are no proofs for development of dacian language into a neo-latin language, because there are not remained dacian vocabulary for the posterior. The dacian conquest was the shortest lasting conquest of the Roman Empire in Europe, it lasted only 160years, the relations between the roman legions and dacians remianed hostile. Note: The barbarisation of the Roman army was very massive and rapid since the end of the first century, the 90% of the “Roman” army had not Roman or central-Italian ancestry. The contemporary multi-ethnic legionaries were Roman citizens, but they were recruited from various primarily multinational, non-Latin provinces, so THEY WERE NOT ROMANS/LATINS. This very short & hostile circumstance are not an ideal contingency for romanization process. There are no CONTEMPORARY historic records for the survive of dacians after the Roman withdrawal, and later the territory was the FOCAL POINT of great migrations. The area saw serials of many strong powerfull and brutal barbaric tribes and people such as Huns, Goths, Gepids Longobards, Avars, Pechenegs later Slavs and Cumans. UNLIKE the Vlach ancestors of modern Romanians, all of these barbarian tribes WERE HISTORICALLY RECORDED countless times in contemporary written sources in the dark age & early medieval period. After the centuries barbarian invasions, the written records mentioned only Slavic speaking populations in the area under turkic- Cuman rule, but they didn't mention the existence of any neo-latino speaking population. There are tons of contemporary written documents (chronicles from early medieval to high medieval era etc.) about the shepherd nomad Vlachs in the Balkan peninsula, but there are no material or written proofs for their existence in the present-day territory of Romania before the 1200s. However the roman rule lasted for 500+ years in many territories of Balkan peninsula (where vlachs were often mentioned by many early medieval chronicles) There is also no trace of lingual influence from any of the other peoples who lived in Transylvania after the withdrawal of the Romans, the Huns, Goths, Gepids Longobards, Avars, Pechenegs and Cumans. If these languages did not have any influence on the Rumanian language, we can be sure that this is proof that at that time there were no Wallachian settlers in Transylvania. Let's don't forget, that the old Romanian language also contained ALBANIAN SUBSTRATUM. During the creation of romanian literary language and language reforms in the 19th century, the high ratio of south-slavic, albanian and turkic words were purged from old romanian language, and they were replaced by adopted modern French Italian and other modern-era neo-latin words, French and Italian neologisms and even full borrowed modern expressions (which were not belong to the original ancient latin and vulgar latin language)
The territory of modern romania belonged to the Bulgaria first, later it came under Byzantine rule. From the late 11th century, the territory was occupied and ruled by the turkic Cuman tribes. After the mongol invasion in 1240, nomadic Vlachs (romanians) started to migrate towards modern romania, and their (turkic) cuman overlords (like the wallachian state-founder Basarab) established their first Vlach romanian principalities. Romanian lands became vassal state of the Hungarian kings and later they were vassals of Polish kings. In the 16th century, romania became an Ottoman province until the Congress of Berlin in 1878.
Since the 16th century the settled life became dominant lifestyle among the formerly mostly nomadic-shepherd romanians. It doesn't sound a very important heroic and interesting history...
-------------------------------
You lost the dabate, accept defeat like a gentleman.
| Thumbs Up |
| Received: 2,070 Given: 899 |
I didn't lost the debate, nor did I win it. Stears, do you really think that this country, which let's face it it's quite rich in natural resources remained unihabited for 1000 years? I have never seen a single alternative. Let's say you're right. Then who was here for 1000 years until the arrival of the Vlachs?
| Thumbs Up |
| Received: 10,426 Given: 4,139 |
Stears I cluster genetically not far from you, something like 55% Grishnack + 45% Norwegian= Stears.
We are genetic brothers Stears <3
| Thumbs Up |
| Received: 2,070 Given: 899 |
Haha, Stears is 55% me so 55% swarthy Vlach.
| Thumbs Up |
| Received: 2,864 Given: 444 |
Actually there is written and archaeological evidence, in a pretty decent size of the many populations (Goths, Huns, Gepids, Avars, Slavs, Bulgarians) that inhabited Transylvania (former Dacia), between the Roman withdrawal and the arrival of the Magyars. Yet there is a lack of mentioning of Roman remains in that territory from contemporary documents and also besides some tools and burial sites from the 4th-5th centuries, neither any archaeological evidence of a continuous inhabiting of Transylvania by a Romance population until the arrival of the Magyars. Another conclusive argument to this is the lack of Romance geographic toponyms in the Hungarian language, while Slavic, German and Turkic are of pretty great abundance, proving that the Magyars adopted the names of rivers, mountains, hills, etc. from people speaking these languages which were found in Transylvania. The territory that would become called Transylvania (as the Magyars seen it as the land beyond the forests from their perspective before migrating here) was under loose Bulgarian control, but scarcely populated because of the very difficult terrain (mountains, hills, rivers) and endless forests. Only when the Magyars started to make their way into Transylvania in the 10th century, deforestation began, leaving space for creating settlements, but also vast meadows, ideal for shepherding, which later attracted many Vlachs, notorious for their semi-nomadic lifestyle, always searching for rich, new terrains for their herds. Since the Hungarian kings realized that this vast scarcely populated land needs to be filled with people, to not be such an easy prey for Eastern nomadic incursions, they welcomed indiscriminately any willing population to settle there next to the Magyars, among them first wave of Germans and later Vlachs and even various Turkic people.
| Thumbs Up |
| Received: 2,070 Given: 899 |
Sorry, but that's speculation. There is not a single prrof that "the Hungarian king allowed Vlachs to settle on his lands". Surely must have been a document to attest this mass migration, yet there is none. Lack of evidence is always speculative.
| Thumbs Up |
| Received: 4,654 Given: 661 |
Wrong. Daco-roman tales are even less than speculations. Because they are nothing more, than tales, motivated by political goals. See your Transylvanian school: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transylvanian_School
Last edited by Stears; 02-08-2017 at 08:41 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Brazil
Posting Permissions
Magyarország
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks