who are the Vlachs... / Ko su Vlasi ..

[ixulescu]

Șerban is not coming from serb. it is pronounced Sherbán and it has a completely different origin.

They do though. Both Șerban and șerb come from sirb. Deriving șerb from servus is incorrect, serv/us was already replaced with sclav in the Medieval Romanian. Many etymologies in DEX are incorrect.

[Blondie]

And if a Magyar state failed to form but instead a Slavic or German one did, you'd be reminiscing your Uralic ancestry just like the Avar one - maybe some here and there, who knows.

Not really, that's happaned in Bulgaria, and modern bulgarians have no any turkic identity but old bulgars were turkic.

I have no reasons to call myself "Latin" or "Italian" - because the base population here adopted the language, with almost no customs whatsoever ? people can't name more than Sânziene and Floriile, the former being a pan-European Ivanа-Kupala/Midsommer tradition for which we just took the name and the later being a Christian one.

I didn't say you should call yourself italian, but you are clearly a latin people and Romania is a latin country. Btw just a question, do you accept turks as natives in Anatolia?

The pre-Roman people here, the Dacians, lost two wars, succumbed to Rome, took the language and the preservation of the language is borderline a miracle. Those are my "oldest ancestors", to quote you. Local people, prior to the Romans being here, and also after them leaving. Just like you are a product of local people in Hungary and barely any actual Hungarian conqueror. My cultural identity is not dictated by the language.

This is your business, other peoples consider themselves apache helicopter, so i don't really care someone's identity, only the facts. But if you're so obsessed with genetic than your E-V13 haplo originated from haplogroup E what is originated from East Africa, so why don't you consider yourself east african? Or you just cherrypicked a random age and says "hmm these guys are cool i choose them"?

[ixulescu]

So you have one person with 15% Italian, which is absurd as there were never enough Romans here to result in a 21st century person having 15% Italian ancestry, not to mention that the Roman legions were not purely Italian nor the colonists. Even further, they were concentrated in what is now the western part of the Wallachia region and partly Transylvania - there was population outside of that region which would have diluted it even more.

Great argument.

On average Romanians score 20% Greek+Italian - they are hard to distinguish and various test will give different proportions of Italian, but it's safe to assume that 10% of the ancestry has Italian origin.

The fact that Romans conquered only Transylvania and Oltenia only strengthens the argument because most Romanians are descendants of Transylvanians. Both Wallachia and Moldova were colonized with Transylvanians. Roman colonists were about 20% of the population in Roman Dacia and that percentage has been diluted to 10% after subsequent migrations.

[WeirdLookingFellow]

Not really, that's happaned in Bulgaria, and modern bulgarians have no any turkic identity but old bulgars were turkic.

The Gagauz call themselves Turkic despite being mostly Bulgarian. Bulgarians would probably call themselves Turkic too if they didn't speak a Slavic language.

I didn't say you should call yourself italian, but you are clearly a latin people and Romania is a latin country. Btw just a question, do you accept turks as natives in Anatolia?

Your question makes no sense relative to the topic - the Romans, if they were even from purely Italic ancestry, came here and colonized us, then left. We stayed and were here before them. Turks are not natives in Anatolia, they're invaders, mixed and stayed in Anatolia.

This is your business, other peoples consider themselves apache helicopter, so i don't really care someone's identity, only the facts. But if you're so obsessed with genetic than your E-V13 haplo originated from haplogroup E what is originated from East Africa, so why don't you consider yourself east african? Or you just cherrypicked a random age and says "hmm these guys are cool i choose them"?

Derailing for no reason because you cannot accept the fact that Romanians are Paleo-Balkan people that have been here for millennia. You complained about genetic arguments, I gave you cultural and historical ones. Now you insist with some absurd E-V13 joke because you have nothing palpable against what I said. I never chose an age or a people, I call myself exactly what I am - a Balkan man (Paleo-Balkan + Slavic) with a Latin language. Want me to call myself from my oldest origin and say I'm African? Then so are you, since we all come from there.

You started this argument by saying:

"Romanians have latin origin and latins originated from Italy, not from Romania."

I told you we are a Paleo-Balkan people that have been here prior to the Latin influence and that we are not Latin just because we speak a Romance language.

If there is a Latin influence in Romania, it's minor and the rest - (85% based on your example - 99%) is local + Slavic.

At the very most, the true argument here is whether we should call ourselves Latin for merely speaking a Romance language, but our presence here prior to Trajan is known.

Even so, this discussion is not yours to have, but for Romanians, since whether I larp as a Roman, Dacian, Slav or Turan does not mean anything to you, as at the most generous claim, I'm all four, and at the most reserved, I'm Dacian/Paleo-Balkan.

[Blondie]

The fact that Romans conquered only Transylvania and Oltenia only strengthens the argument because most Romanians are descendants of Transylvanians. Both Wallachia and Moldova were colonized with Transylvanians. Roman colonists were about 20% of the population in Roman Dacia and that percentage has been diluted to 10% after subsequent migrations.

What about dacians who lived outside of Transylvania? Why they can't be ancestors of romanians why only transylvanians can be that?

[WeirdLookingFellow]

On average Romanians score 20% Greek+Italian - they are hard to distinguish and various test will give different proportions of Italian, but it's safe to assume that 10% of the ancestry has Italian origin.

The fact that Romans conquered only Transylvania and Oltenia only strengthens the argument because most Romanians are descendants of Transylvanians. Both Wallachia and Moldova were colonized with Transylvanians. Roman colonists were about 20% of the population in Roman Dacia and that percentage has been diluted to 10% after subsequent migrations.

Show me proof since all 23andme's I saw show generally less than 10%.

Basescu's old-ass thread that went up until 2018 show percentages of 5%, most lower, even in Southeners.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....-23andme/page8

[ixulescu]

I have no reasons to call myself "Latin" or "Italian" - because the base population here adopted the language, with almost no customs whatsoever ? people can't name more than Sânziene and Floriile, the former being a pan-European Ivanа-Kupala/Midsommer tradition for which we just took the name and the later being a Christian one.

There are quite a few Roman pagan traditions repurposed as Christian traditions. You mentioned a couple, here's another one: Rusaliile. Most Christians call it the Pentecost but we call it Rusalii from Rosalia, a Roman celebration.
The reason most disappeared was because the process of Romanization of Dacians was contemporary with the Christianization of Romans.

The pre-Roman people here, the Dacians, lost two wars, succumbed to Rome, took the language and the preservation of the language is borderline a miracle. Those are my "oldest ancestors", to quote you. Local people, prior to the Romans being here, and also after them leaving.

Dacians had plenty of exposure to Roman life and language before 100 AD. Dacians played a significant role in Roman politics for a 100 years before the Roman invasion. It's pretty certain that educated Dacians spoke Latin before the Dacian wars.

[WeirdLookingFellow]

There are quite a few Roman pagan traditions repurposed as Christian traditions. You mentioned a couple, here's another one: Rusaliile. Most Christians call it the Pentecost but we call it Rusalii from Rosalia, a Roman celebration.
The reason most disappeared was because the process of Romanization of Dacians was contemporary with the Christianization of Romans.



Dacians had plenty of exposure to Roman life and language before 100 AD. Dacians played a significant role in Roman politics for a 100 years before the Roman invasion. It's pretty certain that educated Dacians spoke Latin before the Dacian wars.

I won't bother with Rusalii because that's also Christian. Also, give more than one apart from the two I named.

Regarding the latter, yes, I believe that one of the reasons why Dacians adopted Latin more easily is because of previous contact - but that contact is not "let's all live here together" - there were no Roman colonies in Dacia prior to Trajan, only key people for trade and other things.

[WeirdLookingFellow]

What about dacians who lived outside of Transylvania? Why they can't be ancestors of romanians why only transylvanians can be that?

He never said only Transylvanians can be the ancestors of Romanians, his only point was that Transylvania was the core. I personally don't believe the whole exchange to the full extent that he's arguing for, but your question is just gaslighting.

[ixulescu]

What about dacians who lived outside of Transylvania? Why they can't be ancestors of romanians why only transylvanians can be that?

Dacians living outside the Carpathians were replaced with other migratory tribes. Transylvania was far better defended from migrations.

Take a look at Ion Basescul PCA map of Romanian samples. They don't show any correlation with East/West coordinates, like a normal PCA of different ethnicities would. This can only happen if the Romanian population has a common ethnic origin.