ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
nicetas
Feb 20, 2012 23:13:51 GMT -5
Post by ivo on Feb 20, 2012 23:13:51 GMT -5
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 1:52:19 GMT -5
Post by ioan on Feb 21, 2012 1:52:19 GMT -5
Bulgarians are distant relatives to the modern Turks, Mongols, Tatars, Huns, and whatever else is out there. There is no shame in any of that! if the Bulgarians are distant relatives to the modern Turks, Mongols, Tatars, Huns, then you must be their brothers. As Ruse pointed out, its your country where every single turkic people passed from asia to europe... actually there are info on such people, not on you as we all know. I d say you materilized among the Turkic tribes (mainly Cumans - Vlahia=Cumania) and slowly latinized them... The question is: where the hell you appear from and why no one saw you among the turkic people that u absorbed?
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 1:58:21 GMT -5
Post by ioan on Feb 21, 2012 1:58:21 GMT -5
You're right, they passed through, they didn't stayed though, the Mongoloids preferred to settle on the lands of today Bulgaria and Hungary. Biggest fairytale ever that only you buy. Most authors actually mentioned the barbarian tribes - Turkic, German living on YOUR territory. No mass exodus is recorded. Actually very little is recorded about Romania. However one thing is for sure: Vlachs are not to be found in their present ocupation till 12th century!!! However Avars, Cumans (mainly), Uzis, Pechenegs, Bulgars are all recorded among the inhibitants of presentday Romania!!! So we shouldnt count any Vlach principality and with your logic there is no state north of the Danube?
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 6:24:01 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 21, 2012 6:24:01 GMT -5
It's 11th century, you retard. Where have you been in this thread? The Turkic people that passed through our lands mostly left. They wouldn't remain because they had a different religion. The only exception to that are, as you rightly point out, the Cumans; but they remained a minority, obviously.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 7:31:05 GMT -5
Post by ioan on Feb 21, 2012 7:31:05 GMT -5
|
|
elemag
Senior Moderator
Posts: 369
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 8:22:40 GMT -5
Post by elemag on Feb 21, 2012 8:22:40 GMT -5
You see, Ioan, our dear Romanian visitors forget to mention their most significant achievement ever - that they managed to live in the form of cacoon for several centuries thus succeeding to remain untouched by any invading and settling people and emerging from their cacoon as pure blooded Daco-Romans. Impressive!!!
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 10:14:13 GMT -5
Post by Catcher in the Rye on Feb 21, 2012 10:14:13 GMT -5
Cumans fled like rats when they heard the Tatars were coming. Maybe it was easy for them to move their tents. They moved to their Turkic brothers in Bulgaria and Hungary.
Hungarians baptized some of them and tried to establish a Cuman state and bishopric under their control somewhere on the small Milcov river. These ws possible because the Cuman power at that time begun to fade after a series of lost battles. In Romania of today, it seems their camps occupied a small patch of land in south-east. The Cuman Catholic Bishopric was established in 1227 but in 1234 (just 7 years after the establishment of the Cuman bishopric) the Pope sent letter to the Hungarian king that on that land lived Wallachians who have their own bishops and don't care about the Catholic bishopric of the Cumans and even more they attract Saxons and Hungarians in their ranks. He recommended the sending of a Bishop from the Wallachian nation. As a fact Romanians were those that fought against the Tatars around there parts when they invaded. So no Cumans by 1241. The oldest preserved Romanian documents have no memory of the Cumans.
In 1247 Pial del Carpine met somewhere E of Romania with a duke he named Olaha who came with his suite from the court of Batu-Khan when he most likely paid tribute. Also in 1253, Wilhelm de Rubruck saw at the court of Sartak, the son of Batu Khan, the representatives of the Russans, Wallachians and Bulgarians who brought gifts.
IMO, Cumans are much overestimated, but they contributed to the gene pools of the Bulgarians and Hungarians so no wander they hold them very dear.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 11:16:46 GMT -5
Post by ivo on Feb 21, 2012 11:16:46 GMT -5
Bwahahahhaa HOW DUMB are you. Wow. This is a new low; Anittas the Semi-Literate.
Take it easy pussy cat. Save the hard talk for those who actually have a history.
Some were absorbed by Bulgaria, we resettled some throughout Macedonia, hence the name 'Kumanovo'. Others were absorbed by what remained from the East Roman Empire. Some mixed with the Mongols. And even still a good chunk remained North of the Danube.
As for those that settled in Hungary, where exactly did they go? Transylvania perhaps?
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 13:26:45 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 21, 2012 13:26:45 GMT -5
They wouldn't remain not because they didn't want to remain, but because only Christians (and on a sidenote, Jews, too) could inhabit the principalities. Those that converted were of course integrated and such is the case for Buceag, which now mostly lies in Ukraine. The only Muslims that were permitted to wander the lands were merchants and officials. So you see, it is you who are dumb, because you probably thought of your country where the Muslim Turk ruled over you and deflowered your virgins.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 13:29:59 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 21, 2012 13:29:59 GMT -5
Ivo, you don't even know the history of your kinship. If I were you, I would do the honorable thing left to me and do what the Samurai did (I'll rather not be frank and call it by its rightful name). You screwed up in Canada, you've reached an enough advanced age to realize that you're dumb, people look strangely at you, they don't want you there. So yeah, you think Bulgaria will be your haven, but think again. You're too dumb and too unskilled even for Bulgaria. Imagine that! I didn't think it was possible to be too dumb for Bulgaria!
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 13:31:50 GMT -5
Post by ivo on Feb 21, 2012 13:31:50 GMT -5
Ohhh you think the new Wallachian state had that much authority eh.. now I see where your confusion comes from.
And yes, we were ruled by the Ottomans for quite a while, and many Bulgarians were assimilated into their ethnic group.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 13:40:54 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 21, 2012 13:40:54 GMT -5
You retard, this was written in laws in both principalities. If you don't know the circumstances, why do you open your mouth? There was one attempt to circumvent this law by Ottoman merchants who desired a permanent stay, but it ended in bloodshed--for them. So just as they couldn't stay, their Turkic relatives couldn't remain in earlier times, if they were not Christian or willing to convert. Dobrogea became an exception to this, I believe.
Ottomans ruled your sorry ass not for a while, but for half a millenia. Just how many Bulgarian virgins did they manage to deflower during that lovely yoke? I don't want to inflate the numbers. Give me a conservative account. Say, what's the chance of you being the product of such a meeting? I think it's pretty high!
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 13:59:13 GMT -5
Post by ivo on Feb 21, 2012 13:59:13 GMT -5
Written laws? In both principalities? Waaaaaaaaait a minute, according to this: The first written laws in the Principality of Moldavia came about some 4 centuries after the Cumans. And as for Wallachia, a principality that was only formed in the 14th century to have had written laws would have been quite an achievement.. but alas, I know not of any such laws during the time period in question. Feel free to enlighten me. Don't know the circumstances? Open my mouth? Hmm.. I write with my mouth closed. But here's a rather curious question; what do you have in your mouth when you write that disallows it to remain shut? Damn, this really is getting too easy. Still entertaining though.. keep trying.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 14:10:22 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 21, 2012 14:10:22 GMT -5
Yes, those written laws described this rule of the land as it has always been. We also know of these circumstances and how they were dealt with in the conflict aforementioned above.
Now let me about the deflowering practice in Bulgaria! Or do I need to start a seperate thread for that subject? I suppose you're right, it deserves its own thread, doesn't it?
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 14:11:18 GMT -5
Post by ivo on Feb 21, 2012 14:11:18 GMT -5
Please do. I look forward to reading it.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 14:14:52 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 21, 2012 14:14:52 GMT -5
Okay, but I still need your help by providing me with numbers. How many virgins were deflowered by the Ottomans? How many Bulgarians are the product of that unholy sexual alliance?
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 14:18:16 GMT -5
Post by Catcher in the Rye on Feb 21, 2012 14:18:16 GMT -5
Take it easy p**y cat. Save the hard talk for those who actually have a history. But do you have a history? What is your history? The history of the Turk Asparuh and his band? The history of the three Romanian brothers Asan and their Romanian army? Or the history of the Ottomans? In between there isn't much left. How did a Turkic state became Sclavonic? How did a Romanian state or let's say a Romanian-Sclavonic state became only Sclavonic? Rats breed fast, no doubt about it. That when the rats took over, the end was near. There is a very short history you spent not as Turkic or Greek slaves. Eve today it's only because of the Atomic Peace that you still defile the map of the world. BTW, I remembered browsing some time ago through some medieval Moldavian documents and I've noticed that in Moldavia alongside the more numerous Gypsy and Tatar slaves, there were Bulgarian slaves also. I did a quick search and found one document. I'm sure you can understand enough of it and don't need a translation, it's OCS after all.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 14:26:42 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 21, 2012 14:26:42 GMT -5
Yes, Bulgarians were harvested as slaves and their virgin women were deflowered by the Ottoman governors (which included Turks, Albanians, some Serbs and even a Wallachian). Everyone waited patiently for their turn to mount the Bulgarian virgin. The result of this are Ivo and Ioan.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 14:36:24 GMT -5
Post by Catcher in the Rye on Feb 21, 2012 14:36:24 GMT -5
Gypsies, Tatars and Bulgarians... Birds of a feather flock together.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
nicetas
Feb 21, 2012 16:14:25 GMT -5
Post by ioan on Feb 21, 2012 16:14:25 GMT -5
Good you wrote in your slaves language, you proud roms!
|
|