- The Vlach Connection and Further Reflections on Roman History?
- Digital Pictures: Representation and Compression.
- Languages and the First World War: Communicating in a Transnational War?
- A grammar of the Yoruba language;
In either or the Roman army and administration left Dacia, which was invaded by Goths who lived with the local people until the 4th century, when another nomadic people, the Huns, arrived. However, most of the population, made up of Roman colonists and Romanized Dacians, stayed on and continued to keep up close relations with the South-Danubian Romans.
The process of Romanization went on north of the Danube River after the 3rd century as well. This was largely due to the Christian faith which was spreading out from towns situated on the right bank of the middle and lower streams of the Danube. Some Roman emperors, and subsequently some of the Byzantine ones, would raid the north-Danubian areas, managing, under emperors Constantine the Great — , Valens — and Justinian — , to partially restore Roman rule over the former Dacia province.
Gepids and Avars ruled Transylvania until the 8th century, after which Bulgarians included the territory of modern Romania into their Empire until Transylvania was part of the powerful Kingdom of Hungary from the th century until the 16th century, afterward the independent Principality of Transylvania was formed. The Pechenegs, the Cumans and Uzes were also mentioned by historic chronicles on the territory of Romania, until the founding of the Romanian principalities of Wallachia by Basarab I, and Moldavia by Dragos during the 13th and the 14th centuries respectively.
Evidences of the Serbs on the territory of present Romania should be traced at least from the 6th century, when part of the Slavic population let their homeland to settle down in the Pannonian Plain. Slavic people settled in the northers and eastern parts of today Romania, arriving in masses to the Banat, Krisana and Erdely, even before arrival of Avars, either independently or together with Huns and Gepids.
At the beginning of the 7th century part of Slavic population moved from mentioned areas to the Balkan peninsula, but a significant portion of people remained in those areas. The earliest archives and documents of the Romanian history and a number of toponymes testify on the presence of the Serbs in those historical provinces of the present Romania. The Serbian character of Romania and Modavia was fiercely destroyed in by creation of Romania from two Danubian Princedoms — the independent Serbian states of the Princedoms of Wallachia and Moldavia.
Romanian historiography is currently in a phase of necessary critical revisions. Several competing theories have been generated to explain the origin of modern Romanians, although constant ongoing linguistic and geo — historical research and analysis tend to indicate that Romanians have coalesced as a major ethnic group both South and North of the Danube.
Between and the Cyrillic alphabet gave way to a mixed form of writing, a combination of Cyrillic characters and Roman letters, with a tendency for the latter to become more prevalent. In the Roman alphabet was established by law. By around , young aristocrats had already adopted Western clothing. Likewise their compatriots south of Sava and Dunube rivers, the Serbs in the southeaster part of the Pannonian plain were Christianized by the Byzantine Empire in the second half of the 9th century.
In the Middle Ages, Byzantium offered the Romanians their principal political, cultural and religious model, largely through the intermediary of the Balkan Slavs.
At the top is Japhetic a now obsolete term meaning "Indo-European" , one of whose branches is Scythian. Scythian is in turn subdivided into Getic and Sarmatian, from which the Germanic and Slavic peoples, respectively, are descended. In other words, where Protochronists put the Getae at the top of the hierarchy, Bergmann describes them as just one of the many Indo-European branches and puts them near the bottom. Furthermore, while Bergmann does claims that the Germanic peoples are the Getae's descendants, he lists them as their only descendants. In other words, in his view, the Romance and Slavic peoples are not descended from the Getae.
Bergmann describes, too, the Getae and Scythians as being separate but related groups, and specifically describes Getic and Scythian as being separate languages. One glaring statement near the beginning of the book outright contradicts the idea of the Indo-European homeland being in Romania:.
If anything, Bergmann seems to be saying that the Getae were practically Germans, just as Protochonists claim the Getae were essentially or even identical to Romanians. He argues that, of the contemporarily extent ethnic groups, the Germanic peoples are linguistically, genetically, and culturally the closest to the Getae, as well as their only descendants.
Ironically, the Protochronist claim that the Goths and Getae were the same people would actually support Bergmann's theory, since the Goths did indeed speak a Germanic language. Bergmann also claims the origin of the Indo-Europeans is Asia, not Romania, and his linguistic arguments involve Scythian words that do not exist in Romanian, such as Pakus venerable , apia earth , konus nice , and daviketas intelligence.
Indeed, it contradicts it almost completely. Furthermore, a significant proportion of the evidence adduced by Bergmann involves cultural and religious similarities, whereas the classification of Scythian and Germanic is first and foremost a linguistic matter: the German language is claimed to be descended from the Scythian language. Cultural traits can be shared by speakers of multiple languages  through cultural diffusion , a process that can be independent of linguistic descent or relatedness. For instance, Bergmann cites similarities in the clothing worn by Scythians and the Germanic peoples, but this is not necessarily an indicator of linguistic relatedness; Western clothing such as jeans is now worn across the world due to the influence of Western culture on other societies.
None of this, however, constitutes proof of a genetic relationship between English and Japanese or English and Arabic or any other of the many languages spoken by Muslims, for that matter. Scythian, it may also be mentioned, was a vague term historically used to refer to many different and unrelated peoples. Because of the indiscriminate use of the word Scythian by the ancients, nationalists of many different ethnic groups, such as Serbians and Hungarians, also claim the Scythians as their own.
Dacians, Romans, Romanians / Gabor Vekony | National Library of Australia
Finally, it must be said that none of the preceding claims made by Bergmann or, for that matter, Protochronists regarding these ancient peoples are accepted by modern scholarship. So little is known about the Scythian and Getic languages that it is not possible to draw definitive conclusions as to their nature or origins. Marija Gimbutas is quoted as saying, in response to a question regarding the existence of human archaeological remains from the 5th millennium B. Then a map of Gimbutas' Old Europe culture, in which these objects were found, is shown. Old Europe is a region including not only Romania, but also the Balkans and a significant part of Italy.
The implication is that the Aryans originated in Romania.
- Origin of the Romanians - Wikipedia.
- Navigation menu.
- About the Book?
- Custom builder (January 2006)!
- Applied Reliability Engineering and Risk Analysis: Probabilistic Models and Statistical Inference?
First, it is misleading to say that Gimbutas found the statuettes "in Romania", since she found them in various countries, including Greece and Yugoslavia. Second, Gimbutas argued that Old Europe was a pre -Indo-European hence, non-Aryan culture which was wiped out by Indo-Europeans invaders migrating from the East and originating at the location of the Yamna culture, which is located in modern-day Ukraine and Russia.
Third, and more importantly, the fact that Romanian happens to be spoken nowadays in the area designated by Gimbutas as Old Europe in no way means that Romanian was also spoken there years ago.
There are many languages besides Romanian currently spoken in "Old Europe", and one could, by the same logic, argue that Serbian  or Albanian is the original Indo-European language. Indeed, there is at least one Serbian nationalist article  that displays a map of Gimbutas' Old Europe to support its arguments regarding the Serbs' alleged antiquity.
To put it another way, the fact that modern-day Turkish happens to be spoken on the former territory of the Hittite Empire does not mean Turkish is Hittite or even descended from Hittite , and, similarly, Arabic is neither Ancient Egyptian, nor Akkadian, nor Sumerian. Some Protochronists will cite sources  saying that the Proto-Indo-Europeans originated in the Carpathic area, and claim that this must indicate Romanians are the Indo-European master race, and that Romania is the cradle of civilization. However, the fact of the matter is that the exact location of the PIE homeland is very speculative.
There are many different competing hypotheses as to the origin of the Proto-Indo-Europeans such as the prevailing Kurgan Hypothesis mentioned in the previous section , and it would be trivial for a nationalist to cherry-pick a source supporting any one of these hypotheses in support of the idea that their ethnic group is somehow "primordial. In addition, geographical proximity to the PIE homeland in no way indicates a particular linguistic or genetic connection. For instance, let's say the Kurgan Hypothesis were true. Could the Ukrainians and Russians now living at the location of the Yamna culture be said to have any special connection to the Proto-Indo-Europeans?
Certainly not. The connection to the people of the Yamna culture would be merely geographical. A Turkish nationalist could also cite various sources supportive of the Anatolian Hypothesis in an attempt to demonstrate their theory of Turkish supremacy.
But, naturally, the Turks would have no real relationship with whatever people happened to live there thousands of years ago. Similarly, even if the Proto-Indo-Europeans originated in what is now Romania, to say that this shows they spoke Romanian or had some special connection to modern-day Romanians is laughable. Romania would merely happen to be located on the spot where the Proto-Indo-Europeans once lived. Indeed, the Germans, Hungarians, Slavs, and other ethnic groups of Romania would have just as much to do with the Proto-Indo-Europeans as Romanians: That is, virtually nothing at all.
Salt is essential for the human body; it cannot survive without sodium. Animals will sometimes go hundreds of miles to lick salt. Thousands of years ago, when mobility and transportation were limited, human populations must have centered around a source of salt to be able to survive. And the only region where salt can be found above-ground is Romania. In the neighboring countries, there is no salt. Serbia has no salt whatsoever, it imports Carpathian salt; Bulgaria and Hungary likewise. In fact, "I read somewhere that" the Hungarians conquered the Carpathian Basin in order to gain access to its salt resources.
Also, in response to a question as to whether such salt sources might exist in Asia, "I've looked all over at the Chinese border and found no above-ground salt there either.
And with what tools? Clearly, Romania is the only place the Indo-Europeans could have originated.