România: differences between regions and people ?

[Volkodav]

This thread/question is mainly for Central Europeans and Scandinavians, do you see us the same ? or we are different in our own country ?
Keep in mind that those in Italy/Spain or begging in France are not Romenians. Also if you are some Yugoslav muslim or Verka Serduchka from Crimea and feel the need to troll, just restrain yourself.

So some time ago was a song and the band decided to let the fans make the video for that song. Here are the top two clips:

First the clip from North Transilvania, with tipical romanians from Transilvania:

- www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEPsSIb4lnE
.

Now this clip was filmed in the south in Bucuresti, and everybody in the video is pure Moldavian:

- www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zIYnjFjXu8

So its more a question of Transilvania vs Moldavia.

[Sagitta Hungarica]

Until this point Romanians mixed very much among them (thanks to the Communist regime, which continued a policy of favoring massive migration from certain, less prosperous parts of Romania to other somewhat more rich parts), so there isn't a very big difference between regions from what I've seen, but generally those from North are fairer skinned than those from the South. Also it is another big problem that it is hard in some cases in the South to differentiate between who are ethnic Romanians and who are ethnic Romas.

[Sokil]

Many Romanians look European because they mixed with Hungarians, Ukrainians and Bulgarians. There is almost no difference between pure blooded Romanians and Gypsies.

[Hurrem sultana]

you are all same to us

[Ushtari]

you are all same to us

[Unurautare]

@Volkodav: They can't differentiate between Moldovans from Rep.Moldova(those with the Russian accents) and Romanians from other places,and I'm talking about Italians,let alone Scandinavians.

@Sagitta Hungarica: Ethnic Romanians don't usually mix with minorities,and especially not with gypos because most gypsies aren't even Christians,not to mention that the gypos have their own system of arranged marriage(usually at very young ages),retard.

[Adrian]

I'm not trolling.

Why this high percentage of gypsies in Romania. When did thay come in your country?

[Volkodav]

I'm not trolling.

Why this high percentage of gypsies in Romania. When did thay come in your country?

Mongols were selling very cheap slaves captured in India, was a good investment at that time so we bought a lot.
Turks were selling slaves captured in the Arabic Peninsula, we bought again.
After WW2 the germans runned away from Romania, and we had all this empty houses where nobody wanted to live, Soviet Union gave us a lot of gypsys to put in those houses, it was for free so we accepted right away.

Was it a good investment ? You be the judge of that.

[Motörhead Remember Me]

Mongols were selling very cheap slaves captured in India, was a good investment at that time so we bought a lot.

A good investment? It hasn't really paid off in the long run.

Mongols were smart, they sold slaves that did not work. A little like selling broken transistor radios (Besides this slave theory is wrong, they mostly migrated there).

[Motörhead Remember Me]

This thread/question is mainly for Central Europeans and Scandinavians, do you see us the same ? or we are different in our own country ?Keep in mind that those in Italy/Spain or begging in France are not Romenians. Also if you are some Yugoslav muslim or Verka Serduchka from Crimea and feel the need to troll, just restrain yourself.

So some time ago was a song and the band decided to let the fans make the video for that song. Here are the top two clips:

First the clip from North Transilvania, with tipical romanians from Transilvania:

- www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEPsSIb4lnE
.

Now this clip was filmed in the south in Bucuresti, and everybody in the video is pure Moldavian:

- www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zIYnjFjXu8

So its more a question of Transilvania vs Moldavia.

Whatever the question, I don't understand it.

But my answer would be, the people of Romania are called Romanis and the people of Bulgaria are called Burglars.

[Unurautare]

Whatever the question, I don't understand it.

But my answer would be, the people of Romania are called Romanis and the people of Bulgaria are called Burglars.

Clearly you don't. The question was for Scandinavians or Central Europeans,not butthurt mongs,thanks anyway but at least we founded and built our own cities. ;P

[hajduk]

Whatever the question, I don't understand it.

But my answer would be, the people of Romania are called Romanis and the people of Bulgaria are called Burglars.

burlgars bulgars raped your ass?

[Caeruleus]

I'm not trolling.

Why this high percentage of gypsies in Romania. When did thay come in your country?

if you are so interested in the gypsy problem you can always search for information on the internet but I guess its more convenient to flood romanian threads with gypsy related duscussions ...

by the way i see that some individuals thanked me for this post, its sarcasm if you didnt get it the first time :)


The exact origins of slavery in the Danubian Principalities are not known. Historian Nicolae Iorga associated the Roma people's arrival with the 1241 Mongol invasion of Europe and considered their slavery as a vestige of that era, the Romanians taking the Roma from the Mongols as slaves and preserving their status.[1] Other historians consider that they were enslaved while captured during the battles with the Tatars.[1] The practice of enslaving prisoners may also have been taken from the Mongols.[1] The ethnic identity of the "Tatar slaves" is unknown, they could have been captured Tatars of the Golden Horde,[2] Cumans, or the slaves of Tatars and Cumans.[1]
While it is possible that some Romani people were slaves or auxiliary troops of the Mongols or Tatars, the bulk of them came from south of the Danube at the end of the 14th century, some time after the foundation of Wallachia. By then, the institution of slavery was already established in Moldavia and possibly in both principalities,[3] but the arrival of the Roma made slavery a widespread practice. The Tatar slaves, smaller in numbers, were eventually merged into the Roma population.[4]
Slavery was a common practice in Eastern Europe at the time (see Slavery in medieval Europe). Non-Christians in particular were taken as slaves in Christian Europe: in the Kingdom of Hungary, Saracens (Muslims) and Jewish Khazars were held as slaves until they were forced to convert to Christianity in the 13th century; Russians enslaved the prisoners captured from the Tatars (see Kholop), but their status eventually merged with the one of the serfs.[5]
There is some debate over whether the Romani people came to Wallachia and Moldavia as free men or as slaves. In the Byzantine Empire, they were slaves of the state and it seems the situation was the same in Bulgaria and Serbia until their social organization was destroyed by the Ottoman conquest, which would suggest that they came as slaves who had a change of "ownership".[6] The alternate explanation, proposed by Romanian scholar P. P. Panaitescu, was that following the Crusades, an important East-West trade route passed through the Romanian states and the local feudal lords enslaved the Roma for economic gain for lack of other craftsmen. However, this theory is undermined by the fact that slavery was present before the trade route gained importance.[6] Historian Neagu Djuvara also supposes that Roma groups came into the two countries as free individuals and were enslaved by the hospodars and the landowning boyar elite.[7]
The very first document attesting the presence of Roma people in Wallachia dates back to 1385, and refers to the group as aţigani (from, athiganoi a Greek-language word for "heretics", and the origin of the Romanian term ţigani, which is synonymous with "Gypsy").[8] The document, signed by Prince Dan I, assigned 40 sălaşe (hamlets or dwellings) of aţigani to Tismana Monastery, the first of such grants to be recorded.[9] In Moldavia, the institution of slavery was attested to for the first time in a 1470 Moldavian document, through which Moldavian Prince Stephan the Great frees Oană, a Tatar slave who had fled to Jagiellon Poland.[10]
Anthropologist Sam Beck argues that the origins of Roma slavery can be most easily explained in the practice of taking prisoners of war as slaves, a practice with a long history in the region, and that, initially, free and enslaved Roma coexisted on what became Romanian territory.[11]
There are some accounts according to which some of the Roma slaves had been captured during wars. For instance, in 1445, Vlad Dracul took by force from Bulgaria to Wallachia around 11,000-12,000 people "who looked like Egyptians", presumably Roma.[11] A German-language Moldavian chronicle recorded that, in 1471, when Stephen confronted and defeated a Wallachian force led by Prince Radu cel Frumos at Soci, "he took with him [and] into slavery 17,000 Gypsies."[9] The numbers were most likely exaggerated.

if you wanna know more read the wikipedia article : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Romania

looks like foreigners are more interested in gypsies from Romania than romanians :) as they say fecking trolls and wankers

[Caeruleus]

when talking about tzigani (gypsies) one starts to realise what a great man this lad was

http://www.personality.com.ro/ion.antonescu_a.jpg

too bad he didnt had more time :(

[Motörhead Remember Me]

Clearly you don't. The question was for Scandinavians or Central Europeans,not butthurt mongs,thanks anyway but at least we founded and built our own cities. ;P

Your answer makes even less sense than the initial question. Are you suggesting that 1. I'm not Scandinavian 2. Finnish cities were not founded by my ancestors?

[Motörhead Remember Me]

burlgars bulgars raped your ass?

Burglarians do that too? That shows what lowlife comes out of there.

[Caeruleus]

Eu sunt de parerea ca threadul asta e usor inutil si nu va servi scopul pentru care a fost creat. Majoritatea europenilor "civilizati" :) nu stiu sa faca diferenta intre dreapta si stanga dapoi sa-ti mai spuna daca romanii sunt un grup unitar sau nu. Pina nu demult era o prosta in forumul asta care credea ca Republica Moldova a obtinut independenta fata de Romania si nu fata de URSS :laugh2:
Putinii care stiu ceva despre istoria romanilor si in consecinta si despre diferentele regionale sunt ungurii (vezi sagetatorul mongoloid) a caror singur interes este sa bage strambe.

[Unurautare]

Your answer makes even less sense than the initial question. Are you suggesting that 1. I'm not Scandinavian 2. Finnish cities were not founded by my ancestors?

European languages are hard for you,understandable. I'm suggesting you a Siberian tent or a fisherman's hut,have fun.

[Motörhead Remember Me]

European languages are hard for you,understandable. I'm suggesting you a Siberian tent or a fisherman's hut,have fun.

Ştiu că nu sunteţi foarte inteligent, dar te iert ca învăţământul din Europa de Est este rău. Trebuie să vă informez că maternă limbă meu este un indo limbă europeană şi strămoşi mea este o parte scandinave. Acest argument mongole este învechit şi plictisitor
de acum. Găsiţi ceva mai amuzant. Ca prostitues finlandeză, hoti, spargatori, traficanţi şi muncitori ieftine către glumă despre. Oh Ne pare rău, sunteţi cunoscut pentru acele ocupaţii ..
..

[Unurautare]

Ştiu că nu sunteţi foarte inteligent, dar te iert ca învăţământul din Europa de Est este rău. Trebuie să vă informez că maternă limbă meu este un indo limbă europeană şi strămoşi mea este o parte scandinave. Acest argument mongole este învechit şi plictisitor
de acum. Găsiţi ceva mai amuzant. Ca prostitues finlandeză, hoti, spargatori, traficanţi şi muncitori ieftine către glumă despre. Oh pare rau, tu esti cel cunoscuta pentru acele ocupaţii ..

N-am spus nimic de mongoli,paranoia. Apropo,mai bine cunoscut decât inexistent. :P
N-am niciun interes să mă cert cu nimeni. Daca nu-ţi convine ceea ce spun,corect oricum, atunci nu mai vorbi prostii despre noi.

[Amarantine]

I am not Scand nor CentralEuro but there is difference for me (even it was boring to watch youtube, since I know how Romanians looks like).

Dacians are darker pigmentation then some Romanians and less Dinaric then Romanians.

Transilvanians really have BIG TEETH :P

[Incal]

looks like foreigners are more interested in gypsies from Romania than romanians :) as they say fecking trolls and wankers

Well it's normal considering the alarming numbers of gypsies in Romania (though Spain seems to have surpassed you guys) and big concentrations of gypsies can never lead to any good thing. What surprises me is that back in the days their lives were spared by the Princes... Maybe gypos only work when enslaved?

[Motörhead Remember Me]

N-am spus nimic de mongoli,paranoia. Apropo,mai bine cunoscut decât inexistent. :P
N-am niciun interes să mă cert cu nimeni. Daca nu-ţi convine ceea ce spun,corect oricum, atunci nu mai vorbi prostii despre noi.

Am numai încercat să răspundă la prima întrebare, dar întrebarea a fost greu de înţeles.

[Unurautare]

Well it's normal considering the alarming numbers of gypsies in Romania (though Spain seems to have surpassed you guys) and big concentrations of gypsies can never lead to any good thing. What surprises me is that back in the days their lives were spared by the Princes... Maybe gypos only work when enslaved?

Yes,sir,we also have alarming numbers of vampires here too. :D
To me even seeing one gypsy per day seems more than alarming,but it somehow beats seeing Blacks and Muslims because most gypsies live in self-isolation. The only danger that might upset this status quo is precisely the EU.

[Adrian]

if you are so interested in the gypsy problem you can always search for information on the internet but I guess its more convenient to flood romanian threads with gypsy related duscussions ...

by the way i see that some individuals thanked me for this post, its sarcasm if you didnt get it the first time :)


The exact origins of slavery in the Danubian Principalities are not known. Historian Nicolae Iorga associated the Roma people's arrival with the 1241 Mongol invasion of Europe and considered their slavery as a vestige of that era, the Romanians taking the Roma from the Mongols as slaves and preserving their status.[1] Other historians consider that they were enslaved while captured during the battles with the Tatars.[1] The practice of enslaving prisoners may also have been taken from the Mongols.[1] The ethnic identity of the "Tatar slaves" is unknown, they could have been captured Tatars of the Golden Horde,[2] Cumans, or the slaves of Tatars and Cumans.[1]
While it is possible that some Romani people were slaves or auxiliary troops of the Mongols or Tatars, the bulk of them came from south of the Danube at the end of the 14th century, some time after the foundation of Wallachia. By then, the institution of slavery was already established in Moldavia and possibly in both principalities,[3] but the arrival of the Roma made slavery a widespread practice. The Tatar slaves, smaller in numbers, were eventually merged into the Roma population.[4]
Slavery was a common practice in Eastern Europe at the time (see Slavery in medieval Europe). Non-Christians in particular were taken as slaves in Christian Europe: in the Kingdom of Hungary, Saracens (Muslims) and Jewish Khazars were held as slaves until they were forced to convert to Christianity in the 13th century; Russians enslaved the prisoners captured from the Tatars (see Kholop), but their status eventually merged with the one of the serfs.[5]
There is some debate over whether the Romani people came to Wallachia and Moldavia as free men or as slaves. In the Byzantine Empire, they were slaves of the state and it seems the situation was the same in Bulgaria and Serbia until their social organization was destroyed by the Ottoman conquest, which would suggest that they came as slaves who had a change of "ownership".[6] The alternate explanation, proposed by Romanian scholar P. P. Panaitescu, was that following the Crusades, an important East-West trade route passed through the Romanian states and the local feudal lords enslaved the Roma for economic gain for lack of other craftsmen. However, this theory is undermined by the fact that slavery was present before the trade route gained importance.[6] Historian Neagu Djuvara also supposes that Roma groups came into the two countries as free individuals and were enslaved by the hospodars and the landowning boyar elite.[7]
The very first document attesting the presence of Roma people in Wallachia dates back to 1385, and refers to the group as aţigani (from, athiganoi a Greek-language word for "heretics", and the origin of the Romanian term ţigani, which is synonymous with "Gypsy").[8] The document, signed by Prince Dan I, assigned 40 sălaşe (hamlets or dwellings) of aţigani to Tismana Monastery, the first of such grants to be recorded.[9] In Moldavia, the institution of slavery was attested to for the first time in a 1470 Moldavian document, through which Moldavian Prince Stephan the Great frees Oană, a Tatar slave who had fled to Jagiellon Poland.[10]
Anthropologist Sam Beck argues that the origins of Roma slavery can be most easily explained in the practice of taking prisoners of war as slaves, a practice with a long history in the region, and that, initially, free and enslaved Roma coexisted on what became Romanian territory.[11]
There are some accounts according to which some of the Roma slaves had been captured during wars. For instance, in 1445, Vlad Dracul took by force from Bulgaria to Wallachia around 11,000-12,000 people "who looked like Egyptians", presumably Roma.[11] A German-language Moldavian chronicle recorded that, in 1471, when Stephen confronted and defeated a Wallachian force led by Prince Radu cel Frumos at Soci, "he took with him [and] into slavery 17,000 Gypsies."[9] The numbers were most likely exaggerated.

if you wanna know more read the wikipedia article : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Romania

looks like foreigners are more interested in gypsies from Romania than romanians :) as they say fecking trolls and wankers

I think you become paranoic when someone mention gypsies. I didn't want to troll in your thread (I don't do it usualy).
Gypsies are part of your life and heritage...and you have to deal with it. It's not my problem. I didn't send any of them to you. lol

[Unurautare]

I think you become paranoic when someone mention gypsies. I didn't want to troll in your thread (I don't do it usualy).
Gypsies are part of your life and heritage...and you have to deal with it. It's not my problem. I didn't send any of them to you. lol

If he wants to talk about wikipedia articles about gypsies and whatnot then good luck talking to himself,you should have mentioned to him that your brain is absent most of the time thus he has really nobody to talk to.

Btw,Albania seems wonderful,I feel like I'm watching a video about the earthquake in Haiti,no wonder Albananian Muslims on this forum live in European countries and not Albania:

gWgqnCcQ1u4

[Volkodav]

.... and they call us gypsys. Ironic.

[Adrian]

If he wants to talk about wikipedia articles about gypsies and whatnot then good luck talking to himself,you should have mentioned to him that your brain is absent most of the time thus he has really nobody to talk to.

Btw,Albania seems wonderful,I feel like I'm watching a video about the earthquake in Haiti,no wonder Albananian Muslims on this forum live in European countries and not Albania:

Unuraturate, I feel sorry for you!

I think you dream albanians every fucking night?

Don't be scared man, if we join EU...Romania will be the last place to go! lol

[Unurautare]

.... and they call us gypsys. Ironic.

Yes,any 3 years old can think of better trolls than "Roma",but that won't stop the non-whites coming to the Romanian sub-forum to say how things "really are". :rolleyes:


@Illyrian: you want me to search for Albanian crime in Romania? it's there...

[Incal]

Btw,Albania seems wonderful,I feel like I'm watching a video about the earthquake in Haiti,no wonder Albananian Muslims on this forum live in European countries and not Albania:


LOL I just saw what you did there :D

[Volkodav]

Btw,Albania seems wonderful,I feel like I'm watching a video about the earthquake in Haiti,no wonder Albananian Muslims on this forum live in European countries and not Albania:

gWgqnCcQ1u4

Compare that clip with what happened to that guy in the Republic Moldova, the country that all call the most poor and the most primitive in Europe.

bSp0yNOOMTo

[Rron]

....

[Volkodav]

........... Also if you are some Yugoslav muslim or Verka Serduchka from Crimea and feel the need to troll, just restrain yourself.............

[Redar14]

Live in Moldavia large gypsy community?

[Caeruleus]

Live in Moldavia large gypsy community?

by Moldavia you mean Republic of Moldova or the moldovan part of Romania !?

[Redar14]

by Moldavia you mean Republic of Moldova or the moldovan part of Romania !?

I mean Besarabia/Independent Moldavia. :)

[Caeruleus]

I mean Besarabia. :)

gypsies in Rep. of Moldova (ex Bessarabia) form less than 0,5 % of the population, Moldova's population is 3 mil. people ... Most of these gypsies live in the city of Soroca (north-east) and in the nearby villages, we're ought to drop a bomb or something in that region :D

[Redar14]

gypsies in Rep. of Moldova (ex Bessarabia) form less than 0,5 % of the population, Moldova's population is 3 mil. people ... Most of these gypsies live in the city of Soroca (north-east) and in the nearby villages, we're ought to drop a bomb or something in that region :D

I know that a lot of eastern slavs live in Moldavia/Moldova. Do you like their?

[Caeruleus]

I know that a lot of eastern slavs live in Moldavia/Moldova. Do you like their?

if I like them !? well, I would like to see them all on sticks :D (impaled I mean) ... just jocking :) I as an ethnic romanian and a romanian nationalist dont really like eastern slavs, after all they've done a lot of bad things to my people (deported, killed members of my family during the soviet occupation) so no LIKE wouldnt be the word I would use to describe how I feel about them ... but I have a totally different attitude towards western and southern slavs.

[Redar14]

OK... I understood. It seems to me that Romanians must support Slovaks because You have common enemy - hungarian nationalists.

[Caeruleus]

OK... I understood. It seems to me that Romanians must support Slovaks because You have common enemy - hungarian nationalists.

of course :) I would support anyone who stands against hungarians ;) but since we're talking about slovaks (Romanias interwar period friend) my support is even stronger

[Redar14]

Hungarians are only ones polish friends. :)

[Comte Arnau]

Here "Romanian" is mainly a synonym now of "Eastern Gypsy" for the average non-educated guy in the street. To the point I've met Romanians who didn't tell anybody they were Romanians (a girl I know even preferred to pass for Italian) not to be associated with Romanian Gypsies.

As for internal ethnicities in Romania, some people know that Romanians speak a Romance language, and a few know about Hungarians and Germans in Romania, but most people wouldn't even be able to locate the country. You are "somewhere to the East".

[Sagitta Hungarica]

Eu sunt de parerea ca threadul asta e usor inutil si nu va servi scopul pentru care a fost creat. Majoritatea europenilor "civilizati" :) nu stiu sa faca diferenta intre dreapta si stanga dapoi sa-ti mai spuna daca romanii sunt un grup unitar sau nu. Pina nu demult era o prosta in forumul asta care credea ca Republica Moldova a obtinut independenta fata de Romania si nu fata de URSS :laugh2:
Putinii care stiu ceva despre istoria romanilor si in consecinta si despre diferentele regionale sunt ungurii (vezi sagetatorul mongoloid) a caror singur interes este sa bage strambe.

I am glad that you recognize that Hungarians are among the few who know the Romanian history :thumb001:

[Caeruleus]

Hungarians are only ones polish friends. :)

does that mean poles would take Hungary's side in a hypothetical slovakian-hungarian conflict !? after all slovaks are slavs just like poles, hungarians on the other hand are not

[Caeruleus]

I am glad that you recognize that Hungarians are among the few who know the Romanian history :thumb001:

it was not a compliment, it was just an observation ... the only reason you take an interest in romanian history is beacuse of Trianon ... and there is a huge difference between what you know and what you claim to know ;) what you claim to be the truth :)

[Redar14]

does that mean poles would take Hungary's side in a hypothetical slovakian-hungarian conflict !? after all slovaks are slavs just like poles, hungarians on the other hand are not

It's very hard situation. I don't know how answer on your question. :(

[Sagitta Hungarica]

it was not a compliment, it was just an observation ... the only reason you take an interest in romanian history is beacuse of Trianon ... and there is a huge difference between what you know and what you claim to know ;) what you claim to be the truth :)

You are the one who needs to be educated about your own history, and it seems from a "Hungarian knowledgeable about true Romanian history" more precisely ;)

[Caeruleus]

You are the one who needs to be educated about your own history, and it seems from a "Hungarian knowledgeable about true Romanian history" more precisely ;)

http://www.round-the-world-trip.com/travel-photos/central-mongolia/12_mongolia.jpg

what was that again !? zee true history !? :) by the way I love that little "homecoming" theory of yours ;)

[Sagitta Hungarica]

http://www.round-the-world-trip.com/travel-photos/central-mongolia/12_mongolia.jpg

what was that again !? zee true history !? :) by the way I love that little "homecoming" theory of yours ;)

The level of your posting hardly surpasses the level of a 14 year old boy in puberty. But I am that nice of a guy, who will take his time to correct you, every time you walk in uncharted territories for yourself of historical accuracies.

[Caeruleus]

The level of your posting hardly surpasses the level of a 14 year old boy in puberty. But I am that nice of a guy, who will take his time to correct you, every time you walk in uncharted territories for yourself of historical accuracies.

I as a descendant of true europeans dont take history lessons from mongoloid immigrants :)

my ancestors are these guys
http://www.dracones.ro/imagini-site/decebal.jpg
http://temesgms.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/traian.jpg

your ancestor is this guy
http://css.top-10-list.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/Attila-the-Hun.jpg

so in the light of the above stated facts why dont you take the pony express
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_28zyUqUeKoE/R4J1gEHFShI/AAAAAAAAATM/AYaSIOLSyrY/s400/Mongol.jpg

back to your homeland
http://www.face-music.ch/Bilder/mapmn.jpg

godspeed my chinky neighbour :thumbs up

[hajduk]

Hungarians are only ones polish friends. :)

In a futute conflict between Poland and Germany, hungarians will back you?

[Volkodav]

your ancestor is this guy
http://css.top-10-list.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/Attila-the-Hun.jpg


That is a very big lie from the hungarian propaganda machine.

How unfortunate for hungarians that some people wrote about other people: Khazars in Ancient Amazonia, north of them were Pechenegs, and north of them were the MAGYARS.
At the same time in the Northern Charpatians were the very ancient people of Slovaks, north of them was the vestern slavic tribes that would become Scleszian, Polish and Czech, south of the Slovaks were the AVARS, and in the South-Westhern Charpatians were the Vlachs.

None of them had anything to do with Attila or the huns. Its just a magyar need to connect with ancient peoples.

[Sagitta Hungarica]

In a futute conflict between Poland and Germany, hungarians will back you?

It's hard to say. There are Hungarians who feel more close to Poles than to Germans, and the other way around. But I believe Hungary would keep a neutral position, and accept refugees from both countries if they will ask for it. Hungary was the only Axis country in WWII who offered refuge to fleeing Poles from the fury of the Wermacht. Hungary also refused to attack Poland, while their beloved Slovak "brothers" didn't backed up in doing so, and to please Hitler, they attacked Poland. If I were a Pole to decide between Slovaks or Hungarians it wouldn't be that hard. But of course anyone is free to decide on its own.

[Sagitta Hungarica]

That is a very big lie from the hungarian propaganda machine.

How unfortunate for hungarians that some people wrote about other people: Khazars in Ancient Amazonia, north of them were Pechenegs, and north of them were the MAGYARS.
At the same time in the Northern Charpatians were the very ancient people of Slovaks, north of them was the vestern slavic tribes that would become Scleszian, Polish and Czech, south of the Slovaks were the AVARS, and in the South-Westhern Charpatians were the Vlachs.

None of them had anything to do with Attila or the huns. Its just a magyar need to connect with ancient peoples.

Please say more. I want to keep laughing :loco:

[Caeruleus]

That is a very big lie from the hungarian propaganda machine.

How unfortunate for hungarians that some people wrote about other people: Khazars in Ancient Amazonia, north of them were Pechenegs, and north of them were the MAGYARS.
At the same time in the Northern Charpatians were the very ancient people of Slovaks, north of them was the vestern slavic tribes that would become Scleszia, Polish and Czech, south of the Slovaks were the AVARS, and in the South-Westhern Charpatians were the Vlachs.

None of them had anything to do with Attila or the huns. Its just a magyar need to connect with ancient peoples.

of course its a lie (I just needed a chinky fella') :) hunnic and magyar invasion is 500 years apart from each other. Hungarians are known to be the biggest falsifiers in world history :lie:, they've been the descendants of huns, sarmatians, scythians, old magyars and the best in my opinion is the pre-indo-european theory :laugh2: (the magyars appeared in the heart of Europe 100 billion years ago and because of the ghost invasion they had to move to ASIA :laugh: when things finally settled down they made their way "home" ;)

Hungarians are one of the last ethnic groups to arrive in Europe, because they had to legitimate their presence in Pannonia somehow, they started visiting Fantasy Land (quite frequently actually) :wink

[Sagitta Hungarica]

of course its a lie (I just needed a chinky fella') :) hunnic and magyar invasion is 500 years apart from each other. Hungarians are known to be the biggest falsifiers in world history :lie:, they've been the descendants of huns, sarmatians, scythians, old magyars and the best in my opinion is the pre-indo-european theory :laugh2: (the magyars appeared in the heart of Europe 100 billion years ago and because of the ghost invasion they had to move to ASIA :laugh: when things finally settled down they made their way "home" ;)

Hungarians are one of the last ethnic groups to arrive in Europe, because they had to legitimate their presence in Pannonia somehow, they started visiting Fantasy Land (quite frequently actually) :wink

But also among the first to organize a national state from the current European nations. Romanians only managed this 150 years ago ;) Compared to us Romanians made it only to the kindergarten on the palette of history :D

[Caeruleus]

But also among the first to organize a national state from the current European nations. Romanians only managed this 150 years ago ;) Compared to us Romanians made it only to the kindergarten on the palette of history :D

actually romanians had two states for the most part of their history (they still do) so its Romanians 2 Hungarians 1 :) also, romanian national states (since their foundation 700 years ago) managed to preserve their independence uninterruptedly, they were vassals of the Turkish Empire but they never got transformed into pashaliks like Hungolia :laugh2: ... an additional point for romanians

final score: Romanians 3-1 Hungarians :thumbs up

[HungAryan]

actually romanians had two states for the most part of their history (they still do) so its Romanians 2 Hungarians 1 :) also, romanians since the foundation of their national states 700 years ago managed to preserve their independence uninterruptedly, they were vassals of the Turkish Empire but they never got transformed into pashaliks like Hungolia :laugh2: ... an additional point for romanians

final score: Romanians 3-1 Hungarians :thumbs up

Romanians were cowards who preferred paying taxes to the Ottomans rather than fighting them.

The Hungarians fought bravely against the Mongols and Turks.
The Mongol invasion in 1241 killed off 50% of our population.
The Turkish occupation for 150 years made us into a minority in our own country.

We were fighting face-to-face against the Turks, while you were cowardly paying taxes to them.

[Caeruleus]

Romanians were cowards who preferred paying taxes to the Ottomans rather than fighting them.

The Hungarians fought bravely against the Mongols and Turks.
The Mongol invasion in 1241 killed off 50% of our population.
The Turkish occupation for 150 years made us into a minority in our own country.

We were fighting face-to-face against the Turks, while you were cowardly paying taxes to them.

You fought two battles against the turks : Battle of Belgrade which you won because of Iancu de Hunedoara's genius and Battle of Mohachs which you disgracefully lost (that time you didnt had any romanian generals to bail your asses out) ... Romanian kings with their tinny armies managed to reach Adrianopole :) when did the hungolians had the balls to invade the turks !? You were sitting on your asses all the time and when the turks finally increased the pressure a little bit you gave up like a bunch of pussies. Now fuck off and learn how to be a fighter mongol pussy.

[HungAryan]

Iancu de Hunedoara

That's János Hunyadi, you prick!

[Volkodav]

Romanians were cowards who preferred paying taxes to the Ottomans rather than fighting them.

The Hungarians fought bravely against the Mongols and Turks.
The Mongol invasion in 1241 killed off 50% of our population.
The Turkish occupation for 150 years made us into a minority in our own country.

We were fighting face-to-face against the Turks, while you were cowardly paying taxes to them.
You know very well that every romenian voivod who got the trone due to the turks also fought against the turks, last one was Constantin Brâncoveanu, since then only greeks for the principates.
How many times did you fought againt the Habsburgs before 1848 ?

[Sagitta Hungarica]

You fought two battles against the turks : Battle of Belgrade which you won because of Iancu de Hunedoara's genius and Battle of Mohachs which you disgracefully lost (that time you didnt had any romanian generals to bail your asses out) ... Romanian kings with their tinny armies managed to reach Adrianopole :) when did the hungolians had the balls to invade the turks !? You were sitting on your asses all the time and when the turks finally increased the pressure a little bit you gave up like a bunch of pussies. Now fuck off and learn how to be a fighter mongol pussy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3KiCZDq_C4

Watch this reenactment video, and learn some history. Disgraceful is the last word that should be used for the heroism of the Hungarian troops facing an adversary almost impossible to defeat. Shame on you for spitting on all the lost soldiers, who fought with bravery, among them from several European nations. Why do most associate Romanians with Gypsies? Well because of such attitude as you and your folk manifest on this site might be a good reason.

[Sagitta Hungarica]

actually romanians had two states for the most part of their history (they still do) so its Romanians 2 Hungarians 1 :) also, romanian national states (since their foundation 700 years ago) managed to preserve their independence uninterruptedly, they were vassals of the Turkish Empire but they never got transformed into pashaliks like Hungolia :laugh2: ... an additional point for romanians

final score: Romanians 3-1 Hungarians :thumbs up

Romania was founded in 1856, by the union of Moldova and the Tara Romaneasca, but inside the Ottoman Empire. Romania is an independent state however only from 1877. There was no Romania before, unless you can prove the unprovable :p

[Caeruleus]

Do you think I care about some lame cartoon made to excuse your lack of balls !? The only thing that matters is that you lost and you got your asses raped for 150 years (something that you completely deserved) ... I piss on your soldiers and I piss on your history, hungarians were a disgrace for the anti-ottoman cause.

Moldova and Wallachia were romanian states inhabited by romanians (that spoke the romanian language), also the first unitarian romanian state was created by Michael the Brave in 1600 (as you can see there was a united romanian country before 1859) so go ride a pony my chinky neighbour :wink

In the 15th century, French and Italian travelers realized the Neo-Latin features of the Romanian language.[6] The Dominican John of Sultanieh referred to the Romanians’ Latin origin already around 1400.[6] The archaic-sounding name ‘Daco-Roman’ was given to them by Gian Francesco Poggio Bracciolini (1380–1459).[17] who writes that in the western part of eastern Europe live the descendants of Trajan's settlers[18]
Giovanni Andrea Gromo (in 1564) and Pierrre Lescalopier (around 1574), remarked that the Romanians called themselves the descendants of the Roman colonists [19]
In Romanian historiography it was Grigore Ureche (c. 1590-1647) who first noted that the origin of the Romanians was in “Râm” (Rome).[5] In his Chronicle of Moldavia, he presents many strong arguments for the claim that the Romanians “descended from Rome.”[1]

[Sagitta Hungarica]

Do you think I care about some lame cartoon made to excuse your lack of balls !? The only thing that matters is that you lost and you got your asses raped for 150 years (something that you completely deserved) ... I piss on your soldiers and I piss on your history, hungarians were a disgrace for the anti-ottoman cause.

Moldova and Wallachia were romanian states inhabited by romanians (that spoke the romanian language), also the first unitarian romanian state was created by Michael the Brave in 1600 (as you can see there was a united romanian country before 1859) so go ride a pony my chinky neighbour :wink

In the 15th century, French and Italian travelers realized the Neo-Latin features of the Romanian language.[6] The Dominican John of Sultanieh referred to the Romanians’ Latin origin already around 1400.[6] The archaic-sounding name ‘Daco-Roman’ was given to them by Gian Francesco Poggio Bracciolini (1380–1459).[17] who writes that in the western part of eastern Europe live the descendants of Trajan's settlers[18]
Giovanni Andrea Gromo (in 1564) and Pierrre Lescalopier (around 1574), remarked that the Romanians called themselves the descendants of the Roman colonists [19]
In Romanian historiography it was Grigore Ureche (c. 1590-1647) who first noted that the origin of the Romanians was in “Râm” (Rome).[5] In his Chronicle of Moldavia, he presents many strong arguments for the claim that the Romanians “descended from Rome.”[1]

Links? Just don't expect me to believe on your word.

[Caeruleus]

Links? Just don't expect me to believe on your word.

you think I invented this whole text !? :) what do you take me for, a hungarian !? :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Romanians#Origin_of_theories

na link obsedatule vezi sa nu faci crampa musculara de la atata onanism
:) taraie pula mongoloida

I suppose you dont need a link for Michael's Union!? or do you !?

[Sagitta Hungarica]

you think I invented this whole text !? :) what do you take me for, a hungarian !? :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Romanians#Origin_of_theories

na link obsedatule vezi sa nu faci crampa musculara de la atata onanism
:) taraie pula mongoloida

I suppose you dont need a link for Michael's 1600 Union!? or do you !?

I haven't denied that Romanians are the descendants of Roman settlers, only that they originate South of the Danube, being a mixture of Romanized Thracians, Illyrians, Roman soldiers from the Middle East, who in the Middle Ages became heavily influenced by the Southern Slavs, both linguistically and culturally, and who assimilated the Cumans after their migration North of the Danube ;)

[Caeruleus]

I haven't denied that Romanians are the descendants of Roman settlers, only that they originate South of the Danube, being a mixture of Romanized Thracians, Illyrians, Roman soldiers from the Middle East, who in the Middle Ages became heavily influenced by the Southern Slavs, both linguistically and culturally, and who assimilated the Cumans after their migration North of the Danube ;)

Romanians originated north of the Danube, the fact that eastern romance people live north of the Danube 2000 years after the roman occupation of virtually the same area (not all of it but more than a half) is prove in itself that the romanian nation was born in the lands of modern day Romania and therefore romanians are a mix of daco-thracians, roman soldiers (not middle-easterners) and colonists from other roman provinces.

The only two roman legions that were permanently stationed in Dacia are : XIII Gemina - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legio_XIII_Gemina, a legion that not only has never been stationed in the Middle-East but it was actually never involved in military actions in that particular area.V Macedonica - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legio_V_Macedonica took part in middle-eastern military actions (parthian campaign and jewish wars) but it was never stationed there.

Legions I Adiutrix (based in Hungary) and IV Flavia Felix (based in Serbia) were heavily engaged in the dacian wars but never stationed in Dacia Romana for a long period of time. Once again IV Flavia Felix was never involved in the Middle East, I Adiutrix took part in the parthian campaign only. Legions I Italica (based in Bulgaria), VII Claudia (based in Serbia) and XI Claudia (based in Bulgaria) that played a secondary role in the dacian campaign were never involved in the Middle-East.

The colonists, besides the Roman troops, were mainly first or second-generation Roman colonists from Noricum or Pannonia (thats modern Slovenia, Austria and Hungary), later supplemented with colonists from Thracia (modern Bulgaria) ... so your little theory of "middle-east romans" is bogus :)

I never said that romanians were not influenced by the slavs (that is a fact that no sane man can deny), on the contrary I stated several times that the slavic element is an important (but not major) part of the romanian nation.
Cumans did not play any role in the shaping of my nation. We romanians do not preserve any genetical, cultural or linguistical cuman heritage. The cuman connection is just another hungarian (austrian or german if you like) lie meant to undermine the history and heritage of romanians.

[Sagitta Hungarica]

Romanians originated north of the Danube, the fact that eastern romance people live north of the Danube 2000 years after the roman occupation of virtually the same area (not all of it but more than a half) is prove in itself that the romanian nation was born in the lands of modern day Romania and therefore romanians are a mix of daco-thracians, roman soldiers (not middle-easterners) and colonists from other roman provinces.

The only two roman legions that were permanently stationed in Dacia are : XIII Gemina - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legio_XIII_Gemina, a legion that not only has never been stationed in the Middle-East but it was actually never involved in military actions in that particular area.V Macedonica - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legio_V_Macedonica took part in middle-eastern military actions (parthian campaign and jewish wars) but it was never stationed there.

Legions I Adiutrix (based in Hungary) and IV Flavia Felix (based in Serbia) were heavily engaged in the dacian wars but never stationed in Dacia Romana for a long period of time. Once again IV Flavia Felix was never involved in the Middle East, I Adiutrix took part in the parthian campaign only. Legions I Italica (based in Bulgaria), VII Claudia (based in Serbia) and XI Claudia (based in Bulgaria) that played a secondary role in the dacian campaign were never involved in the Middle-East.

The colonists, besides the Roman troops, were mainly first or second-generation Roman colonists from Noricum or Pannonia (thats modern Slovenia, Austria and Hungary), later supplemented with colonists from Thracia (modern Bulgaria) ... so your little theory of "middle-east romans" is bogus :)

I never said that romanians were not influenced by the slavs (that is a fact that no sane man can deny), on the contrary I stated several times that the slavic element is an important (but not major) part of the romanian nation.
Cumans did not play any role in the shaping of my nation. We romanians do not preserve any genetical, cultural or linguistical cuman heritage. The cuman connection is just another hungarian (austrian or german if you like) lie meant to undermine the history and heritage of romanians.

Are you sure? :D

Because C.C. Giurescu (Romanian historian) in his book "Istoria romanilor" says the next thing about the ethnic component of the Roman legions from Dacia: "The legions situated in Dacia came from many different places. We find Britons, Asturians, Lusitans, Bosporians, Antiochians, Gauls, Rethians, Commagenes from Siria, and even Nubians and Mauri from Africa". It is evident that Latin wasn't their native tongue to either of these soldiers, so it is in the domain of sci-fi that Dacians could learn Latin from none-Latin Roman soldiers.

Also it is beyond ridiculous that you deny any relation with the Cumans (Kipchaks), when they ruled the future Wallachia and Moldova just before these states were founded in the 13th century.
http://www.sibiweb.de/geschi/karten/1241-3.gif
http://firfilika.com/images/depo/AD1237_KipchakKhanate.gif
http://www.imninalu.net/Myths_files/Vlach-expansion.jpg

Even the first Vlach dynasty was of Cuman origin, the House of Basarab. Basarabia, the other name of Moldova clearly points to the Cuman origin of the state.

Basarab I's name was originally Basarabai and lost the ending -a when it was borrowed into Romanian. The name is of Cuman or Pecheneg[1] origin and most likely meant "father ruler". Basar was the present participle of the verb "to rule", derivatives attested in both old and modern Kypchak languages. The Romanian historian Nicolae Iorga believed the second part of the name, -aba ("father"), to be an honorary title, as recognizable in many Cuman names, such as Terteroba, Arslanapa, and Ursoba.

Basarab's father Thocomerius of Wallachia also bore a Cuman name, identified as Toq-tämir, a rather common Cuman and Tatar name in the 13th century. The Russian chronicles around 1295 refer to a Toktomer, a prince of the Mongol Empire present in Crimea.

While the names indicate a Cuman (or Pecheneg) origin, contemporaries constantly identified Basarab as a Vlach. Charles I of Hungary speaks of him as "Bazarab infidelis Olacus noster" ("Bazarab, our treacherous Vlach").

As you see, in those times the Cuman house of Basarab was named as Vlach, evidence of the complete assimilation of Cumans into the Vlachs.

As a side note, I know several Ardeleni and Banateni consider Southern Romanians as Turks, Orientals, Gypsies, because of their darker skin complexion. This is because of the intermarriage between Cumans and Vlachs in the Middle Ages.

[Caeruleus]

Are you sure? :D

Because C.C. Giurescu (Romanian historian) in his book "Istoria romanilor" says the next thing about the ethnic component of the Roman legions from Dacia: "The legions situated in Dacia came from many different places. We find Britons, Asturians, Lusitans, Bosporians, Antiochians, Gauls, Rethians, Commagenes from Siria, and even Nubians and Mauri from Africa". It is evident that Latin wasn't their native tongue to either of these soldiers, so it is in the domain of sci-fi that Dacians could learn Latin from none-Latin Roman soldiers.

Yes I'm sure ... let me enlighten you, only roman citizens (free men) were eligible to serve in the army :) therefore negros, turks and other slave material (barbarians) couldnt be legionnaires :) but you as a chinky cunt that you are had to give it shot, I understand a mongol is a mongol ;) ... take a look at the history of the roman army and you will understand that only after 284 they started recruiting barbarians as legionnaires, this period (284-476) is called the late roman army period which marks the downfall of the roman army and the Roman Empire.


Also it is beyond ridiculous that you deny any relation with the Cumans (Kipchaks), when they ruled the future Wallachia and Moldova just before these states were founded in the 13th century.

Cuman reign in modern Romania ended in 1241, romanian Middle Age states were founded in 1330 (Wallachia) and 1345 (Moldova) :) cumans fleed romanian lands when mongols invaded that area in 1241 and took refuge in the Kingdom of Hungary. The end of the Cuman military entity did not mean the end of the term Cumania. In the Kingdom of Hungary, Cuman refugees created two more regions named Cumania (Kunság in Hungarian): Greater Cumania (Nagykunság) and Little Cumania (Kiskunság), both located in the Great Hungarian Plain. Here, the Cumans maintained their language and some ethnic customs well into the modern era http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuns%C3%A1g so if cumans influenced someone somehow it was the hungarians, not the romanians :)


Even the first Vlach dynasty was of Cuman origin, the House of Basarab. Basarabia, the other name of Moldova clearly points to the Cuman origin of the state.

As you see, in those times the Cuman house of Basarab was named as Vlach, evidence of the complete assimilation of Cumans into the Vlachs.

It is only a theory that the house of Basarab was of cuman origin, it hasnt been proved as being so, and even if the Basarabs were originally cumans it doesnt mean that the whole wallachian/romanian nation was cuman.

Basarabia is not the other name of Moldova, eastern Moldova (present day Rep. of Moldova) started to be called wrongfully Basarabia by the russians when they annexed it in 1812.



As a side note, I know several Ardeleni and Banateni consider Southern Romanians as Turks, Orientals, Gypsies, because of their darker skin complexion. This is because of the intermarriage between Cumans and Vlachs in the Middle Ages.

Is that another episode of the series "I know some romanians that say this and that and the other" !? what is it ? you wanna give more credibility to what you blab in this forum like a whining cunt that you are ? you really think that this is working ? :laugh2:

if you would've actually read something about the cumans and the pechenegs you would've known that the cumans were not dark on the contrary they were blonds with pale skin.

A variety of sources from different countries (such as Germany, Hungary and the historic Rus) explain that the different names for the Cumans may all refer to the meaning 'blond', 'sallow' and 'yellow', in reference to the color of the Kumans' hair.[15] The Ukrainian word 'Polovtsy' (Пóловці) means "blond", since the old Ukrainian word "polovo" means "straw". "Kuman" means "pale yellow" in Turkic.

so if the vlachs would've mixed with cumans they sould've been lighter and not darker my little mongol friend :)

[HungAryan]

if you would've actually read something about the cumans and the pechenegs you would've known that the cumans were not dark on the contrary they were blonds with pale skin.


Pigmentation is one thing, they were still a Turkic tribe, therefore Mongoloid.

There are actually blond people in Mongolia
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lSMDXzV755c/Ttv7GWqpuSI/AAAAAAAABKA/0K4Wf9mNWd8/s1600/blond-mongol-girl.jpg
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQUNu32c6RZJWdtrcp9531za3ypV7mkx 6eaKvuCt35UCCU0ueQEtQ5epzLobg
http://www.gnxp.com/blog/uploaded_images/blondechinese-789403.jpg
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQpZDBoXvELVUK3GXqPjTuol4dx956hp Zyi3NVDZIB08RMLXQgcr02_WVF_
http://www.ibelieveinadv.com/commons/ibtelefonica2.jpg


9B7yduWlIDE
O5XSECQFTl4
HhxlBAfHZtE


So what?
Albino Mongol is still Mongol.
Therefore, the Cumans and Kipchaks who mixed with the Vlachs (Romanians) were still Mongoloid.
Genetics have proven that ethnic Romanians have HIGHER amount of Mongoloid admixture than ethnic Hungarians.

Also, there are 535 140 gypsies living in Romania, making up 2.46% of the population. In Hungary, the number of gypsies is 205 720, 2.02% of the population.

So much for pure Daco-Roman lineage...
Oh, and did I mention those Nubian Negroes serving in the Ancient Roman army?
Nubia and Egypt were parts of the Roman Empire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_citizenship

-Client state citizens and allies (socii) of Rome could receive a limited form of Roman citizenship such as the Latin Right. While such citizens could vote in Roman elections, it was impractical.
-Freedmen, freed slaves, were granted a limited form of Roman citizenship.[2] Freedmen could later attain full Roman citizenship. The children of freedmen and women were legally free-born; for example, the father of the poet Horace was a freedman.


The Edict of Caracalla was an edict issued in 212, by the Roman Emperor Caracalla which law declared that all free men in the Roman Empire were to be given full Roman citizenship and all free women in Empire were given the same rights as Roman women were

Since Nubia was part of the Roman Empire, yes, the Nubian negroes were given Roman citizenship, along with all those Middle Eastern and North African peoples. So they could serve in the army.
Thus, the Romans employed a clever strategy which was later re-used by the Habsburgs: put everyone as far away from their homeland as possible. Send the Middle Easterners into Britain, and send the Britons and Gauls into the Mid East. Send the Eastern Greeks into Spain, and send the Western Spaniards into Greece, Dacia and Asia Minor.
Yes, the Romans employed that strategy. 1700 years later, the Austrian Habsburgs re-employed it.

[Sagitta Hungarica]

Yes I'm sure ... let me enlighten you, only roman citizens (free men) were eligible to serve in the army :) therefore negros, turks and other slave material (barbarians) couldnt be legionnaires :) but you as a chinky cunt that you are had to give it shot, I understand a mongol is a mongol ;) ... take a look at the history of the roman army and you will understand that only after 284 they started recruiting barbarians as legionnaires, this period (284-476) is called the late roman army period which marks the downfall of the roman army and the Roman Empire.



Cuman reign in modern Romania ended in 1241, romanian Middle Age states were founded in 1330 (Wallachia) and 1345 (Moldova) :) cumans fleed romanian lands when mongols invaded that area in 1241 and took refuge in the Kingdom of Hungary. The end of the Cuman military entity did not mean the end of the term Cumania. In the Kingdom of Hungary, Cuman refugees created two more regions named Cumania (Kunság in Hungarian): Greater Cumania (Nagykunság) and Little Cumania (Kiskunság), both located in the Great Hungarian Plain. Here, the Cumans maintained their language and some ethnic customs well into the modern era http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuns%C3%A1g so if cumans influenced someone somehow it was the hungarians, not the romanians :)



It is only a theory that the house of Basarab was of cuman origin, it hasnt been proved as being so, and even if the Basarabs were originally cumans it doesnt mean that the whole wallachian/romanian nation was cuman.

Basarabia is not the other name of Moldova, eastern Moldova (present day Rep. of Moldova) started to be called wrongfully Basarabia by the russians when they annexed it in 1812.




Is that another episode of the series "I know some romanians that say this and that and the other" !? what is it ? you wanna give more credibility to what you blab in this forum like a whining cunt that you are ? you really think that this is working ? :laugh2:

if you would've actually read something about the cumans and the pechenegs you would've known that the cumans were not dark on the contrary they were blonds with pale skin.

A variety of sources from different countries (such as Germany, Hungary and the historic Rus) explain that the different names for the Cumans may all refer to the meaning 'blond', 'sallow' and 'yellow', in reference to the color of the Kumans' hair.[15] The Ukrainian word 'Polovtsy' (Пóловці) means "blond", since the old Ukrainian word "polovo" means "straw". "Kuman" means "pale yellow" in Turkic.

so if the vlachs would've mixed with cumans they sould've been lighter and not darker my little mongol friend :)

I gave you a quotation from a Romanian source who admits that there were many soldiers from the Middle East and North Africa among the Roman legions settled in Dacia. And Romans recruited soldiers from the "barbarians" even during the period of Imperial Roman army:

To complement the legions, Augustus established the auxilia, a regular corps of similar numbers to the legions, recruited from the peregrini or non-citizen inhabitants of the empire, who constituted about 90% of the Empire's population in the 1st century. These units were termed cohortes if they consisted of infantry, alae if they consisted of cavalry and cohortes equitatae if they were composed of infantry with a cavalry contingent attached.

According to one survey about the components of the legions, ca. 65% were Italian-born in the early Julio-Claudian period (to AD 41), 49% in the period 42-68, 21% in the Flavian era (69-96) and around 8% under Hadrian. Italians thus represented ca. 4% of total army recruits under Hadrian.

From the time of Augustus until the rule of Septimius Severus (197-211), serving legionaries were legally prohibited from marrying (presumably so as to discourage them from deserting if they were deployed far from heir families).

So there goes the famous myth of Roman soldiers taking Dacian women as wives :). Plus it should be stated that during Roman rule of Dacia there were deployed 32 Cohortes (which as seen above was mostly of none-Italian component), and only 2 legions.

As I quoted above, it is accepted that the first Romanian ruling class was of Cuman origin, and only a part of the Cumans fled to Hungary, while the others remained in today's Moldova and Muntenia, mixing with the Vlach newcomers.

After the joint Cuman-Russian army lost the battle with the Tatars at Kalmius in 1223 the Cumans fled on today's territory of Basarabia and Moldova, and founded the independent state of Cumania, terra Cumanorum. In 1227 their leader Bortz adopted Christianity to the pressures of the Hungarian Kingdom, and got under the influence of Hungary. In 1279 the Hungarian priests founded the Roman Catholic Diocese of Cumania, in Milcov, situated in today's Moldova. In 1239, during another Tatar invasion a part of the Cumans, around 40000 found refuge in Hungary. However many of them left Hungary towards South, after Hungarian noblemen killed their leader on March 17, 1241.

These are facts. For some reason you turn a blind eye on them, and prefer the myths :confused:

[Caeruleus]

Pigmentation is one thing, they were still a Turkic tribe, therefore Mongoloid.

Agreed, but your mongoloid countrymen was specifically talking about pigmentation and not morphology.


Genetics have proven that ethnic Romanians have HIGHER amount of Mongoloid admixture than ethnic Hungarians.

WHAT !? :lol00002:

I'll post a couple of videos of hungarian facial types (notice the great amount of asian/mongoloid faces)

5Vuz_fhzkQA
wmM6iv0Xgxw
zwV7yowmvok


you wont find this kind of individuals in Romania (or at least not that many, if at all) ... saying that Romanians have a higher mongoloid admixture than hungarians is just pure bollocks.


Also, there are 535 140 gypsies living in Romania, making up 2.46% of the population. In Hungary, the number of gypsies is 205 720, 2.02% of the population.

well yeah a difference of 0,44 % is "huge" :laugh2: basically you have as many gypsies as Romania does.



Oh, and did I mention those Nubian Negroes serving in the Ancient Roman army? Nubia and Egypt were parts of the Roman Empire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_citizenship

Since Nubia was part of the Roman Empire, yes, the Nubian negroes were given Roman citizenship, along with all those Middle Eastern and North African peoples. So they could serve in the army.

Read the history of the roman army and its customs, yes it is true that Caracalla awarded citizenship to everybody in 212 but barbarians werent recruited as legionnaires until 284 (since 284 they started to enroll them en-mass which eventually lead to the demise of the roman army)

[Nurzat]

north romanians of all types (hungarians, ukrainians, moldavians, moroshans) are much lighter and germanic or slavic looking on average (on average i say, don't give me individual examples)

romanians of one region are only partially mixed with romanians of other regions and only in the big cities, in the rest you will see in 90% of the cases couples from the same region (moldavian-moldavian, wallachian-wallachian, moroshan-moroshan etc)

gypsies are many indeed, but still no more than 5-6% (i mean maybe three-four times their official data at the census). plus, they are packed in specific regions like southern transylvania and baragan, and gypsy-mixed people are VERY obvious for at least northern romanians so one can't lie about it, i mean he cannot be credible if he denies it

[HungAryan]

I cannot send Gypsyleus's trolling anymore. Time to expand the ignore list :coffee:

[Volkodav]

Do you people realise that tme Romanian Medieval History began with the war against the Golden Horde in the Hungarians Army, total extermination of all the people who were ar the foothills of the Charpatians (all the way to the Dnister).
The Magyar army stoped at the Charpatian passes and did not allowed the ex-soldiers to return home. Keep in mind that Magyar land at that time was formed mostly of non-magyars.
Also in the south the proto-Walahian state was created by imigrants from Transilvania who took over the assian establisament from inside, we can see this in the use of the coat of arms: at first in Wallachia there was used the Arpad flag with green-yellow stripes, and after the "take over" was used the raven with cross coat of arms.

[Sagitta Hungarica]

Agreed, but your mongoloid countrymen was specifically talking about pigmentation and not morphology.



WHAT !? :lol00002:

I'll post a couple of videos of hungarian facial types (notice the great amount of asian/mongoloid faces)

5Vuz_fhzkQA
wmM6iv0Xgxw
zwV7yowmvok


you wont find this kind of individuals in Romania (or at least not that many, if at all) ... saying that Romanians have a higher mongoloid admixture than hungarians is just pure bollocks.



well yeah a difference of 0,44 % is "huge" :laugh2: basically you have as many gypsies as Romania does.




Read the history of the roman army and its customs, yes it is true that Caracalla awarded citizenship to everybody in 212 but barbarians werent recruited as legionnaires until 284 (since 284 they started to enroll them en-mass which eventually lead to the demise of the roman army)

Lol. Even your president has evident Mongoloid features ;)
http://www.cotidianul.ro/images/stiri/0611/1309374371traian-basescu.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5CyN5cFPMic/TZyG4UIOnsI/AAAAAAAAAA8/kEG0J6WnKEs/s1600/traian_basescu.jpg

[Caeruleus]

Lol. Even your president has evident Mongoloid features ;)
http://www.cotidianul.ro/images/stiri/0611/1309374371traian-basescu.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5CyN5cFPMic/TZyG4UIOnsI/AAAAAAAAAA8/kEG0J6WnKEs/s1600/traian_basescu.jpg

oooohhh you mongoloid cunts :) you never give up dont you ? Basescu is an alpinoid-dinarid (pred. alpinoid) nothing mongoloid about him. Learn a little anthropology chinky cunt ;)

He is ugly but still europid, if there is something "less" european about him it could be the armenoid (not sure about that) which would explain the rumours that he is a jew.

his eyes are actually pretty big
http://www.badpolitics.ro/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/traian-basescu_biografie.jpg
http://www.adevarul.ro/bbtcontent/clipping/ADVIMA20110324_0003/1.jpg
http://www.romanialibera.ro/usr/thumbs/thumb_289_x_340/2011/12/01//212647-traian-basescu-tanar.jpg

so fuck off mongoloid cunts, you and jewdeus

[Volkodav]

Băsescu este tătar, toată lumea ştie asta. E o corcitură.

eng - Traian Băsescu is mongolian, all people know that. Not pure romanian.