ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
nicetas
Feb 12, 2012 13:49:53 GMT -5
Post by ioan on Feb 12, 2012 13:49:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 12, 2012 14:08:44 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 12, 2012 14:08:44 GMT -5
Actually, yes, I do. Since we have around 300 words left from the Dacians, I speak some of weekly. If I want some cheese, I use the word "branza". I'm glad you brought this up, because linguistics constitute as proof, also; and those 300 words prove our connection to the Dacians.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
nicetas
Feb 12, 2012 14:38:40 GMT -5
Post by ioan on Feb 12, 2012 14:38:40 GMT -5
We also have some Thracians words but the core of the language is Slavic. Your core is Romance so non Dacian. The early Daco-Romanians of Transylvanian did not convert en masse or in any organized way to Christianity, or we would have heard about their bishops at the Ecumenical Councils, and they very well could have been Arians, like the Goths. Nor did Daco-Romanians acquire the religion of the Hungarians, for that would have been allied to the Church of Rome, not of Constantinople. Instead, the Romanian Church goes back to the conversion of the Bulgars. The appearance of "Roumanian" in the Cyrillic alphabet, as well as the influence of Old Church Slavonic, the liturgical language of the Bulgarian Church, on Daco-Romanian, are all evidence of that. After the conquest of Bulgaria by Basil II and the century and a half of rule from Constantinople, the Bulgarian Church was revived by the Vlach Asens, with the Patriarchate at Trnovo. "The Primate of all Bulgaria and Vlakhia" (totius Bulgariae et Blachiae Primas, in Latin) is what the Patriarch called himself. This seat, and that of Russia, were the only independent Orthodox Churches authorized from Constantinople. As Bulgaria declined and Serbia arose, an independent Serbian Patriarchate was established at Peç (Kosovo) in 1346, just in time for the coronation of Stephan Dushan as "Tsar of the Serbs and Romans." Bulgaria, Serbia, and Wallachia, however, were soon all overrun by the Turks. By 1483, in the still, for the time being, independent Moldavia, there was metropolitan established in Suceava for the Romanian Orthodox Church. I have not found yet the year in which this was actually done, but the Romanian Church has been autonomous ever since [note]. The Orthodox faith of Romanians in Transylvania cannot have originated there except directly under the influence of the Bulgarians, who ruled it at the time of their conversion, or because of migration and influence of Vlachs, who had converted closer to the center of Bulgarian power. Once Transylvania passed to Hungary, any influence would have been for Catholicism, which evidently is something that we do not see. www.friesian.com/decdenc2.htm
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 12, 2012 15:25:11 GMT -5
Post by uz on Feb 12, 2012 15:25:11 GMT -5
This place need a "Gypsy-forum sub-section"... say aye.... AYE.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 12, 2012 15:51:11 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 12, 2012 15:51:11 GMT -5
Aye, Aye!
I say: Aye, Aye!
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 12, 2012 15:52:06 GMT -5
Post by uz on Feb 12, 2012 15:52:06 GMT -5
you think the emperror would allow it ?
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 12, 2012 16:03:10 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 12, 2012 16:03:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 12, 2012 16:13:05 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 12, 2012 16:13:05 GMT -5
We also have some Thracians words but the core of the language is Slavic. Your core is Romance so non Dacian. The early Daco-Romanians of Transylvanian did not convert en masse or in any organized way to Christianity, or we would have heard about their bishops at the Ecumenical Councils, and they very well could have been Arians, like the Goths. Nor did Daco-Romanians acquire the religion of the Hungarians, for that would have been allied to the Church of Rome, not of Constantinople. Instead, the Romanian Church goes back to the conversion of the Bulgars. The appearance of "Roumanian" in the Cyrillic alphabet, as well as the influence of Old Church Slavonic, the liturgical language of the Bulgarian Church, on Daco-Romanian, are all evidence of that. After the conquest of Bulgaria by Basil II and the century and a half of rule from Constantinople, the Bulgarian Church was revived by the Vlach Asens, with the Patriarchate at Trnovo. "The Primate of all Bulgaria and Vlakhia" (totius Bulgariae et Blachiae Primas, in Latin) is what the Patriarch called himself. This seat, and that of Russia, were the only independent Orthodox Churches authorized from Constantinople. As Bulgaria declined and Serbia arose, an independent Serbian Patriarchate was established at Peç (Kosovo) in 1346, just in time for the coronation of Stephan Dushan as "Tsar of the Serbs and Romans." Bulgaria, Serbia, and Wallachia, however, were soon all overrun by the Turks. By 1483, in the still, for the time being, independent Moldavia, there was metropolitan established in Suceava for the Romanian Orthodox Church. I have not found yet the year in which this was actually done, but the Romanian Church has been autonomous ever since [note]. The Orthodox faith of Romanians in Transylvania cannot have originated there except directly under the influence of the Bulgarians, who ruled it at the time of their conversion, or because of migration and influence of Vlachs, who had converted closer to the center of Bulgarian power. Once Transylvania passed to Hungary, any influence would have been for Catholicism, which evidently is something that we do not see. www.friesian.com/decdenc2.htmI agree with your source, Ioan. In fact, I once emailed that professor on the issue of Asen; needless to say, as your source confirms, the Asens were Vlach; there seems to have beena Bulgarian-Vlach church (Bulgariae et Blachiae Primas); and Orthodoxy was introduced to Transylvanian Vlachs by Bulgarians or the Vlachs who migrated there. See, we agree, Ioan! Now let's have peace, for we agree!
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
nicetas
Feb 13, 2012 13:58:47 GMT -5
Post by ivo on Feb 13, 2012 13:58:47 GMT -5
Aha, so the sun is about 150 years old.. got it.
Lol
The Bulgarian Empires, particularly the first, were cultural centers for Slavic Europe. These are are recorded facts.
And the truth is, whatever you think you may have inherited from Byzantine culture.. it came to you under Bulgarian influence. As for the linguistics, like I said, study your religious terms and their origins.
No need to get upset, read and learn.
Oh yeaah? Tell me more.
Hahaha they really DO whine a lot.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 13, 2012 17:01:17 GMT -5
Post by Catcher in the Rye on Feb 13, 2012 17:01:17 GMT -5
Vlach means Roman. They are synonyms. One an endonym, other an exonym. Italians were Romans before they became known as Italians, didn't they? Well, Italians were/are called Vlachs. In Polish Wloch means Italian and Woloch means Romanian. In Hungarian Olasz for Italian, Olah for Romanian. Slovakian: Vlach = Italian, Valach = Romanian, etc. Our culture came to us though you? There isn't any Byzantine culture, that is a word invented in modern time. Your culture is Roman from state called Romania. A state that was until the Savages broke through Danubian frontier not only inhabited but ruled by the Latin speaking Romans living North. That guy Anittas was talking about, knew some things but only had glimpses of the whole picture. What he didn't knew is that before the fall of the Danubian limes and the Asiatic infestation, on the Danube there was a very well developed Christian life, an impressive number of Christian bishoprics. In Tomis for example there was one of the oldest Christian bishoprics. Some of Tomis Archbishops: Gerontius or Terentius, participant at the First Council of Constantinople (381) Saint Theotimos I (390-407) Timotheus, participant at the First Council of Ephesus (431) John I (448) Alexander, participant at the Council of Chalcedon (451) Theotimos II (457) Peter (c. 470-496)After that Tomis was reorganised as a Metropolitan bishopric, these are two of the bishops: Paternus (519) Valentinianus (550) Notice the Roman names. There is an interesting decree that give a glimpse of how developed and rich those Churces were. An excerpt dating from 544 AD, from Corpus Iuris Civilis: „We urge the most holy Churches from the cities of Odessos and Tomis to sell some of their buildings for the redeeming of the prisoners of war. Issued on the second of may in the eighteenth year of reign of the emperor and master Justinian”As developed if not more developed was Sirmium, if you look on Sirmium you'll see no less than ten Roman Emperors were born in this city and its surroundings. The city was of utmost importance for the Roman empire and for Christianity, Some of the Sirmium natives and bishops made important contribution to Christianity even becoming saints. As for the Romanian words regarding Christianity: christian = creştin (lat. christianus), church = biserică (lat. basilica), to baptize = botezare (lat. baptizare), cross = cruce (lat. crucem), saint = sânt (lat. sanctus), angel = înger (lat. angelus), pagan = păgân (lat. paganus), priest = preot (lat. prebiter), easter = paşti (lat. paschae), God = Dumnezeu (Dominus Deus), if you watched Niceta's „Te Deum Laudamus/Pe tine Doamne te lăudăm” maybe you noticed „Dominus Deus”, only Romanians preserved this name of God, etc, all the essential vocabullary. When our people gave Roman emperors and so many fathers and saints of the Christian church, the Slaves and Mongolians ate dung in Mongolia or who knows where because no one known where the Turkic slaves came from.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 13, 2012 17:09:01 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 13, 2012 17:09:01 GMT -5
Retard, we bordered the Byzantine Empire. No need for Bulgarian BS.
The Romanian identity specifically under that name is attested by Italian travelers in the early 16th century. You were shown the sources, so shut your mouth!
Bulgaria has nothing to do with Slavic culture. You are Mongols, what relation do you have with Slavs, except that you learned their language? None whatsoever!
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 13, 2012 17:46:32 GMT -5
Post by Catcher in the Rye on Feb 13, 2012 17:46:32 GMT -5
Do you believe these Mongols imagine they invaded Balkans as a civilizing race? It's amazing, really. I think they are sick, nobody can be wrong unless it can't be helped.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 13, 2012 17:59:48 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 13, 2012 17:59:48 GMT -5
Of course they are sick. Nature formed them that way. If you hail from a region where you had to employ unimaginative cruelty in order to survive, your entire constitution as a human being is forever changed. It's a tragedy that European soil must nurture such monsters.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
nicetas
Feb 13, 2012 20:15:08 GMT -5
Post by ivo on Feb 13, 2012 20:15:08 GMT -5
Fellows fellows, relax, calm down, count to ten.
Ok, now, it's obvious that your knowledge is limited. Clearly you prefer to stick to some politically inspired fairytales.. but don't worry, you're not alone, there are several others on this forum who are very much like you.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 13, 2012 22:49:43 GMT -5
Post by Moe Lester on Feb 13, 2012 22:49:43 GMT -5
I find it disgusting how people talk about other countries on this forum. Like this thread for example; it contains things such as: - "Bulgaria has nothing to do with Slavic culture. You are Mongols"
- Do you believe these Mongols imagine they invaded Balkans as a civilizing race?
- Of course they are sick. Nature formed them that way.
- It's a tragedy that European soil must nurture such monsters.
Shameful.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 13, 2012 22:55:18 GMT -5
Post by uz on Feb 13, 2012 22:55:18 GMT -5
you can't expect much from these types of gypsies, maybe a dance if you throw them some change.
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 13, 2012 22:57:07 GMT -5
Post by Moe Lester on Feb 13, 2012 22:57:07 GMT -5
Anittas is a gypsy? Or are you adding to the insults?
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 13, 2012 23:06:55 GMT -5
Post by Anittas on Feb 13, 2012 23:06:55 GMT -5
He's just adding to the insults. The American is trying to fit in by imitating other people's insults. Sad, so sad. Hey, Uz, maybe you should keep to the things that you're informed about. Like Nietzsche, politics and philosophy. Lolz. Bytch, get the F out! Silly dumbass boy. Haha!
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 14, 2012 5:20:28 GMT -5
Post by falansteru on Feb 14, 2012 5:20:28 GMT -5
„Existã o tradiþie la Români, care ne-a fost pãstratã de Dimitrie Cantemir. Ea spune cã: „înainte de sinodul dela Florenþa, Moldovenii, dupã exemplul celorlalte naþii cari îºi trãgeau limbile lor din graiul roman, întrebuinþau literile latine. Dar fiindcã în acel sinod mitropolitul Moldovei trecuse în partea Latinilor, urmaºul sãu Teoctist, diaconul lui Marcu Efesianul, de neam bulgar, pentru a desrãdãcina cu atât mai mult din Moldova sãmânþa catolicismului ºi sã ridice totdeauna tinerilor putinþa de a ceti sofismele Latinilor, a încredinþat pe Alexandru-cel-Bun cã, nu numai sã surgiuneascã din þarã pe oamenii de altã credinþã, ci sã scoatã ºi literile latine din toate scrierile ºi cãrþile, ºi sã întoarcã în locul lor pe acele slavone” [1]. „Legenda este de o mare importanþã. Se vede din ea cã poporul moldovenesc pe timpul lui Cantemir, punea în legãturã o ceartã între biserica latinã care fusese mai înainte la el, ºi acea slavonã, cu schimbarea alfabetului latin în acel cirilic”. „Pãstrarea acestei tradiþii, în o altã formã ºi pe o altã cale, ne va lumina însã ºi mai mult asupra adevãratului ei înþeles. În o carte tipãritã la Buda în limba bulgarã în 1844 întitulatã Tarstvenica, în care se cuprind biografiile domnilor bulgari, autorul ei, raportându-se la niºte manuscripte vechi spune: „S’au însemnat în niºte cãrþi vechi scrise de mânã cã dupã reposarea patriarhului bulgar, Sfântul Ioan carele a ridicat pe Asan la împãrãþie, a chemat Asan dela Ohrida pe pãrintele Teofilact, a luminat ºi a curãþit toatã Bulgaria de eresurile de cari multe se aflau atunci în ea. Dupã aceea a invitat pe împãratul Asan de a trecut în Valahia, sã o cucereascã ºi sã o cureþe de eresul roman, care pe atunci domnea în ea; ºi Asan s’a dus ºi a supus amândouã Valahiile sub stãpânirea sa, ºi a silit pe Valahi, cari pânã atunci citeau în limba latinã, sã lese mãrturisirea romanã, ºi sã nu citeascã în limba latinã, ci în cea bulgarã, ºi a poruncit ca celui ce va citi în limba latinã sã i se taie limba, ºi de atunci Valahii au început a citi bulgãreºte”. tomisthecat.wordpress.com/credinta-adevarata-iosif-ton-marturia-marilor-istorici-romani/
|
|
|
nicetas
Feb 14, 2012 5:42:21 GMT -5
Post by falansteru on Feb 14, 2012 5:42:21 GMT -5
2. DESPÃRÞIREA DE BISERICA ROMEI Încã în anul 860, Arhiepiscopul de Tesalonic era vicar al Papei îndiecezele din peninsula Balcanicã ºi Dacia Aurelianã. Deci creºtinii dinnordul Dunãrii aparþineau de aceeaºi bisericã. Chiar ºi slavii au primit uneleelemente creºtine în forma latinã, cum aratã cuvintele creºtine de originelatinã rãmase în limba lor. (D. Onciul, "Originea Principatelor")Printe popoarele migratoare, din aceastã perioadã erau ºi bulgarii carese stabilesc în sudul Dunãrii.Principele bulgar Boris (852-888) primeºte creºtinismul fiind botezatchiar de împãratul Mihail de la Constantinopol. El primeºte ritul grecesc, având limba slavonã cu alfabetul introdus de cei doi fraþi Metodiu ºi Ciril.Încreºtinarea bulgarilor a hotãrât soarta Bisericii Române.Acest popor care mai pãstra multe obiceiuri primitive, fiind lacomi, jefuiau mereu regiunile din nordul Dunãrii ºi treptat se impuserã, chiar ocupându-le, în timpul domniei Asãneºtilor. Bulgarii având episcopi proprii,hirotoneau preoþii din Vlahia, care au fost rupþi de legãturile avute pânãacum cu Vicariatul de Tesalonic.Treptatbulgarii impuserã limba slavonã în locul celei latine.La început românii au opus rezistenþã, dar bulgarii au aplicat în multecazuri forþa, prin tãierea limbii preoþilor care vor folosi în bisericã limbalatinã.Dupã ce Asan întemeiazã imperiul româno-bulgar (1187-1196), subinfluenþa cãlugãrilor aplicã pedepse grele în provinciile româneºti din nordulDunãrii pentru a înlocui limba latinã cu cea slavonã.A. D. Xenopol citeazã o carte tipãritã la Buda în 1844 în limba bulgarã,"Tarstvenica", în care se cuprind biografiile domnilor bulgarilor. Iatã ce scieaceastã cronicã:"Teofilact venind de la Ohrida a ajuns Patriarh la Târnov ºi a curãþitBulgaria de erezuri. Dupã aceea a invitat pe împãratul Asan de a trecut înVlahia sã o cucereascã ºi sã o cureþe de erezul roman. ªi Asan s-a dus, asupus amândouã Valahiile sub stãpânirea sa ºi a silit pe valahi, care, pânãatunci, citeau în limba latinã, sã lase mãrturisirea româneascã ºi sã nuciteascã în limba latinã, ci pe cea bulgarã. ªi a poruncit ca celui ce va citi înlimba latinã sã i se taie limba. ªi de atunci vlahii au început a citi bulgãreºte."Acest citat este reprodus ºi de episcopul Melchisedec, în "Uricariul III", pagina 107.Istoricii spun cã pedeapsa trebuie sã se fi aplicat cu multã cruzime, cãcia rãmas, pânã astãzi, ameninþarea pentru copii: "Taie popa limba!"Înlocuirea limbii latine cu cea slavonã va avea o influenþã nefastãasupra întregii istorii a poporului român. www.scribd.com/doc/3677457/Episcop-Ioan-Ploscaru-SCURTA-ISTORIE-A-BISERICII-ROMANE
|
|