0
Thumbs Up |
Received: 3,471 Given: 1,541 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 735 Given: 846 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 735 Given: 846 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 3,983 Given: 2,435 |
This is just hilarious. It's a perfect example of why "Moldovenism" appeals only to idiots.
Let's take it step-by-step.
1. Moldovenists deny that the word "Romanian" was used before the 19th century, or if it was it meant "serf" not "Romanian". Yet, the word "Romanian" appears many times in the first major Moldovan chronicle (Letopisetul Tarii Moldovei, written in the 17th century) and it denotes the ethnicity, not a social status.
2. Moldovenists deny that Moldovans ever used the word Romanian to refer to themselves before the Union in 1859. Yet, we can read in all Moldovan chronicles exactly the opposite. Even in the first chronicle, Letopisetul Tarii Moldovei, Moldovans are called Romanians, from the very beginning of Moldova as a state, quote:
This basically says that Romanians from Maramures colonized Moldova with Romanians in the South and Ruthenians (described as Russians from Poland) in the North. Note, it says Romanians not Moldovans. And that makes perfect sense, because the name Moldovan didn't even exist at the time of the colonization (14th century), whereas Romanian did."Iar Iațco prisecariul, deaca au īnțeles de descălecarea maramorășénilor, īndată s-au dus și el īn Țara Leșască, de au dus ruși mulți și i-au descălecat pre apa Sucévei īn sus și pre Sirétiu despre Botoșiani. Și așa de sārgu s-au lățit rumănii īn gios și rușii īn sus."
3. Another Moldovenist nonsensical claim is that before the 19th century "ruman" (the spelling that uses the letter "u") strictly meant "serf". This is obviously false, since "ruman" is extensively used in Moldovan chronicles to designate the ethnicity. The words ruman/serb/neighbor had for a while the informal meaning of "serf" (because serfdom was widespread in the region), but they have always designated the respective ethnicities. In addition to this, ruman and roman were just alternative spellings and meant exactly the same thing, contracting the Moldovenist claim. In "Letopisetul Tarii Moldovei" both "ruman" and "roman" are used to designate Romanians.
4. I see here an original Aspirin claim that Maramuresan Vlachs were not Romanians. Bigger bullshit is hard to find, not even Hungarians claim such nonsense. But again, in "Letopisetul Tarii Moldovei" it's explicitely noted that Romanians lived in Maramures:
In order for Aspirin's claim to be true, it would require that in Maramures to exist at the same time both Romanians and some misterious Vlachs nobody heard about. Obviously that's bullshit, nobody saw 2 different types of Vlachs in Romania - the Vlachs of Romania are the Romanians."Rumānii, cāți să află lăcuitori la Țara Ungurească și la Ardeal și la Maramoroșu, de la un loc suntu cu moldovénii și toți de la Rām să trag."
Last edited by ixulescu; 10-01-2020 at 04:39 PM.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 8,748 Given: 3,188 |
Acestea īs adaosuri la cronica originală a lui Ureche, adăugate de Simion Dascălul cīteva decenii mai tīrziu, un individ originar din Transilvania. Dacă nu ai fi o putoare și ai mai verifica sursa pe care citezi, poate nu te-ai faci de rīs așa. Ureche nu folosește termenul romān pentru moldoveni nicăieri, e folosit strict pentru romānii din Transilvania. Ureche doar spune că moldovenii și romānii au aceiași origine ceea ce nimeni nu neagă asta. Dascălul īn genere spune că Moldova jumătate e de ruși chiar și la vremea lui, ceea ce e imposibil, dar dacă e adevărat, atunic moldovenii la sigur nu-s rumāni.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 3,983 Given: 2,435 |
You are persisting in stupidity. I didn't say all of those quotes belong to Gh. Ureche, just that they come from "Letopisetul Tarii Moldovei". Simion Dascalul was a Moldovan not Transylvanian. He was a contemporary of Gh. Ureche, and continued "Letopisetul Tarii Moldovei" after Ureche's death. Oldest preserved copies of "Letopisetul Tarii Moldovei" are those of Simion Dascalul. Simion Dascalul says that Maramures Romanians colonized Moldova with Russians from Poland (in other words Ruthenians) in the North and Romanians in the South. It is a fact that Northern Moldovans have Ruthenian admixture - that said formation of Moldova didn't stop in 1350. Many more Romanians came from Transylvania, some Hungarians too. The end result is that Moldovans are far closer to average Romanian than to any other nation in the region - Moldovans are just the local variety of Romanians, deal with it.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 8,748 Given: 3,188 |
N-o mai continuat el nici o cronică, doar a adăugat ceva amănunte noi pentru care a stīrnit ura lui Costin și Cantemir. Și el era din Transilvania, cred că ți-i lene șu să cauți, da dacă ești rumīn, n-ai ce să-i faci. Moldovenii īs total diferiți de rumīni mai ales genetic, nu degeaba Costin īi numește pe rumīni popor negru.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 3,983 Given: 2,435 |
You're a fucking idiot. Simion Dascalul added 70 years to the 230 years covered by Gh. Ureche. These were not just "some details", it's basically a 4th of the book.
Moldovans from Romania cluster with the rest of Romanians, as shown on Ion Basescul PCA. Moldovans from RM are a bit different because of the East Slavic admixture assimilated in the past 200 years - but they're still closer to Romanians than to any other ethnicity - they are Northeastern Romanians (Aspirin Romānaşu' is a good example).
Thumbs Up |
Received: 8,748 Given: 3,188 |
Moldovenii nu-s aproape de romīni, populațiile cele mai aproape sīnt sīrbii, croații și ucrainenii carpatici, doar pentru cei de la sud care s-au mixat cu bulgari/găgăuzi romīnii īs aproape genetic. Moldovenii din Romīnia desigur īs aprope de noi genetic īn mare parte, dar asta că nu-s romīni la origini, s-au romīnizat īn ultimii 160 de ani. Unde eu trăiesc, populația e foarte nordică, așa că e imposibil să fii rom genetic aici, e destul să te uiți și la īnfățișarea oamenilor.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks