The other example with an european nation that has been on the intersection of 3 empires is Switzerland. And the Swiss are 1/3 German, 1/3 French and 1/3 Italian.
Learning about my people history from a Celt leaving on the other end of Europe. Last time proto Romanians and Celts were neighbors was over 2000 years ago
I find trace , in documents, of my family from 1300 .. my grandfather sell the house were he live to museum (450 years old wood house) ... Romania, Valahia, Dacia, Tracia.. name change but people not.. we are the same people more than 2000 years.. we live in north Romania
Why do you want to impose a history of Romania without the multidisciplinary sources made by foreigners and included by different Romanians now in numerous books and it would be welcome if you correct the following obvious mistakes, because whatever you do your fate as an island separated from Europe is now sealed at the End of Time and your reprehensible deeds speak for you before God: 1. The presented map is false or at least misrepresenting the historical reality for Romania: in 1526 the battle of Mohacs, the Kingdom of Hungary - becomes a Turkish paschal - disappears from the map, becoming part of the Ottoman Empire. Many Hungarian counts sneaked onto domains in the Transylvania voivodeship. 2. The end of the century xvii The Habsburg Empire conquers the territory of the old Kingdom of Hungary, therefore it comes under the rule of the Emperor of Vienna. Transylvania is also part of this empire, but as a separate principality from the rest. 3. Mihai the Brave united the three Romanian countries - Muntenia, Bessarabia (Moldova), Transylvania due to the majority of the population speaking the Romanian language and at the coronation in Alba Iulia he said "this is craved what I craved". At that time the Szeklers fought in his army. He fulfilled his purpose for which he was born as a man on Earth. (Did you fulfill it? At least you grew something in spirit or now at the end you are going lower than where you came from). 4. The word Vlach - Valahia comes from German - Walhala - see their myth. Why did they have such great respect for this territory? Because their origin was from here, they are looking for the transformation of the name Get into Got. 5. We have some gold plaques, discovered at the end of the century. xix in which it is said that the Getae worshiped God calling him by the name Arimin, from here immediately the names Ruman and Roman with which the Geta population, the majority of the current territory of the country, is identified. 6. What Bulgarian (Slavic) Empires do you dream of when the names of their leaders were Romanian - e.g. Asan - Asanes and Romanians were the majority on both banks of the Danube. See Emperor Basil II - Bulgaroctonul (where it gets its name). 7. I tell you the ethnicity of Gelu, Glad, and Mnemurut, all found as lords of the lands of Transylvania, were Gets - Romanians and that is how they are written in the Gesta Hungarorum when the Uighurs - Hungarians came. 8. I look at you and I feel like telling you directly, your DNA is mixed with that of the draconian, as your eyes play in your head, because the DNA of the Romanians is 40% exactly like that of ancestors. No country in Europe has such a percentage of original ethnogenetic population. I and many other millions of Romanians are proof that the male population has not disappeared from Romania. Herodotus said - Geti - The Romans are the bravest of the Thracians. Therefore, they have no way of coming from the south when even now, even in Greece, populations can be easily identified that claim their origin from the current territory of Romania. 9. AI Cuza nationalized only the Greek monasteries, this as a consequence of what I said about the origin of the Thracians above with living on the primordial territory of Romania and the revelation of your lie, but he left the Romanian monasteries, which had existed for a long time, like the oldest known archdiocese is - Arges since the century. iii. Romania converted to Christianity through the missionary work of the apostle Andrei. 10. There is too much for a comment, but in short, you talk too much about Hungary - a Romanian name - and God did not want it to appear again as an independent country until after the Treaty of Trianon and only after all the lands Romanians asked for union with the country on December 1, 1918. Looking at Culture: from the spoken language, the folk dress, the solar models in the sculptures to the melody of the popular songs imitate the sounds of nature. It's not for nothing that we have a saying "codru is a brother to a Romanian". Because the iniquities of the darkness on Geea - Tera have come to an end, so everything that will happen here from now on will be within the limits approved by Arimin and in no case will you have an escape even in the snake hole for your iniquities along history. I would show you a video of what happened to the USA in Forth Worth following the discovery of an ancient ship in Afghanistan, but I'm sure you'll remember it as well, so that you realize how low you are for the fire that follows. You still have a few months to repent.
@mesager5438 Hey, you! Who are you quarrelling with? Have not taken your pills today? Even if you were right about the history of Romanians, which I very much doubt, why do you have this aggressive language? Where are your manners? You will not get any respect unless you give respect to others.
@@mesager5438you're making Romanians look stupid with such a comment. Please visit Wiktionary and Wikipedia and learn basic history, basic linguistics, and basic anthropology before commenting on a subject which is beyond your comprehension.
There is evidence in the Romanian language that there was a core of Latin based Christiany that was overlayed with a more complex church Christianity of Slavic origin. There are basic words in the Romanian language such as "Dumnezeu" (God), credinta (faith), cruce (cross) etc which are (late/vulgar) Latin derived. But also words primarily used in church such as slava (glory), duh (spirit), rob (slave) and so on which are Slavic derived. This would point to some sort of Slavic "re-christianization" in the region's history. As a side note, I've been binge watching your videos while going through a cold. Thank you for the quality content. The captivating accent also helps :). Oh, and to the best of my knowledge, Welsh and Vlach have a common root. The word comes from the germanic or proto-germanic word for "stranger" "other". Like the word "barbarian" was to latin or greek speakers.
Thank you for watching my videos. Appreciate that. Given your response, you would enjoy this one if you have not already seen it - ruclips.net/video/qD5Q6bauvK0/видео.html
Not sure how you could present such a sophisticated subject so easily and naturally. It is obviously your own talent to retain and provide information in a simple and clear way. Truly amazing, especially that our culture and spirituality are really deep and stubborn, and hard to understand from an outside perspective. Many thanks, Benjamin.
But that map of the Ottoman Empire you're showing is wrong - the three main principalities of Romania were never an ottoman territory per se but just dominated autonomous principalities (without independent Foreign Policy, basically, and with a mechanism through which the turks extorted the Romanians).
@@MatiaCovacescu First of all, you are stupid. Second, this is why: (a) the fact that Transylvania was under Hungarian rule does not make it Hungarian; its character was Romanian. It was a Romanian principality ruled for a while by Hungary (btw, before magyarization was complete, Hungary proper in the Panonnian plain wasn't Hungarian itself - it was just rulled by a rulling minority, the magyars); (b) The question here was about the time when Transylvania was also under the suzeranity of the Ottomans (like Hungary-proper itself, by the way - which didn't make it Turkish, it was till Hungarian).
Yes this guy is an idiot that has no credentials. He is a disinformation agent that should be investigated by SRI IM Germanic and Finish and a know more than this Agent.
Thank you for your work. Romania as a country is about the same age as Germany and Italy who were unified in the 19th century, but Romanians are as old as hills :)
Archealogical evidence for dacians past the 271AD pullout is virturally non existant. There are virtually no documented proof of dacians living north of the lower danube. Despite numerous written papers, not a single one says there was vlach or even native latin speaking population. Linguistics has very little to do with this since romanian attempt at artifical latinization in the 18th and 19th century. On top of this, we dont know what the dacian language is. Of course romanians have been known to forage evidence for this lapse of logic, with artifacts such as the Tartara tablets, and the sinaia lead plates. Who knows how many other artifacts are foraged as well.
We have a saying that goes something like "romanian folk dances involve a lot of jumping around because the ground was still lava when they where invented". Now that is clearly an exageration, but it's a cool joke about how old we feel
Mihai had to collaborate with the feudal lords of the two conquered principalities. In Transylvania, the main power was the Hungarian feudal lords, the power of the Saxons had begun to decline, and the Szeklers were his allies. The Romanian feudal lords had been replaced or Hungarianized sometime before. So, in a few months, he could do nothing for the Romanians from Transylvania except for help and respect for their Orthodox religion. There were also connections between the three principalities, apart from Mihai's rule. There were alliances between Transylvania and Wallachia, between Transylvania and Moldova, and between all three on several occasions (15th, 16th and 17th centuries). The alliances were made against the Ottomans or to help themselves reach the throne (disregarding the interest of the Ottoman Empire or of the Polish Kingdom). There are testimonies from the 17th century, when Habsburg officials were afraid that, for example, the Romanians from Maramures could join Moldova, because they were of the same culture, language, and religion. The affinity between Romanians from the principalities was felt by the Austrian state in this case, as a threat. Interestingly, both those from Moldova and those from Wallachia used the name Romanian to refer to themselves.
I suspect the culture came first. When the Balkans and Pannonian Plain were swept by Huns, then Goths and then by a dozen different invaders for the next thousand years, somehow romance-language speakers scattered in the hills kept their culture and language, and then at some point they came together in the Carpathians and from there spread to the rest of Romania. By the way, in the Middle Ages, all non-romance speakers called speakers of romance languages "Romans". The Franks called the romance speakers of France "Romans". It took almost a thousand years for the French to identify themselves as French.
After the death of the king of Dacia Decebal, conquered by Rome, in 106 AD, the Kingdom of Dacia was divided among the descendants of others. And so they remained until the Middle Ages under the form of duchies (Glad, Seneslau, Menumorut, of which the Hungarian chronicles of the time also mention that they found them here and fought with them) or then the great principalities of Moldova, Multenia, Dobrogea and The rich Transylvania overrun by a series of rich robbers. A great empire for example. The inhabitants of the territory of ancient Dacia remained in place and perpetuated themselves until today, the continuity here, proven by a large study of Paleogenetics from Germany on the population of Romania. In 2012. We are the descendants of the Neolithic populations of 6000-7000 years ago of brilliant civilizations that succeeded each other on the territory of today's Romania. . Cucuteni, Gumelnita, Hamangia, etc., etc. for 7500 - 8000 years. Romanians carry their DNA back to the Dacians of the Getae-Goths, our ancestors. In conclusion, the inhabitants of ancient Dacia stayed here and developed until today. In all the provinces where we were separated by history, the same nation lived with the same language and customs. Gradually, gradually, the Daco-Romanian nation united. Under the name of Romania, from imperial Rome. The Romanian-Latin language is not from the Romans. In ancient Europe, vulgar Latin was spoken, meaning popular. This is what our Dacians and other nations from Europe used to say. Younger Romanians like us then chiseled it. From this popular Vulgar Latin came all the Romance languages in Europe. Not through false romanization. There are linguistics studies from Romania, France, Spain, USA. . The theme of Romanization of peoples is the great falsity of 19th century history.
@@mariadespina80 Once conquered and integrated into the Roman Empire, all inhabitants of a province became Romans. `Roman" was not an ethnicity, but a way of saying that one had become a citizen of the Roman empire who served in the imperial army and spoke Latin. Romanization was real, as the Latin language was instrumental for a disciplined and well-functioning army formed by men gathered from all the corners of the Empire. In some regions, the Romanization was overwritten by subsequent invasions, such as in Britain, North Africa or Palestiine. In some other regions, the Romanization proved to be more resiliant and gave rise to present day Romance languages (Italian, Spanish, French, Portuguese, Catalan, Romanian etc),
@@mariadespina80 nu mai veni cu teorii handicapate ca ne faci de ras. Daca vrei sa te tragi din maimuta lui Burebista, trage-te la tine acasa cu usa inchisa.
I think the term Goths comes from the Geti, a Roman emperor decreed that the Geti should no longer be called by their name, and then the term Goti appeared. Before the Romans, the Geti (Dacians) lived in peace with the Sarmatians and other nations.
@@andreivlad3518 The Goths ('Gutþiuda' in their own language) have nothing to do with the Getae. The Goths were a union of Germanic tribes who spoke Gothic, a Germanic language that is well preserved, mainly due to the Bible translation done by Wulfila in the 4th century.
Let's put it simply, Romania is the mystery of the globe and will remain so. The land here is magical - and it breeds wizards. Also from here, thousands of years before Rome, the creation of Rome itself began. If they were not "Vlachs", from the past (current Romanians), all of Europe spoke either Turkish or Russian or German. Now we are again a shield for the "crazies" from the west, being on the border with Ukraine. The peace of 1000 years will also be written here. After 1000 years, it's another problem. Dissensions with aliens begin, regarding the piece on Mars, assigned - New Romania, because it will be full of wizards Amazing work you do! (Yoda thinking)
The answer is simple for those who know history. Romania is a nation and not just a country due to the common language, common traditions, common history. The Romanian language does not have dialects like other languages, it is unitary in Romania. See also common genetics between areas. There is absolutely no surprise or lack between the years 300 and 1300... look for the Romanians in this period in the empires: Hun, Avar, Bulgar (I and II), Mongol. Many other peoples, like the Romanians, were temporarily part of different empires (Greeks, Bulgarians, Albanians in the Ottoman Empire, Byzantine). Poles, Baltics, Ukrainians, also were in different empires. So it is something common in Europe, the Romanians made their own states when they came out from under the different empires (1300s) and then in 1859 Romania appeared (the union of Wallachia + Moldova), later in 1918 + Transylvania. It is very simple and there is no "missing" period or mistery in the history of the Romanian people, there are many documents (Slavic, Greek, German, Hungarian, Arab) and archaeological research that confirm the continuity in this space.
I agree. Although the Romanian language (daco-Romanian) is unitary, there are still 3 dialects spoken today: Aromanian, Megleno-Romanian and Istro-Romanian.
@@popacristian2056 Yes, there are 3 dialects but in other areas of the Balkans, not in Romania. In Romania it is a unitary language, without dialects (only ...graiuri... ,,speechs" and some regionalisms).
@@cllaudiusd521 That's right. Daco-Romanian is unitary spoken on the territory of Romania including Moldova across the Prut as well as the ethnic Romanians remaining outside the borders in Serbia, Hungary, Bulgaria and Ukraine.
aaaa, low birth rate? migration of romanians to the west? migration from other people to Romania is not a concern, but who knows what the future brings? And God forbid some major conflict (nuclear?) that kills many people or displaces large populations. We should hope for the best, but not be complacent and still prepare for the worst.
@@ionut2v I'm not complacent at all. If you believe we are doing badly, how did we do when we didn't even have a country and had to retreat to the mountains constantly?
@@tricolourbearer2435 True... and it's difficult to say whether we are doing badly or not (for one we are chatting in English here :D ), but the challenges are different today (not saying we wont adapt), however I see how "nationalism" or "patriotism" are demonized in the west, and how they seem to be losing their national identity, who knows if that will be a challenge over here too.
@@ionut2v există o tendință vestică ce e și la noi, în orașe, dar mai ales la București. Nu știu ce dracu' va fi cu noi, cert e că eu rămân aici, nu dau bir cu fugiții
Very good video. You have many work and efort doing this video. I hope that you made more subcrivers, you deserve. I am portuguese and hope One day you made a video like that of Portugal and Spain ... Gratulations my friend
Moldovan chronicle of Grigore Ureche (mid 1600s) underlines the unity of Romanians: ”Românii, câţi se află lăcuitori la ţara ungurească şi la Ardeal şi la Maramureş, de la un loc sânt cu Moldovenii…” = "Romanians, as many as they live in Hungary, Transylvania and Maramuresh are together from the same spot with Moldavians..."
The origin theory of a nation can be easily manipulated by those who are connected in a large group of nations who are choosing to give legitimacy to certain historic writings or made-up stories.
And a lot of prsent day Hungarian and Russian propaganda is trying hard to manipulate and present what they are interested to promote in regards to Romania and Romanians.
@@mimisor66 , the daco-roman theory (fals propaganda) invented by wallachs priest (greco-catholic in Rome) in XIX century for justification of wallachs dream for Hungarian Transylvania .
Great vid. As a romanian you confirmed what I already know and I learned some new things. I wisk I know many things about my nation between IIIrd century and XI.
I don't agree so much with the video. Where I started to disagree is when you talked about Gesta Hungarorum, the shepherd's of the Romans and of course Duke Gelu. Gesta Hungarorum makes clear that Gelu was a Vlach, that the land's he ruled over was Transylvania, and his subjects were Vlachs and Slavs. Another thing it makes clear is that he was Duke of the Vlachs, making it clear that the Duchy was a Vlach political entity. ("Dum thutum audiuiesst a legaato, preparauit se cum suis militibus, et dimissis ibi sociis suis egressus est ultra siluas uersus orientem contra Gelou Ducem Blacorum") "When Tuhutum heard this from an envoy, he readied himself with his warriors and, having left his companions there, went forth eastwards beyond the woods against Gelou, duke of the Vlachs" ("dum cepisset audire ab incolis, bonitatem terre ultra siluane, ubi Gelou quidam Blacus") "When he learned from the inhabitants of the goodness of the land of Transylvania, where Gelou a Certain Vlach" ("Et habitarores terre illius uiliores homines essent tocius mundi, Quia essent blasji et Sclaui") "And that inhabitants of that land were the basest of the whole World, because they were Vlachs and Slavs" About the "shepherd's of the Romans", which is "ac pastores romanorum", is not in reference of the Romanians. As the text refers to the inhabitants of Pannonia, and among the "shepherd's of the Romans" were also the Vlachs (Blasji), "ac" means "and also". So the Pastores Romanorum probably refers the shepherds subjects to the Vlachs thus showing their Romanity or in reference to the one's subjected to Francia which claimed Roman imperial succession. Also another thing people must understand is that Vlachs were Romanians, or at least those in the region of Romanian influence, from modern day Romania, Moesia and Illyricum. Because you said that 'Vlachs eventually became Romanians', which is not the case as they always have been român. One thing I am glad about is your talk about Michael the Braves military and diplomatic campaign of 1599 - 1601, where he managed to dominate the three danubian Principalities. You made it clear that it was never based on nationalist interest, as no documents issued by Michael makes such claims. But one cannot deny this was the first United Romanian realm, based on political and administrative interests. One thing that I want to bring to the table is the 17th century after Michael the Brave, where the Romanian Orthodox Churches started to nationalise themselves. Saint Varlaam Moțoc, the Metropolitan of Moldavia under Vasile Lupu, translated many Byzantine laws from the time of Justinian into Romanian (pre limba româniască), and on expenses of Vasile Lupu, he granted them to "toată șemenița româniască" (to the whole seed of Romania). The latter was a reference to the all Romanian speaking territory. This movement took place after Michael the Brave, and some rulers like Mihnea Vodă claimed to be the ruler of both Moldavia and Wallachia.
The problem with the Gesta Hungarorum is that document also talk about cumans. And cumans arrived in that area only in 1200-1300. This document is not very accured
@@m.serban2523 It isn't 100% accurate as all the sources of that time. I recommend: ("Gesta Hungarorum as parody. The literary analysis of a medieval text") by Florin Curta, a recent study that adds the research of a similar discredited source from Britain called "De gestis Britonum" from the 12th century, conducted by Monika Otter.
@@cristidan1380 In fact we do. We have Nestors Chronicle which confirms Vlachs and Slavs inhabiting Transylvania and Pannonia before the Magyars. And also Jansen Enikels Chronicle from 1277, which talks about the Vlachs (Walachen) and the Avars (whom he calls "Ungern") as inhabiting the lands during Charlemagnes conquest of the Avars in the 9th century.
This is /the best/ short material I've ever seen/read on the history of the culture and of Romanians as a nation. Also I find it unbiased in any way. Amazing work!
How you talk about my country nobody does it,I love when you talk about Romania just because you do your homework about it,I am not breathing when I listen to you ❤thank you mulțumesc mult❤
Cymru ? Thanks. It is amazing that a Westerner is interested in our history, moreover is doing a video about that. Min. 13:38 - Pastores Romanorum = shephards of the ROMANS, not "Romanians". Min. 14:19 - Gelu. The mentioned Hungarian chronicle "Gesta Hungarorum" (Deeds of the Hungarians) clearly mentions that he was Vlach = Romanian : "Gelou, a certain Romanian" (GLat. : Gelou quidam blachus), and tells us that he ruled (Lat. : dominium tenebat) a country inhabited by Romanians and Slavs (Lat. : blasii et sclaui).
because people called themselves romans in those murky centuries. This holds to scrutiny because otherwise there would have only been remnants of latin culture and only along the Danube and later along with greek at the Black Sea coast, and not in and over the Carpathian mountains. With horse barbarians at an all time high, sheep in the mountains became the ca$h crops during the murky centuries.
Nice in-depth analysis. How old are we? It's very difficult to establish that because we are very old... Dacians are in our national consciousness, Romans are there too and not because some demagogs told us so. How this nation was born? I have my own theory. Some Roman veterans were colonized in the Balkans and they started practicing what the natives (Thracians / Dacians / Getae) used to practice: mixing with the natives, getting married, having kids, building farms, raising sheep...living in the mountains, away from the violent barbarians... This way of life, our way of life - comes from ancient times and was favored by the geography of this place. Our people lived from the northern Carpathians down to Greece for centuries, they mixed with many other people, they kept their religious beliefs...and here we are. It's very difficult to state how it started because our nation is very old. Our land is very beautiful and I believe that many people loved it during the centuries and they preferred to live here and keep the flame alive. It's a "continuum" and personally I think it started thousands of years before our time. Otherwise I agree with your analysis.
Multe multumiri pentru obiectivitate. Surprised to find this youtoube channel and an approach to romanian history that is genuine and respectful. How old romanians are? Probably older than most are willing to admit. Considering romanian folk culture, the death rites, the birth rites, the marriage rites have elements that go back to the proto european layer ... I would say there is a continuity of cultural and generic material that goes very deep. Maybe 3-5-7 thousands year deep or more. Over this very ancient root that somehow made it to the 20 th century, there are many layers, painted over by various populations that passed by or stayed longer. I am very sad that with the end of 20 th century, beggining of 21 century, our ancestral rural way of life was very much diminished and with it we, the current generations, lost contact with that ancient vine that kept us together. Also there are many who scorn, ridicule and depreciate our most ancient traditions, labeling them as primitive superstitions and things we should get read of. I hope the work of people like you to make more romanian to understand the value of our traditions and the duty to preserve them for future generations.
Mulţumesc mult. Yes, I respect your country. That you speak a Romance Language makes your country more immediately accessible to me than Slavic or Greek.
-Why don't we Romania have documents starting with the 14th century? Thanks to the IV Crusade 1202-1204 - that looted Constantinople and 3 days and 3 nights they carried archives and the great library of Constantinople, carried, a part reached the Vatican. That's why we who belonged to Constantinople have no documents regarding our multi-millenary Daco-Romanian past. ( "The Russian Chronicle from Novgorod XV century and the Byzantine chronicler Nicetas Akominatos, witness to the robbery)
@@BenLlywelyn Historical Romanian researchers visited the Vatican a few years ago and received approval to enter the Vatican archives. They researched there. This is how new data appeared, non-existent on Wikipedia. That is why I am well documented . Being a reference to Romania , my country, I brought here information.
@@BenLlywelynWith all the respect for your hard work, you are wrong. The Vatican's language is Latina, and, if the lost Dacian's documents are coming to the light, the entire story about the Romanian language deriving from Latin is falling. In fact, the Vatican is the first one they will never like to disclose the Dacian history, which is the ancestral Romanian history. Everyone will know,the Latin comes from our old Dacian language that I believe, it's still alive today. And this is only regarding our language, but the implications in other European nations ' history.
1918, the idea came about around the 1840s with the wave of European nationalism. Before that, it wasn't straightforward and it was probably an interaction with the Romans/Dacians in the mountains interacting with the Slavs in the plains. You can see this with the other Roman-descended population in the Balkans and around who also live a pastoral life in the mountains. There are populations like this from Poland to Greece. So there was an expansion around mountain ranges even after the Romans left. The DNA stuff is slightly irrelevant , because besides some haplogroups like i-s17250 , who is heavily associated with Romanian and Moldavian and some of Ukraine. most of the genetics is the same as everyone else's in the region.
@@mirelchirila The most dominant Y-haplogroup in Romania is I2a which is also dominant in the Balkans and it tells us about a certain resilience and continuity of our peoples. Depending on which barbaric horde hit us, we may have sometimes retreated either to the mountains, or south or north of the Danube, but this was always our home.
@@nuescu no but there is this thing called writing, where people can record their thoughts and they stay there after their death. We also have this thing called history that compiles these writings into a cohesive narrative . It’s almost like you don’t have to travel through time to know things.
This is another great video. For me personally, I won't complicate this matter any further. Romania began with the Roman conquest and settlement of Dacia. That is the inception of the concept of "Romanian". Making a continuous ancestral lineage that is 1900 years old. Of course in such a large span of time, Romanians were influenced by other people, but the backbone of the Romanian nation is still the Roman settlement of this land.
Except it didnt and romanains and their history isnt as heroic and as glorious as the romanians make it out to be, and romanians were certiainly not the "first ones here"
1877 was the years first independent Romanian state did appear. Before that, about three state formations under influence of one power or another. Before that, check out recorded history. First settlements were here about 10 thousands years ago, Cucuteni culture.
Australian here, married to a Romanian. Had the pleasure of visiting her family back in 2022. Interesting country. The Carpathians were amazing, the people warm. The legacy of Communism still scene. I feel that they really don't appreciate their history, largley appears to be crumbling. My wife's DNA is largley Balkan and Greek with a touch of Swedish. My DNA is redominaltely UK and northern Europe. My family tree I've been able to research way back, like way back. One ancestor is Attila the Hun, born in Central Asia, which today is in present day Romania. Go figure. Went to a number of places shown here in the vid. Particlarly enjoyed the Saxon villages. If you ever walk into a pub in the mountains (particularly behind Brasov on the ski slopes) and its really cold, and you see a jug of water on the counter, whatever you do, don't pour a cup and knock it back without a thought. It's not water, it's Tuica (apologies, no accents on this computer), sounds a little like zzwika, it's 40% alcohol. Learnt the hard way. The walk back down from the ski slopes was pretty merry. What was the tune playing from around 9:30?
@@Istoricescu Well I gues then that the whole geneaology industry falls over then because it can't be scientifically proven, according to yourself. I can't prove my father is my father then unless I and he have a DNA test to prove so. Now that he's dead, I guess I'll just never know.
Most comments are "trigger" comments, which is good for the algorithm. I appreciate how you structured the video, giving every low-read, nation(alist)-hyped mind a chance to make their own decisions. It is informative to see how foreigners are reading into our history (I am Romanian) and I appreciate that given the sensitive topic in this area of Europe, you kept yourself to the facts. Of course, I feel that culturally (I might be biased) one can dig up more info to regards to Romanians and I would like to see that, but given your perspective of defining the moment of Genesis by those 4 factors, it is an alright job in my opinion. Now, I have a question, this is the first video of yours I saw, and I've seen from your channel, that you are quite passionate about this country. I am just curious, what drove you to this passion?
I have studied Latin, and French. So being curious about eastern Europe, Romania was the easiest to get fast access into without wasting my time. Mulțumesc pentru ca tipule.
Good work! Thank you for this video. As for the last question, I would argue it is safe to point the 19th century's revolutions as the awakening of national counciosness, any date before that is just speculation.
Regarding your last question - when did the Romanian consciousness appear - this boils down to two aspects: 1) the idea that we're descendents of Rome (106-1000) 2) the idea that Rome is no more and that we are our own people. (1204-1453-present).
Not so. Moldova and Walachia fought each other several times in Medieval times. In fact, there was no concept of a Romanian nation in medieval times since Greek-orthodox religion was the principalities' identity which was the same as the other Slavic ethnic people in the Balkans. After the first Union on 24th January 1859, the Moldovans wanted to annul it. So much for the Romanian identity in medieval times:_)) Most Romanians do not know their history of being brainwashed by communist propaganda.
in the period from 271AD to around the time of the 10th century there was little or no contemporary sources mentioning anyone who fit in the description of what a Romanian is today. So the entire daco romanian continuation theory which says the romanian culture formed imbetween this period despite there being no archealogical evidence, no contemporary evidence, and basically nothing to go on. Of course this is complete bullshit, but remember only romanians believe this anyways.
Come on ! The German families fought each other for power, the English fought the Scotts.....such were those times. Small principalities fighting each other. What we call now nations were formed mostly towards the end of the 19th century.
The Dacians existed under the name Vlalahs , meaning speakers of the Latin language. The Byzantine chronicles mention them in documents. -Niketas Chroniates (12th century), Vlachs organized in a military state north of the Danube. Dacia's northern border was then today's Galicia. - Theodoros Prodomos 1118 - speaks of the Dacian race. - Ioanides .Kinames 1185 - Dacians- Vlachs in the Byzantine army. - The Wallachians, the descendants of the Dacians, are spoken about in many epics from the Middle Ages - the Song of the Niebelungs from 1200 ( the Wallachian people ) , the Song of Igor's Army - Russia IXth century.- describing their bravery in battle and their weapons - walahians near the Carpathians , Song of Roland..XI century , El Cid...etc.. - The Daco-Romanian unity was destroyed during Pope Innocent III and the Fourth Crusade, when the inquisition began. Then the Orthodox churches were destroyed as well as orthodox churches , books, chronicles, archives and diplomatic documents. -Why don't we have documents starting with the 14th century? Thanks to the IV Crusade 1202-1204 - that looted Constantinople and 3 days and 3 nights they carried archives and the great library of Constantinople, carried, a part reached the Vatican. That's why we who belonged to Constantinople have no documents regarding our multi-millenary Daco-Romanian past. ( "The Russian Chronicle from Novgorod XV century and the Byzantine chronicler Nicetas Akominatos, witness to the robbery)
"Rural" in Romania means something else than in the rest of Europe: it means the town does not have manufacturing companies and cannot afford to pay for a set of services. There are "villages" of 10000 inhabitants who do not have the manufacturing or choose not to take on the expense. Had the same rule applied in Romania as in US or in UK Romania would be like 99% urban, that is all towns including the smallest, have a charter, a budget (including the possibility to take on debt), an elected mayor and an elected council. I wrote "99" because there are some towns who lost most of their population and will be folded into other neighbouring towns.
@@BenLlywelyn Yes, the smallest town has a lot of leeway in how they spend their money, and can even block government projects in the area they control if they choose to :) . After 1990 Romania managed to create a very effective system of local self-administration, my guess is involuntarily. The only limitation is loans taken by towns must be approved by the Ministry of Finance, mostly because the Ministry of Finance guarantees those loans. The main lever the government has when dealing with towns is whether the government gives them extra money or not (Bucharest is worth like 25% of the GDP, and gets back only 10% of the taxes paid in Bucharest, the rest is redistributed), which is why after the party in charge at the central level changes lots of mayors change their party :).
@@BenLlywelynThere are just 10 million greeks speakers in the world. With their magnificent cities their coulture had little influence in Europe compared to romanians wich are the proto indoeuropeans that named all the rivers and mountains in Europe.
I don't know if your source of information about DNA is correct. As far as I know, the current DNA also varies gradually from one border to another and has similarities with the neighbors in all directions. If there were no men in this area in certain centuries, the invaders from Asia would have died of hunger because there would have been no farmers, only they did not live on milk and cheese. Whoever was the new boss in the area, would not have killed the farmers. The wars with Rome from 101-106 did not eliminate the male population, because in the year 117, after the death of Trajan, there was an important revolt of the locals, and don't say that it was a revolt only of Dacian women.
It was a change in the proportions of masculine haplogrups when migrations that bring other new haplogroups appear. *It was not a depletion of the existing local male population but a phenomenon with purely genetic causes. **14:55*
@@bujdososzekely I NOSTRI AVI DACII HANNO VISSUTO SU QUELLA TERRA DALL'ANNO 1000.A.C. INUTILE CERCARE AD INVENTARE ALTRE STORIE. I ROMANII HANNO CONQUISTATO SOLO 1/4 DELLA DACIA FINO ALLA MINIERA D'ORO (ROSIA MONTANA ) ANCORA OGGI LA PIÙ RICCA DI TUTTA L'EUROPA. IL MOME DELLA DACIA IN ROMANIA FU CAMBIATA MOLTO PIÙ TARDI.
Initially I perceived you as arrogant, typical westerner looking down at romanians. I guess, this is your way of speaking. Much appreciated your work. I hope you can find a bottle of ȚUICĂ (plum brandy) or Wine, Made in Romania.
We Romanians never called ourselves vlachs. Its just an EXTERNAL nickname from the Germans deriving from the word "walhaz" which means "latin speakers"... by the way Germans also dont call themselves internally as "Germans" they call thelselves "Deutshce volk" and Deutschland. The nickname "Germans" was given by the Romans which means barbarians or savages. Also it doesnt matter there is a blank in history of Romania. All countries have such blanks. What is the history of Hungarians for example BEFORE they came to Europe, to Panonia from today's Russia. What was their lives there in Russia before coming to Europe and why did they leave?? The same can be said about Bulgaria, Vikings and many others...
@@timixx2270 yes, from the Ural region in central Russia is the origin of the Hungarian language, it's Finno-Ugric. But Turkic-speaking peoples may have also played a part.
Ben, a study of the architecture, the people costumes, housing, way of living will lead you to very interesting conclusions. You will be surprised to see how similar are the popular costumes with those of the Dacians from Traian Column in Rome. Equally, two thirds of the Dacians tribal unions were outside Roman occupation. In my natal town, there is an ancient citadel call Petrodava (means stone citadel in Dacian) which used to be an important stronghold of the Carpi Dacian union of tribes. The name of my natal city is Piatra (Romanian word for stone) and Neamt (Romanian word for German - you read it as in Frantz - because for some hundred years there was a Teutonic Order Mark, until the foundation of the Moldavian Principality).
More ....Romania and the Romanians are the ancient nation of the Dacians and the Getae. While the Hungarians, Szeklers and Saxons who settled in Transylvania are not nations. There are populations that migrated here and settled over the native population. . The Romanians are a nation that never conquered and robbed other peoples like the Austro-Hungarian Empire did. Invasion and robbery. Emperor Aurelian withdrew from Dacia to the south of the Danube with the administration and the army. The Dacians, the future Romanians, stayed put, not with the tendentious support of the Hungarians. The Gesta Hungarorum of the anonymous notary of King Bella III, which I read, clearly writes about the native population and their Dukes with whom they fought. In the Middle Ages, the principalities of Moldova and Muntenia and their Princes had numerous wars with the Ottoman Empire, which they always defeated, stopping the invasion in Europe where you build palaces and we fought and died here. But I see too much insistence on Transylvania, which was from antiquity and is Romanian. The proof of the continuity of Daco-Romanians on this territory is the paleogenetic study from Germany in 2012. on the population of Romania. He says who Romanians are. The conclusions of the study proved, in the end, shocking for the Romanian space because they overturn the main thesis of the history of Romania, that of the ethnogenesis of the Romanian people. A selection: - Between the current population of Romania and the populations that lived on the territory of this country 2,500-5,000 years ago, there is a clear genetic relationship, which speaks of an indisputable continuity of the Romanian people in these lands. Even if there are also genetic traces belonging to the various migratory populations that passed through here, the basic genetic background proves the continuity and connection with the old populations; - The current population of Romania is genetically related in particular to the populations of Greece and Bulgaria, which developed in a space once inhabited by Thracians, with whom they also mixed, and only to a small extent with the Italian population; - It has also been proven, and this is the most shocking conclusion of the study, that some Italians, especially those from the north, are in turn genetically related to the ancient populations that lived in the Carpathian Arc 2,500-5,000 years ago. Hence the hallucinatory conclusion that part of the Italians are descendants of the Thracians, part of the Italians also have Thracian roots, Why are Romanians and Italians genetically related so little today? The explanation However, apart from the populations with Thracian roots, there were also populations belonging to other ethnic families - the Sabines and the Samnites - living in the Italic peninsula. then Greek Jews, etc. www-tnb-ro.translate.goog/ro/prof-univ-dr-alexander-rodewald-originea-genetica-a-poporului-roman-intre-mit-si-realitate?_x_tr_sl=ro&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc
@@bujdososzekely Gepids from Transylvania are the vlachs. Gepids are identical visigoths wich are the vlachs getae dacians. Transylvania is romanian( getae) land since before any hungarian. Transylvania belongs to Romania and its vlach 100%. Vlach means getae dacian, means gepid, visigoth and even ostrogoth. Its only the lowest educated barbarians that call us vlach. Greeks call us getae, romans call us vlach and slavs, hungarians and germanics calls us vlach.
You dont have to look at Alexander Rodewald paleogenetic studies. You just look at todays Romania haplogroups wich are mostly I2 ( the only native european haplogroup wich means romanian and albanian) and R1b wich is Yamnaya steppe people known as scithians. I2 haplogroup is 12000 years old and its present in Romania since the begining, 12000 years ago. This is male haplogroup, I2 Y DNA thats the most common in Romania. Dacians had high I2 and R1b just like todays romanians.
@@mihaiilie8808 2012, was the paleogenetic study carried out in Germany by Mr. Prof. univ. Dr. Dr. Alexander Rodewald, director of the Institute of Human Biology and Anthropology of the University of Hamburg, and Mrs. Dr. Georgeta Cardoș, scientific researcher biologist, specialist in genetics. The paleogenetics study that shocked Romania. According to the conclusions of this study, the current population of Romania is clearly related to the populations that lived on the territory of Romania during the bronze and iron ages, i.e. 2,500 - 5,000 years ago, something that highlights the continuity of this people, despite all the vicissitudes of history . So the study can tell us, among other things, who our real ancestors are. And our real ancestors are not the Romanians, but the Thracian-Geto-Dacians. In total, the study had at its disposal bone material from over 20 sites in Romania (the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic basin), from a number of 50 individuals belonging to ancient populations (22 from the Bronze Age, 28 from the Iron Age). As for the blood samples from the current population of Romania, they were obtained in medical centers. A research spanning several years (2003-2006) The conclusions of the study proved, in the end, shocking for the Romanian space because they overturn the main thesis of the history of Romania, that of the ethnogenesis of the Romanian people. But to fully assess the culture shock caused by the public presentation of the study's conclusions, let's present them: - Between the current population of Romania and the populations that lived on the territory of this country 2,500-5,000 years ago, there is a clear genetic relationship, which speaks of an indisputable continuity of the Romanian people in these lands. Even if there are also genetic traces belonging to the various migratory populations that passed through here, the basic genetic background proves the continuity and connection with the old populations; - The current population of Romania is genetically related in particular to the populations of Greece and Bulgaria, which developed in a space once inhabited by Thracians, with whom they also mixed, and only to a small extent with the Italian population; - It has also been proven, and this is the most shocking conclusion of the study, that some Italians, especially those from the north, are in turn genetically related to the ancient populations that lived in the Carpathian Arc 2,500-5,000 years ago. Hence the hallucinatory conclusion that we are not the descendants of Rome, but part of the Italians are descendants of the Thracians. Apart from the populations with Thracian roots, there were also populations belonging to other ethnic families - the Sabines and the Samnites - in the Italic peninsula. Over time, these populations mixed with each other. Imperial Rome then pursued an aggressive policy of mixing populations within the Empire. Etc.. Etc.. The history of Romania is made by Romanians. And haplogroup I2 is widely spread in the Balkans, western Europe and in Sweden, in these territories through the migration of the Dci and Getae-Goths to northern Europe. Haplogroup I2 made Europe. his stallion is Dacia. www.voci.ro/studiul-de-paleogenetica-care-a-bulversat-romania/ P.S Relation only with Albania? Well, the Albanians are the ancient Illyrians from the great family of the European Thracians, like us, the Bulgarians, and others. And .. look for the map of the spread of haplogroup I2 in Europe.
between AD 101 and 106 the romans conquered us, we are still descendants of dacians, you can see it in the ear lobes, which are different. Romans have them detached and dacians have them attached. A lot of romanians still have attached ear lobes which means Romania is actually Dacia and our history starts way before the romans invaded us. They say they used to live next to us (Dacia), but they left the territory, established themselves, raised an army and came back to conquer what they already knew to be a wealthy land. They say the language that romans established as latin is derived from the language that the dacians were speaking, which were much more evolved then them at that point in history. I would love to hear more about this side of the story, but I presume it was forever deleted from history by the romans, who probably portrayed us dacians as savages, which I don't believe we were. What do you think about this? cheers!
That about the ears of romans and dacians are an urban Myth. It actually does us bad because people think the dacopaths are some soird of believers in aliens invasion, giants and other such esoteric things. To beat any argument just use science, haplogroups and DNA, paleogenetics, etc.
There are 2 different relevant notions here - 1)Identity 2) The state or the polity Identity is a fluid and a bit vague notion whose birth cannot be dated exactly. Its main cimponents are languge and cultural practices(including religion/cultic practices) Unlike identity- Romanian statehood is clearly defined and can be exactly dated - and Romania just like Italy and Germany and other European nations were formed in the latter part of the 19th century. Romania's direct predecessors as a state were the so-called Danubaian principalities Wallachia and Molodova which were founded at.the end middle of the 13th century in Wallachia's.case and the.midddle of the 14th century un Moldova's.
Romania is the ancient Kingdom of Dacia which, after the Roman conquest, was divided into provinces, duchies representing the same nation. Just like Italy, which became a national state in 1861 when all the city-states united. . The name "Romania" comes from the Latin Romanus meaning citizen of Rome. "The name Romania (in the specific form, with the vowels "o" and "â") was used for the first time officially, in state documents, in the years 1862-1866, for the territory resulting from the union of the Wallachia (Oltenia and Muntenia) , without Dobrogea) and Moldova (the central-western part - with the area north of the mouths of the Danube - without Bucovina and without most of Bessarabia). (…) The Constitution of 1866 consecrated the name of Romania. Abroad, the name Wallachia was also used for a while. Many people have forgotten, and others never knew that, until late in the 19th century, what Romanians generically called "Romania" was for any foreigner "Wallachia" (with different spellings and pronunciations). Due to this late constitution of the modern Romanian state and the imposition of the official name Romania only in the second part of the 19th century, many foreign authors were confused about the duality of the name of Wallachia-Romania and Wallachian-Romanian. It has often been said and written that the name Romania was "invented" or used for the first time by a Greek author, Dimitrie Philippide, around 1816, when he published in Leipzig the works Istoria României and Geografia României, referring in the lines large in the space of the old Trajan Dacia". The Great Union of 1918 was the historical process following which all the historical provinces inhabited by Romanians united in 1918 within the same national state, Romania. The preliminary stages were the Union of the Romanian Principalities in 1859 and the acquisition of independence following the war of 1877-1878, against the backdrop of the national renaissance of the Romanians during the 19th century. And the final union restoring the territory of ancient Dacia was in 1918 on December 1. the principle of Nations. Then the Romanian nation was united, a state named Romania- from Rome, Roman as a result of the legacy of the Roman conquest of Dacia from antiquity. Romania is a national, unitary state, the Latin language is unitary throughout the territory up to Bessarabia, ancient Romanian territory. .We are the only native European state. We were born here, we didn't come from. other territories. Paleogenetics tests (2012-Germany) confirm Daco-Romanian continuity here, for 6-7 millennia. P.S. Similar situation to Romania. The unification of Italy, according to the term originally from Italian, Risorgimento, was the social, political and administrative process that had the final result of the unification of the states of the Italian peninsula into a single nation, Italy. The unification of Italy was part of the process of establishing modern European nations , completed with the emergence of new unitary and independent national states in Western Europe (Belgium, Italy, Germany) and in the Balkans (Greece, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Montenegro, and at the beginning of the 20th century - Albania). All after the defeat of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The right of nations to self-determination. The national state of Italy - like the national state of Romania are as OLD - 100 years as national states . After escaping from the rule of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, plundering. Italy is ancient Rome, Romania is ancient Dacia. Both divided into pieces that finally united as one nation. Simple.
There are many sources that prove that the Romanians called themselves Romanians and that they were only called by foreigners Wallachians. Only you pointlessly advance the assertion that Romanians evolved from Wallachians. In 1532, Francesco della Valle traveling in Transylvania, Wallachia and Moldova notes that the Romanians kept the name Romans (Romani) and "are called in their language Romans (Romei)". He even quotes the sentence "Sti Rominest?" ("do you speak Romanian?" for original Romanian "do you know Romanian?") Pierre Lescalopier, recounting his journey, notes in 1574 that those living in Wallachia, Moldavia and most of Transylvania say they are descendants of the Romans, calling their language "romanechte" (the French transcription for Romanian). The Lutheran preacher and the first Transylvanian Saxon historiographer Johann Lebel testifies in 1542 that ordinary Romanians call themselves "Romuini". Antonius Verantini, who settled in Transylvania as bishop of Alba Iulia, and later became cardinal and viceroy of Habsburg Hungary, also states in 1570 that "the Wallachians are called Romans" and offers an example: "When they ask if someone knows how to speak Wallachian, they say: do you speak Roman? And [when they ask] if someone is Wallachian they say: are you Roman? Pierre Lescalopier notes in 1574 that those living in Wallachia, Moldavia, and most of Transylvania say they are descendants of the Romanians, calling their language "romanechte" (the French transcription for Romanian Romanian). Convince yourself at least on Wikipedia, there search for "Name of Romania". You will find this information with the sources quoted.
Of course Romania is old. Since ancient times, Waleachia was called "Tara Românească" by the Romanians themselves, which means Romanian land. Check out what “Tara Românească means” on Wukipedia! Now, what does “England” mean and what does “Deutschland” mean?
@@bujdososzekely Wallachia and Moldova were not created by the Hungarian kings. Tara Românească was created between 1270 - 1352 by Basarab Întemeietorul. He was the first independent ruler. And whether they were once vasal or not doesn't matter at all. Hungary has also been vasale throughout history.
Deutschland means the dacians land😂. Its because of the visigoths wich are 100% dacians ( celts and vulgar latin speakers) that named Sweden, Denmark and Finland Dacia in official documents. The heart of the germanic nations is Gotland wich was a colony of dacians.
@@mihaiilie8808 Deutschland, that is how Germans refer to Germany! And by that they mean German land.That's something everybody schuld know. What's wrong with you, are you uneducated? Your taking about Daciana is inappropriate in this context.
The romanian ancestors are possibly one or more pack of survivors after the catastropic events including megafloods that terminated the Old World from before the Younger Dryas period. Pyrenees, Alps and Carpathians will just apply for the best places to survive to regional or even continental tsunamis, one type of events that pack the YD boundaries. This is just my humble opinion based on multilevel integration of scientific facts
@@cezar211091 The survivors of events that are difficult to understand for those who do not have reference points, but which are widely reported in the specialized scientific literature, are real like the biblical story of the Flood. Exacty as there too, the heights of the mountains offered the refuges beaten by the terrible fate. The only question that troubles me and I try to find an answer to it is whether we and others in the Carpathian area are direct descendants of extremely powerful people forged under the auspices of an era extremely hostile to life, in general.. That's why I said it's "possible"
You supposedly don't like defining nationality genetically. But genetics comes in handy when you want to sing the old song of the hungarian revisionists and claim that the Romanians supposedly migrated from the south. But no serious historian would claim such a thing today, only the hungarian revisionists claim it. On the other hand, it is common sense who the migrantors are; the Maghyars and the Huns migrated to the territory of today's Hungary. This is still reflected in the country's name today. The Hungarians call their country MAGHYARoszag and the others call it HUNgary
@@mihailvormittag6211 And slavs were different? Or they were physically better looking and were easier accepted? Wondering why hungarians look like no mongols? Huh? Well well well. Ask the historian.
@@Info-God No, the Slavs were no better in this regard. It is well known why Hungarians don't look like Asians. First, the Panonian Plain was not depopulated when the Maghyars and the Huns invaded it, there was already a native population there. Secondly, the Maghyars of that time did not look Asian: the Finns and the Estonians, people from the Fino-Ugric language family like the Hungarians, also do not look Asian. And finally, the Huns were too few for their appearance to prevail, they were assimilated by the local population.h
@@mihailvormittag6211 Ha. I read that somewhere in 800 the huns have been eliminated physically by a r3volt of local populations: dacians, germans, celts(?). And the pope said it wants a maghyar language in Panonia. And with practically few 10s of families left, the pope created this nation.
It is common sense that the Romanians called Vallachia Țara Românească (the Romanian Land). Search on wikipenia and there you will be told that it is so. In addition, from Basarab I the founder, who annihilated almost the entire Hungarian army at the Battle of Posada, to Neacșu's letter that refers to Țara Românească and Neagoe Basarab its leader, there were 26 rulers of Țara Românească. All of these documented. Not to mention those rules after Neacșu's letter. And you continue to insinuate that the Idea of Romania is new, that the Romanians did not have a state and this period was very nebulous. Take a look at Wikipedia where you can find a list of all the voivodes of Țara Românească.
The nation în modern meaning of the concept îs born only in the 18-th and 19-th centuries. Before we can speake only about peoples or populations or states everywhere / anywhere, but not modern nations nor in Europe neither în other continent. The Romanians were conscient of they Roman origins from begining and they are living în the large geographically space between Danube, Balkans and Carpathians Mountains as the descendants of the all Oriental Romanity în European continent.
Claiming that all Dacian men were wiped out after the Romans conquered Dacia and only women were spared, is foolish, especially when there is clear evidence that supports the existence of Free Dacians around the area conquered by the Romans (about 20% of Dacian land was occupied by Romans, mostly the gold mines area). Some Dacian men served in the Roman army after the conquest, as it was normal at the time, but the entire male population couldn't disappear. Britannia was twice as long under Roman rule (4 centuries), their male population has also been wiped out?
That should be right, but there were a lot of other nomad tribes that walked through these lands and left big footprints here. Important is that out of all those populations, the one that prevailed and asimilated the others was the vlach one (at least in the north of the Danube). In Hungary for exemple, the much smaller population of the nomad magyars dominated and overpowered and imposed its culture over the existing Panonian population.
NARAVUL DIN FIRE ,NU ARE LECUIRE. MA REFER LA POPORUL UNGURESC CARE PROVIN DIN UN TRIB DI NOMAZI DIN MONGOLIA ,PRIMA S AU OPRIT PE UN TERITORIU INTRE TURCIA SI IRAN APOI IAR AU MIGRAT PINA IN CIMPIA PANONICA UNDE S AU ACIUAT ( ASA ERA FELUL LOR) SI AU CREAT ACEST POPOR UNGARIA.
Similar situations. Romania - Italy. How old is Italy? The Kingdom of Italy was a state formed in 1861 by the unification of Italy, under the influence of the Kingdom of Sardinia; it existed until 1946, when Italians opted for a republican constitution. The Kingdom was the first Italian state to include the entire Italian Peninsula since the fall of the Roman Empire. Antiquity, separate feudal states, unification = modern states. Romania was called Dacia in antiquity, Italy was called Rome in antiquity. Both got new names in the 19th century. Romania and Italy have the same age. They were kingdoms from antiquity. Dacia and Rome.
@@BenLlywelyn Yes. About the evolution of the Italian peninsula from the Roman Empire to the Middle Ages when there were many statuettes in the boot that still fought among themselves. But also different dialects that even today do not understand each other. There was no homogeneous population like in Dacia-Romania. The Romanian language is a unitary language even in the territories in front of the borders where Romanians live. What is the explanation? The same race perpetuated from antiquity to today. Italy is special. What nations lived on its territory? How many languages spoken? Commonly, we have the creation of a modern state in the 19th century through various unions of territories of the same race in the case of Romania and ... everything after the disappearance of the Austro-Hungarian Empire when liberated, new national states appeared in Europe. Romania is one. On January 24, 1862, after partial rains, we got the name of Romania. From Rome, Romanus.. It is a complicated topic, but it is worth deciphering. Italy.
The DNA from the Balkans is shared with that of the Bulgarians and the Croats because we were there, the ones who made and brought food to the Romans after Venice and Constantinople. In Croatia, after the second wave of plague in the Middle Ages, Romanians occupied 3/4 of Dubrovnik. In 1400, only one Romanian family had 10k sheep! that in 1552 trade with Venice was 40k Venetian ducats, today 6 million$, carried on donkeys in caravans. They had their port on the Adriatic Sea: Canale della Morlacca On the other side of the Balkans, the Romanian caravans from Constantinople were so strong that they founded a state: Dobrogea. And the Romanians also founded the Asanesti dynasty, that is, the Wallachian-Bulgarian state, the beginnings of the Bulgarian state. That is why our DNA is found everywhere in Croatia, Montenegro, Bulgaria. Let me say more about the Romanians from Poland or Urcaina?. That's why we emphasize the importance of the Dacians, because this explains the spread that the Romanians have in this part of Europe, with a great contribution to its history. One last example: Constantine opened the doors of pagan Rome with the Dacian troops formed by the Roman emperor of Dacian origins, Galerius.
nu stiu cum se face dar in romania oricat de grea era viata sau cat de saraci am fost evreii au trait tot timpul bine. vacante doua masini excursi in strainatate la ei nu era o problema. de ce tocmai tu ai facut un asa video lipsit de sens
@@MiomMiomissimo sunt machiavelicii. inca mai merge varianta auschvitz.. -vai am fost persecutati cineva trebuie sa plateasca pt asta ... s.a.m.d. si apoi mai e indoctrinarea religiei (la musulmani nu merge) varianta intoarce si celalalt obraz stiind ca scapa ca religia iti spune sa ierti si atunci incep manipularea. ca doar nu o sa ii persecuti ca sunt evrei nu vinovati de ceva. ei iti spun ce sa faci si apoi profita de tine ca ei te-au invatat. pe scurt sunt plini de idei machiavelice care suna bine dar in practica iti fac rau. cel mai bun sxemplu este datoria. sau datoriile la banci camete toate sunt idei jidanesti. . citeste-l pe eminescu cartea chestiunea evreiasca si inveti multe
Romanian/ Sardinian similar words Magura ( hillock)/ Mogoro ( hill) Groapa ( pit)/ Groppu ( pit, canyon) Beci( underground storage)/ Beciu Cancioc ( scoop for plastering)/ Cancedu ( laddle, wine poorer) Pusti/Puscedu ( slang for kid) Berbec/ Berbecu ( ram) Pisica/Pissitu ( cat) Cas/ Casu ( fresh cheese) Ou/Ou (egg) Patru(4)/ Batturu. Apa/Abba ( water) Sange/Sange ( blood) Limba/Limba ( tongue) A few with Etruscan Leu/Leu ( lion) Cutie ( box in Romanian, Basque, Turkish, Albanian)/ kutum in Etruscan I think that kutum comes from Latin "quadrum", a reference to the four corners of the box,( square,) Pui, Puia ( a kind of "honey" for wife)/ Puia ( wife) Nene, (a polite term for older men)/ Nene ( wet nurse)
Which are those genetic tests that support the statement that there is a genetic difference between Romanians on one side of the Carpathian arc and those on the other side of the Carpathian arc. Any serious person would cite the sources. What you say is nothing but nonsense, meant to support the cause of the Hungarian secessionists from Transylvania, who are trying to convince the Romanians from Transylvania that they should be separated from their brothers beyond the Carpathians.
@@BenLlywelyn It is appropriate to cite one's sources when making such a blatant claim. It is you who claims what you claim and not some scientist. You have to prove your claim if you want it to be credible, so that we can see for ourselves whether it is true. Otherwise you're just telling fairy tales. Which scientist should I ask? You have to tell me which one I should ask. You have to know from which scientist you heard or read that.
The painting in the thumbnail may interest the presenter - the model was a socialite born in the Channel Islands who married a Romanian nobleman and the painter was an Austrian Jew who immigrated to Romania and made a name for himself there. He was eventually killed by the Austrian authorities for political reasons.
Answer: a couple of centuries barely, now Valahia & Transylvania are much older but Romania as a state is an relatively recent Austro Hungarian Empire just like Yugoslavia was... & look at where those are today...
Would the fact that the "birth of a nation" cannot be pinpointed on a timeline mean it never died? Just changed, rolled with the punches from Dacian times?
@@BenLlywelyn it would be wild it that can be quantified, how much a nation formed with people living in the same area changed over the centuries. But at the same time, depends on what you are tracking, is the Modern state in an area, when it was officially added in foreign to that country documents, and recognized, or the more "untouchable" wish for unity under one banner that existed in an area.
Roman Macedonia was a province of ancient Rome, created in 146 BC, after the Roman general Quintus Caecilius Metellus defeated Andriscus of Macedon, the last self-styled King of Macedonia in the Fourth Macedonian War. The province incorporated the former Kingdom of Macedonia with the addition of Epirus, Thessaly, and parts of Illyria, Paeonia and Thrace. By 74 BC, the Roman legions under Gaius Scribonius Curio reached the lower Danube and proceeded to come into contact with the Dacians. Roman Dacia was a province of the Roman Empire, created in 106 AD, by emperor Caesar Nerva Traianus. Its territory consisted of what are now the regions of Oltenia, Transylvania and Banat.
Yes, officially, Emperor Rudolf helps Mihai (as virtual ruler of the three principalities) with money for the army that he will use in the battle of Guraslau, when he returns to the Transylvanian throne. Behind the scenes, it seems that Rudolf had other intentions, but he used Mihai to chase away Sigismund de Bathory. Among the officers hired by Michael was John Smith - the one with Jamestown.
How old is Romania, is a wrong question!!! The right question is; how old is the Romanian nation, and its language??? On this matter I know more then anyone on earth, But You Tube is blocking my videos and delete my comments. Hope they didn't delete this comment!!!
@@BenLlywelyn Thank you. Good to know. In this case I will continue to bring some of real history of Romanians. Let me start with a little etymology. In Romanian the word for "copper" is ARAMA. ARMA means "weapon", but the word ARMS and ARMA are the same in other languages. In case you people don't know, the first ARMA (weapon) was made out of ARAMA (copper) Do you people see how the word ARMA/ARMS (weapon) evolved from ARAMA??? Romanian words explain themselves and how they evolved. This is only one word but I have hundreds of examples. The word ALARMA/ALARM which came from the Romanian A LA ARME (to the weapons) is a very international word. It evolved from Romanian language. The word ARAMA exist only in Romanian. Did you people get it so far???
During my very brief visit to the Transylvania area, I was struck by the history of people living on the hilltops & mountaintops. How they began to protect themselves from invaders by building walled towns atop the mountains, often with religious figures & beliefs there. My sense was of an ancient culture long protected by the mountainous area needing to consolidate due to hostile invasion. My sense about Romanian "attitude" is still of feeling invaded & beset by foreign culture.
''Between Rome and the 14th century, this large space within Europe is a wild?'' After the Roman conquest and the abandonment of Dacia by Aurelian with all the Roman administration, south of the Danube, the Dacians continued to exist. - The Turkish chronicle Ohuz Han (Oguzname) from the 9th century describes the opposition of the Urus (Russians), Ulak (Dacian Vlachs), they opposed the Cumans and that reminds of the Ulashuwi-Wallachians, when the Hungarians lived between the Don and the Dnieper. -In Pannonia and Moesia (Dacia Minor) there were 10 Dacian kingdoms, with some of them the Hungarian tribes started fighting. Ex. The kingdom of Salanus occupied by the Hungarians in 903, the king of Menu in 880, inherited from his ancestor - the Dacian dynasty. In 950, a Duke Gyla in Transylvania. Gelu, Glad, etc. But not all the information can be brought here. "Gesta Hungarorum" or The Deeds of the Hungarians of the anonymous notary of King Béla III. (Belae regis Hungariae notarius) is the oldest chronicle of Hungary. In 1200. See here the native Dacian or Wallachian population and the local Duke or rulers with whom with which the nomads Hungarians fought.
@@zoltan6451 Read here : "Gesta Hungarorum" or The Deeds of the Hungarians of the anonymous notary of King Béla III. (Belae regis Hungariae notarius) is the oldest chronicle of Hungary. In 1200. See here the native Dacian or Wallachian population and the local Duke or rulers with whom with which the Hungarians fought.
Written between 1282-1285, the Gesta Hungarorum is an ingenious and imaginative historical fiction of prehistory, medieval history and contemporary social history.@@mariadespina80
I will tell you how old Romania is. Getica written by Jordanes (Iordanes) around 500 AD tells the history of the Goths and all that followed. fun facts 1)The word “Ge” means “earth”. The word Get or Getae (Geti plural) means born out of the earth or man of earth (which has serious implications regarding who is not of earth). 2. The Roman Emperor **Claudius II Gothicus** (reigned 268-270 AD) is primarily credited with changing the perception from "Getae" to "Goths." Claudius II won a significant victory against the Goths, earning him the title "Gothicus," which started the more common use of "Goths" over "Getae." You see, all the evidence is there the Romanian land is the cradle of civilization. 3.Nicolae Densusianu wrote the book Dacia Preistorica (Ancient Dacia) which talks about so much everyone should know yet no one does including the Romanian Sphinx, ancient civilization such as Cucuteni Tripiliu, Turdas Vinca and so many artifacts over 7000 years old. 4)Romus and Remulus had the mother wolf, these founders of the Roman Empire is the ultimate proof Romania is the cradle of civilization. In ancient times the word Dac or Dacian used to mean “wolf”. So Dacia as a country was the great wolf mother. You see whose tits Romus and Remulus were sucking on? They were Dacians. My personal belief is there used to be a great worldwide civilization what we know today as Atlantis (maybe Lemuria was different civilization who knows). This civilization had an apocalypse known as the Younger Dryas. They knew what was about to happen so they set outposts (markers). That’s the sphinx. Everyone knows the Egyptian sphinx, you didn’t even mention the Romanian one, shame. So yeah the survivors were up in the mountains where the great flood did not reach them. These are the Getae, my ancestors, the ancestors of most of Europe and North Africa and Minor Asia (Pomponius Mela Map). So the question remains. Who were the not of earth invaders, the Annunaki? Went to all corners of the earth and spread their seed? Do they rule to this day? You work for them?
@@BenLlywelyn then please take this video down. It’s 100% inaccurate spreading a false narrative. It’s not only an insult to my people, it’s an insult to all earth born
@@BenLlywelynDo not take the videos down and please make more videos about Romania as you have a connexion with your knowledge about the celts. Critic is useful and a dacopat like myself, altough i get upset at times that you got the wrong facts, i cant get upset on you.
@@BenLlywelyn From latin. Dacus =(The) Dacian Malus = Mean, Bad, Aggressive If you wish Malus = Mal-igne. The Mean Dacian. Or in Romanian: Dacul cel Rau. You can Google the Romanian wording if you want to check. It shows these 2 words, clearly, on a Hungarian (?) painting. Is real.
@@BenLlywelynIf you go to a romanian village you will see the houses are build like 12 000 years ago, from twigs and mud,much older than Burebista. 😂 They are a rare sight now a days and should be protected, but our coulture and language is very old, much older than Burebista.
@@mihaiilie8808 and said techniques were exported to the syberian gulags when the rabid bear clawed in the mid 20th century. Legends say that when gulaged romanians from the army, most of the people came from villages, arrived and they found other poor souls from all over Europe just left out in the open sleeping in holes in the tundra, they started organizing and building said 'Burebista style' of straw and mud huts. And when the russians came later to check, they cringed and moved the romanians away. Take the legend with as many booze shot salt and believe what you will.
@@cristibrad6742 I have a friend(romanian but he claims he is siberian) that was born in Siberia gulag and he has a home and relatives there and wants to visit. He has a home in Mangalia and another in Buzau and another in Vrancea, plus the home in Siberia. From all these he talks the most about Siberia and his home there that he left to his cousin, and how he wants to go back and visit. Must be a nice home.
Why so 'fearful' of genetics and race,ethnicity? I think is very interesting and in fact, a particular culture is born of those genes over a period of time. ie. European, Asian, African, etc. cultures are distinct and unique in their own way.
@@BenLlywelynoh, is that because the Third Reich used genetics as a litmus test (rather than culture/religion) when deciding whom to discriminate against, or worse...? On the other hand, don't Israeli universities study the Ashkenazi and Sephardic ancestries? I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with studying any subject if it helps us understand the world better, even if a horrible regime used that knowledge for evil.
Watch "DALMATIAN LANGUAGE - the missing link-( ROMANCE LANGUAGES) The extinct Dalmatian language was the link between Romanian and Italic languages So many similarities.
The only attestation of Proto-Romanian would be, according to some authors, the phrase torna, torna, fratre "return, return, brother". The first word, repeated, appears in the Byzantine chronicler Theophylact of Simocatta, around the year 630. The whole phrase was transcribed by another Byzantine chronicler, Theophanes the Confessor, around the years 810-814. It would have been spoken in the year 587, during a campaign against the Avars, by a soldier of the Byzantine army, probably a proto-Romanian native. Here, the word "brother" has the meaning of "one of the same nation as me", of the same ethnicity. The one who said these words was aware of belonging to a particular ethnic group of which he was also a part.
Are you seriously telling us that the people in the three Principates only very late realized that they speak the same language and have the same culture?
@@BenLlywelyn Are you serious? I don't think it's possible to make the decision to become conscious about something. In this case about the own nationality. How can someone make a decision about something that he is supposedly unaware of? That sounds illogical.
@@BenLlywelynItalian and german and indian speakers are different case because they cant understand each otther like italians from south with italians from north. Romanian language is soo old that there are not even dialects and all romanians speak exactly the same language.
How old is Romania? The mysterious one. Since ancient times, the Dacian Kingdom was divided into pieces after the death of King Decebal, among his descendants and others. It remained like this in pieces in the Middle Ages, first small duchies in the 11th-11th century with dukes - Vlachs (Dacians - Romanians) Menumorut, Seneslau, Glad and others described in the Gesta Hungarorum of the anonymous notary of King Bella III in 1200, with which the Hungarian invaders fought. In the Middle Ages, the 13th - 14th - 15th centuries, the great Romanian principalities, Moldova, Muntenia, Dobroge, and Transylvania, which was rich and seized by some invaders, were established. temporarily. Rulers and princes ruled these Romanian principalities. . They united in stages, until in 1918 the National State was created with the new name of Romania, inspired by imperial Rome. And the name Romanian = Romanus, a citizen of Rome. In the 19th century, with the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, all the nations oppressed by it formed modern national states. Romania, Belgium, Germany, Italy, and countries in the Balkans. So Romania is as thirsty for OLD as these new national states, around 100 years with the new name of Romania. In 1918, the territory of the Kingdom of Dacia was restored. ( VLACHS is the name given to the Romanian and Aromanian population by foreigners, the Germans - that is, population speaking a Latin language.)
Romanized population of North Danube was attested since the Hunnic times. The chronicle of Priscus, for example. He was part of a delegation from the Eastern Roman Empire to the court of Atilla. He describes the Romanized population that lived on Hunnic territories, and on Hunnic main camp. He also describes them as “locals”. There are many such mentions about the proto Romanians.So, Romanians are locals in the Balkans and Carpathian area. They were under the Hunnic empire, then under the Avars, and later under Bulgars. They were part of those armies, and are attested as it. They origin is clearly from the local mix ofCeltic, Geto-Dacian and Thracian peoples, to whom we should add the Roman legions that were recruited from various parts of the empire. 860 A letter from Emmerich of Elwangen to Grimaldus, St.Gall Abbey mentions the North-Danubian Romanians with the name of Dacians (year 860):...“gentes innumeras... Sunt his Germanique truces et Sarmata bellax-atque Getae nec non Bastarnae semina gentis-Dacorumque manus et Martia pectori Alani. Matila Ghyka. A Documented Chronology of Romanian History: From Pre-historic Times to the Present Day. Translated from the French by Fernand G. Renier and Anne Cliff, B. H. Blackwell, 1941, p.26 830 The Turkish Bulgars conquered parts of Pannonia. Buda was founded by the Bulgarians and so was the Csongrad Fortress (cernii grad = black fortress) on the Tisza. From this settlement, around the year 830, a detachment of soldiers was sent to Transylvania to control or organize the salt trade from Ocne (today Ocna Mureș, Turda, Sărăteni, etc.) All these show that Transylvania was inhabited and part of the local population worked to obtain or to transport the salt. Later, Gesta Hungarorum described that Romanians/Vlach/Blaci were the local dwellers and worked for the extraction of Salt and Gold. All this shows that Transylvania was inhabited and part of the local population worked to obtain or transport salt. Later, the Gesta Hungarorum described that the Romanians/Vlachs/Blacians were the inhabitants of Transylvania and worked in the extraction of salt and gold.
PERCHÉ NON FINITE A DIRE TANTE BAGGIANATE SULLA STORIA DELLA DACIA ????? OGGI LA ROMANIA. CERTO CHE LUNGO I SECOLI SONO PASSATI TANTI POPOLI MIGRATORI MA IL POPOLO DELLA ATTUALE ROMANIA HA MAMTENUTO LA SUA LINGUA ED E SUCCESO CHE IL LORO DNA SI È UNITO CON ALTRI DNA TRAMITE UNIONI CON ALTRE PERSONE CHE SONO STATE DI PASSAGIO AL NOSTRO PAESE.CHIARO?????
No reliable and contemporary sources information can attest to vlachs (Romanians) north of the Danube before the later half of the 10th century. in regards to your 860 letter, he probably was not referring to Romanians. There isn't any reliable evidence for dacians past the 271AD pullout. People referred to themselves or those living in the carpathian mountains as dacian. Because in the Carpathian mountains, it was referred to (and south of the sava) as dacia. The byzantine chroniclers referred to the Hungarians as Dacian as well. There was also Dacian tribes who survived in Rome at least until the 320's when the entirety of dacia was abandoned. I have never heard anyone use the source of Priscus. So i decided to read the whole thing and then i figured out why i never heard anyone mention it as a source before. It does not mention any romanized population, it does describe locals. But it is left as that. Locals. It never says they spoke Latin, better yet were romanized populations. It does however describe numerous people who were scythian and "barbarian" and even prisoners who abandoned their old lives, and one hellanic man who told Priscus that their lives under the Huns were better. (Priscus, fr. 8 in Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum) The salt mines is why Transylvania was such a contested area at times. These probably was plenty of people who was in the busisness of trading the lucrative salt in Transylvania. What i am also sure of, is that the huns would not tolerate even local rich traders in that particular business. In the source of which you gave me, it tells us that in regards to the man who i mentioned said life under the huns was better, " -he was stript of his prosperity, and on account of his riches was allotted to Onegesius in the division of the spoil, as it was the custom among the Scythians for the chiefs to reserve for themselves the rich prisoners". This clearly demonstrates that there was not these supposed roman salt traders (who would have been rich) and locals who remained in Dacia. If there was, then why did the Huns only take ranson some of the traders and not the roman ones in Dacia? Even if this source is completely false, and you are right, this does not mean anything in the context of when the romanians culture formed or when the Romanians migrated to romania. Why isnt there any latin speaking dacians Because we clearly have more non fragmented more reliable chronicals of the Byzantines and their emperours who clearlyt state that there was a vlach (some considored bessan and dacian) living south of the danube from Thessolonka, to albania, to Mosia. Also the gesta hungaroum is not a particularly reliable source, especially since it was written a good 300 years after the supposed events took place, and the author worked directly for the king who had a vested intrest in selling estates, particularly in transylvania. This is why they made up the fantastical hero character of Geulo, who no other source menions the name of, and who we have no archealogical evidence for and his supposed followers and people. Do you think people would pay more if the land had heros and stories of battles which many hungarians died for? Absolutely, and it did work.
@@schutzanzug6731 You have no ideea what you talk about my friend. If you haven't heard about Priscus chronicles, or the fact that Byzantine empire established a few times control over the North of Danube.... Roman empire resettled around 700.000 to 1.200.000 Romans north of the Danube, they came because they received free land... Where do you think that those people went? Also the Huns, avars kept the local population to grow food. Your only arguments is " i didnt hear of that, i think etc..." The fact that Romanian is a latin speaking language and the fact that in the first writing they considered themselves Romanian, are the main proofs. Also there is archeological proof that people continued to live in this lands, they were never empty. Even the Magyars wrote about the fights with the local population, when they came.... There is no proof of any Romanian missive migration, yet now we have 20 milion Romanian speakers in these lands.. Your arguments are phatetic, study more...
@@schutzanzug6731 here is a crazy thought... Take a map from the height of the Roman Empire. If some1 wrote before literacy was mildly spread after the Dark Ages, *meme voice* there be weird latin sounding peoples north of the Danube, who could it possibly be and how given the mass of migration and a lack of a solid kingdom? After the most developed land and capital of Dacia was taken and for its entirety said region was only a roman border region, I think some have way too much expectation from the people there, when they did manage to survive in many spread out pockets, later to adapt and finally come together.
It’s a miracle that we preserved our country in such a difficult neighborhood with 3 big empires!
Indeed.
The other example with an european nation that has been on the intersection of 3 empires is Switzerland.
And the Swiss are 1/3 German, 1/3 French and 1/3 Italian.
Which quite concretely means that we, Romanians, can work miracles! :)
@@BenLlywelynRomania it's an ARTIFICIAL NAME they should change the name to VALAHIA.
Agree
Learning about my people history from a Celt leaving on the other end of Europe. Last time proto Romanians and Celts were neighbors was over 2000 years ago
Romanians are celts i bet 😂
I find trace , in documents, of my family from 1300 .. my grandfather sell the house were he live to museum (450 years old wood house) ... Romania, Valahia, Dacia, Tracia.. name change but people not.. we are the same people more than 2000 years.. we live in north Romania
Nothing feels as nice as a well kept, old house passed on through the generations.
mars
@@BebyArte marș spune-i la centurista de mată
Dear Mr. Ben,
Thank you for this brillant video! It is a pleasure to watch it
With love, from Romania
Thank you very much.
Why do you want to impose a history of Romania without the multidisciplinary sources made by foreigners and included by different Romanians now in numerous books and it would be welcome if you correct the following obvious mistakes, because whatever you do your fate as an island separated from Europe is now sealed at the End of Time and your reprehensible deeds speak for you before God:
1. The presented map is false or at least misrepresenting the historical reality for Romania: in 1526 the battle of Mohacs, the Kingdom of Hungary - becomes a Turkish paschal - disappears from the map, becoming part of the Ottoman Empire. Many Hungarian counts sneaked onto domains in the Transylvania voivodeship.
2. The end of the century xvii The Habsburg Empire conquers the territory of the old Kingdom of Hungary, therefore it comes under the rule of the Emperor of Vienna. Transylvania is also part of this empire, but as a separate principality from the rest.
3. Mihai the Brave united the three Romanian countries - Muntenia, Bessarabia (Moldova), Transylvania due to the majority of the population speaking the Romanian language and at the coronation in Alba Iulia he said "this is craved what I craved". At that time the Szeklers fought in his army. He fulfilled his purpose for which he was born as a man on Earth. (Did you fulfill it? At least you grew something in spirit or now at the end you are going lower than where you came from).
4. The word Vlach - Valahia comes from German - Walhala - see their myth. Why did they have such great respect for this territory? Because their origin was from here, they are looking for the transformation of the name Get into Got.
5. We have some gold plaques, discovered at the end of the century. xix in which it is said that the Getae worshiped God calling him by the name Arimin, from here immediately the names Ruman and Roman with which the Geta population, the majority of the current territory of the country, is identified.
6. What Bulgarian (Slavic) Empires do you dream of when the names of their leaders were Romanian - e.g. Asan - Asanes and Romanians were the majority on both banks of the Danube. See Emperor Basil II - Bulgaroctonul (where it gets its name).
7. I tell you the ethnicity of Gelu, Glad, and Mnemurut, all found as lords of the lands of Transylvania, were Gets - Romanians and that is how they are written in the Gesta Hungarorum when the Uighurs - Hungarians came.
8. I look at you and I feel like telling you directly, your DNA is mixed with that of the draconian, as your eyes play in your head, because the DNA of the Romanians is 40% exactly like that of ancestors. No country in Europe has such a percentage of original ethnogenetic population. I and many other millions of Romanians are proof that the male population has not disappeared from Romania.
Herodotus said - Geti - The Romans are the bravest of the Thracians. Therefore, they have no way of coming from the south when even now, even in Greece, populations can be easily identified that claim their origin from the current territory of Romania.
9. AI Cuza nationalized only the Greek monasteries, this as a consequence of what I said about the origin of the Thracians above with living on the primordial territory of Romania and the revelation of your lie, but he left the Romanian monasteries, which had existed for a long time, like the oldest known archdiocese is - Arges since the century. iii. Romania converted to Christianity through the missionary work of the apostle Andrei.
10. There is too much for a comment, but in short, you talk too much about Hungary - a Romanian name - and God did not want it to appear again as an independent country until after the Treaty of Trianon and only after all the lands Romanians asked for union with the country on December 1, 1918.
Looking at Culture: from the spoken language, the folk dress, the solar models in the sculptures to the melody of the popular songs imitate the sounds of nature. It's not for nothing that we have a saying "codru is a brother to a Romanian".
Because the iniquities of the darkness on Geea - Tera have come to an end, so everything that will happen here from now on will be within the limits approved by Arimin and in no case will you have an escape even in the snake hole for your iniquities along history. I would show you a video of what happened to the USA in Forth Worth following the discovery of an ancient ship in Afghanistan, but I'm sure you'll remember it as well, so that you realize how low you are for the fire that follows. You still have a few months to repent.
@mesager5438
Hey, you! Who are you quarrelling with? Have not taken your pills today?
Even if you were right about the history of Romanians, which I very much doubt, why do you have this aggressive language? Where are your manners?
You will not get any respect unless you give respect to others.
ce e bun la materialul asta? ca te face sa pari o simpla intamplare aleatoare a istoriei? treziti-va, cititi mai multe surse, ganditi
@@mesager5438you're making Romanians look stupid with such a comment. Please visit Wiktionary and Wikipedia and learn basic history, basic linguistics, and basic anthropology before commenting on a subject which is beyond your comprehension.
There is evidence in the Romanian language that there was a core of Latin based Christiany that was overlayed with a more complex church Christianity of Slavic origin. There are basic words in the Romanian language such as "Dumnezeu" (God), credinta (faith), cruce (cross) etc which are (late/vulgar) Latin derived. But also words primarily used in church such as slava (glory), duh (spirit), rob (slave) and so on which are Slavic derived. This would point to some sort of Slavic "re-christianization" in the region's history.
As a side note, I've been binge watching your videos while going through a cold. Thank you for the quality content. The captivating accent also helps :).
Oh, and to the best of my knowledge, Welsh and Vlach have a common root. The word comes from the germanic or proto-germanic word for "stranger" "other". Like the word "barbarian" was to latin or greek speakers.
Thank you for watching my videos. Appreciate that. Given your response, you would enjoy this one if you have not already seen it -
ruclips.net/video/qD5Q6bauvK0/видео.html
Not sure how you could present such a sophisticated subject so easily and naturally. It is obviously your own talent to retain and provide information in a simple and clear way. Truly amazing, especially that our culture and spirituality are really deep and stubborn, and hard to understand from an outside perspective. Many thanks, Benjamin.
You are very welcome.
But that map of the Ottoman Empire you're showing is wrong - the three main principalities of Romania were never an ottoman territory per se but just dominated autonomous principalities (without independent Foreign Policy, basically, and with a mechanism through which the turks extorted the Romanians).
Which "three" principalities? Two! Transylvania belonged to the Hungarians!
@@MatiaCovacescu First of all, you are stupid. Second, this is why:
(a) the fact that Transylvania was under Hungarian rule does not make it Hungarian; its character was Romanian. It was a Romanian principality ruled for a while by Hungary (btw, before magyarization was complete, Hungary proper in the Panonnian plain wasn't Hungarian itself - it was just rulled by a rulling minority, the magyars);
(b) The question here was about the time when Transylvania was also under the suzeranity of the Ottomans (like Hungary-proper itself, by the way - which didn't make it Turkish, it was till Hungarian).
Yes this guy is an idiot that has no credentials.
He is a disinformation agent that should be investigated by SRI
IM Germanic and Finish and a know more than this Agent.
no, Hungary belonged to the Turks heh
@@Dimples_Mom Fals
Thank you for your work. Romania as a country is about the same age as Germany and Italy who were unified in the 19th century, but Romanians are as old as hills :)
Good analogy.
Videos about Romania are always amazing!
WE VE BEEN HERE FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS
🤣 No you havent
@@schutzanzug6731 yep we do and u to since the europeans have very old origins even if some of them are come from Asia or other lands..t
Archaeology, documents, even linguistics can confirm this kind of a statement. Caps Lock is not a valid historic argument,
Archealogical evidence for dacians past the 271AD pullout is virturally non existant.
There are virtually no documented proof of dacians living north of the lower danube. Despite numerous written papers, not a single one says there was vlach or even native latin speaking population.
Linguistics has very little to do with this since romanian attempt at artifical latinization in the 18th and 19th century. On top of this, we dont know what the dacian language is. Of course romanians have been known to forage evidence for this lapse of logic, with artifacts such as the Tartara tablets, and the sinaia lead plates. Who knows how many other artifacts are foraged as well.
@@schutzanzug6731 Go and learn TRUE history first, in order for you to stop making "bs" allegations here 😠
We have a saying that goes something like "romanian folk dances involve a lot of jumping around because the ground was still lava when they where invented". Now that is clearly an exageration, but it's a cool joke about how old we feel
Good one.
and is still burning,belive me,i was at a wedding:romanian bride and a greek groom.wild!
Yeah. Romanian women are shitting on romanian men.
What kind of stupid invented joke is that? :)) Never heard it, where are you from in Romania?
@@Bayard1503 bucurești :))) de ce nu stii glumele cu adevăru' despre daci? :)))
Mihai had to collaborate with the feudal lords of the two conquered principalities. In Transylvania, the main power was the Hungarian feudal lords, the power of the Saxons had begun to decline, and the Szeklers were his allies. The Romanian feudal lords had been replaced or Hungarianized sometime before. So, in a few months, he could do nothing for the Romanians from Transylvania except for help and respect for their Orthodox religion.
There were also connections between the three principalities, apart from Mihai's rule. There were alliances between Transylvania and Wallachia, between Transylvania and Moldova, and between all three on several occasions (15th, 16th and 17th centuries). The alliances were made against the Ottomans or to help themselves reach the throne (disregarding the interest of the Ottoman Empire or of the Polish Kingdom).
There are testimonies from the 17th century, when Habsburg officials were afraid that, for example, the Romanians from Maramures could join Moldova, because they were of the same culture, language, and religion. The affinity between Romanians from the principalities was felt by the Austrian state in this case, as a threat.
Interestingly, both those from Moldova and those from Wallachia used the name Romanian to refer to themselves.
Migratiile si expansiunea romanilor in Evul Mediu ruclips.net/video/vEBeYGpTCcU/видео.html
I suspect the culture came first. When the Balkans and Pannonian Plain were swept by Huns, then Goths and then by a dozen different invaders for the next thousand years, somehow romance-language speakers scattered in the hills kept their culture and language, and then at some point they came together in the Carpathians and from there spread to the rest of Romania. By the way, in the Middle Ages, all non-romance speakers called speakers of romance languages "Romans". The Franks called the romance speakers of France "Romans". It took almost a thousand years for the French to identify themselves as French.
After the death of the king of Dacia Decebal, conquered by Rome, in 106 AD, the Kingdom of Dacia was divided among the descendants of others. And so they remained until the Middle Ages under the form of duchies (Glad, Seneslau, Menumorut, of which the Hungarian chronicles of the time also mention that they found them here and fought with them) or then the great principalities of Moldova, Multenia, Dobrogea and The rich Transylvania overrun by a series of rich robbers. A great empire for example. The inhabitants of the territory of ancient Dacia remained in place and perpetuated themselves until today, the continuity here, proven by a large study of Paleogenetics from Germany on the population of Romania. In 2012. We are the descendants of the Neolithic populations of 6000-7000 years ago of brilliant civilizations that succeeded each other on the territory of today's Romania. . Cucuteni, Gumelnita, Hamangia, etc., etc. for 7500 - 8000 years. Romanians carry their DNA back to the Dacians of the Getae-Goths, our ancestors. In conclusion, the inhabitants of ancient Dacia stayed here and developed until today. In all the provinces where we were separated by history, the same nation lived with the same language and customs. Gradually, gradually, the Daco-Romanian nation united. Under the name of Romania, from imperial Rome.
The Romanian-Latin language is not from the Romans. In ancient Europe, vulgar Latin was spoken, meaning popular. This is what our Dacians and other nations from Europe used to say. Younger Romanians like us then chiseled it. From this popular Vulgar Latin came all the Romance languages in Europe. Not through false romanization. There are linguistics studies from Romania, France, Spain, USA. . The theme of Romanization of peoples is the great falsity of 19th century history.
@@mariadespina80 Once conquered and integrated into the Roman Empire, all inhabitants of a province became Romans. `Roman" was not an ethnicity, but a way of saying that one had become a citizen of the Roman empire who served in the imperial army and spoke Latin. Romanization was real, as the Latin language was instrumental for a disciplined and well-functioning army formed by men gathered from all the corners of the Empire. In some regions, the Romanization was overwritten by subsequent invasions, such as in Britain, North Africa or Palestiine. In some other regions, the Romanization proved to be more resiliant and gave rise to present day Romance languages (Italian, Spanish, French, Portuguese, Catalan, Romanian etc),
@@mariadespina80 nu mai veni cu teorii handicapate ca ne faci de ras. Daca vrei sa te tragi din maimuta lui Burebista, trage-te la tine acasa cu usa inchisa.
I think the term Goths comes from the Geti, a Roman emperor decreed that the Geti should no longer be called by their name, and then the term Goti appeared. Before the Romans, the Geti (Dacians) lived in peace with the Sarmatians and other nations.
@@andreivlad3518 The Goths ('Gutþiuda' in their own language) have nothing to do with the Getae. The Goths were a union of Germanic tribes who spoke Gothic, a Germanic language that is well preserved, mainly due to the Bible translation done by Wulfila in the 4th century.
Let's put it simply, Romania is the mystery of the globe and will remain so. The land here is magical - and it breeds wizards. Also from here, thousands of years before Rome, the creation of Rome itself began. If they were not "Vlachs", from the past (current Romanians), all of Europe spoke either Turkish or Russian or German. Now we are again a shield for the "crazies" from the west, being on the border with Ukraine. The peace of 1000 years will also be written here. After 1000 years, it's another problem. Dissensions with aliens begin, regarding the piece on Mars, assigned - New Romania, because it will be full of wizards Amazing work you do! (Yoda thinking)
Thank you. Aliens amused me.
Ce fumezi? Cât despre vrăjitori, te referi la rromi?
The answer is simple for those who know history. Romania is a nation and not just a country due to the common language, common traditions, common history. The Romanian language does not have dialects like other languages, it is unitary in Romania. See also common genetics between areas. There is absolutely no surprise or lack between the years 300 and 1300... look for the Romanians in this period in the empires: Hun, Avar, Bulgar (I and II), Mongol. Many other peoples, like the Romanians, were temporarily part of different empires (Greeks, Bulgarians, Albanians in the Ottoman Empire, Byzantine). Poles, Baltics, Ukrainians, also were in different empires. So it is something common in Europe, the Romanians made their own states when they came out from under the different empires (1300s) and then in 1859 Romania appeared (the union of Wallachia + Moldova), later in 1918 + Transylvania. It is very simple and there is no "missing" period or mistery in the history of the Romanian people, there are many documents (Slavic, Greek, German, Hungarian, Arab) and archaeological research that confirm the continuity in this space.
I agree.
Although the Romanian language (daco-Romanian) is unitary, there are still 3 dialects spoken today: Aromanian, Megleno-Romanian and Istro-Romanian.
@@popacristian2056 Yes, there are 3 dialects but in other areas of the Balkans, not in Romania. In Romania it is a unitary language, without dialects (only ...graiuri... ,,speechs" and some regionalisms).
@@cllaudiusd521 That's right. Daco-Romanian is unitary spoken on the territory of Romania including Moldova across the Prut as well as the ethnic Romanians remaining outside the borders in Serbia, Hungary, Bulgaria and Ukraine.
You cant just claim something like this when the dacian language is EXCTINCT. 😂😂😂@@popacristian2056
@@zoltan6451 Ai?!
Bag seama ca mongoleza inca se vorbeste undeva... Poate vrei sa te duci la origini!?
We are a people that has refused again and again to be extinguished and at this point literally nothing can make us disappear
aaaa, low birth rate? migration of romanians to the west? migration from other people to Romania is not a concern, but who knows what the future brings? And God forbid some major conflict (nuclear?) that kills many people or displaces large populations. We should hope for the best, but not be complacent and still prepare for the worst.
@@ionut2v I'm not complacent at all. If you believe we are doing badly, how did we do when we didn't even have a country and had to retreat to the mountains constantly?
@@tricolourbearer2435 True... and it's difficult to say whether we are doing badly or not (for one we are chatting in English here :D ), but the challenges are different today (not saying we wont adapt), however I see how "nationalism" or "patriotism" are demonized in the west, and how they seem to be losing their national identity, who knows if that will be a challenge over here too.
@@ionut2v există o tendință vestică ce e și la noi, în orașe, dar mai ales la București. Nu știu ce dracu' va fi cu noi, cert e că eu rămân aici, nu dau bir cu fugiții
The Fury of the Tsar , book on the colision of the West and the East in Central Europe and the Hungary ruclips.net/video/3W3AbgzrjEE/видео.html
Very good video.
You have many work and efort doing this video.
I hope that you made more subcrivers, you deserve.
I am portuguese and hope One day you made a video like that of Portugal and Spain ...
Gratulations my friend
Portugal is worthy of such a video too.
Moldovan chronicle of Grigore Ureche (mid 1600s) underlines the unity of Romanians: ”Românii, câţi se află lăcuitori la ţara ungurească şi la Ardeal şi la Maramureş, de la un loc sânt cu Moldovenii…” = "Romanians, as many as they live in Hungary, Transylvania and Maramuresh are together from the same spot with Moldavians..."
The origin theory of a nation can be easily manipulated by those who are connected in a large group of nations who are choosing to give legitimacy to certain historic writings or made-up stories.
And a lot of prsent day Hungarian and Russian propaganda is trying hard to manipulate and present what they are interested to promote in regards to Romania and Romanians.
@@mimisor66 , the daco-roman theory (fals propaganda) invented by wallachs priest (greco-catholic in Rome) in XIX century for justification of wallachs dream for Hungarian Transylvania .
@@bujdososzekely pathetic hun... crying on every post 🤣
Esatto!!!
Great vid. As a romanian you confirmed what I already know and I learned some new things. I wisk I know many things about my nation between IIIrd century and XI.
Mulțumesc.
I don't agree so much with the video. Where I started to disagree is when you talked about Gesta Hungarorum, the shepherd's of the Romans and of course Duke Gelu. Gesta Hungarorum makes clear that Gelu was a Vlach, that the land's he ruled over was Transylvania, and his subjects were Vlachs and Slavs. Another thing it makes clear is that he was Duke of the Vlachs, making it clear that the Duchy was a Vlach political entity.
("Dum thutum audiuiesst a legaato, preparauit se cum suis militibus, et dimissis ibi sociis suis egressus est ultra siluas uersus orientem contra Gelou Ducem Blacorum")
"When Tuhutum heard this from an envoy, he readied himself with his warriors and, having left his companions there, went forth eastwards beyond the woods against Gelou, duke of the Vlachs"
("dum cepisset audire ab incolis, bonitatem terre ultra siluane, ubi Gelou quidam Blacus")
"When he learned from the inhabitants of the goodness of the land of Transylvania, where Gelou a Certain Vlach"
("Et habitarores terre illius uiliores homines essent tocius mundi, Quia essent blasji et Sclaui")
"And that inhabitants of that land were the basest of the whole World, because they were Vlachs and Slavs"
About the "shepherd's of the Romans", which is "ac pastores romanorum", is not in reference of the Romanians. As the text refers to the inhabitants of Pannonia, and among the "shepherd's of the Romans" were also the Vlachs (Blasji), "ac" means "and also". So the Pastores Romanorum probably refers the shepherds subjects to the Vlachs thus showing their Romanity or in reference to the one's subjected to Francia which claimed Roman imperial succession. Also another thing people must understand is that Vlachs were Romanians, or at least those in the region of Romanian influence, from modern day Romania, Moesia and Illyricum. Because you said that 'Vlachs eventually became Romanians', which is not the case as they always have been român. One thing I am glad about is your talk about Michael the Braves military and diplomatic campaign of 1599 - 1601, where he managed to dominate the three danubian Principalities. You made it clear that it was never based on nationalist interest, as no documents issued by Michael makes such claims. But one cannot deny this was the first United Romanian realm, based on political and administrative interests. One thing that I want to bring to the table is the 17th century after Michael the Brave, where the Romanian Orthodox Churches started to nationalise themselves. Saint Varlaam Moțoc, the Metropolitan of Moldavia under Vasile Lupu, translated many Byzantine laws from the time of Justinian into Romanian (pre limba româniască), and on expenses of Vasile Lupu, he granted them to "toată șemenița româniască" (to the whole seed of Romania). The latter was a reference to the all Romanian speaking territory. This movement took place after Michael the Brave, and some rulers like Mihnea Vodă claimed to be the ruler of both Moldavia and Wallachia.
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
The problem with the Gesta Hungarorum is that document also talk about cumans.
And cumans arrived in that area only in 1200-1300.
This document is not very accured
@@m.serban2523 It isn't 100% accurate as all the sources of that time. I recommend: ("Gesta Hungarorum as parody. The literary analysis of a medieval text") by Florin Curta, a recent study that adds the research of a similar discredited source from Britain called "De gestis Britonum" from the 12th century, conducted by Monika Otter.
When a historian has one source, he has none, so until we find another document to coroborate with "Gesta..." we have nothing
@@cristidan1380 In fact we do. We have Nestors Chronicle which confirms Vlachs and Slavs inhabiting Transylvania and Pannonia before the Magyars. And also Jansen Enikels Chronicle from 1277, which talks about the Vlachs (Walachen) and the Avars (whom he calls "Ungern") as inhabiting the lands during Charlemagnes conquest of the Avars in the 9th century.
Love your videos about Romania and the way you say eerie :)
This is /the best/ short material I've ever seen/read on the history of the culture and of Romanians as a nation. Also I find it unbiased in any way. Amazing work!
Kind indeed. Thank you.
How you talk about my country nobody does it,I love when you talk about Romania just because you do your homework about it,I am not breathing when I listen to you ❤thank you mulțumesc mult❤
Multumesc!
Thanks!
Thank you very much.
Cymru ? Thanks. It is amazing that a Westerner is interested in our history, moreover is doing a video about that.
Min. 13:38 - Pastores Romanorum = shephards of the ROMANS, not "Romanians".
Min. 14:19 - Gelu. The mentioned Hungarian chronicle "Gesta Hungarorum" (Deeds of the Hungarians) clearly mentions that he was Vlach = Romanian : "Gelou, a certain Romanian" (GLat. : Gelou quidam blachus), and tells us that he ruled (Lat. : dominium tenebat) a country inhabited by Romanians and Slavs (Lat. : blasii et sclaui).
because people called themselves romans in those murky centuries. This holds to scrutiny because otherwise there would have only been remnants of latin culture and only along the Danube and later along with greek at the Black Sea coast, and not in and over the Carpathian mountains. With horse barbarians at an all time high, sheep in the mountains became the ca$h crops during the murky centuries.
very good video, you can see the work done to create it. congratulations.
Kind of you. Thank you.
Nice in-depth analysis. How old are we? It's very difficult to establish that because we are very old... Dacians are in our national consciousness, Romans are there too and not because some demagogs told us so. How this nation was born? I have my own theory. Some Roman veterans were colonized in the Balkans and they started practicing what the natives (Thracians / Dacians / Getae) used to practice: mixing with the natives, getting married, having kids, building farms, raising sheep...living in the mountains, away from the violent barbarians... This way of life, our way of life - comes from ancient times and was favored by the geography of this place. Our people lived from the northern Carpathians down to Greece for centuries, they mixed with many other people, they kept their religious beliefs...and here we are. It's very difficult to state how it started because our nation is very old. Our land is very beautiful and I believe that many people loved it during the centuries and they preferred to live here and keep the flame alive. It's a "continuum" and personally I think it started thousands of years before our time. Otherwise I agree with your analysis.
Unde există dacii in conștiința noastră națională? Ce vă mai place să mirosiți sub coada oii...
Un video foarte interesant și complex! Mulțumesc!
Multumesc foarte.
Multe multumiri pentru obiectivitate.
Surprised to find this youtoube channel and an approach to romanian history that is genuine and respectful.
How old romanians are? Probably older than most are willing to admit. Considering romanian folk culture, the death rites, the birth rites, the marriage rites have elements that go back to the proto european layer ... I would say there is a continuity of cultural and generic material that goes very deep. Maybe 3-5-7 thousands year deep or more. Over this very ancient root that somehow made it to the 20 th century, there are many layers, painted over by various populations that passed by or stayed longer.
I am very sad that with the end of 20 th century, beggining of 21 century, our ancestral rural way of life was very much diminished and with it we, the current generations, lost contact with that ancient vine that kept us together. Also there are many who scorn, ridicule and depreciate our most ancient traditions, labeling them as primitive superstitions and things we should get read of.
I hope the work of people like you to make more romanian to understand the value of our traditions and the duty to preserve them for future generations.
Mulţumesc mult. Yes, I respect your country. That you speak a Romance Language makes your country more immediately accessible to me than Slavic or Greek.
👍
-Why don't we Romania have documents starting with the 14th century?
Thanks to the IV Crusade 1202-1204 - that looted Constantinople and 3 days and 3 nights they carried archives and the great library of Constantinople, carried, a part reached the Vatican. That's why we who belonged to Constantinople have no documents regarding our multi-millenary Daco-Romanian past. ( "The Russian Chronicle from Novgorod XV century and the Byzantine chronicler Nicetas Akominatos, witness to the robbery)
The Vatican could not care less about your past. They are not hiding anything from you. Come to your senses.
@@BenLlywelyn Historical Romanian researchers visited the Vatican a few years ago and received approval to enter the Vatican archives. They researched there. This is how new data appeared, non-existent on Wikipedia. That is why I am well documented . Being a reference to Romania , my country, I brought here information.
@@BenLlywelynWith all the respect for your hard work, you are wrong. The Vatican's language is Latina, and, if the lost Dacian's documents are coming to the light, the entire story about the Romanian language deriving from Latin is falling. In fact, the Vatican is the first one they will never like to disclose the Dacian history, which is the ancestral Romanian history. Everyone will know,the Latin comes from our old Dacian language that I believe, it's still alive today. And this is only regarding our language, but the implications in other European nations ' history.
1918, the idea came about around the 1840s with the wave of European nationalism. Before that, it wasn't straightforward and it was probably an interaction with the Romans/Dacians in the mountains interacting with the Slavs in the plains. You can see this with the other Roman-descended population in the Balkans and around who also live a pastoral life in the mountains. There are populations like this from Poland to Greece. So there was an expansion around mountain ranges even after the Romans left. The DNA stuff is slightly irrelevant , because besides some haplogroups like i-s17250 , who is heavily associated with Romanian and Moldavian and some of Ukraine. most of the genetics is the same as everyone else's in the region.
@@mirelchirila The most dominant Y-haplogroup in Romania is I2a which is also dominant in the Balkans and it tells us about a certain resilience and continuity of our peoples. Depending on which barbaric horde hit us, we may have sometimes retreated either to the mountains, or south or north of the Danube, but this was always our home.
so you are a time traveller
@@nuescu no but there is this thing called writing, where people can record their thoughts and they stay there after their death. We also have this thing called history that compiles these writings into a cohesive narrative . It’s almost like you don’t have to travel through time to know things.
@@mirelchirilaso DNA is irrelevant but writing is... especially what dacians wrote.
@@nuescu and let me guess you have secret Dacian scrolls that no one else has .
I am Hungarian but great video! Well done! Finally an unbiased video about the history of Romania!
I could see how bias maybe difficult for Hungarians when discussing Romania. Both of your countries have a great deal to offer one another.
This is another great video. For me personally, I won't complicate this matter any further. Romania began with the Roman conquest and settlement of Dacia. That is the inception of the concept of "Romanian". Making a continuous ancestral lineage that is 1900 years old. Of course in such a large span of time, Romanians were influenced by other people, but the backbone of the Romanian nation is still the Roman settlement of this land.
Thank you for sharing. Perhaps the areas around Constanța mark a significant continuation of Roman settlement?
@@BenLlywelyn Yes and the mountains of Transylvania where people sought refuge.
Except it didnt and romanains and their history isnt as heroic and as glorious as the romanians make it out to be, and romanians were certiainly not the "first ones here"
@@schutzanzug6731 Hungarian propaganda... Next!
@@UlpianHeritor When your false history is called out and I’m the one being called the propagandist you know your world is twisted
1877 was the years first independent Romanian state did appear. Before that, about three state formations under influence of one power or another. Before that, check out recorded history. First settlements were here about 10 thousands years ago, Cucuteni culture.
Yes, old settlements. Another culture.
@@BenLlywelyn Yes, from where actual culture comes.
We're like 🪳 🪳 🪳 🪳 🪳, we'll never dissappear and we'll never go away...🇷🇴🇷🇴🇷🇴
Und niemals hat Romania existiert.... Migranten cca 1890......
Australian here, married to a Romanian. Had the pleasure of visiting her family back in 2022. Interesting country. The Carpathians were amazing, the people warm. The legacy of Communism still scene. I feel that they really don't appreciate their history, largley appears to be crumbling. My wife's DNA is largley Balkan and Greek with a touch of Swedish. My DNA is redominaltely UK and northern Europe. My family tree I've been able to research way back, like way back. One ancestor is Attila the Hun, born in Central Asia, which today is in present day Romania. Go figure.
Went to a number of places shown here in the vid. Particlarly enjoyed the Saxon villages.
If you ever walk into a pub in the mountains (particularly behind Brasov on the ski slopes) and its really cold, and you see a jug of water on the counter, whatever you do, don't pour a cup and knock it back without a thought. It's not water, it's Tuica (apologies, no accents on this computer), sounds a little like zzwika, it's 40% alcohol. Learnt the hard way. The walk back down from the ski slopes was pretty merry.
What was the tune playing from around 9:30?
How can Central Asia be in present day Romania? Romania is in Europe, Central Asia is in Asia😂😊
@@mimisor66also did not get what he wanted to say by that
There is no scientific proof able to link you to Attila, mate
@@Istoricescu Well I gues then that the whole geneaology industry falls over then because it can't be scientifically proven, according to yourself. I can't prove my father is my father then unless I and he have a DNA test to prove so. Now that he's dead, I guess I'll just never know.
As if you could appreciate how much we appreciate our history. As if you somehow did Romanian history at school.
Most comments are "trigger" comments, which is good for the algorithm.
I appreciate how you structured the video, giving every low-read, nation(alist)-hyped mind a chance to make their own decisions. It is informative to see how foreigners are reading into our history (I am Romanian) and I appreciate that given the sensitive topic in this area of Europe, you kept yourself to the facts.
Of course, I feel that culturally (I might be biased) one can dig up more info to regards to Romanians and I would like to see that, but given your perspective of defining the moment of Genesis by those 4 factors, it is an alright job in my opinion.
Now, I have a question, this is the first video of yours I saw, and I've seen from your channel, that you are quite passionate about this country. I am just curious, what drove you to this passion?
I have studied Latin, and French. So being curious about eastern Europe, Romania was the easiest to get fast access into without wasting my time. Mulțumesc pentru ca tipule.
Good work! Thank you for this video. As for the last question, I would argue it is safe to point the 19th century's revolutions as the awakening of national counciosness, any date before that is just speculation.
Thank you. As you clearly do, I admire the 19th century age of romantic revolution. It is a fascinating period.
I2 is Y-chromosome DNA, so, Ben, you are wrong to say we owe it strictly to the women.
You can still thank women.
@@BenLlywelyn a little defensive?
We thank women, starting with Maica Domnului!
Regarding your last question - when did the Romanian consciousness appear - this boils down to two aspects: 1) the idea that we're descendents of Rome (106-1000) 2) the idea that Rome is no more and that we are our own people. (1204-1453-present).
Not so. Moldova and Walachia fought each other several times in Medieval times. In fact, there was no concept of a Romanian nation in medieval times since Greek-orthodox religion was the principalities' identity which was the same as the other Slavic ethnic people in the Balkans. After the first Union on 24th January 1859, the Moldovans wanted to annul it. So much for the Romanian identity in medieval times:_)) Most Romanians do not know their history of being brainwashed by communist propaganda.
in the period from 271AD to around the time of the 10th century there was little or no contemporary sources mentioning anyone who fit in the description of what a Romanian is today. So the entire daco romanian continuation theory which says the romanian culture formed imbetween this period despite there being no archealogical evidence, no contemporary evidence, and basically nothing to go on. Of course this is complete bullshit, but remember only romanians believe this anyways.
@@octavianciutacu6162Not guite… as today the liders fight but not on their own they oblidge the population into a conflict that does not concern them
Come on ! The German families fought each other for power, the English fought the Scotts.....such were those times. Small principalities fighting each other. What we call now nations were formed mostly towards the end of the 19th century.
@@octavianciutacu6162 , romanianization the Hungarians (Csangos) in Csangoland , Moldova ruclips.net/video/JazRNjGmZwo/видео.html
The Dacians existed under the name Vlalahs , meaning speakers of the Latin language. The Byzantine chronicles mention them in documents.
-Niketas Chroniates (12th century), Vlachs organized in a military state north of the Danube. Dacia's northern border was then today's Galicia.
- Theodoros Prodomos 1118 - speaks of the Dacian race.
- Ioanides .Kinames 1185 - Dacians- Vlachs in the Byzantine army.
- The Wallachians, the descendants of the Dacians, are spoken about in many epics from the Middle Ages - the Song of the Niebelungs from 1200 ( the Wallachian people ) , the Song of Igor's Army - Russia IXth century.- describing their bravery in battle and their weapons - walahians near the Carpathians , Song of Roland..XI century , El Cid...etc..
- The Daco-Romanian unity was destroyed during Pope Innocent III and the Fourth Crusade, when the inquisition began. Then the Orthodox churches were destroyed as well as orthodox churches , books, chronicles, archives and diplomatic documents.
-Why don't we have documents starting with the 14th century?
Thanks to the IV Crusade 1202-1204 - that looted Constantinople and 3 days and 3 nights they carried archives and the great library of Constantinople, carried, a part reached the Vatican. That's why we who belonged to Constantinople have no documents regarding our multi-millenary Daco-Romanian past. ( "The Russian Chronicle from Novgorod XV century and the Byzantine chronicler Nicetas Akominatos, witness to the robbery)
"Rural" in Romania means something else than in the rest of Europe: it means the town does not have manufacturing companies and cannot afford to pay for a set of services. There are "villages" of 10000 inhabitants who do not have the manufacturing or choose not to take on the expense. Had the same rule applied in Romania as in US or in UK Romania would be like 99% urban, that is all towns including the smallest, have a charter, a budget (including the possibility to take on debt), an elected mayor and an elected council. I wrote "99" because there are some towns who lost most of their population and will be folded into other neighbouring towns.
It must also grant a lot of independence.
@@BenLlywelyn Yes, the smallest town has a lot of leeway in how they spend their money, and can even block government projects in the area they control if they choose to :) . After 1990 Romania managed to create a very effective system of local self-administration, my guess is involuntarily. The only limitation is loans taken by towns must be approved by the Ministry of Finance, mostly because the Ministry of Finance guarantees those loans. The main lever the government has when dealing with towns is whether the government gives them extra money or not (Bucharest is worth like 25% of the GDP, and gets back only 10% of the taxes paid in Bucharest, the rest is redistributed), which is why after the party in charge at the central level changes lots of mayors change their party :).
@@BenLlywelynThere are just 10 million greeks speakers in the world. With their magnificent cities their coulture had little influence in Europe compared to romanians wich are the proto indoeuropeans that named all the rivers and mountains in Europe.
I don't know if your source of information about DNA is correct. As far as I know, the current DNA also varies gradually from one border to another and has similarities with the neighbors in all directions.
If there were no men in this area in certain centuries, the invaders from Asia would have died of hunger because there would have been no farmers, only they did not live on milk and cheese. Whoever was the new boss in the area, would not have killed the farmers.
The wars with Rome from 101-106 did not eliminate the male population, because in the year 117, after the death of Trajan, there was an important revolt of the locals, and don't say that it was a revolt only of Dacian women.
It was a change in the proportions of masculine haplogrups when migrations that bring other new haplogroups appear. *It was not a depletion of the existing local male population but a phenomenon with purely genetic causes. **14:55*
Romanian culture have 4000 years old,before Dacians.
@andreivlad3518 , is a wallach dream !!!
@@bujdososzekely its true😘
55 million years ago, when the first Romanians were taming the dinosaurs.
@@UlpianHeritor , the romanian people name only 150 years ago was invented !!!
@@bujdososzekely I NOSTRI AVI DACII HANNO VISSUTO SU QUELLA TERRA DALL'ANNO 1000.A.C. INUTILE CERCARE AD INVENTARE ALTRE STORIE. I ROMANII HANNO CONQUISTATO SOLO 1/4 DELLA DACIA FINO ALLA MINIERA D'ORO (ROSIA MONTANA ) ANCORA OGGI LA PIÙ RICCA DI TUTTA L'EUROPA. IL MOME DELLA DACIA IN ROMANIA FU CAMBIATA MOLTO PIÙ TARDI.
Initially I perceived you as arrogant, typical westerner looking down at romanians. I guess, this is your way of speaking. Much appreciated your work. I hope you can find a bottle of ȚUICĂ (plum brandy) or Wine, Made in Romania.
That sounds tasty.
@👍BenLlywelyn
Whisky its rubish...!
Țuica its very good for healty !
We Romanians never called ourselves vlachs. Its just an EXTERNAL nickname from the Germans deriving from the word "walhaz" which means "latin speakers"... by the way Germans also dont call themselves internally as "Germans" they call thelselves "Deutshce volk" and Deutschland. The nickname "Germans" was given by the Romans which means barbarians or savages. Also it doesnt matter there is a blank in history of Romania. All countries have such blanks. What is the history of Hungarians for example BEFORE they came to Europe, to Panonia from today's Russia. What was their lives there in Russia before coming to Europe and why did they leave?? The same can be said about Bulgaria, Vikings and many others...
Interesting question about Hungary.
Hungarians didn't come from Russia
@@timixx2270 yes, from the Ural region in central Russia is the origin of the Hungarian language, it's Finno-Ugric. But Turkic-speaking peoples may have also played a part.
Thank you Mr. Ben for the concern about the history of these areas. Respect!

Welcome.
Romania is quite old even older its neighbours but its not old enough for Romanian nationalists that claim the country is over 10000+ years old.
Yes, some of these people are nuts.
Only 10.000+?? I would say it's about 66.000.000 years old.
Ben, a study of the architecture, the people costumes, housing, way of living will lead you to very interesting conclusions. You will be surprised to see how similar are the popular costumes with those of the Dacians from Traian Column in Rome. Equally, two thirds of the Dacians tribal unions were outside Roman occupation. In my natal town, there is an ancient citadel call Petrodava (means stone citadel in Dacian) which used to be an important stronghold of the Carpi Dacian union of tribes. The name of my natal city is Piatra (Romanian word for stone) and Neamt (Romanian word for German - you read it as in Frantz - because for some hundred years there was a Teutonic Order Mark, until the foundation of the Moldavian Principality).
Therr are no doubt some Dacian traces. But we know almsot nothing about the area pre-Rome.
@@BenLlywelynWe dont know much about anybody in Europe pre Rome.
@@BenLlywelyn , dacians and wallachs is different people .
Ce va mai fute pa voi grija...
@@bujdososzekely Yes, they are not like the Huns and the Hungarians who rode the same breed of horses.
More ....Romania and the Romanians are the ancient nation of the Dacians and the Getae. While the Hungarians, Szeklers and Saxons who settled in Transylvania are not nations. There are populations that migrated here and settled over the native population. . The Romanians are a nation that never conquered and robbed other peoples like the Austro-Hungarian Empire did. Invasion and robbery. Emperor Aurelian withdrew from Dacia to the south of the Danube with the administration and the army. The Dacians, the future Romanians, stayed put, not with the tendentious support of the Hungarians. The Gesta Hungarorum of the anonymous notary of King Bella III, which I read, clearly writes about the native population and their Dukes with whom they fought.
In the Middle Ages, the principalities of Moldova and Muntenia and their Princes had numerous wars with the Ottoman Empire, which they always defeated, stopping the invasion in Europe where you build palaces and we fought and died here. But I see too much insistence on Transylvania, which was from antiquity and is Romanian. The proof of the continuity of Daco-Romanians on this territory is the paleogenetic study from Germany in 2012. on the population of Romania. He says who Romanians are.
The conclusions of the study proved, in the end, shocking for the Romanian space because they overturn the main thesis of the history of Romania, that of the ethnogenesis of the Romanian people. A selection:
- Between the current population of Romania and the populations that lived on the territory of this country 2,500-5,000 years ago, there is a clear genetic relationship, which speaks of an indisputable continuity of the Romanian people in these lands. Even if there are also genetic traces belonging to the various migratory populations that passed through here, the basic genetic background proves the continuity and connection with the old populations;
- The current population of Romania is genetically related in particular to the populations of Greece and Bulgaria, which developed in a space once inhabited by Thracians, with whom they also mixed, and only to a small extent with the Italian population;
- It has also been proven, and this is the most shocking conclusion of the study, that some Italians, especially those from the north, are in turn genetically related to the ancient populations that lived in the Carpathian Arc 2,500-5,000 years ago. Hence the hallucinatory conclusion that part of the Italians are descendants of the Thracians,
part of the Italians also have Thracian roots, Why are Romanians and Italians genetically related so little today?
The explanation However, apart from the populations with Thracian roots, there were also populations belonging to other ethnic families - the Sabines and the Samnites - living in the Italic peninsula. then Greek Jews, etc. www-tnb-ro.translate.goog/ro/prof-univ-dr-alexander-rodewald-originea-genetica-a-poporului-roman-intre-mit-si-realitate?_x_tr_sl=ro&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc
Saxon settlement in Transylvania ruclips.net/video/CTDRl2n284c/видео.html
Wallach "romanian" migration to Transylvania , Hungary . ruclips.net/video/XTdEpbjGdAw/видео.html
@@bujdososzekely Gepids from Transylvania are the vlachs. Gepids are identical visigoths wich are the vlachs getae dacians.
Transylvania is romanian( getae) land since before any hungarian.
Transylvania belongs to Romania and its vlach 100%.
Vlach means getae dacian, means gepid, visigoth and even ostrogoth.
Its only the lowest educated barbarians that call us vlach. Greeks call us getae, romans call us vlach and slavs, hungarians and germanics calls us vlach.
You dont have to look at Alexander Rodewald paleogenetic studies.
You just look at todays Romania haplogroups wich are mostly I2 ( the only native european haplogroup wich means romanian and albanian) and R1b wich is Yamnaya steppe people known as scithians.
I2 haplogroup is 12000 years old and its present in Romania since the begining, 12000 years ago.
This is male haplogroup, I2 Y DNA thats the most common in Romania.
Dacians had high I2 and R1b just like todays romanians.
@@mihaiilie8808 2012, was the paleogenetic study carried out in Germany by Mr. Prof. univ. Dr. Dr. Alexander Rodewald, director of the Institute of Human Biology and Anthropology of the University of Hamburg, and Mrs. Dr. Georgeta Cardoș, scientific researcher biologist, specialist in genetics.
The paleogenetics study that shocked Romania.
According to the conclusions of this study, the current population of Romania is clearly related to the populations that lived on the territory of Romania during the bronze and iron ages, i.e. 2,500 - 5,000 years ago, something that highlights the continuity of this people, despite all the vicissitudes of history .
So the study can tell us, among other things, who our real ancestors are. And our real ancestors are not the Romanians, but the Thracian-Geto-Dacians.
In total, the study had at its disposal bone material from over 20 sites in Romania (the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic basin), from a number of 50 individuals belonging to ancient populations (22 from the Bronze Age, 28 from the Iron Age).
As for the blood samples from the current population of Romania, they were obtained in medical centers.
A research spanning several years (2003-2006)
The conclusions of the study proved, in the end, shocking for the Romanian space because they overturn the main thesis of the history of Romania, that of the ethnogenesis of the Romanian people. But to fully assess the culture shock caused by the public presentation of the study's conclusions, let's present them:
- Between the current population of Romania and the populations that lived on the territory of this country 2,500-5,000 years ago, there is a clear genetic relationship, which speaks of an indisputable continuity of the Romanian people in these lands. Even if there are also genetic traces belonging to the various migratory populations that passed through here, the basic genetic background proves the continuity and connection with the old populations;
- The current population of Romania is genetically related in particular to the populations of Greece and Bulgaria, which developed in a space once inhabited by Thracians, with whom they also mixed, and only to a small extent with the Italian population;
- It has also been proven, and this is the most shocking conclusion of the study, that some Italians, especially those from the north, are in turn genetically related to the ancient populations that lived in the Carpathian Arc 2,500-5,000 years ago. Hence the hallucinatory conclusion that we are not the descendants of Rome, but part of the Italians are descendants of the Thracians.
Apart from the populations with Thracian roots, there were also populations belonging to other ethnic families - the Sabines and the Samnites - in the Italic peninsula.
Over time, these populations mixed with each other. Imperial Rome then pursued an aggressive policy of mixing populations within the Empire. Etc.. Etc..
The history of Romania is made by Romanians. And haplogroup I2 is widely spread in the Balkans, western Europe and in Sweden, in these territories through the migration of the Dci and Getae-Goths to northern Europe. Haplogroup I2 made Europe. his stallion is Dacia.
www.voci.ro/studiul-de-paleogenetica-care-a-bulversat-romania/
P.S Relation only with Albania? Well, the Albanians are the ancient Illyrians from the great family of the European Thracians, like us, the Bulgarians, and others. And .. look for the map of the spread of haplogroup I2 in Europe.
I like your videos on Romania as you are not biased, and the content is very accurate.
When some videos on Hungary?
What kind of content would you like on Hungary?
@BenLlywelyn the controversial origins. The unique language. You can add the Fins in this category as well.
Are you going to do a deep dive in to each of the nations you speculated could be the oldest in Europe?
Very good documented.You
surprised me couple of times 🙏❤
between AD 101 and 106 the romans conquered us, we are still descendants of dacians, you can see it in the ear lobes, which are different. Romans have them detached and dacians have them attached. A lot of romanians still have attached ear lobes which means Romania is actually Dacia and our history starts way before the romans invaded us. They say they used to live next to us (Dacia), but they left the territory, established themselves, raised an army and came back to conquer what they already knew to be a wealthy land. They say the language that romans established as latin is derived from the language that the dacians were speaking, which were much more evolved then them at that point in history. I would love to hear more about this side of the story, but I presume it was forever deleted from history by the romans, who probably portrayed us dacians as savages, which I don't believe we were. What do you think about this? cheers!
That about the ears of romans and dacians are an urban Myth.
It actually does us bad because people think the dacopaths are some soird of believers in aliens invasion, giants and other such esoteric things.
To beat any argument just use science, haplogroups and DNA, paleogenetics, etc.
There are 2 different relevant notions here -
1)Identity
2) The state or the polity
Identity is a fluid and a bit vague notion whose birth cannot be dated exactly. Its main cimponents are languge and
cultural practices(including religion/cultic practices)
Unlike identity- Romanian statehood is clearly defined and can be exactly dated - and Romania just like Italy and Germany and other European nations were formed in the latter part of the 19th century.
Romania's direct predecessors as a state were the so-called Danubaian principalities Wallachia and Molodova which were founded at.the end middle of the 13th century in Wallachia's.case and the.midddle of the 14th century un Moldova's.
Romania is the ancient Kingdom of Dacia which, after the Roman conquest, was divided into provinces, duchies representing the same nation. Just like Italy, which became a national state in 1861 when all the city-states united. .
The name "Romania" comes from the Latin Romanus meaning citizen of Rome.
"The name Romania (in the specific form, with the vowels "o" and "â") was used for the first time officially, in state documents, in the years 1862-1866, for the territory resulting from the union of the Wallachia (Oltenia and Muntenia) , without Dobrogea) and Moldova (the central-western part - with the area north of the mouths of the Danube - without Bucovina and without most of Bessarabia). (…)
The Constitution of 1866 consecrated the name of Romania. Abroad, the name Wallachia was also used for a while. Many people have forgotten, and others never knew that, until late in the 19th century, what Romanians generically called "Romania" was for any foreigner "Wallachia" (with different spellings and pronunciations). Due to this late constitution of the modern Romanian state and the imposition of the official name Romania only in the second part of the 19th century, many foreign authors were confused about the duality of the name of Wallachia-Romania and Wallachian-Romanian. It has often been said and written that the name Romania was "invented" or used for the first time by a Greek author, Dimitrie Philippide, around 1816, when he published in Leipzig the works Istoria României and Geografia României, referring in the lines large in the space of the old Trajan Dacia". The Great Union of 1918 was the historical process following which all the historical provinces inhabited by Romanians united in 1918 within the same national state, Romania. The preliminary stages were the Union of the Romanian Principalities in 1859 and the acquisition of independence following the war of 1877-1878, against the backdrop of the national renaissance of the Romanians during the 19th century.
And the final union restoring the territory of ancient Dacia was in 1918 on December 1. the principle of Nations. Then the Romanian nation was united, a state named Romania- from Rome, Roman as a result of the legacy of the Roman conquest of Dacia from antiquity.
Romania is a national, unitary state, the Latin language is unitary throughout the territory up to Bessarabia, ancient Romanian territory. .We are the only native European state. We were born here, we didn't come from. other territories. Paleogenetics tests (2012-Germany) confirm Daco-Romanian continuity here, for 6-7 millennia.
P.S. Similar situation to Romania. The unification of Italy, according to the term originally from Italian, Risorgimento, was the social, political and administrative process that had the final result of the unification of the states of the Italian peninsula into a single nation, Italy. The unification of Italy was part of the process of establishing modern European nations , completed with the emergence of new unitary and independent national states in Western Europe (Belgium, Italy, Germany) and in the Balkans (Greece, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Montenegro, and at the beginning of the 20th century - Albania). All after the defeat of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The right of nations to self-determination.
The national state of Italy - like the national state of Romania are as OLD - 100 years as national states .
After escaping from the rule of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, plundering. Italy is ancient Rome, Romania is ancient Dacia. Both divided into pieces that finally united as one nation. Simple.
BS
The question is, how do you know so much? Respect to you!
Work. Also, Ioan is a Welsh name too. So our countries share this.
There are many sources that prove that the Romanians called themselves Romanians and that they were only called by foreigners Wallachians.
Only you pointlessly advance the assertion that Romanians evolved from Wallachians.
In 1532, Francesco della Valle traveling in Transylvania, Wallachia and Moldova notes that the Romanians kept the name Romans (Romani) and "are called in their language Romans (Romei)". He even quotes the sentence "Sti Rominest?" ("do you speak Romanian?" for original Romanian "do you know Romanian?")
Pierre Lescalopier, recounting his journey, notes in 1574 that those living in Wallachia, Moldavia and most of Transylvania say they are descendants of the Romans, calling their language "romanechte" (the French transcription for Romanian).
The Lutheran preacher and the first Transylvanian Saxon historiographer Johann Lebel testifies in 1542 that ordinary Romanians call themselves "Romuini".
Antonius Verantini, who settled in Transylvania as bishop of Alba Iulia, and later became cardinal and viceroy of Habsburg Hungary, also states in 1570 that "the Wallachians are called Romans" and offers an example: "When they ask if someone knows how to speak Wallachian, they say: do you speak Roman? And [when they ask] if someone is Wallachian they say: are you Roman?
Pierre Lescalopier notes in 1574 that those living in Wallachia, Moldavia, and most of Transylvania say they are descendants of the Romanians, calling their language "romanechte" (the French transcription for Romanian Romanian).
Convince yourself at least on Wikipedia, there search for "Name of Romania". You will find this information with the sources quoted.
Of course Romania is old. Since ancient times, Waleachia was called "Tara Românească" by the Romanians themselves, which means Romanian land. Check out what “Tara Românească means” on Wukipedia! Now, what does “England” mean and what does “Deutschland” mean?
Ungro-wallachia and Moldova was vasal states , was created by the Hungarian Kings in XIV. century from Cuman teritory .
@@bujdososzekely
Wallachia and Moldova were not created by the Hungarian kings. Tara Românească was created between 1270 - 1352 by Basarab Întemeietorul. He was the first independent ruler. And whether they were once vasal or not doesn't matter at all. Hungary has also been vasale throughout history.
Deutschland means the dacians land😂. Its because of the visigoths wich are 100% dacians ( celts and vulgar latin speakers) that named Sweden, Denmark and Finland Dacia in official documents.
The heart of the germanic nations is Gotland wich was a colony of dacians.
@@mihailvormittag6211 , you need learn history !!!
The true story of wallachs-mongols ("romanians") ruclips.net/video/xaUbU6L7jnI/видео.html
@@mihaiilie8808
Deutschland, that is how Germans refer to Germany! And by that they mean German land.That's something everybody schuld know. What's wrong with you, are you uneducated? Your taking about Daciana is inappropriate in this context.
I missed you Ben!
Thank you kindly.
Any thoughts on the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture !?
Millennia before anyone thought of themselves as Romanian.
@@BenLlywelyn Or as English or German or Hungarian or American for that matter.
Great video. And yes, make a video about your DNA results.
Well, nevermind, I just caught up to your DNA results video.
Thank you for coming back and watching.
The romanian ancestors are possibly one or more pack of survivors after the catastropic events including megafloods that terminated the Old World from before the Younger Dryas period. Pyrenees, Alps and Carpathians will just apply for the best places to survive to regional or even continental tsunamis, one type of events that pack the YD boundaries. This is just my humble opinion based on multilevel integration of scientific facts
Transylvania sounds like a nice place to go to avoid world doomsday events.
That's a bit of a stretch.
@@cezar211091 The survivors of events that are difficult to understand for those who do not have reference points, but which are widely reported in the specialized scientific literature, are real like the biblical story of the Flood. Exacty as there too, the heights of the mountains offered the refuges beaten by the terrible fate. The only question that troubles me and I try to find an answer to it is whether we and others in the Carpathian area are direct descendants of extremely powerful people forged under the auspices of an era extremely hostile to life, in general.. That's why I said it's "possible"
You supposedly don't like defining nationality genetically. But genetics comes in handy when you want to sing the old song of the hungarian revisionists and claim that the Romanians supposedly migrated from the south. But no serious historian would claim such a thing today, only the hungarian revisionists claim it. On the other hand, it is common sense who the migrantors are; the Maghyars and the Huns migrated to the territory of today's Hungary. This is still reflected in the country's name today. The Hungarians call their country MAGHYARoszag and the others call it HUNgary
Invaded not migrated.
@@Info-God
You're right, "invaded" is the right word, because the Maghyars and the Huns came in looting and slaughtering.
@@mihailvormittag6211 And slavs were different? Or they were physically better looking and were easier accepted?
Wondering why hungarians look like no mongols? Huh? Well well well. Ask the historian.
@@Info-God
No, the Slavs were no better in this regard. It is well known why Hungarians don't look like Asians. First, the Panonian Plain was not depopulated when the Maghyars and the Huns invaded it, there was already a native population there. Secondly, the Maghyars of that time did not look Asian: the Finns and the Estonians, people from the Fino-Ugric language family like the Hungarians, also do not look Asian. And finally, the Huns were too few for their appearance to prevail, they were assimilated by the local population.h
@@mihailvormittag6211 Ha. I read that somewhere in 800 the huns have been eliminated physically by a r3volt of local populations: dacians, germans, celts(?). And the pope said it wants a maghyar language in Panonia. And with practically few 10s of families left, the pope created this nation.
It is common sense that the Romanians called Vallachia Țara Românească (the Romanian Land). Search on wikipenia and there you will be told that it is so. In addition, from Basarab I the founder, who annihilated almost the entire Hungarian army at the Battle of Posada, to Neacșu's letter that refers to Țara Românească and Neagoe Basarab its leader, there were 26 rulers of Țara Românească. All of these documented. Not to mention those rules after Neacșu's letter. And you continue to insinuate that the Idea of Romania is new, that the Romanians did not have a state and this period was very nebulous. Take a look at Wikipedia where you can find a list of all the voivodes of Țara Românească.
ruclips.net/video/xaUbU6L7jnI/видео.html
The nation în modern meaning of the concept îs born only in the 18-th and 19-th centuries. Before we can speake only about peoples or populations or states everywhere / anywhere, but not modern nations nor in Europe neither în other continent.
The Romanians were conscient of they Roman origins from begining and they are living în the large geographically space between Danube, Balkans and Carpathians Mountains as the descendants of the all Oriental Romanity în European continent.
Claiming that all Dacian men were wiped out after the Romans conquered Dacia and only women were spared, is foolish, especially when there is clear evidence that supports the existence of Free Dacians around the area conquered by the Romans (about 20% of Dacian land was occupied by Romans, mostly the gold mines area). Some Dacian men served in the Roman army after the conquest, as it was normal at the time, but the entire male population couldn't disappear. Britannia was twice as long under Roman rule (4 centuries), their male population has also been wiped out?
I did not say 'all".
@@BenLlywelyn Please check again what you said between 17:26 and 17:40.
@@BenLlywelyn Maybe you didn't use the word "all" but you clearly insinuated that most men were gone.
All Dacians and Getae were moved south of Danube by the Romans!
That should be right, but there were a lot of other nomad tribes that walked through these lands and left big footprints here.
Important is that out of all those populations, the one that prevailed and asimilated the others was the vlach one (at least in the north of the Danube).
In Hungary for exemple, the much smaller population of the nomad magyars dominated and overpowered and imposed its culture over the existing Panonian population.
NARAVUL DIN FIRE ,NU ARE LECUIRE. MA REFER LA POPORUL UNGURESC CARE PROVIN DIN UN TRIB DI NOMAZI DIN MONGOLIA ,PRIMA S AU OPRIT PE UN TERITORIU INTRE TURCIA SI IRAN APOI IAR AU MIGRAT PINA IN CIMPIA PANONICA UNDE S AU ACIUAT ( ASA ERA FELUL LOR) SI AU CREAT ACEST POPOR UNGARIA.
Similar situations. Romania - Italy.
How old is Italy?
The Kingdom of Italy was a state formed in 1861 by the unification of Italy, under the influence of the Kingdom of Sardinia; it existed until 1946, when Italians opted for a republican constitution. The Kingdom was the first Italian state to include the entire Italian Peninsula since the fall of the Roman Empire.
Antiquity, separate feudal states, unification = modern states. Romania was called Dacia in antiquity, Italy was called Rome in antiquity. Both got new names in the 19th century. Romania and Italy have the same age. They were kingdoms from antiquity. Dacia and Rome.
Maybe a video about Italy?
@@BenLlywelyn Yes. About the evolution of the Italian peninsula from the Roman Empire to the Middle Ages when there were many statuettes in the boot that still fought among themselves. But also different dialects that even today do not understand each other. There was no homogeneous population like in Dacia-Romania. The Romanian language is a unitary language even in the territories in front of the borders where Romanians live. What is the explanation? The same race perpetuated from antiquity to today. Italy is special. What nations lived on its territory? How many languages spoken? Commonly, we have the creation of a modern state in the 19th century through various unions of territories of the same race in the case of Romania and ... everything after the disappearance of the Austro-Hungarian Empire when liberated, new national states appeared in Europe. Romania is one.
On January 24, 1862, after partial rains, we got the name of Romania. From Rome, Romanus..
It is a complicated topic, but it is worth deciphering. Italy.
@@mariadespina80 The unification of Italy is a good story.
The DNA from the Balkans is shared with that of the Bulgarians and the Croats because we were there, the ones who made and brought food to the Romans after Venice and Constantinople. In Croatia, after the second wave of plague in the Middle Ages, Romanians occupied 3/4 of Dubrovnik. In 1400, only one Romanian family had 10k sheep! that in 1552 trade with Venice was 40k Venetian ducats, today 6 million$, carried on donkeys in caravans. They had their port on the Adriatic Sea: Canale della Morlacca
On the other side of the Balkans, the Romanian caravans from Constantinople were so strong that they founded a state: Dobrogea. And the Romanians also founded the Asanesti dynasty, that is, the Wallachian-Bulgarian state, the beginnings of the Bulgarian state. That is why our DNA is found everywhere in Croatia, Montenegro, Bulgaria. Let me say more about the Romanians from Poland or Urcaina?. That's why we emphasize the importance of the Dacians, because this explains the spread that the Romanians have in this part of Europe, with a great contribution to its history. One last example: Constantine opened the doors of pagan Rome with the Dacian troops formed by the Roman emperor of Dacian origins, Galerius.
👍
nu stiu cum se face dar in romania oricat de grea era viata sau cat de saraci am fost evreii au trait tot timpul bine. vacante doua masini excursi in strainatate la ei nu era o problema.
de ce tocmai tu ai facut un asa video lipsit de sens
De ce oare 🤔
@@MiomMiomissimo
sunt machiavelicii.
inca mai merge varianta auschvitz.. -vai am fost persecutati cineva trebuie sa plateasca pt asta ... s.a.m.d. si apoi mai e indoctrinarea religiei (la musulmani nu merge) varianta intoarce si celalalt obraz stiind ca scapa ca religia iti spune sa ierti si atunci incep manipularea. ca doar nu o sa ii persecuti ca sunt evrei nu vinovati de ceva. ei iti spun ce sa faci si apoi profita de tine ca ei te-au invatat. pe scurt sunt plini de idei machiavelice care suna bine dar in practica iti fac rau.
cel mai bun sxemplu este datoria. sau datoriile la banci camete toate sunt idei jidanesti. .
citeste-l pe eminescu cartea chestiunea evreiasca si inveti multe
Romanian/ Sardinian similar words
Magura ( hillock)/ Mogoro ( hill)
Groapa ( pit)/ Groppu ( pit, canyon)
Beci( underground storage)/ Beciu
Cancioc ( scoop for plastering)/ Cancedu ( laddle, wine poorer)
Pusti/Puscedu ( slang for kid)
Berbec/ Berbecu ( ram)
Pisica/Pissitu ( cat)
Cas/ Casu ( fresh cheese)
Ou/Ou (egg)
Patru(4)/ Batturu.
Apa/Abba ( water)
Sange/Sange ( blood)
Limba/Limba ( tongue)
A few with Etruscan
Leu/Leu ( lion)
Cutie ( box in Romanian, Basque, Turkish, Albanian)/ kutum in Etruscan
I think that kutum comes from Latin "quadrum", a reference to the four corners of the box,( square,)
Pui, Puia ( a kind of "honey" for wife)/ Puia ( wife)
Nene, (a polite term for older men)/ Nene ( wet nurse)
This is fascinating. Do you have any resources on Romanian / Sardinain similarities?
@BenLlywelyn
I join Quora and I learn many important things.
These are not Romanian but Bulgarian words.
@@nestingherit7012 They passed the Vlachs in the ranks of the old Bulgarians, they are only wrong about the language.
@CocoSon-we2rg
Balegarska are the most annoying people in the Balkans.
It's true we don't know how old is Romania, but we know that Iliescu is older than Romania.
Which are those genetic tests that support the statement that there is a genetic difference between Romanians on one side of the Carpathian arc and those on the other side of the Carpathian arc. Any serious person would cite the sources. What you say is nothing but nonsense, meant to support the cause of the Hungarian secessionists from Transylvania, who are trying to convince the Romanians from Transylvania that they should be separated from their brothers beyond the Carpathians.
Ask a scientist.
@@BenLlywelyn
It is appropriate to cite one's sources when making such a blatant claim. It is you who claims what you claim and not some scientist. You have to prove your claim if you want it to be credible, so that we can see for ourselves whether it is true. Otherwise you're just telling fairy tales. Which scientist should I ask? You have to tell me which one I should ask. You have to know from which scientist you heard or read that.
The painting in the thumbnail may interest the presenter - the model was a socialite born in the Channel Islands who married a Romanian nobleman and the painter was an Austrian Jew who immigrated to Romania and made a name for himself there. He was eventually killed by the Austrian authorities for political reasons.
This is fascinating. Thank you.
@@BenLlywelyn en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_Daniel_Rosenthal and en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Rosetti respectively.
Excellent, as usually. Talking about mothers... the terms country and nation are feminine nouns in Romanian.
As they are in other Latin languages.
Welsh for nation/country in Welsh (gwlad), is feminine.
Answer: a couple of centuries barely, now Valahia & Transylvania are much older but Romania as a state is an relatively recent Austro Hungarian Empire just like Yugoslavia was... & look at where those are today...
Yugoslavia was nothing like Romania.
Would the fact that the "birth of a nation" cannot be pinpointed on a timeline mean it never died? Just changed, rolled with the punches from Dacian times?
At some point you change so much you are no longer the same nation, do you think?
@@BenLlywelyn it would be wild it that can be quantified, how much a nation formed with people living in the same area changed over the centuries. But at the same time, depends on what you are tracking, is the Modern state in an area, when it was officially added in foreign to that country documents, and recognized, or the more "untouchable" wish for unity under one banner that existed in an area.
Roman Macedonia was a province of ancient Rome, created in 146 BC, after the Roman general Quintus Caecilius Metellus defeated Andriscus of Macedon, the last self-styled King of Macedonia in the Fourth Macedonian War. The province incorporated the former Kingdom of Macedonia with the addition of Epirus, Thessaly, and parts of Illyria, Paeonia and Thrace. By 74 BC, the Roman legions under Gaius Scribonius Curio reached the lower Danube and proceeded to come into contact with the Dacians. Roman Dacia was a province of the Roman Empire, created in 106 AD, by emperor Caesar Nerva Traianus. Its territory consisted of what are now the regions of Oltenia, Transylvania and Banat.
Like your approach.
Thank you.
Yes, officially, Emperor Rudolf helps Mihai (as virtual ruler of the three principalities) with money for the army that he will use in the battle of Guraslau, when he returns to the Transylvanian throne. Behind the scenes, it seems that Rudolf had other intentions, but he used Mihai to chase away Sigismund de Bathory.
Among the officers hired by Michael was John Smith - the one with Jamestown.
Yes, internal Austrio Hungarian rivalries often helped Romanian divide them.
How old is Romania, is a wrong question!!!
The right question is; how old is the Romanian nation, and its language???
On this matter I know more then anyone on earth, But You Tube is blocking my videos and delete my comments.
Hope they didn't delete this comment!!!
@ravenalbj , nu l au sters😅,toti avem aceasta problema
Your comment is not deleted.
@@BenLlywelyn Thank you. Good to know.
In this case I will continue to bring some of real history of Romanians.
Let me start with a little etymology.
In Romanian the word for "copper" is ARAMA.
ARMA means "weapon", but the word ARMS and ARMA are the same in other languages.
In case you people don't know, the first ARMA (weapon) was made out of ARAMA (copper)
Do you people see how the word ARMA/ARMS (weapon) evolved from ARAMA???
Romanian words explain themselves and how they evolved. This is only one word but I have hundreds of examples.
The word ALARMA/ALARM which came from the Romanian A LA ARME (to the weapons) is a very international word. It evolved from Romanian language.
The word ARAMA exist only in Romanian.
Did you people get it so far???
@@ElenaGheorghita-nu2vt Nu nu aveti problema mea. Videourile mele sunt blocate. Citeste raspunsul dat lui Ben mai jos, si vei intelege de ce!!!
You're kind of pathetic
During my very brief visit to the Transylvania area, I was struck by the history of people living on the hilltops & mountaintops. How they began to protect themselves from invaders by building walled towns atop the mountains, often with religious figures & beliefs there. My sense was of an ancient culture long protected by the mountainous area needing to consolidate due to hostile invasion. My sense about Romanian "attitude" is still of feeling invaded & beset by foreign culture.
Transylvania is incredibly defendable if you hold thr key passes. I can see why its sense if differentness has endured.
''Between Rome and the 14th century, this large space within Europe is a wild?''
After the Roman conquest and the abandonment of Dacia by Aurelian with all the Roman administration, south of the Danube, the Dacians continued to exist.
- The Turkish chronicle Ohuz Han (Oguzname) from the 9th century describes the opposition of the Urus (Russians), Ulak (Dacian Vlachs), they opposed the Cumans and that
reminds of the Ulashuwi-Wallachians, when the Hungarians lived between the Don and the Dnieper.
-In Pannonia and Moesia (Dacia Minor) there were 10 Dacian kingdoms, with some of them the Hungarian tribes started fighting. Ex. The kingdom of Salanus occupied by the Hungarians in 903, the king of Menu in 880, inherited from his ancestor - the Dacian dynasty. In 950, a Duke Gyla in Transylvania. Gelu, Glad, etc. But not all the information can be brought here.
"Gesta Hungarorum" or The Deeds of the Hungarians of the anonymous notary of King Béla III. (Belae regis Hungariae notarius) is the oldest chronicle of Hungary. In 1200. See here the native Dacian or Wallachian population and the local Duke or rulers with whom with which the nomads Hungarians fought.
True not all the stolen history can be stolen from Hungarians here 😂
The Hungarian tribes didnt fight against Vlachs or "dacians" you can look It Up anywhere .
@@zoltan6451 Read here :
"Gesta Hungarorum" or The Deeds of the Hungarians of the anonymous notary of King Béla III. (Belae regis Hungariae notarius) is the oldest chronicle of Hungary. In 1200. See here the native Dacian or Wallachian population and the local Duke or rulers with whom with which the Hungarians fought.
Written between 1282-1285, the Gesta Hungarorum is an ingenious and imaginative historical fiction of prehistory, medieval history and contemporary social history.@@mariadespina80
You should look into 1241 see what happened there . @@mariadespina80
I will tell you how old Romania is.
Getica written by Jordanes (Iordanes) around 500 AD tells the history of the Goths and all that followed.
fun facts
1)The word “Ge” means “earth”. The word Get or Getae (Geti plural) means born out of the earth or man of earth (which has serious implications regarding who is not of earth).
2. The Roman Emperor **Claudius II Gothicus** (reigned 268-270 AD) is primarily credited with changing the perception from "Getae" to "Goths." Claudius II won a significant victory against the Goths, earning him the title "Gothicus," which started the more common use of "Goths" over "Getae."
You see, all the evidence is there the Romanian land is the cradle of civilization.
3.Nicolae Densusianu wrote the book Dacia Preistorica (Ancient Dacia) which talks about so much everyone should know yet no one does including the Romanian Sphinx, ancient civilization such as Cucuteni Tripiliu, Turdas Vinca and so many artifacts over 7000 years old.
4)Romus and Remulus had the mother wolf, these founders of the Roman Empire is the ultimate proof Romania is the cradle of civilization.
In ancient times the word Dac or Dacian used to mean “wolf”. So Dacia as a country was the great wolf mother. You see whose tits Romus and Remulus were sucking on? They were Dacians.
My personal belief is there used to be a great worldwide civilization what we know today as Atlantis (maybe Lemuria was different civilization who knows). This civilization had an apocalypse known as the Younger Dryas. They knew what was about to happen so they set outposts (markers). That’s the sphinx. Everyone knows the Egyptian sphinx, you didn’t even mention the Romanian one, shame. So yeah the survivors were up in the mountains where the great flood did not reach them. These are the Getae, my ancestors, the ancestors of most of Europe and North Africa and Minor Asia (Pomponius Mela Map).
So the question remains. Who were the not of earth invaders, the Annunaki? Went to all corners of the earth and spread their seed? Do they rule to this day?
You work for them?
If I woked for the rulers of the earth I would have a more expensive camera.
@@BenLlywelyn then please take this video down. It’s 100% inaccurate spreading a false narrative. It’s not only an insult to my people, it’s an insult to all earth born
@@BenLlywelynDo not take the videos down and please make more videos about Romania as you have a connexion with your knowledge about the celts.
Critic is useful and a dacopat like myself, altough i get upset at times that you got the wrong facts, i cant get upset on you.
Michael the Brave = Dacus Malus. The mean dacian a hungarian nickname.
But what does Dacus Malus mean?
@@BenLlywelyn From latin.
Dacus =(The) Dacian
Malus = Mean, Bad, Aggressive
If you wish Malus = Mal-igne.
The Mean Dacian. Or in Romanian: Dacul cel Rau. You can Google the Romanian wording if you want to check.
It shows these 2 words, clearly, on a Hungarian (?) painting. Is real.
@@Info-God👍
@@BenLlywelyn In latin = the Bad Dacian .
As a romanian i ask if you can make a video about the modern history of romania 19, early 20th centuries
200 years is a long time. Which part of that?
It formed during Burebista, and then reborn during Mihai the Brave, and then Ioan Cuza. Same people with new influences for the last 2000 years.
Burebista was another epoch, another nation. Good to care foe the memory and protect it, but Romania is something else now.
@@BenLlywelynIf you go to a romanian village you will see the houses are build like 12 000 years ago, from twigs and mud,much older than Burebista. 😂
They are a rare sight now a days and should be protected, but our coulture and language is very old, much older than Burebista.
Nah, we still have 3000 years huts reminding us o Burebista
@@mihaiilie8808 and said techniques were exported to the syberian gulags when the rabid bear clawed in the mid 20th century.
Legends say that when gulaged romanians from the army, most of the people came from villages, arrived and they found other poor souls from all over Europe just left out in the open sleeping in holes in the tundra, they started organizing and building said 'Burebista style' of straw and mud huts. And when the russians came later to check, they cringed and moved the romanians away.
Take the legend with as many booze shot salt and believe what you will.
@@cristibrad6742 I have a friend(romanian but he claims he is siberian) that was born in Siberia gulag and he has a home and relatives there and wants to visit.
He has a home in Mangalia and another in Buzau and another in Vrancea, plus the home in Siberia.
From all these he talks the most about Siberia and his home there that he left to his cousin, and how he wants to go back and visit.
Must be a nice home.
Why so 'fearful' of genetics and race,ethnicity? I think is very interesting and in fact, a particular culture is born of those genes over a period of time. ie. European, Asian, African, etc. cultures are distinct and unique in their own way.
Many who practice Judaism are uneasy around genetics as a determinant of nationality for historical reasons.
@@BenLlywelynHitler and Ramses ( biggest jew haters in history) had haplogroup E wich is jewish haplogroup.
@@BenLlywelynoh, is that because the Third Reich used genetics as a litmus test (rather than culture/religion) when deciding whom to discriminate against, or worse...? On the other hand, don't Israeli universities study the Ashkenazi and Sephardic ancestries? I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with studying any subject if it helps us understand the world better, even if a horrible regime used that knowledge for evil.
Over 14000 years old.
Whoa.
@@BenLlywelyn Hold your horses.. I’m talking about Dog years. Why don’t people hint about their system of reference?!?
Watch "DALMATIAN LANGUAGE - the missing link-( ROMANCE LANGUAGES)
The extinct Dalmatian language was the link between Romanian and Italic languages
So many similarities.
You should get a honorific romanian citizenship for your amazing research!
Sounds like a deal.
@@BenLlywelyn , the Szekely people is not happy because after shameful Trianon Dictate in 1920. get the romanian citizenship .
@@BenLlywelyn , 250000 Szekely singing the Hungarian anthem in Csiksomlyo , Szekelyland , Transylvania ruclips.net/video/G2v5j1IiZQs/видео.html
@@bujdososzekely😇
That's the true when we speak this word, that the best of our neighbours is Black Sea...
The only attestation of Proto-Romanian would be, according to some authors, the phrase torna, torna, fratre "return, return, brother". The first word, repeated, appears in the Byzantine chronicler Theophylact of Simocatta, around the year 630. The whole phrase was transcribed by another Byzantine chronicler, Theophanes the Confessor, around the years 810-814. It would have been spoken in the year 587, during a campaign against the Avars, by a soldier of the Byzantine army, probably a proto-Romanian native. Here, the word "brother" has the meaning of "one of the same nation as me", of the same ethnicity. The one who said these words was aware of belonging to a particular ethnic group of which he was also a part.
Fascinating suggestion, and possible.
@@BenLlywelynThank you! I'm honoured!
Are you seriously telling us that the people in the three Principates only very late realized that they speak the same language and have the same culture?
German speakers, Italians and Indians did not decide they had a national consciousness until rather late.
That's how it happened to most of the nations. There was no internet then, nor television or radio.
@@BenLlywelyn
Are you serious? I don't think it's possible to make the decision to become conscious about something. In this case about the own nationality. How can someone make a decision about something that he is supposedly unaware of? That sounds illogical.
@@BenLlywelynItalian and german and indian speakers are different case because they cant understand each otther like italians from south with italians from north.
Romanian language is soo old that there are not even dialects and all romanians speak exactly the same language.
@@mihaiilie8808 Esatto finalmente ( forse) così capiscono una volta per sempre quall'e la verità. GRAZIE
How old is Romania? The mysterious one.
Since ancient times, the Dacian Kingdom was divided into pieces after the death of King Decebal, among his descendants and others. It remained like this in pieces in the Middle Ages, first small duchies in the 11th-11th century with dukes - Vlachs (Dacians - Romanians) Menumorut, Seneslau, Glad and others described in the Gesta Hungarorum of the anonymous notary of King Bella III in 1200, with which the Hungarian invaders fought. In the Middle Ages, the 13th - 14th - 15th centuries, the great Romanian principalities, Moldova, Muntenia, Dobroge, and Transylvania, which was rich and seized by some invaders, were established. temporarily. Rulers and princes ruled these Romanian principalities. . They united in stages, until in 1918 the National State was created with the new name of Romania, inspired by imperial Rome. And the name Romanian = Romanus, a citizen of Rome. In the 19th century, with the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, all the nations oppressed by it formed modern national states. Romania, Belgium, Germany, Italy, and countries in the Balkans. So Romania is as thirsty for OLD as these new national states, around 100 years with the new name of Romania. In 1918, the territory of the Kingdom of Dacia was restored.
( VLACHS is the name given to the Romanian and Aromanian population by foreigners, the Germans - that is, population speaking a Latin language.)
Romanized population of North Danube was attested since the Hunnic times. The chronicle of Priscus, for example. He was part of a delegation from the Eastern Roman Empire to the court of Atilla. He describes the Romanized population that lived on Hunnic territories, and on Hunnic main camp. He also describes them as “locals”. There are many such mentions about the proto Romanians.So, Romanians are locals in the Balkans and Carpathian area. They were under the Hunnic empire, then under the Avars, and later under Bulgars. They were part of those armies, and are attested as it. They origin is clearly from the local mix ofCeltic, Geto-Dacian and Thracian peoples, to whom we should add the Roman legions that were recruited from various parts of the empire.
860
A letter from Emmerich of Elwangen to Grimaldus, St.Gall Abbey mentions the North-Danubian Romanians with the name of Dacians (year 860):...“gentes innumeras... Sunt his Germanique truces et Sarmata bellax-atque Getae nec non Bastarnae semina gentis-Dacorumque manus et Martia pectori Alani. Matila Ghyka. A Documented Chronology of Romanian History: From Pre-historic Times to the Present Day. Translated from the French by Fernand G. Renier and Anne Cliff, B. H. Blackwell, 1941, p.26
830
The Turkish Bulgars conquered parts of Pannonia. Buda was founded by the Bulgarians and so was the Csongrad Fortress (cernii grad = black fortress) on the Tisza. From this settlement, around the year 830, a detachment of soldiers was sent to Transylvania to control or organize the salt trade from Ocne (today Ocna Mureș, Turda, Sărăteni, etc.) All these show that Transylvania was inhabited and part of the local population worked to obtain or to transport the salt. Later, Gesta Hungarorum described that Romanians/Vlach/Blaci were the local dwellers and worked for the extraction of Salt and Gold. All this shows that Transylvania was inhabited and part of the local population worked to obtain or transport salt. Later, the Gesta Hungarorum described that the Romanians/Vlachs/Blacians were the inhabitants of Transylvania and worked in the extraction of salt and gold.
PERCHÉ NON FINITE A DIRE TANTE BAGGIANATE SULLA STORIA DELLA DACIA ????? OGGI LA ROMANIA. CERTO CHE LUNGO I SECOLI SONO PASSATI TANTI POPOLI MIGRATORI MA IL POPOLO DELLA ATTUALE ROMANIA HA MAMTENUTO LA SUA LINGUA ED E SUCCESO CHE IL LORO DNA SI È UNITO CON ALTRI DNA TRAMITE UNIONI CON ALTRE PERSONE CHE SONO STATE DI PASSAGIO AL NOSTRO PAESE.CHIARO?????
No reliable and contemporary sources information can attest to vlachs (Romanians) north of the Danube before the later half of the 10th century.
in regards to your 860 letter, he probably was not referring to Romanians. There isn't any reliable evidence for dacians past the 271AD pullout. People referred to themselves or those living in the carpathian mountains as dacian. Because in the Carpathian mountains, it was referred to (and south of the sava) as dacia. The byzantine chroniclers referred to the Hungarians as Dacian as well.
There was also Dacian tribes who survived in Rome at least until the 320's when the entirety of dacia was abandoned.
I have never heard anyone use the source of Priscus. So i decided to read the whole thing and then i figured out why i never heard anyone mention it as a source before. It does not mention any romanized population, it does describe locals. But it is left as that. Locals. It never says they spoke Latin, better yet were romanized populations. It does however describe numerous people who were scythian and "barbarian" and even prisoners who abandoned their old lives, and one hellanic man who told Priscus that their lives under the Huns were better.
(Priscus, fr. 8 in Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum)
The salt mines is why Transylvania was such a contested area at times. These probably was plenty of people who was in the busisness of trading the lucrative salt in Transylvania. What i am also sure of, is that the huns would not tolerate even local rich traders in that particular business. In the source of which you gave me, it tells us that in regards to the man who i mentioned said life under the huns was better, " -he was stript of his prosperity, and on account of his riches was allotted to Onegesius in the division of the spoil, as it was the custom among the Scythians for the chiefs to reserve for themselves the rich prisoners". This clearly demonstrates that there was not these supposed roman salt traders (who would have been rich) and locals who remained in Dacia. If there was, then why did the Huns only take ranson some of the traders and not the roman ones in Dacia? Even if this source is completely false, and you are right, this does not mean anything in the context of when the romanians culture formed or when the Romanians migrated to romania. Why isnt there any latin speaking dacians Because we clearly have more non fragmented more reliable chronicals of the Byzantines and their emperours who clearlyt state that there was a vlach (some considored bessan and dacian) living south of the danube from Thessolonka, to albania, to Mosia.
Also the gesta hungaroum is not a particularly reliable source, especially since it was written a good 300 years after the supposed events took place, and the author worked directly for the king who had a vested intrest in selling estates, particularly in transylvania. This is why they made up the fantastical hero character of Geulo, who no other source menions the name of, and who we have no archealogical evidence for and his supposed followers and people. Do you think people would pay more if the land had heros and stories of battles which many hungarians died for? Absolutely, and it did work.
@@schutzanzug6731 You have no ideea what you talk about my friend. If you haven't heard about Priscus chronicles, or the fact that Byzantine empire established a few times control over the North of Danube.... Roman empire resettled around 700.000 to 1.200.000 Romans north of the Danube, they came because they received free land... Where do you think that those people went? Also the Huns, avars kept the local population to grow food. Your only arguments is " i didnt hear of that, i think etc..." The fact that Romanian is a latin speaking language and the fact that in the first writing they considered themselves Romanian, are the main proofs. Also there is archeological proof that people continued to live in this lands, they were never empty. Even the Magyars wrote about the fights with the local population, when they came.... There is no proof of any Romanian missive migration, yet now we have 20 milion Romanian speakers in these lands.. Your arguments are phatetic, study more...
@@schutzanzug6731 PECATO CHE NON C'È LA POSSIBILITÀ DI USUFRUIRE DELLA TRADUZIONE. TRANSLATE PLEASE!!!!
@@schutzanzug6731 here is a crazy thought... Take a map from the height of the Roman Empire. If some1 wrote before literacy was mildly spread after the Dark Ages, *meme voice* there be weird latin sounding peoples north of the Danube, who could it possibly be and how given the mass of migration and a lack of a solid kingdom?
After the most developed land and capital of Dacia was taken and for its entirety said region was only a roman border region, I think some have way too much expectation from the people there, when they did manage to survive in many spread out pockets, later to adapt and finally come together.
You know I am really curious if Wallace is related to Wallachia :)
Salutations from Upper Valachia - Muntenia.
Yes, Wallace is related linguistically to Wallachia. en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/walhaz