Who were first to inhabit Transylvania?Romanians or Hungarians?Not even chatgpt can give me a clear answer.By inhabit I mean the majority local population, not the ruling aristocracy.
>>534474612Vampires, obviously.
>>534474612>Who were first to inhabit Transylvania?>Romanians or Hungarians?Dacians. So, Romanians, since those are the result of mixed Dacian and Roman populations. The Magyars (Hungarians) came much later.
Balts. The old Dacian and Thracian languages were both unambiguously east Baltic (70% confidence).
>>534474612Romanians sort of. Hungarians come from Steppe. Romanians are descended from Dacians and Pannonians who were taught Latin by the Romans.
>>534474708>Romans are a mix of Dacian and RomaAre they?
>>534474612Tartarians
>>534474612>Who were first to inhabit Transylvania?>Romanians or Hungarians?Does it really matter? jews are going to flood these countries with jeets and niggers like everywhere else, regardless of who was first.
>>534474708You are truely delusional. Dacs were enslaved and when the Romans left they left for good, according to evidence.>>534474612Material evidence show that the area was inhabited by Goths, Gepids, Bolghars and Slavs.>>534474746Partially true. By the time theRomans left, Dacians as a people were no longer. But they do group with Balts.
>>534474612>Not even chatgpt can give me a clear answer.like OMG it must be impossible to find out then, you retarded chatbot idolizing nigger.
>>534474783are you trying to be funny?
>>534474612>The DaciaThey lived in the mountainous region.The country was basically a giant forest in the rest.The Hungarian Empire wanted to expand and create a buffer region against the ottomans, for this hungarians and germans where invited to romania and deforest it and secure the border region.the east and south of romania is basically DACIA (romanians) The coast has some roman mixturethe middle and west used to be hungarian german mix, but during the soviet union 90% of the german left, now its basically romanian.
Salut!>>>/int/221239990>>>/int/221239990>>>/int/221239990
It matters not. The lands of Saint Stephen are not up for grabs. Just as you wont declare the Malmo area an outpost of syria out of brotherly love, it's irrelevant the number of minorities. All (and more) will be restored and the nations who sought our destruction eliminated.
>>534474612>>534475261>>534474612I believe this is the map of the hungarian border. On the far east, is the province of Siebenbürgen. After WW2 it was removed from austro-hungaria and given to romania.
>>534474612Look up the borders of Dacia. They adopted the Latin language from the Romans which eventually evolved into Romanian. The Hungarians arrived much later, and even the Szekelys, the Hungarians in Romania, have been found to have substantially different ancestry than Hungarians in Hungary. They are essentially mixed between Balkan Romanian and Eastern European Hungarian, in line with the Hungarian policy of "Hugarianizing" the Romanian population.
>>534474612Pannonia is part of the plains of Eurasia. There have been nomads coming to this region since forever. Even during Rome the Roxolani lived there
>>534475015cute, you want to repeat 1919 little boy ? this time we'll force feed you some mamaliga to keep quiet
why do you guys use chatgpt when claude is way more autistic?This is one of the most contested questions in Central European historiography, with significant nationalist investment on both sides distorting the scholarship. Here's a honest accounting:The Romanian position (Daco-Roman continuity)Romanians descend from Dacians and Roman colonists who remained in Transylvania after Rome's withdrawal in 271 AD. A Romance-speaking population persisted through the Migration Period, was present when Hungarians arrived in the 9th–10th century, and constitutes the Vlachs mentioned in medieval sources.The Hungarian position (immigration/terra nullius)When the Magyars conquered the Carpathian Basin (895–896 AD), Transylvania was sparsely populated by Slavic groups. Vlach/Romanian speakers migrated northward from the Balkans in the 12th–13th centuries or later, after Hungarian political organization was already established.What the evidence actually shows:1/2
>>534476108Archaeology: Settlement continuity after Roman withdrawal exists but is thin. The Migration Period brought successive waves — Goths, Huns, Avars, Slavs — causing significant demographic disruption. Population density was almost certainly low.Linguistics: Romanian has a heavy Slavic substrate (~20% of core vocabulary) consistent with prolonged Balkan contact rather than isolated Carpathian survival. The absence of Germanic loanwords from Migration Period groups who occupied Transylvania is awkward for the continuity thesis.Documents: The first unambiguous reference to Vlachs in Transylvania is 1222 (Teutonic Knights diploma). The Gesta Hungarorum (~1200) mentions Blacii and Slavs, but it's a retrospective chronicle of disputed reliability for 9th-century conditions.Toponymy: Transylvanian place names are predominantly Hungarian and Slavic in origin; Romanian names often appear as translations of Hungarian ones — which implies Hungarian naming came first in many areas.The most defensible neutral position:Transylvania was sparsely and heterogeneously populated when Hungarians arrived. Some Romance-speaking element may have persisted, but was not dominant. Romanian/Vlach presence grew substantially through migration from the south between the 12th–14th centuries. By the late medieval period Romanians were the majority rural population — but this majority was built through a combination of continuity and in-migration, not pure continuity from Roman Dacia.Neither side's maximalist claim holds up. Romanian nationalist historiography overstates the unbroken thread from Decebalus; Hungarian nationalist historiography understates the evidence for any pre-Magyar Romance speakers. The honest answer is: we don't know with precision, and anyone who tells you they do is doing politics, not history.2/2
>>534474612
>>534475015
>>534476108>>534476125but who are these Vlach-romanian speakers coming from the Balkans in the Magyar hypothesis
>>534475527>Just as you wont declare the Malmo area an outpost of syriasame apply for magyars and panonia
>>534474646>>534474612Romanians
>>534474612>Chatgpt can’t answer so I go on /pol/Humanity is doomed, we are too stupid to live.
>>534474612Avars lived in the area before Romanians or Hungarians
>>534475015cope, but most importantly, seethe
>>534474708>Romanians, since those are the result of mixed Dacian and Roman populations.Kek, good one. Wait, are you serious?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlachs
>>534474612One thing you can say for sure is none of the people who call it Transylvania or something that translates to the same like the hungarian Erdély or the romanian Ardeal are the original inhabitants. Calling it "the place beyond the forest" like that is basically saying "that other place that isn't our home".
>>534474612the historical romanians populated fertile lowland valleys around the danube, it would be retarded to think they existed in the infertile mountains in any numbers 1000 years ago so the region was hungarian back then, but sparsely populated.The Romanian migrations occurred later because hungary was a powerful christian kingdom and Vlachs (romanians didn't exist until the 19th century) migrated there because the ottoman muslims otherwise fursecuted them.In fact the same is true of the serbs on your map, as the Austrians encouraged their migration since Austria and shit.The romanians then wewuzzed about being dacians and flooded the region and took over, the end.
Given how many jeets come in Eastern Europe, it won't matter and in 20 years (You) will see the jeet from Romania calling the jeet from Hungary a bozgor, with gypsies still living on gibs in both countries.
>>534477570and slavs
>>534477918>region was hungarian
>>534478192hungary will change name to Cyganorszag, they accepted gypsie anthem
