Hello,
can anybody tell me:
-why romanian call them "romanian" and not... I dont know, "vlachs" (I hope is not an offence) Is there any link with Rome? (ancient eastern roman empire called itself, in greek, "Romŕnia")

-How it's possible that your language sounds so "latin" (sometimes sounds italian) when all countries around have been completely influenced by magyar, slavs and turks?

-What happened to the name "Walacchia"? - I hope I spell it correctly.

Thanks,
Curious Italian.

Roman Emperor Caracalla in 212 by "Constitutio Antoniana" made Dacian People,Citizens of Roman Empire.Dacia is the ancient name of România.

More than that,because Dacians learned Latin Language,Slavic people who came later and Germans called them also Romans.During the time the word Roman changed into Rumân and Român,(Romanian in English).Also the Roman Emperor Caius Ulpius Traianus (who was borned in Spain) brought in here a lot of Roman colonists.And the Roman Emperor Aurelian was from our country Dacia Romana.

The Romanian Language comes from Latin Language and the most of the words have Latin origins and the Grammar is the Latin.

The term Wallach is from German Language and means Roman or Latin.

The term Valachus(Valah)is also from German Language but means Român(Romanian).

Dacodava from Bacau County

In Romanian Language the word Romeno is Român.So you can see that Român is in fact the word Roman.Even if hungarians contest us,we Romanians are the Rome's descendants.
Dacians+Romans=Romanians
In Latin the word for Dacians is Daci.

So you mean that Dacians spoke latin and latin-speaking italics lived there, so when slavs arrived called them "romans"... and all the "walacchia"-connected words are german... that'interesting.

When happened that walacchians (vlachs?) called themselves "romanian"? I read in half 1500, - just on the brink of ottoman invasion. Not earlier?
OR romanians always called themselves in this way?

But how slavs, germans and magyars influenced your language, if they did?

And one more, what do you know about cuman and peceneg influence on Romania?
(I know, this is difficult )

thanks a lot.

Italiano

An interesting fact is also that hungarians and poles came in contact with us first and called us vlachs/olahs, which meant a roman/latin speaking people from german language, and only later with the italians whom they named THE SAME considering them the same people with romanians. Chec out how Italy is called in hungarian and polish.

Yes, you are right! In magyar "olah" (Not sure about spelling) means "italian" - I dont know about polish.
Here's a conclusion:
Dacians+Romans = Daco-romans (that's a temporary name I given)
then slavs and then magyars came, and hearing this people speaking a almost-latin language, called them "romans" or, "olah" in the case of magyars.
So these "romans" called themselves "rumenians", while germans and magyars called them "olah" and similarly "vlach" from which comes Walacchia.

But in the Middle Ages, before ottoman conquer, rumenians called themselves "rumenians", not (?) "walacchians" or something similar. Correct?

Foreigners called us Vlachs and they called Tara Romaneasca (Romanian Land) for Wallachia. Wallachia merged with Moldavia and created Romania. We call our selves Român or Rumân because we were citizen of Rome and the name stuck to our identity.

There are southern Romanians, too, and they call themselves Arumân (Aromanian). They live in Macedonia and Greece.

I read that the romanian "what is your name" is something like:
cum te cheama?
In italian we say: "come ti chiami?"
this similarity is incredible, considering italian has MANY differences from latin (spanish is more similar to latin than italian)

on the other hand, I read "yes" is like the panslavic "da" as russians and I think many many slav languages.

I'm saying this because I'd like to understand WHAT influenced romanian language, and compare it to what influenced italian language in its formation.

thanks for help.

Romanians never called themselves vlachs/wallachs/olahs, and i mean never! it is a completly strange name for us, i can't even spell it. But we, i think every other romanian agrees upon this with me, don't see this designation, this term as an insult. Wallachia - sounds nice, but the correct name will be "Tara Romaneasca", wich means romanian/roman land or Muntenia (i think it was named Muntenia later), but not Wallachia. Thank slavs and germans for this.
Even the so called vlahs south of danube call themselves "aromanians", wich also is a legacy of the Roman Empire. Imagine that after 2000 years between slavs, greeks and turks this people preserved their language and this name. I think that the roman era always remained in their mind, it's unbelievable!

It was not mean as an offence, of course.
But on history books I always read:
"Walacchia, which inhabitants are called romenians, also called vlachs."
Just after independence it's written "Romania".

It's however VERY remarkable that your land and people mantained this form of "independence" since roman times. It did not happen in any part of Europe.
(Also if in Italy there's a region called "Romagna", but it's why there were the eastern roman empire controlled territories in the 7th century. No relation )

Uhm... I was thinking now that Transilvania sounds as a latin name... and it's used also today. That's not a usual thing. Do you think it has been always called in this way? Do you know anything about something called "siebenburgen?" (maybe a german principate?)

An ItalianCuriousGuy

The Latin Language does not has an word for "yes".So we took the word "da" from Slavon Language and not from russian.Slavon Language came from Slavc from soth of Romania.

Wallachia or Valahia,as I said comes from German Language and means "The Country of Romanians" which is Tara Romaneasca in Romanian.Germans called as Valahs.

We always called us Romans,because our ancestors were the Roman Emperor Marcus Ulpius Traianus and the King Decebal.

Marius Ulpius Trajanus - not Marcus

No one knows who named Transylvania. It could have been the Hungarians. The name is of Latin origin.

Marcus Ulpius Trajanus! There was no Marius Ulpius Trajanus!

Oops, you guys are right. Sorry!

But wait... Traianus won over Decebalus and conquered Dacia, or not?

Curiously, a week ago I went in a museum and I saw a copy of the Traian column here in Rome, where is represented the phases of the war against Daci

Yes you're right!
Traian is considered as our ancestor since we spoke a latin language ever since ho conquered Dacia and the romanization process has begun. And don't forget that Traian was a thracian himself.
It is a emotional story between Traian and Decebal (i often laugh when hearing it)!

Yes .. We know who named Transylvania , The Magyar . Romanian name for Transylvania is " Tara Ungureasce " Land of the Hungarians . Ardeal is even copied from Erdely . Romanian theories and history is propaganda , fabricated to lay claim to all of Erdely .

"And don't forget that Traian was a thracian himself."

Boys, read, don't act like bozgors. Marcus Ulpius Trajanus was born in Italica, which is nearby Sevilla in Andaluzia. He was a romanized Celtiberian, not a Thracian.

Ha Ha Ha ... Only Romanians claim direct decent and continuity to an ancient , extinct people . The Greeks and Italians can't even do it . How pathetic and insecure a people you are . You say even modern peasant clothing reflect that of ancient Dacia . You are obsessed . Get a real history ! Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha !!!

Traian was borned in Spain named at that time Italica.And Traian conquered only a part of Dacia:Transilvania,Banat and Oltenia.But not Muntenia,Moldova and Dobrogea they were free.

Romania has 3 main provinces:Wallachia(or Valahia Maior),Moldavia(or Valahia Minor) and Transilvania.
Wallachia and Moldavia united in 1859 and later became Romania Kingdom.And Transilvania united in 1918.The name Transilvania is a latin name and means "over forest" and was given by Romans.
In 1912 russian took a the east part of Moldavia and split it in 3 parts:northand south gave them to ukraine and the other called Republic of Moldavia.So when you hear about Rep of Moldova.It is a part of Great Romanian Province Moldova.

We consider Traian our ancestor because he brought in here many Roman colonists and that Roman colonists and Dacians make the new nation:Romanians.

Please do not pay any atention to hungarians because they are our enemies!

Dacians were known as North Thracians.The most known Thracian in our times is Spartacus.The most known Thracian in ancient time was The Dacian King Burebista,the biggest enemy of Caius Iulius Cezar.

I am very proud to be descendant from Traian and Decebal!!!And Romania means:"The country of Romans"!

Wrong Romanian .... your propaganda is a lie . Romans named the region Dacia , Magyar named it Transylvania or Erdely , land beyond the forest . Transylvania didn't decide to unite with Romania , it was illegally taken . Why weren't the Magyar allowed to vote at Gyulafehervar ( Alba Iulia ) 33% 0f the population ? You were on Hungarian soil before the treaty was signed . Get out of my country , Moldavian .

"Traian was borned in Spain named at that time Italica"
No Dacodava, Traian was born in a CITY called Italica which was in Spain. The Latin name for Spain or better said for all the Iberian peninsula was HISPANIA. Italica is now almost a district of Sevilla.

Marcus Ulpius Trajanus was the most important Roman Emperor, with no doubt.

Even if everything you wrote was right Ungaro, that still doesnt matter. And Dacodava is living in a region that was never part of Hungary. You, stubborn in your theories about Romanians, cant deny one thing. Romanians speak a latin language, so we are on this continent centuries before Hungarians arrived. It doesnt matter if Romanians formed as a nation in today's Romania or in Albania or in Northern Italy. Our European origins are untouchable.

Yesterday the Hungarian Parliament ratified the Accesion Treaty for Romania and Bulgaria, rejecting in the same time the proposal of autonomy made by the Council of Szeklers. This means tha we will have to live in peace, the EU will be home for all of us. Take a break yourself from those furious posts of yours and try to talk about something different. You made your point, time to move on.

The name of the President of Romania is Traian and that says a lot!

Transilvania is the land of Daco-Romans!

Romanians are the only autochtones in Transylvania. It means everything!

ITALIANO,
Let me show you the REAL map of ROMAnia. This is what you dont see because they try to cover up the truth.



ROMAnians are mixed with Punjab blood aside from Slav with a Latin language.

It was a pleasant topic till this two hunagarians came and screwed it. Ignore them, never answer to their insults and they will dissapear. just ignore them. Because this hungaro guy this forum looks like this, for me this is obvious (just wait and you will see something like ' cigany, get out of erdely, go to albania, magyar land and of course hahahahaha).

Ah so you know the truth. thats great! first step into resolving the problems!

- Romans held garissons in other parts of Dacia;
- Augustus was probably the most significant Emperor, not Trajan;
- Burebista was not Caesar's greatest enemy;
- Transylvania was not illegaly taken

According to you , Anittas .

Ba muie, tu nici nu stii cum se numea Traian si vii asa din pizda ma-tii sa dai lectii pe net?

That map shows the Romanian Provinces:
1.Transilvania,Maramures,Crisana,Banat
2.Muntenia+Oltenia=Wallachia
3.Bucovina is the name of North of Moldavia.The Capital of Moldavia was at Suceava in Bucovina.

so what?

And does not exist any Punjab.That palace is called Dobrogea (Dacia Pontica) and is a part of Wallachia.

Despre Italica:Am vazut o harta in care pe Peninsula Iberica era trecut numele Italica.Deci daca nu era numita asa,insemna ca voia sa indice orasul Italica sau mai probabil,legiunea romana I Italica.

Anittas, mai treci pe la scoala,fara suparare!

Mai Daco, nu e nevoie sa inventezi porcarii. Baga o simpla cautare pe Google si vei vedea site-uri SPANIOLE despre orasul Italica de langa Sevilla. Spania nu a fost niciodata numita Italica. Niciodata, indiferent de hartile pe care zici tu ca le-ai vazut. Romanii erau prea destepti si rationali ca sa nu faca incurcaturi. Si oricum romanii italiotzi nu ar fi permis niciodata asta.

Daco, imi pare rau de vehementa raspunsului meu. Nu citisem cum trebuie raspunsul tau...

Moldovia is an ancient Arab land.

Eu nu am negat ceea ce ai spus tu.Stiu ca exista orasul Italica in Spania.Eu ti-am explicat de ce aveam eu impresia ca se cheama Italica.Am incercat sa regasesc harta unde am vazut acea notare ca sa vad despre ce era vorba dar nu o mai gasesc.

Well, it's nice too see how many debated and spoke about my discussion.

However, I dont think the problem "who had been the best emperor in the history of Rome" is an important issue. Both Traian and Augustus did much and good.

I'm quite surprised by reading the contrasts between romanians and hungarians.
I mean, I know Transilvania (however, name sounds much latin. Almost ita) passed to Romania after WWI, because Romania fought aside allies. When Austro-hungarian empire had been distrupt, Transilvania had been annex to Romania.

I cant read this as "stolen". No austrian ever told me "you b*****d spaghetti-eater stole us Bozen and Sud Tirol!" I'm surprised hungarians say this!

In the province of Moldavia live moldavians? Or it's just a name?
Are there many differences between moldavians and rumanians?

And what's the relation with Punjab?!?

However, just to respond to Hungaro, it's no strange to underline connection to great past times. In Italy we used to claim Augustus titles, in Germany they built statues to Arminium (the german leader who rebelled and won over romans) and in Greece almost a century ago the Megali Idea reconnected to the Romaoi Empire... Again, it's no strange. Hungaro sounds having no real issues to insult romanians any more.

Thanks guys.

OPS, I forgot. I didnt understand a word of rumenian. Speak english, please. Thank you very much

Italiano , Are there 2 million Austrians living in Italian Tyrol ? as there are 2 million Hungarians living in Transylvania . Maybe if 1/3 of Italian population lived outside of Italy's borders in neighboring countries , you would be more understanding .You should learn more of the history of the region before you make comments , for a thousand years Transylvania was either part of , or an independent Hungarian province .Hungarians named the region Transylvania , Latin was the official language of Hungary in the middle ages . As far as insults , Romanians insult me first when I express my opinion , I just return the pleasantries .

Now as you will soon see ... an anonymous romanian will respond with there typical vulgarities .

And another thing Italiano ... Did Italians ever try to erase Austrian culture from south Tyrol as romanians tried to do to Hungarians in Transylvania . Or do Italian police beat up Austrians because they can't speak Italian in south Tyrol ? Romanian police do it to Hungarians in Transylvania .

Ungaro, cut the BS and let's get to the roots of the real problem. The only reason why you (and other Hungarians like you) hate Romanians is simply because Romania controls Transylvania and not Hungary! It is not more complicated than that.
I mean you can find plenty of excuses and make up plenty of reasons why Hungary should rule Transylvania and not Romania such as: 'A Romanian beat up a Hungarian', 'Romanians are uncultured', 'Romanians did bad things hence are unfit to rule', 'Some Hungarians live in Transylvania', 'Romanians stole...', etc... etc... etc... However beneath all that the only thing you hate is simply that Romanians rule Transylvania and not Hungary. It just comes down to power and naturally you want to be more powerful than anyone around you (and all the bitterness that surrounds that)!

But if we do look realistically at the problem, Romanians do make up roughly 75% of the population of Transylvania, and there is no external pressure upon the Romanian state to give more rights to the Hungarians in the country (not even from Hungary herself, let alone the EU). Simply put: this is an internal problem between the Hungarians (and Szeklers) living in Romania and the Romanian state! It is true that Bucharest will have to cede more autonomy.

Wrong !! Its a power thing for you . Once Romania enters Eu it won't be an internal matter . Romania has no right to govern over 2 million Hungarians in their historic land . This artificial border means nothing . Do you know what that article said ... Romanian police beat a man with a heart condition because he couldn't speak Romanian , each time they aked him and he couldn't reply , they slapped and punched him , then threw him on the street . This shows thats impossible to live together . You want power over us to harass , assult , degrade and humiliate us . Why do you think most Magyar live in compact communities . We shouldn't have to live in fear . You have the power and you brutalize us . You'll pay dearly .

Yet again you are getting too emotional Ungaro!

Trying to emphasize an isolated incident as a characteristics of the relations between Ro and Hu is not going to solve the problem. in 99,99% of the cases, relations are great, which is sign of a normal society. This incident should be condamned by both sides and the incriminated policeman punished. From this to speak about a generalized fear it a very long way. But Ungaro is playing his card of hate.

There seems to be quite a few isolated incidents .

Yes, Ungaro, you are right. There are not many austrians living in Tyrol, absolutely not many as Hungarians living in Transilvania.
Yes, you are right about what you stated about knowing history.

Tell me a thing I did not understand, Ungaro. Are you an Hungarian living in Romania or in Hungary?

I want you to remember a thing that Hungary and Italy share. We both lost a war. Losing and winning wars seems to be the main pillar of this discussion.
When Austria-Hungary was disrupted in 1918, Transilvania was givan to Romania, that won that war. Italy won WWI and obtained Istria and for a small time Dalmatia - all italian-populated regions.
We lost those regions in the WWII: all italians were killed or kicked away.
Something similar happened in Konigsberg and in Prussia after WWII. Millions of germans fled or have been killed. And Prussia, Dalmatia, Transilvania - in ancient history, all of them were NOT where are now.
Prussia was an historical piece of Germany, Dalmatia was part of the Venice Republic (couldnt be more italian than this, no offence towards slavs) and Transilvania was part of the big ancient Hungary.

What is my point, you will ask. My point is that we cannot use ancient claims to justify hates o racisms. I'm not saying you are racist or whatever else, but just that history does not justify.

And I know what I'm talking about. Before WWII, Mussolini found ANY kind of historical claim to justify possible attacks to Corcica, Malta, and more!
What would you all think if mongols come to you and say: "ehy guys, you are our vassals because you were in the 13th century"?

I'm sorry if bad things happen to those 2 millions.
Just try not to hate and ... just that. I dont know any other word

With respect to each part, Italiano

Italiano, I can assure you that what happened to the Hungarians in Transylvania is not as bad as what happened to Romanians in Ukraine for example. So if you want to cry for them, then cry for us too! However sh:t happens and you just have to move on.

Vaisva , remember your IQ . I want you to be successful .

Yes Italiano , Hungarians and Italians have shared alot . Hungarian claims on Transylvania are not ancient . My grandmother remembers Transylvania as part of Hungary . My family is from Szekelyfold , an area of Transylvania inhabited by majority Hungarians . Not many Italians are left in Dalmatia . Hungary and Italy once shared a border . Our Adriatic port of Fiume , also taken from us .

Fiume another great Hungarian city! LOL! What a Hungarian name it has!

Ungaro, in the best case, that city might be croatian, and because Croatia was part of Austria-Hungary, one can say that Fiume was a Hungarian city. But this is an exageration! Fiume- hungarian city! Remember that Italy had its own problems with Austria-Hungary.

Hungarians are Asians. They scorn and slander every European people. As simply as that.

No wonder you too want VAISVA off this forum Ungaro, you hardly ever manage to come up with a convincing reply to his posts. Anyway Ungaro, maybe it's time to save the few IQ points you have left and leave this forum yourself. You can whine, complain and cry about Romania/Serbia/Slovakia/historical injustices on the streets of whatever place you now live and are unemployed in instead.

Dankat , my posts go against all the propaganda you've learned doesn't it . you always mention Austria- Hungary this and A-H that . You seem to think that Hungary aguired its territory because of Austria . WRONG ! Hungary was at its size a millenia before A-H , get your facts straight , not the garbage and anti- Magyar propaganda you were taught in Romanian history books . The Hrvat were part of Magyarorszag for a millenia and Fiume ( Rijcka ) had a sizable Hungarian population . So what do you know of names , you Romanianized every town in Transylvania . And to Anclation , Vaisva said he was losing IQ points , I'm only agreeing lol . his arguments are pitiful , with his power thing . And your the one whining , if you don't like my posts don't read them and don't reply , you seem to be losing IQ points too .

Neither Fiume, nor Rijeka are Hungarian names, proving that this city didnt belong to Hungary.

I can accuse Ungaro of a similar type of Magyar propaganda. YOu are tought that Hungary was from Brasov to Bratislava, Fiume, Belgrade and Vienna. But you dont want to learn that in this territory Hungarian were only 48% of the total population and they were concentrated in what is today Hungary. Hungary was a giant multi-ethnic state. After 1849 minorities began to ask for rights, autonomy and later independence. This is the story of any multi-ethnic state. If we go on your story we can easily say that Bucharest, Athens, Budapest, Zagreb, Belgrade, Sofia are all Turkish cities. Obviouslly this is wrong. Hungary and Turkey did the same thing: they conquered territories, but they couldnt change the population of that territory. Russia had a similar attitude, but in the end they failed, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Georgia, Armenia never died, they waited until the giant state disappered and they formed new other states.

Why Ungaro it is not true?
It just comes down to power. You want Hungary to be as powerful as possible hence you want Hungary to rule Transylvania! You can find a million excuses why Romania should not rule Transylvania such as: 'a Romanian beat a Hungarian up', etc... but deep down you know that's the reason for your hatred.
If you did swallow a bit of pride then you realise that all you need is enough rights to keep your culture going, and for the most part Hungarians in Transylvania has this. Anything else apart from this is just your pure survival instinct going. You want power Ungaro, admit it!

Dankat ... Your arguments and comparisons are soooo weak , they border on pathetic .

Vaisva ... I think you lost several more IQ points , you and your power trip .

But both of you READ!.................The Treaty of Trianon was signed on June 4, 1920.

As a result of this treaty, Hungary lost
- 71.5% of her land
- Transylvania and part of Bánát to Romania (31.4%)
- Southern Hungary Bácska (Vojvodina) and the rest of Bánát to Yugoslavia (19.5%)
- Northern Highlands (Slovakia) and Carpathian Ruthenia to Czechoslovakia (19.2%)
- The Burgenland region to Austria
- Other small territories to Italy and Poland
- 63% of her population, and half of the Hungarian speaking population
- 1.5 million of these 3.5 million Hungarians were living right along the new borders.
- Cities of almost pure Hungarian population

- Irreplaceable historical monuments, cultural artifacts, churches, and educational and cultural institutions
- 90% of her natural resources, including
- 88% of timber
- 63% of arable land
- 65% of navigable water
- 95% of water power
- Fiume, a port city which was Hungary’s only outlet to sea
- 56% of industrial plants
- 85% of iron
- all gold and silver mines
- all salt deposits
- Hungary’s army was limited to 35 000 volunteers. The navy and air force were disbanded.
- Reparations had to be paid: one part by May, 1921, the rest in 66 semiannual installments.
- Hungary’s livestock and coal was given away to her successor states.
- In comparison, Germany lost only 13% of her land, and Bulgaria, 8%.

The TREATY OF TRIANON was one of the cruelest, most absurd treaties ever, and the greatest tragedy in Hungary’s 1000 year history. France and England aimed to completely annihilate the strong power of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, as it was in their imperial interest. Their representatives were concerned only about gaining land and power, and about destroying the Central Powers, and so, the Rumanians were able to manipulate them to support Rumanian interests. In the process, the Allied Powers did not care that a country was dismembered and suffered losses to such extent that it was barely able to function afterward. Because of the scheming and intrigue of the Rumanian delegates and the geopolitical interests of France and England, a biased and unjust treaty was created at the Trianon treaty conferences, causing immeasurable losses to Hungary, political tensions in Central Europe, and widespread persecution and violence against ethnic minorities.

Hungary couldn’t expect fair treatment from the major Allied Powers. Their representatives were too concerned about gaining power, not considering what was in the best interest of the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe. The French prime minister Clemenceau and the French delegation’s main goal was to practically destroy the Central Powers, so none of them would be able to wage war again. Andre Tardieu, the French delegate in charge of the peace committee regarding Austria- Hungary, had very similar views. He saw France’s relative safety in disabling Germany, creating powerful Slavic states -Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia- in Central Europe, and increasing Romania’s territory. This would ensure that a strong, centralized power, like Austria- Hungary would never emerge in Central Europe again. Tardieu opposed plebiscites in Hungary, because if they were to prevail, the Slavic states he had hoped for couldn’t be created. (Glatz, 228)

England’s prime minister, Lloyd George, was also unconcerned about Central Europe. While the English public wanted to demolish the Central Powers, like the French, his only goal was gaining Germany’s colonies, and therefore strengthening England’s influence in the seas. However, many other English politicians, who were somewhat interested in Central Europe’s fate, saw a powerful, independent Hungary as a threat to the balance of power in Europe.(Nemeskürty, 105) To prevent this, they chose to leave Hungary in ruins after the treaty negotiations.

President Wilson of the United States, was the only main delegate who tried to create a treaty acceptable to all the countries concerned. His Fourteen Points, which he wanted the peace treaties to be based on, would have ensured self-determination by plebiscites, peace without reparations or annexations, and free trade. The fourteenth point, in Wilson’s view the most important in keeping world peace, called for the creation of a League of Nations. In this organization, all nations, even the Central Powers, would be treated as equals. Unfortunately, Wilson was unable to get his view across to the other Allied Powers, who had felt bitter resentment towards the Central Powers even before Word War I. He was willing to let the other negotiators disregard the first thirteen points, just as long as the League of Nations was created. As it turned out, only the Allied Powers were allowed to join the League, and the isolationist US congress decided not to do so. The rest of the American delegates were concerned only about gaining influence in South America and Eastern Asia and had no interest in Europe whatsoever. Therefore, they did not support Wilson and his ideas.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, Russia sponsored a Panslavic campaign in Central and Eastern Europe, with the cultural and political unity of all Slavs as a goal. This movement was extremely popular among the Serbs, Bosnians, Slovenes and especially the Croats, who were striving for an age old ideal: the unity of all Southern Slavs on the Balkan Peninsula. As with Czechoslovakia, the formation of Yugoslavia was pushed by political exiles, in this case, mostly by Croats (The founders of the Yugoslav committee formed in Paris in 1015, Ivan Mestrovic, Franjo Supilo and Ante Trubic were all Croats.) and supported by Western European politicians and writers. However, although he considered the idea of Yugoslavia, Nicola Pasic, the premier of Serbia, really wanted to create a Great Serbia embracing all the people of Yugoslavia, including the Croats (Sisa, 201). Although Supilo resisted, Trumbic reluctantly agreed, advocating unity at all costs, and so the Croats, Bosnians, Slovenes and Serbs of Vojvodina (South Hungary) came to be practically ruled by the Serbs of Serbia, despite the initial ideals of equal representation of all South Slavs in government.

Yugoslavia might never have been created had its creation not been in the interest of the advocates of Czechoslovakia's formation. Initially, although a few Czechs were for the creation of Czechoslovakia, but hardly any Slovaks supported it. Of the less than 1000 Slovakian nationalists, only a small percentage desired the union with the Czechs, or would have preferred the Czechs to the Hungarians, given equal political conditions (Sisa 205). By promising Slovakia widespread autonomy, the Czech leaders of the movement persuaded Slovakians living in America into signing the Pittsburgh pact, in which both parties agreed on the formation of Czechoslovakia. Meanwhile, Thomas G. Masaryk and Eduard Benes, the architects of the Czechoslovak movement, were able to obtain the support of prominent French, English and American politicians, "transforming themselves from consultants of the allies to the architects of the allied policy for Central Europe" (Liptak, 4). The allied politicians, ignorant of the ethnographic situation in Central and Eastern Europe, were willing to accept, with little or no resistance, the "solutions" proposed by these "experts". It was on the basis of this false data and biased solution that the Treaty of Trianon was drafted.

The Rumanians claimed that Transylvania rightfully belonged to their country, because, according to the theory of the Daco-Roman continuity, the ancestors of the Rumanians -Roman colonists- had been living in Transylvania from 106 BC to 275 AD However, the theory is not supported by history. Not only is there no archeological proof -remnants of roads or cities- pointing to the existence of a Daco-Roman civilization in Transylvania, but the Rumanians can’t bring evidence to their existence for almost a thousand years: from 275 AD to 1200, when their appearance in Transylvania is first mentioned. They ignored the fact that they had adopted the Latin alphabet only at the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century, and have been called Wallachians by themselves and other nations prior to 1861.(Sisa, 214) Even without historical basis, the theory of Daco-Roman continuity proved extremely useful for political and propaganda purposes.

The Allied Powers didn’t have much reason to reward Romania for its actions during World War I. It officially declared war on the Central Powers only in August 1916, during the great Russian offensive in which Russia broke through the Carpathian mountains. Romania therefore figured it would gain something without taking a great risk, by fighting alongside Russia. After three months of fighting it withdrew from war, because its capital, Bucharest had been occupied, and signed a separate peace treaty with the Central Powers, despite its promise not to do so. The other Allied Powers felt Romania could have held out longer, tying down some of the German and Austro-Hungarian troops. Despite these facts, the Allied Powers were quite willing to give Romania most of the land it coveted, as this would also ruin Hungary.

The Allied Powers most likely wouldn’t have rewarded Romania with so much of Hungary’s land if the Rumanian delegates had provided them with true information about the ethnographic situation in Transylvania. When asked how many Hungarians would be subjected to foreign rule if Transylvania was given to Rumania, they declared it would be around one million, although at least twice as many Hungarians were living in the area at that time. Bratianu managed to convince the Allies that the 1910 Hungarian census, which showed Transylvania’s population as 44.7% Rumanian and 40.6 % Hungarian, was entirely false. After numerous "complicated calculations", he presented the Allied Powers the "actual data", which stated that 60.9 % of Transylvania’s population was Rumanian, while only 24.5 % was Hungarian. In the same manner, he showed towns with almost pure Hungarian population as barely having any Hungarians. When the negotiations were over, Lloyd George even admitted that "at the time of the peace-negotiations we have been supplied from certain quarters with false data and it was upon the basis of this false data we decided of frontiers and races." (Sisa 232).

At the peace conferences, the viewpoint of Hungary and her representatives were at best ignored. The Allied Powers didn’t want her input, because such input would have threatened the validity of the decisions they had already made. The Hungarian delegates were not allowed to attend the peace conferences, and were only invited to Neuilly (a suburb of Paris) on December 1st, 1919. Promptly upon their arrival on January 7, 1920, they were interned in the Chateau de Madrid, and guarded by police. On January 14, 30-40 representatives of the Allied Powers summoned the Hungarian delegates, and gave them until 3 p.m. the next day to review the treaty. (Mikes, 269) Although they agreed to listen to the Hungarian delegates’ expose on the treaty, they made it clear that the contents of the treaty are final. When the Hungarian delegates were again granted audience on the 16th, they brought up numerous arguments against the treaty provisions. Count Apponyi, the main Hungarian delegate pointed out in his expose that greater Hungary is a perfect geographical and economical unit with a 1000 year-old history. The treaty wouldn’t solve the minority problem in Central Europe, because Hungary’s successor states, would have just as much, if not more minority than greater Hungary had. Hungary’s dismemberment would cause continuous conflict in Central and Eastern Europe.

The most absurd provision of the treaty was the war guilt clause, which identified Hungary as a major belligerent cause of World War I, and a historical German ally. As the Hungarian delegates pointed out, it was a Serb who assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Hungary’s prime minister Tisza alone voted against retaliation against Serbia in the Austro-Hungarian Council of Ministers, he was the only politician in Europe who had spoken out against the war. As for being a German ally, history proves the exact opposite. During her 500 years of independence, Hungary blocked the spread of German influence, and created stability by filling the power vacuum of the region. When she was under Austrian occupation between 1688 and 1867, she rose twice against her oppressors, eventually gaining partial independence from them. (Liptak, 4)

On February 12, 1920, the Hungarian delegates gave the written answer to the plan of the peace treaty, declaring that Hungary would not accept these terms, demanded plebiscites, the result of which Hungary was willing to respect. The written answer included numerous memoranda, maps, and figures about Hungary’s ethnographic situation. These were not even read by the Allied Powers. (Sisa, 227)

Hungary only received a written response on May 6. It denied Hungarian demands and forced Hungary to accept the terms of the treaty, threatening to further occupy the country if her government didn't cooperate. The government finally appointed Ágoston Bernard, the minister of welfare and Alfred Drasche-Lazar to sign the treaty at 10:00 a.m. on June 4, 1920.
Treaty of Trianon in comparison to (UK) the other post-World War I peace treaties, Germany & Bulgaria
Treaty of Trianon in comparison to (UK) the other post-World War I peace treaties, Germany & Bulgaria

In the end, all the terms of the Treaty of Trianon prevailed, cutting Hungary to pieces. Whereas before, the country had an area of 325 000 km, this was reduced to 93 000 km, or 28.48% of the original land. Romania alone received Transylvania and part of the Bánát region, an area larger than rump Hungary herself. (Map III) Yugoslavia was allotted Croatia, Slavonia, Bácska and part of Bánát (19.52% of the original land), and Czechoslovakia was allotted a similar chunk: The Northern Highlands (today Slovakia), and Carpathian Ruthenia (Sub-Carpathia). Poland and Italy received other, very small territories. However, even Austria was rewarded with 4000 km square of territory, as a ploy to poison any future relationship between her and Hungary. (Map I)

In comparison, Germany, the leader of the Central Powers, lost only 13% of her land, and Bulgaria, only 8%. (Map IV) 63% of Hungary’s population, including one half of her Hungarian speaking population, was lost. Out of these 3.5 million Hungarians, 1.5 million were living along the new frontiers. In the territories Hungary had lost, there were cities of almost entirely Hungarian population, which contained numerous irreplaceable historical monuments, cultural artifacts, churches, and educational and cultural institutions. Transylvania especially had been a vital center of Hungarian culture and patriotism.

As a result of the War guilt clause, Hungary’s army was limited to 35 000 volunteers. Its navy and air force were disbanded. This made her extremely vulnerable to her successor states, who had formed a political and military alliance based on their common hatred of Hungarians. This alliance, known as the "Little Entente", could call into arms 562 000 soldiers in times of peace, and 4 365 000 during war. Economically, Hungary was hit just as hard. She lost 88% of her timber, 63% of arable lands, 65% of navigable water, Fiume - her only outlet to sea, 85% of her iron deposits, practically all of her gold and silver mines, and became the only country in Europe who couldn’t produce her own salt. The already ruined country was forced to pay reparations as well: one part by May 1, 1921, and the rest in 66 semiannual installments.

The Trianon treaty turned the nationalities of Central Europe, who had always lived in coexistence, into mortal enemies. They refused to unite and therefore couldn’t form a neutral barrier between Germany and Russia, both trying to fill the power vacuum in Central Europe that had been created by the annihilation of the Austro-Hungarian empire. Instead, they came to be dominated by both powers subsequently during the twentieth century. The treaty served to create geographical and economical problems in Central Europe. Historical Hungary had been the most perfect geographical and economical unit with the most unified river system in Europe. (Liptak, 3) Out of this unit, the treaty created Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, and greater Romania. They were "not only geographical monstrosities, but economic absurdities as well, and therefore their self-destruction was only a matter of time." (Liptak, 3) During the last decade, both Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia have ceased to exist.

The only way a peace treaty after World War I could have solved the ethnic minority problem in Central Europe was on the basis of the Wilsonian principle of self-determination. In creating the Trianon treaty, not only were plebiscites refused, ethnographic borders were overlooked as well. The Allied Powers assumed that their provisions would satisfy every nationality concerned. However, many Rumanians in Transylvania didn’t want to become part of the culturally and economically inferior Romania. Numerous Slovakians and Ruthenians didn’t consider themselves as part of the Czechoslovak state, and Croats viewed themselves as their own nationality. Even if it is assumed that all these nationalities wanted to be part of the successor states, a significant number of Hungarians were subjected to foreign rule. (Map III) For the 7 258 000 "liberated" people, 6 113 000 Hungarians became ethnic minorities, Only 47% of those "liberated" were actually the same nationality as the successor states. 53% were foreigners, and 33.5% were Hungarian. They became ethnic minorities in the extremely nationalistic successor states.

Throughout her history, Hungary had lived with her ethnic minorities, and granted them political and religious autonomy. However, her successor states "considered the territories given to them after World War I as conquered provinces, a glorious aggrandizement of their national territories in which non-nationals such as Hungarians constituted a foreign element." (Glatz, 253) The minorities where viewed as threats, as they presented Hungary with a basis for seeking border revisions - the successor states’ greatest fear.

The successor states were forced to sign conventions guaranteeing cultural autonomy to the ethnic minorities in their country, but none of these were enforced. In fact, soon after the treaty was signed, the successor states were already trying to "solve" their minority problems, through denationalization, and several means of ethnocide: deportations, expulsions, transfers, dispersions, and other forms of uprooting. Hungarian schools, churches, museums, libraries, historical monuments, and cultural institutions were also targeted. In Transylvania alone, Hungarians lost 1 665 of their schools, including the world famous János Bolyai University. They were forced to

choose between their nationalities and their properties, and so, 350 000 Hungarians decided to leave all their possessions behind and move to rump Hungary.

The peace treaties after World War I were meant to ensure world peace, and self-determination for the different ethnic groups of Europe. Instead, they became nothing more than a means for the Allied Powers to gain more political power while destroying the Central Powers, whom they viewed as enemies. Countries like Romania were able to manipulate those Allied Powers into serving their interests, because this involved destroying the Central Powers. The Treaty of Trianon, the most unjust of the treaties after World War I, left Hungary in ruins, and put more minorities under foreign rule, without plebiscites, than it tried to "liberate". It paved the way for the persecution of ethnic minorities in Central Europe, and the armed conflicts in the Balkans, happening today.

Trianon: The are of Hungarian majority within pre-World War I Hungary
Trianon: The are of Hungarian majority within pre-World War I Hungary
I. Territories ceded to Hungary's successor states as a result of the Trianon peace treaty.



Trianon: territories ceded to Hungary's successor states
Trianon: territories ceded to Hungary's successor states
II. The area of Hungarian majority within pre-World War I Hungary is indicated in black. The white lines represent the current borders.

Ok Ungaro, keep walking! All territories lost by Hungary were inhabited by non-Hungarian majorities. This is the explanation for Trianon; unfortunately there were sizeable Hungarian minorities inside those territories. In a way or another Romanians had the right to ask for a part of Transylvania, so were Slovaks, Croatians and Serbs. They were the majority. This was the main argument. Indeed France and England wanted Austria-Hungary gone. They had luck: Romanians, Serbians, Croatians, Slovaks were already against this multi-ethnic state. Hungary was far from being a tolerant ethnic structure as that time, this infuriated minorities. The biggest mistake made by Hungary was to send Romanians from Transylvania to fight against Romanians from Romania in ww1. This was considered too much, and this is the moment when all Romanians from Transylvania understood that Hungary can no longer be their homeland.

You cry about Hungarians who live in Transylvania.

Romanians also lost Moldova, Northern Bukovina and Southern Basarabia to Russians. Moscow took good care of this regions and killed all intellectuals in Siberia. Our language was transformed in Moldavian, our alphabet turned to Cyrillic, our culture devided in 2. Allthough in 1939 all 3 territories had strong Romanian majorities, only Moldova maintains a Romanian majority. In northern Bukovina and southern Basarabia Romanians are almost gone.

Poland lost about 1/3 of its territory and population after ww2; today those regions are Poland and Belarus. Poles are almost gone there too.

Slovakia lost its eastern region to Russia.

This is history Ungaro. None of our nations decided what to do. Great powers did that for us. We are only simple pieces on a table. Claiming that Romanians influenced the results of the Trianon treaty is childish. Everything was decided by Great Powers in their own interests. Hungarians, Romanians, Serbs and so on werent important at all back then, and probably this is the situation even today.

Something of interest Dankat...

Although Croatia had a constitutional autonomy within Hungary, the City of Fiume was independent, governed directly from Budapest by an appointed governor, as Hungary's only international port. There was competition between Austria's Port of Trieste and Hungary's Port of Fiume.

Major port development, the general expansion of international trade and the city's connection (1873) to the Hungarian and Austrian railway networks contributed to rapid population growth from 21,000 in 1880 to 50,000 in 1910. A lot of major building of the city was built at that time, including the Governor's Palace by the Hungarian architect Alajos Hauszmann. The future mayor of New York City, Fiorello La Guardia, lived in the city at the turn of the 20th century, and reportedly even played football for the local sports club.

And did you know that the Hungarian registered steamship Carpathia , heading from Fiume to New York , rescued the passengers of the Titanic . So much for Fiume never being a Hungarian city . lol !!!

You se arguments that at a second look are against you Ungaro. Trieste was and is an Italian town, thesame about Fiume. Northern Italy and Dalmatia were occupied by Austria-Hungary, this is why Trieste was Austrian and Fiume Hungarian. After ww1, Yugoslavia and Italy began to fight over Trieste and Fiume. In Fiume Italians made up 84% of the population, and the remainder were Croats, and in Trieste the population was made of Italians (majority) and Slovenes (minority). SO really, Hungarians only controlled the area, but this doesnt make them Hungarian.

YOu see Ungaro, Fiume and Trieste are very good examples of Austria-Hungary occupation.

This is why Trianon existed. To punish a monster state, who incorporated Northern Italy, Austria, Croatia, Bosnia, parts of Serbia, Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia, Transylvania. This was an utopic state, in which minorities were majority. Everyone was happy to see this state gone - only Austrians and Hungarians were angry, because they lost their influence, they lost enormous territories, they lost extremely rich territories.

Yes, we know bozgors claim every part of the sacred Europe. As a matter of fact these tadjiko-kirgyzo-bashkiro-uzbeks miss their asian steppes desperately. Bozgors, listen to your heart and go back to Altaii. Is it too much?

Italiano,I am 100% Moldavian but I consider myself a Romanian.The name of Moldavian is just a regional name.Does not exists a nation called Moldavian.The nation is Romanian.It is like I say to someone he is from Torino.Does not exist a nation called Torino.

And Italiano,your hungarian friends stoled you colours of the Italian flag!

Your arguments are truly absurd Dankat , you have double standards . I show facts and you don't accept them . lol but thats typical . Monstrosities , were the creation of Czech , Yugo and the Enlargement of Romania. Trianon only created more ethnic hatred and Genocide ! The Magyar Were 55% of Hungary , not 48% as you claim , so the Magyar should of kept 55% of our territory not 33%. Romanians were 54% of Erdely , yet you claimed 100% and beyond plus Banat , Maramaros etc , so in reality you became a monsterous multiethnic state as did Yugo and Czech . Most of those little Transylvanian cities you posted in RF2 are all Magyar with copied Romanianized names , In Hungarian they had a meaning , they mean nothing in Romanian . So they are not actually Romanian , they're just currently occupied by Romania . Read the article I posted again , the truth is unsettling .

Oh and tell Eugene in RF2 there was no Romania in 1600 ,lol,lol, lol

It was Ungaro! You should have known that. Transylvania, Moldova and Wallachia merged to form a single state. The king was called Mihai Viteazul.

Dankat ...lol !! That union was not called Romania in 1600, Romania didn't exist until 1859 ,and in 1600 vlachs were a minority in Erdely , And those Romanian place names in Erdely never existed in 1600 , they were copied from Hungarian place names in 1920 . Thats the most hilarious Romanian propaganda yet. lol!! You change the original name of the town or city into a Romanian one then claim it as Romanian ( Debretin ) Marosvasarhely (Targu Mures) etc . Lol!!! That map is pathetic Ha Ha Ha.

The Allied Powers most likely wouldn’t have rewarded Romania with so much of Hungary’s land if the Rumanian delegates had provided them with true information about the ethnographic situation in Transylvania. When asked how many Hungarians would be subjected to foreign rule if Transylvania was given to Rumania, they declared it would be around one million, although at least twice as many Hungarians were living in the area at that time. Bratianu managed to convince the Allies that the 1910 Hungarian census, which showed Transylvania’s population as 44.7% Rumanian and 40.6 % Hungarian, was entirely false. After numerous "complicated calculations", he presented the Allied Powers the "actual data", which stated that 60.9 % of Transylvania’s population was Rumanian, while only 24.5 % was Hungarian. In the same manner, he showed towns with almost pure Hungarian population as barely having any Hungarians. When the negotiations were over, Lloyd George even admitted that "at the time of the peace-negotiations we have been supplied from certain quarters with false data and it was upon the basis of this false data we decided of frontiers and races." (Sisa 232).

1. And do you honestly think that a Romanian convinced Great Powers to give Transylvania to Romania? LOL! They had decided before what to do! Besides that Austria-Hungary lost the war.

2. As for those names. Even if Transylvania was part of Hungary, Romanians lived there, so obviouslly they gave names to all cities, villages. These names didnt appeared in 1920, they existed before. I told you before, this happens in any normal state - if more than 2 peoples live in a region, the region will have 2 names. Nothing special. Hungarians for example call Bacau, Bako, allthough it is not a Hungarian town and it never was. Usually it is the same name but written in different languages. It is like Koln for Germans and Cologne for French. I dot not understand what do you have against? Do you expect Romanians to call cities in Hungarian? This is absurd. Szatmar is just the Hungarian form for Satu Mare as Miercurea Ciuc is the Romania translation for Csikszereda. This is a natural process - Romanians and Hungarians lived there for centuries, and they named in common places.

3. There werent any census made in 1600, so noone can say what was the ethnic composition of Transylvania back then.

Dankat, you don't beleive anything I say . That article referenced unbiased sources . Anyway just as you want all Moldovans united in one country , so should all Magyar be united , there are many places in Transylvania , Serbia , Slovakia , Ukraine were we are the majority .

THere is a difference. Overall Transylvania has a 75% Romanian majority. Romania has 90% Romanians, Moldova has about 75%. besides the hungarians are located in the middle Romania, impossible to unite with Hungary.

I am not sure that Moldova and Romania should unify. At least not for the next 15-20 years.

Romanians are the only autochtones in Transylvania. Transylvania has been, is and will always be Romanian.

Moghiors are Asian migrants, a non-european invading populace never adapted to Europe, with obvious racial and cultural differences. After all, they are Asians. You can always tell a bozgor from a European by pure visual observation.

I'd like to remark a thing:
WHAT if every nation that in the past lost many ancient territories now would come back and claim those because they were inhabited by their people?
(I suppose that's a strange sentence.. )

Germany did not won the war. It was cutted. Pommern, Prussia... german-inhabited territories. But Germany did not win; similarly in the WWII... and not only Germany! Italy - yes, in a minor way - lost small territories FULLY inhabitated by italians... they were killed or taken away, thanks to Titus partisans. Hungary was a big power when? Before ottoman invasion! Well... what shall italians, germans, russian, turkeys should claim then?

The treaty you are speaking about is the direct, obvious, consequence of losing the war. It is surprising that hungarians are still living outside borders of Hungary. Why surprising? After WWII and disrupting of Ottoman Empire, no greeks were living in Turkey... and no turks were living in Morea or in the greek territory... Similarly, in Dalmatia and in Istria there are no longer a consistent number of italians, considering they lived there till 1945, BUT we have (in Rome, I mean) a zone in the city called "Julian-Dalmatian Neighborhood". Many of them came to live here.
So, It is surprising THERE STILL are hungarians outside the borders...

Answer to Dacodava:
your answer make me smile
But you live in the nation of Romania, or in the nation of Moldavia?
Why you say hungarian friends? I'm not simphatyzing with any particular part.
Well, "stolen" is a big word, as we use to say. We invented the "three-colors" in the XIX century, so I'm not sure :S
I'm sure Ungaro will clear this doubt... maybe saying they invented the flag in the times of Adam and Eve...

Italiano,a Sicilian is an Italian.Am I right? So the same a Moldavian is a Romanian.Russian took from us half of Romanian Province of Moldavia and invented a stupid history which says that "Maldavians" are different from Romanians.It is not true because the language spoken in Romanian Province of Moldavia is Romanian and is perfect the same like Romanian Language spoken in Transilvania or Wallachia.

Michael the Brave united all Romanians in year 1600.

The ROMAN EMPIRE WILL EVER RULE OVER SAVAGE hungarians!!!

www.infoplease.com/ce6/people/A0833019.html
domino.kappa.ro/guvern/istoria.html

Italiano,I told you that does not exist a Moldavian Nation.All Moldavians belong to Romanian Nation.All Moldavian Chronilcles says that we came in here from Rome brought in here by Roman Emperor Traian.

Italiano... Why are you surprized 1/3 Hungarians live outside the borders, it is their rightful home . The dismemberment of Hungary was motivated by greed , they wanted our territory , our railways our established cities our resources , the liberatin of their ethnic brethren was a pretext , who were the 3.5 million Magyar liberated from , read the artcle more carefully . Dankat you have double standards , thats all . I predict within 15 yrs the Magyar will gain autonomy in all 3 trianon countries . Where we are the majority we will rule ourselves , free of foreigners . So it will be less than 100yrs. that you've ruled and oppressed us in our ancient home . 100yrs is nothing in the 1200yr. history of Erdely , what was ours will be ours again .

Dacodava ...looks whos calling who a savage ,lol maybe if you can put two sentences together properly you'd be more believable , what a dumb peasant . and to the German Tziggeuner hasn't your visa expired , are'nt the Germans expelling all illegal cigany back to Romania

Moarte ungurilor!!!

Ungureanu, poor boy keep believing! Guys you have to admire him for his stubborness in believing ijn his dreams i.e. fairy tales. Maybe we should have been also stubborn in claiming in 1920 all the region up to Tijsa!
But you said three Trianon countries! Now please, no double standards, there was also some teritory in Austria!
But on the other hand why am I wasting my time here waiting for some smart answers from him. ?!

Ungaro, why do you always go on about trianon and "trianon country". Romania existed before trianon even by your standards anyway.
However the trianon treaty is a void and irrelevant treaty and has no relevance in todays society. It is just fairly ancient history now. Trianon treaty became void in WW2 when Hungary was awarded Transylvania and other parts. Modern European borders are a direct result of the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty, which is recognised by all major powers. So the fact that USA doesn't recognise trianon is irrelevant now. Similarly the Molotov-Ribentrop pact which the Romanians scorn became invalid when Hitler invaded USSR. The modern border between Moldova and Romania was a result of the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty, hence it is legal and accepted by all major powers.

So Ungaro: Trianon is dead, buried and irrelevant; if you want to hate something hate the Paris Peace Treaty of 1947!

Do you not like Romania referred to as a trianon country .lol Its effects are still with us . It caused the genocide and eventual breakup of the artificial country called Yugo . Czech also gone . Romania could be next . See where lying , deceit and treachery get you , your greed gave you the land and the multi ethnic population , but thats all . Justice will be served . The Magyar will prevail , Hungary was the most ruined country in Europe after WW1 , now look .Hungary is the phoenix rising from the ashes . If Romania is not careful it will be burned .

Oh my GOD so pathetic PHOENIX from the ashes !! MWAHAHA Are you on crack or smth? I think I'm going to have diabetis if I'm reading one more post of this guy! MWHAHA phoenix ... |

I'm surprised you can read . I thought you only spoke pig - latin . Do you know what the phoenix represents my swarthy cigany friend . probably not . Romanian propaganda doesn't indoctrinate you in such things , you poor illiterate Roma .

Hey Cingis Han hungary is a little unimportant country compared to Romania!

E ti un cacanar ! stick to your RF2 , Radu . Ha Ha Ha

Budapest is a bidonville full of bozgors and tziggeuners.

"Romania could be next"

Dream on, not much chance of Romania as a state being split in two or collapsing, when it comes to territorial changes affecting Romania, a reunion between Romania and Moldova is much more likely than your sick fantasy.

Moarte ungurilor!!!

Ungaro, are you sure Hungary was the nation that after WWI suffered most?

Think about Germany.

I'm not saying Hungary did not suffer; I'm just saying... Hungary did not win the war. So there's nothing to complain about. What was done was done.

To Dacodava:
what I meant with "moldavian nation" was the state of Moldova between Romania and Ukraina, the one with Chisinev as capital.
Is Iasi an important city in Romania?

Have a nice day.

Italiano ... Families were cut in half , entire cities with 100% Hungarian population were stolen , but were are those countries now , Yugo gone , Czech gone , artificially enlarged Romania one of the poorest countries in Europe , with large multi-ethnic population .

In comparison, Germany, the leader of the Central Powers, lost only 13% of her land, and Bulgaria, only 8%. (Map IV) 63% of Hungary’s population, including one half of her Hungarian speaking population, was lost. Out of these 3.5 million Hungarians, 1.5 million were living along the new frontiers. In the territories Hungary had lost, there were cities of almost entirely Hungarian population, which contained numerous irreplaceable historical monuments, cultural artifacts, churches, and educational and cultural institutions. Transylvania especially had been a vital center of Hungarian culture and patriotism.

The Habsburgs and the Hungarian kingdom were evil empires consisting of different nations. In your beloved hungary moghiors were minority so shut the **** up cingisKhan.

Austro-Hungary - the famous prison of peoples, the ugliest state ever in Europe.

Magyars, an Asian Turanic people ruled over foreign lands and populations.

Romanians are the only autochtones in the area. Romanians didn't budge from Transylvania.

Hungary is still an Asian island within Europe. You can immediately tell a Hungarian from a European, either from the north or south.

Italiano,I knew what did you mean but I wanted to clear that Moldavians are Romanians.And you are right saying Moldavian state because is a sate,not a country!I live in Bacau County which is in Romania.The name Moldavia (or Moldova) in Romanian Language comes from Moldova River which is now in Romania.The most important Moldavian Prince,Stephen the Great and Holy (Dracula's cousin) was borned at Borzesti in Bacau County.The capital of Moldavia was at Baia,Suceava and Iasi,all in Romania.The first Prince of Moldavia was a Romanian Prince named Dragos who came from Maramures(Transilvania) and the independence of Moldavia was won also by a Romanian Prince from Maramures named Bogdan I,who came in Moldavia and defeated Dragos descendents and the King of Hungary.

Iasi was the capital of Moldavia until the Unification in 1859.The Moldavian Prince who unified Moldavia and Vallachia moved the capital to Bucharest.

Personal pronouns:Italian-Romanian:io=eu,tu=tu,esso=el,essa=ea,noi=noi,voi=voi,essi=ei,esse=ele.We have also the word lui and means he in dative case.

independent Hungary lost only about 20-30 % of its territory... that 60+% you claim were transleithanian austro-hungarian territory, not hungarians one

In comparison, Germany, the leader of the Central Powers, lost only 13% of her land, and Bulgaria, only 8%. (Map IV) 63% of Hungary’s population, including one half of her Hungarian speaking population, was lost.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ungaro if you want a fair comparison, then Germany lost about 90% of its land i.e. ALL its colonies. So even in this respect Germany lost more.

Vaisva ... Thats lame , What a pooooor comparison " German Colonies" Ha ha Ha ,Hungary was the same size before A-H , Just admit it Vaisva , Romania and the other artificial trianon countries were motivated by greed . Who were the 2 million Hungarians in Transylvania liberated from ? You wanted our territory and resources , thats it . Now lets be friends and forget about it right . If you think we will , you're mistaken .

All Transylvania was, is and will always be Romanian.

Hungarians were, are and will always be Asian. Punctum!

In your dreams poponar !

And do you think we'll forget Ip and Traznea (and not the only ones) the villages where the hungarians killed very very very brutally the romanians. In your dreams cacat cu ochi! European Union will not wipe your history of crimes. They'll remain in the collective memory. Admit it, you are still the savages that burnt and robbed Rome 1500 years ago, the barbaric huns!

turanid huns and mongoloid magyars have nothing in common!

Both ciganymous above , are you as stupid as your posts ?
Can you function in society ? I guess begging on street corners doesn't take much thought . Ha Ha Ha

HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha

That's all you know: hahahahaha

Or

you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous you're so jealous

Don't you know other words magyar poturica?

Yea I do , BUTA CIGANY !!! Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha !!!!!

Hey CingisKhan you're a really stupid barbarian!

I see now you really do: hahahahaha hahahahaha

Basinar , don't get upset , get a job . Ha Ha Ha

Go **** yourself cingis! mongolian pederast!

The Hungarians have a saying that their history was written by their enemies. This seems to be the case since the official version which is still being propagated is in fact the product of centuries of foreign rule during which the occupying powers and their puppet regimes took care to fabricate a "Hungarian history" which suited their objectives: to present a distorted and unfavourable image of the Hungarians, in order to weaken their national identity and self-consciousness. Our website does not endorse this politically and ideologically biased "official version" of Hungarian history, as we seek to present a more objective picture of the historical facts.

The origins of the Hungarians can be traced back to Ancient Mesopotamia through the Sumerian-Scythian-Hun-Avar-Magyar ethno-linguistic continuity, which, together with the evidence of the archeological artifacts of Sumerian origin found in the Carpathian Basin, indicates that the ancestors of the Hungarians were the first permanent settlers of the Carpathian Basin.

Within the Carpathian Basin as well as in their other homelands to the East, the preservation of Hungarian independence and culture was a constant struggle against foreign powers and foreign influences which sought to impose themselves upon the Hungarians: over the ages, foreign religions, cultures, languages, political regimes and rulers have been forced upon the Hungarians. In Hungary, the original ancient Hungarian culture, religion and language have been persecuted and suppressed since the forced Christianization of the country which began around 1000 AD.

Since then, Hungary suffered numerous foreign invasions which resulted in the widespread decimation of the Hungarian population and in the partition and dismemberment of Hungary's territory. Foreign occupation and rule brought foreign colonization and exploitation. The Hungarians became a minority and second-class citizens in their own country as the key positions in the state administration, the churches, industry, commerce, finance, media, arts, education and other professions were dominated by foreigners due to the anti-Hungarian policies of the foreign rulers and regimes.

In the past, the Hungarians have repeatedly attempted to liberate themselves from foreign oppression, but the struggle to reassert Hungarian national interests and cultural identity against foreign political, economic and cultural imperialism and colonialism continues to this day. The apparent end of communism in 1990 did not bring the promised and expected national renewal in Hungary. The injustices of the past were not redressed. The old elites and their collaborators are still in power and still serving foreign interests. Millions of Hungarians are still forced to live under oppressive foreign regimes in the territories lost by Hungary after the two World Wars.

After decades of anti-Hungarian policies under various types of dictatorships and under the current post-communist regimes, the Hungarians must face threats to their very existence, identity and self-consciousness as a nation, in Hungary as well as in the neighbouring states. Hungarian culture is threatened with extinction in its native land as a result of the policy of cultural genocide (ethnocide) and ethnic cleansing pursued by the neighbouring states against the indigenous Hungarian populations inhabiting the territories which these states have severed from Hungary. Hungarian national independence and culture are also threatened by corporate globalization and its promoting egotistical and materialistic liberal consumer society ideology which erodes traditional cultural and moral values.


DOCUMENTS

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

If hungarians have something in common with 'sumerian culture' i am the direct descendant of Caesar, no, better Cornelios Publicus Scipio or ... Romulus.
Get real.......

Very fine tool this Google thing. Searching what you want and finding what you want.
Now Ungaro be a good boy and do the following steps:
1. open your web browser
2. type http://www.google.com
3. type - horthy atrocities killed romanians
4. Hit enter

Now start reading the pages but the ones not ending in .hu

Then after learning history of your nation and experiencing a high blood pressure, type:

http://www.friendshospitalonline.org/gero%20link.htm

or (preferably)

http://www.a1b2c3.com/suilodge/metfun1.htm

Keep reading , vlach . You might learn something .

3. The Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin

The Hungarians are the indigenous population of the natural geographical unit of the Carpathian Basin with which the historical territory of pre-WWI Hungary coincided. The historical, archeological, anthropological and linguistic evidence has shown that the the ancestors of the Hungarians were the first permanent settlers of the Carpathian Basin, arriving in several migratory waves originating from the Anatolian-Caucasian-Mesopotamian-Caspian region, beginning around 5000 BC and continuing until the 13th c. AD. At the time of the foundation of the Hungarian state in 896 AD (this Hungarian state was in fact the successor state to the Hun and Avar Empires of the previous centuries) there were no significant or long-established non-Hungarian populations or states within the Carpathian Basin. Claims to the contrary have been formulated since the late 18th century by certain members of the ethnic groups surrounding the Hungarians as justification for territorial demands against Hungary. (BACK)

Never thought till this moment that hungarians will go so far .... very sad .... first permanent people in the Carpathian basin .... ridiculous!

"Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha"
(Ungaro Omniscientus Historicus)

And the indians originate in Scandinavia

Oh yes I learned many things from these sites but more from the people that suffered because of hungarians.
I don't have to read that half of the members of these forum would like you extinct

romanian were majority on all romanian teritory in 1900
there were only some 200.000 magyars in post trianon romanian, the rest were szekelys (romanians mongolized in the 9th and 10th century)

Visit our Link to Map of Ethnolinquistic Distribution East Europe 1900AD

(map made by a hungarian named magocsi)

To come back to the main topic, what means vlach , it should be said that vlach was also used to designate the Italian people.

Etymology of Vlach
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


Vlach is a term used to designate the Latin peoples of South-Eastern Europe: Romanians, Aromanians, Megleno-Romanians and Istro-Romanians.

The origin of the name is Germanic: it originates with *Walha by which the early Germanic tribes called their Celtic neighbours, possibly derived from the name of the tribe which was known to the Romans as Volcae (in the writings of Julius Caesar) and to the Greeks as "Ouólkai" (Strabo and Ptolemy), see also Welsh.

As the Celts of Gaul were Romanized, the word changed its meaning to "Romanic people", as it is still kept in the name of the Walloons of Belgium and in the exonym Welsche which is often used in the German speaking part of Switzerland to refer to the people of the French-speaking Romandy.

This word for Romanic people was borrowed from the Germanic Goths (as *walhs) by the Slavs. Later on, the meaning of this noun in Slavic languages got narrower or just different:

Language Form Meaning

In Czech - Valach = man from Wallachia
In Czech - Valach = man from Valašsko (in Moravia)
In Czech - Vlach = Italian

In Polish - Włoch = Italian
In Polish - Wołoch = Romanian

In Slovak - Vlach = Italian
In Slovene - Lah = Italian (pejorative)
etc

“I want you to remember a thing that Hungary and Italy share.”
“Italy won WWI and obtained Istria and for a small time Dalmatia - all italian-populated regions.”

DALMATIA, VENEZIA AND THE “HUMAN MONSTERS”*

SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE TIME DALMATIA WAS INHABITED BY ILLYRIANS – a population related to the Greeks and Thracians, the 3 only nations to live in the Balkan Peninsula in those times.
The Greeks founded colonies on the Adriatic shore in the 7th BC century. The area became submitted to Rome at the end of the 3rd BC century. It became part of the Roman Empire in 6 – 9 AD.
Invaded and occupied by the Slavs tribes in the 6th AD century and incorporated to Croatia in the 9 – 11 AD centuries.
THE SAVAGE HUNGARIAN INVASION TOOK PLACE IN 1089 – 1091 AD and definitived in 1102 AD.
The continental Dalmatia was OCCUPIED BY THE VENETIAN EXPANSION IN 1420 – 1797 AD. The inner land was occupied by the Turks after the victory against the Hungarians at Mohacs on August 29th, 1526 AD when the Hungary stopped to exist in History and in the historical maps.
It was annexed to Austria in 1797 AD after the Peace Treaty signed at Campoformio, and between 1809 – 1813 AD it found itself under the French (Napoleonian) control as “The Illyrian Provinces” having a French Empire Government. As bad as he was Napoleon (Napoleone Bonaparte), he renamed Dalmatia with the original and deserved rightly name of “the Illyrian Provinces” because this is the original name and population. Dalmatia wasn’t Greek or Roman, Slavic or Hungarian, Venetian or Turkish, Austrian or French, but ILLYRIAN only ! The rest of them are just invaders, including the actual Croatian and Bosnian people. After the defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo, Dalmatia was again occupied by the cruel Austrians in 1815 AD.
Following the WWI Dalmatia returned in 1918 – 1920 AD to Yugoslavia as a new state.
During the WWII (1941 – 1945) became independent controlled by Italy and Germany as a war ally. After the war it came back to Yugoslavia. Since 1991 AD is part of the independent states of Croatia and Bosnia.
So dear ITALIANO, Dalmatia was NEVER VENETIAN OR ITALIAN LAND, but just OCCUPIED by the Romans and Venetians for a few hundred of years. What about the autochtone Illyrian population surviving through the Albanians only up to our day ? The Roman and Venetian invasions as well as the other ones, were unfairly and totally undesired by the local populations.
THE REPUBLIC OF VENICE
Well, this republic was born as many other states in the Midle Ages but particularly due to its high commercial strenght. In the beginning, the area included the Venice area only (Venezia Tridentina and Venezia Juliana). In 899 – 954 AD the Venice area was plundered and destroyed by the savage ancestors of Ungaro, the Hungarians. The year 900 AD found Venice as part of the Byzantine Empire ! Having enough money to pay mercenaries, the Republic of Venice enlarged its territory by illegally occupiyng totally foreign lands. In the year 1000 AD, we find the Republic of Venice occupying the Western Istria and the Dalmatian Slavic islands : Krk, Cres, Pag, Dugi Otok, Brac, Hvar, Peliesac, Korcula, Vis, etc., but NOT the continental land, Dalmatia itself.
Since 1202 AD when the republic had the same territorial configuration, it started to expanand again to Durazzo (Albania – Durres) in 1205 – 1215 AD, Lemnos and Naxos (Greece) islands in 1207 AD, Kephallenia in 1209 AD (Greece), 1211 AD in Euboa (called later Negroponte by the Venetians) which is an island in front of Athens (Greece); it was lost and grabed again in 1355 AD. In 1212 AD in Kreta / Kandia (Greece), 1215 AD in Korfu (Greece). Actually most of the Greek islands in the Aegean Sea have been invaded and occupied by the Venetians becoming part of the Republic of Venice, but this doesn’t mean those territories and people were..Italians.
The Republic of Venice lost all its territories in 1797 AD when the Hapsburg Empire grabed them after the Peace Treaty signed at Campoformio. It returned to Venice in 1805 AD, but not for long because Napoleone Bonaparte, the French Emperor, included them into the French occupied lands. Later, in 1815 AD, the “Venetian Republic” was again incorporated to the Austrian Empire. In 1866 AD, as one of the tens of states in the Italic Peninsula, it became part of Italy without the foreign territories. Since then the Venice and Venetians live inside their own country, even that in 1941 – 1943 the fascist Italy occupied again the Dalmatian islands as well as Zara City.
As a particularity of the Italians there is sometihng very unusual, especially for the Romanians who speak a common language all over the territory, and is to be said that in Italy were a lot of dialects spoken across the country. Not only each historical region had its own different dialect, but sometimes existed a unique dialect at the city level. It was Massimo d’Azeglio (minister in the Cavour’s government 1861 AD) who started to “create” Italy by spreading the Florentin dialect all over the country. It remained to create the..Italians as a nation because they didn’t feel as being part of one single country at that time. As unbelievable it could be, the process took another 100 years (1960 AD) to finish his work and only the advent of the RAI television closed up the standardisation of the Italian language and nation.
COMMON SHARING ?
Yes, Italy has something to “share“ with Hungary but NOT AT ALL what Ungaro is trying to lie over here, but the ITALIAN LAND ITSELF which has been invaded by the savage Huns and Hungarians arrived to Europe from Asia in 375 AD and respectively 896 AD.
If you guys have today a beautiful and a tourist target in Venice (Santa Lucia) is just because of those Hungarian barbarians who scared to death the Italians (Venetians) who found a shelter on that wild and marshy island at their arrival. As you can read right here, Ungaro and his people claim Fiume as a “Hungarian city”. What a lie ! What a nerve ! Gli Ungari, popolo degli stronzzi !
Grab a history book and find out about the great damage they did to your land during the Hun and Hungarian occupations. Actually they rubbed almost the whole Europe from France to Ukraine and from Germany to Italy (see Raymond Hill in “Nations in transition - Hungary”, Ed. Facts on File Inc., 1997 :”Starting in 896 and for the next 60 years, the Hungarians were the Europe’s terror.”)..As savage invaders they copied our European life style and as it already has been told here, they have stolen even your national flag through the Italian monks, scholars, Court’s secretaries, making it their own and yelling across the planet that the flag is theirs. Cheap and miscreant people !
Since their arrival in Europe they are nothing but “trouble makers” and in every country they live, they do high level troubles. Take as an example this very Forum where it took one single Hungarian to mess the whole thing, so try to imagine 1.6 million Hungarians living in Romania. They drive us totally crazy. They push the country down. Since their arrival in Europe they only destroyed just because they don’t know to build something.
Ungaro let us know about a singular (if not a big lie !) case when a Hungarian has been beaten by the Romanian police because he couldn’t speak the official language of the Romanian state ! Personnally, I totally desagree him : there are Hungarians as well in the local Romanian Police Forces, so.. He is enraged against the Romanians (as the majority of the Hungarians is !) who are no longer their work slaves, and he finds normal to DO NOT SPEAK the Romanian state official language while the Romanian minority in Hungary is almost totally magyarised. – I would recall here the words of the Italian Manotti Garibaldi, son of the great revolutionist Giuseppe Garibaldi – the Italy national hero – at the International Peace Congress in Rome 1891, reprimanting the Hungarian deputee Pulzsky, as follows : „The Hungarians do not deserve the Italy’s esteem because they oppress in the most barbarian way 3,000,000 of our brothers.” – he was refering to the Romanians as the direct Romans’ descendants.
Does any Austrian in the Italian Tirol refuse to learn the Italian official language ? Well, in Romania a lot of Hungarians refuse to learn the official language as a hate manifestation against us. The Romanian Government allows and offers them full education (elementary, high school and university levels) IN THEIR OWN LANGUAGE, and once they become physicians (dottore) for example, they refuse to give health care to the Romanian patients in..Romania itself ! (it happens that my uncle is a physician in Transylvania – 23 % Hungarians -, graduated in Targu Mures City – slightly Romanian majority 51 %). Do you understand ? A Romanian-born Hungarian prepared by the Romanian Government which totally pays his / her education as a physician, REFUSES to give health care to a Romanian patient in Romania just because he / she is Romanian !! Now let me know if is that possible as an Austrian or Slovenian physician in Tirol or Trieste refuses to give health care to an Italian patient without answering in front of the authorities ?! NO ! I don’t believe there is such a case in Italy or France or Germany or somewhere else ! It happens only in Romania because we are too tolerant with these Asian barbarians never civilized since their arrival in Europe. In the Covasna and Harghita counties (high Hungarian majority) they refuse to talk to us by answering in Hungarian „Nem tudom !” = I don’t understand (Romanian) ! Their parents teach them to hate Romanians. Their parents teach them to do not hum a Romanian song heared on radio. There are some mixed marriages and friendly relationships between Romanians and Hungarians, but most of them nourish strong hate feelings against us as Ungaro does right here.
They are people to stay away from ! The Byzantine Emperor Leon VI the Philologist (886 – 912 AD) wrote about them in his book "Tactics" : "The Hungarian tribes are perfidious, their decisions are changeable, they don’t look for friendship and nobody can trust them." – according the Hungarian historian Marczali in “Enchiridon Fontium Historiae Hungarorum”, Budapest, 1901 and the French Raoul Chelard in “La responsabilite de la Hongrie / The Hungary’s responsibility”, Paris, Editions Nossard, 1930, p. 5.

* - the German Bishop Otto von Freising in "De situ Ungariae et more gentis", chapter 31, called the Hungarians in Pannonia (Hungary) as „human monsters” in 1147.

Very good post!!!

hey greek vlach, you wouldn't know a good post from a bad one if it hit you in the face. i guess any moron can be a mod of this sh.it hole loooool!!!!!!!!

i guess any moron can be a mod of this sh.it hole loooool!!!!!!!!

of course just look at you!!!!! And to be clear in your mind there NEVER was great hungary just THE AUSTRO-ungarian province!!!!!!!ungary was just a small sh'itless province and another think TRANSILVANYA was allways and it will be Romanian LIKEIT OR NOT!!!!!!!

Ia uite Ungureanu deci....rahatul asta chiar stie romaneste

I know that you are a brainless creature = retarded Hun. I know that an idiot never can recognize the Intelligence :it's your case. Take a look to your own texts - they breath huge stupidity. You copy LONG texts from Hungarian web sites and post them over here, just because you are NOT aible to create something good as all your LOL people : Hungarians !You make fun of my long texts, but remember somthing you savage Asian : I build up those texts !
Romanians have a right saying : "Where God put nothing, nobody can ask something"...How can we ask somthing intelligent from a Hungarian ? We would offence GOd Himself ! So...I'm not angry to you, God would punish me, I have just pitty for you and all Hungarians...There just something which terribly bother me : why did God send you LOL people from Asia over and nexy to us ?...Probably we made somthing wrong in the past and God wants to punish us.

Actually, there are lots and lots of wonderful hungarians and romanians living in Transylvania. I met quite a few of them and once we would have the chance to discuss a 'bit, we'd usually get along very well. At some point during a conversation, our respective origins would become clear, and if different, that wouldn't usually prevent us from communicating or even ending up friends. I guess that happened for one reason: I never treat people based solely on their ethnicity. In fact I don't care much about it, although I surely can notice it. I wasn't always like this - 'guess I learned this somewhere while abroad. Call it political correctness or whatever, but it sure makes everybody's life easier, safer and nicer.

After all, both romanians and hungarians have been inhabiting together Transylvania for more than a thousand years now. That means roughly 40 generations or so, I guess. To me, this should be enough for reasonable people to finally understand that the land is neither fully Romanian nor fully Hungarian, and therefore neither population should try to impose it's rule over the other, or disregard or hate one's neighbor, as it's been sometimes the case in the past and as some people would like to see again.

That's not only criminal and irresponsible (especially if one has kids), that's even worse: plain stupid.
'Cause translating personal frustrations into hatred of an entire ethnic group, based on whatever only some of those people seem to be doing or have done wrong, is not smart, to put it mildly. And building the case against an entire current population, based on history books, propaganda and whatever bad their ancestors might have done, is hardly a sign of excellence either.

Which makes me think that Transylvania is not only beautiful, but also inhabited by a large majority of wise ( although ethnically different ) people, since they, despite some nuts' attempts to set up the fire, managed so far pretty well to ignore the idiots and hence to go about their lives together, all this while also enjoying democracy.

U guys have a great day

wait wait wait....

I dont understand nothing of it anymore, maybe cause I am a little bit tired, but explain again...

are Romanians then originally from Italy??????
so nowadays Romanians are the descendants of Roman people of Italy, if i understand correctly/??????

Ah, this topic reminds me of my Italian class in school (I speak fluent Italian but I take an Italian course to help with grammar and writing). Occasionally, a Romanian woman sits there, near my desk at the request of my Italian professor. I remember once talking with her, and asking how she became interested in the Italian language. She told me that after Romanian Communism was overthrown, that she obtained Italian satellite TV with her mother, who also was a fan of Italian music. Over the years, this influence led her to grasp Italian as a language. I thought it was a really fascinating story.




La Repubblica Ragusana - La quinta repubblica marittrima!
Italia triumphs again!

"When valour takes the field, short will the conflict be; Barbarian rage shall yield the palm to Italy. The vital spark remains, and Roman blood still warms Italians' veins."
- Petrarch

For Romanians is verry easy to learn italian and latin languages...
Many romanians can understand italian and talk a bit italian because the languages are so close.

I understand...
but are Romanians related to the ancient Romans????

Well Elena, tha fact that we speak a latin language proves that we were once citizens of the Roman Empire, don't you think so?

"Well Elena, tha fact that we speak a latin language proves that we were once citizens of the Roman Empire, don't you think so?"

Hehe many people around europe was more or less citizens of the big Roman empire. That does not make u into the same race if thats what you mean. I really dont think Romanian people is viewed as latin people anyway, still they look slavic.

I also dont think they are latin people, in their language they have lots of slavic words and their culture does not belong to the meditarenean one but is Eastern European.

Explicati-le voi cum de pana si dacii liberi au inceput sa vorbeasca o limba romanica, renuntand la propia limba...si inca in ce vremuri...cand comunicatiile se faceau pe 1-2 cai putere, intre doua navaliri barbare. Cum limba romana n-a fost niciodata raspandita cu sabia, precum cea maghiara....

For those with anthropology “passions” and a huge curiosity, relative to our existence, I offer one classification:

Racial Composition in European countries and Outline of Human Racial Classification :

Romania = 35% Dinaric (m.c. in the W ), 25% East Mediterranean (m.c. the coast ), 20% Neo-Danubian (m.c. in the NE, Baltic Slav), 10% Alpine ( UP ), 7% Noric and 3% Nordic (m.c. in the W, German colonists) = 42% Dinarik / 25% Med. / 20% L+N / 10% UP / 3 Nordik

For those who don’t know too much about genetics is necessary to understand that the abouve classification do not represents the different groups of population within Romanian land. There are procentuals that could be foud within each individual as inheritage from that groups, and valid for the most part of Romanians, at least 80%... GENETICS=HYSTORY

Italiano,
sono sempre stata curiosa per la sua Origine infatti...Siete descendenti d'Enea o dei fratteli Rom e Romuli...

Dove appartiene la Sardegnia?! (Sardi)? I Greci dichiarano che sia Greca???

NO. The Latin people is part of dinaric family, and the proof is made by the language. This mean that you are the nephew of the Thracians, Dacians, Albanians,etc.

What about the Vllachs, Власи, also called Aromanian, and with some other names, that live in Macedonia today, their language is similar to the Romanian with influence from the Macedonian. Some say that they were the local population that learned Roman, and continued to live there after the arrival of the Slavs. That would mean that they are the population of Ancient Macedonians mixed with Roman colonizers that speak a Roman, later Aromanian Vllach language. Also in Croatia there are people that speak Istro-Romanski, which is a mix of Croatian and Romanian, but they are only about 500 people, watched them on discovery.

Italy-Romania - allies and friends always!!

Just keep your gypsy population away from us. But you Romanians are fine .




La Repubblica di Ragusa - La quinta repubblica marinara! Non ti dimenticheremo mai...
Italia triumphs again!
"If the Italians needed the Germans before, by mid July, the German formations [were] much too weak to stand alone."
- Erwin Rommel the "Desert Fox", 1942