Origin of the Romanians -- Your Opinion

cimon

Wozza said:
The problem is that Dacia was the first area that the Romans left, and their occupation was relatively short. So why, other than a few remote areas that fell much later or indeed where the population beat off the invaders (West Britain, the Basque Country), is it there that the language survives?
Click to expand...

It doesn't! It was manufactured much later
 

cimon

Perix said:
za brilliant theory!:D:D:D
pleease, enlight us! how did romanians do it? i'm sure you have a palpitant story for us!:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I am following what you write,the same propaganda the Communists were propounding,like the statue of the wolf with Romulus and Remus, the whole Europe has shown enough mirth about it;
OK before the Ardel group put its fingers in your language to make it look latin in mid 19th century can you tell me what was exactly the language the Romanians spoke?
I hope you know Teora.Professor Niculescu in his language section writes that the first written document found in Romania was in 1521! a
letter of a boyar(merchant) writing to his judet about the movement of Turkish armies along the Danube(very indicative date...) the letter was......Church Slavonic!that country must have been the ONLY one in Europe without a language in such an advanced age!
Of course the Romans never colonized Romania for the simple reason that it didn't hold any strategic value to them at that time;only much later in the 4th century AD became a battle ground.
All that is not imagination you totally unred individual!Niculescu is a Romanian professor writing that not some ill-meaning foreigner...
 

Perix

Lot of ambiguous ideeas which spread more confussion than enlightment...typical for "wooden language"
Anyway:
cimon said:
I am following what you write,the same propaganda the Communists were propounding
Click to expand...
I guess any ideea against panslavist(embraced with love by others sometimes, for...patologic reasons) theory that romanians spoke slavonic is "the same propaganda the Communists were propounding". Romanians have no right for their oppinion about their own history and identity. Also vlachs in front of greeks and serbians.
cimon said:
,like the statue of the wolf with Romulus and Remus, the whole Europe has shown enough mirth about it;
Click to expand...
personages as she-wolf, romulus, trajan are myths who penetrated the romanians self-conscience in some given conditions. Around 16-17 cnt, when the first writtings about romanians origins(the authors were moldavians, anyway), all they knew was "we were comming from Rome", and, on those times italians were poor oprimated little nations, like romanians, not the arrogant egoistic dudes like today. So, they claimed the simbols of romanity they knew. Romanians from nowdays are aware there are just myths, but when an individual like you dennounce the property of these myths, as "slavs who consider themselves romans", they'll consider you nothing but jerk, who interfere with what he has no ideea...
Personal I think romanians come from Constantine the Great east empire, and our simbols should be not trajan, but Constantine, justinian, galerius...
East Empire usurpated by greeks latter
cimon said:
OK before the Ardel group put its fingers in your language to make it look latin in mid 19th century can you tell me what was exactly the language the Romanians spoke?
Click to expand...
Please, clear and point out your ideeas, and bring some prooves, I can't argue with stutter and slothful ideeas.
cimon said:
I hope you know Teora.Professor Niculescu in his language section writes that the first written document found in Romania was in 1521! a
letter of a boyar(merchant) writing to his judet about the movement of Turkish armies along the Danube(very indicative date...) the letter was......Church Slavonic!that country must have been the ONLY one in Europe without a language in such an advanced age!
Click to expand...
Pleasse, point out who is prof Niculescu, what he wrote and where, i can't argue with stutter and slothful ideeas. What the hell you mean by "very indicative date...", etc. Neacsu's letter is wellknow and accepted it was written partial in slavonic, and all with slavonic characters. then the author turned into romanian, because of his limited knoledges in slavonic. and the adressant was not his judet, but a german fonctionary from hermanstadt(brasov), in another "judet" and another principate(still he knew romanian)
Good luck!
 

cimon

Perix said:
Lot of ambiguous ideeas which spread more confussion than enlightment...typical for "wooden language"
Anyway:

I guess any ideea against panslavist(embraced with love by others sometimes, for...patologic reasons) theory that romanians spoke slavonic is "the same propaganda the Communists were propounding". Romanians have no right for their oppinion about their own history and identity. Also vlachs in front of greeks and serbians.

personages as she-wolf, romulus, trajan are myths who penetrated the romanians self-conscience in some given conditions. Around 16-17 cnt, when the first writtings about romanians origins(the authors were moldavians, anyway), all they knew was "we were comming from Rome", and, on those times italians were poor oprimated little nations, like romanians, not the arrogant egoistic dudes like today. So, they claimed the simbols of romanity they knew. Romanians from nowdays are aware there are just myths, but when an individual like you dennounce the property of these myths, as "slavs who consider themselves romans", they'll consider you nothing but jerk, who interfere with what he has no ideea...
Personal I think romanians come from Constantine the Great east empire, and our simbols should be not trajan, but Constantine, justinian, galerius...
East Empire usurpated by greeks latter

Please, clear and point out your ideeas, and bring some prooves, I can't argue with stutter and slothful ideeas.

Pleasse, point out who is prof Niculescu, what he wrote and where, i can't argue with stutter and slothful ideeas. What the hell you mean by "very indicative date...", etc. Neacsu's letter is wellknow and accepted it was written partial in slavonic, and all with slavonic characters. then the author turned into romanian, because of his limited knoledges in slavonic. and the adressant was not his judet, but a german fonctionary from hermanstadt(brasov), in another "judet" and another principate(still he knew romanian)
Good luck!
Click to expand...
Declaration of willful ignorance is adequate to declare that someone stutters
Prof Niculescu is Teora Publications inter alia and in his grammar for foreigners in thev second part of the book his has element of Romanian History,culture,Language,poetry,arcitecture etc you are the only one who doesn't know Niculescu among the Romanians I have asked in Romania and outside...I admire your pretence to ignorance as well as your offhand treatement of the subject of the statute of the wolf....as for the Romanian Neacsu's letter contain,what Romanian was he writing?Please tell us...don't give me that he wrote the letter in...a foreign language and then reverted to Romanian!
That area in middle ages was a cloud of tribes without particular morfology,surprising enough you throw the Moldovans in why? they are a different group of people than those that reside in Romania.
Usurped by Greeks how?when 55% and more of the Roman Empire's population spoke Greek,and the Romanians come from Constantine?( You people have nothing to do with the Roman empire) that is byond discussion!write your own history and find readers....
 

Perix

cimon said:
Declaration of willful ignorance is adequate to declare that someone stutters
Prof Niculescu is Teora Publications inter alia and in his grammar for foreigners in thev second part of the book his has element of Romanian History,culture,Language,poetry,arcitecture etc you are the only one who doesn't know Niculescu among the Romanians I have asked in Romania and outside...I admire your pretence to ignorance as well as your offhand treatement of the subject of the statute of the wolf....as for the Romanian Neacsu's letter contain,what Romanian was he writing?Please tell us...don't give me that he wrote the letter in...a foreign language and then reverted to Romanian!
That area in middle ages was a cloud of tribes without particular morfology,surprising enough you throw the Moldovans in why? they are a different group of people than those that reside in Romania.
Usurped by Greeks how?when 55% and more of the Roman Empire's population spoke Greek,and the Romanians come from Constantine?( You people have nothing to do with the Roman empire) that is byond discussion!write your own history and find readers....
Click to expand...
sorry, you didn't listen anything - you carry on bathing in ambiguous swamps! as you seems to be drugged, I can't have a coherent discuttion with you. yes, romanian come from latin speakers of balkans(dacians, thracians, illyrians...), whom symbols were Constantine and Justinian, so, these personages should replace actual symbols as Remus, Trajan...is simple. Read Asen brothers writtings, who considered the same 1000 years ago
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top