Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 84

Thread: Romanian Factions Requierd

  1. #31

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Would Romania fit within the time frame of the mod as some sort of emerging faction?
    Medieval 2: Total Realism Development Team
    Coding & Scripting Lead

  2. #32
    Kavhan Member Kavhan Isbul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pliska
    Posts
    453

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Quote Originally Posted by Russ Mitchell


    and if you know that, then you know who Qoja was, and who he was commanding while in Kaloyan's service, right?
    I know, who Qoja is, but I have to disagree with Istvan Vasary (considering your location it must be his work you are manily relying on) about the role of the Cumans in the battle. While it is beyond any doubt that the Cumans played an important role, by luring the Knights into an ambush, it was the Bulgarian infantry that ultimately destroyed the Latin heavy cavalry in the marshes. Furthermore, I fail to see how this could be a Cuman accomplishment by any stretch of the imagination, as Qoja was acting under orders from Kaloyan, and the whole victory was a result solely of Kaloyan's tactical ingenuity and his ability to put his troops, including the Cuman auxilliaries, to their best use. Alternatively, you can blame the outcome of the battle on the Crusaders, who split their forces (part of their army was in Asia Minor) and then rather foolishly attacked with little knowledge of their enemy's numbers and dispositions. Terrain also played a role. We are getting off topic, but the statement that the Cumans defeated the Crusaders is a gross misrepresentation and one I could not skip.

  3. #33
    Experimental Archaeologist Member Russ Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Texas and Budapest
    Posts
    212

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Not Vasary himself... I have some issues with his framing. I'm much more inclined to run with the actual primary sources describing the battle.

    Though you're right, and Kaloyan's footmen DID play a role in the battle, it's also clear that without the Cumans' ability to force pursuit, the Crusaders wouldn't have split up (though that split is a fairly minor one, as it's clearly indicated that the force doing the fighting has the most and best of the Crusaders' guys). No disrespect towards Kaloyan intended, and the Crusaders clearly were in the wrong to have engaged in the manner that they did...
    Ngata tsukelan mokwisipiak!

  4. #34
    Kavhan Member Kavhan Isbul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pliska
    Posts
    453

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    I completely agree that the Cumans were important for Kaloyan's strategy, but I do not think they were the crucial element. Tsar Boril, who succeeded Kaloyan (after organising his assassination, ironically carried out by a Cuman), tried to pull off the same trick against the Latins in the battle of Plovdiv (Phillipopolis), and the Latins remarkably fell for it again, but this time the Bulgarian foot did not hold and routed, resulting in a defeat for the Bulgarians. I will not argue any further though, because for me history is only a hobby and as the scholar you hold an advanatge (I have never read Choniates and Cleri in full).
    Unfortunately, in the mod there will be no Bulgaria and Latin Empire, but a player would hopefully have the ability to test the Cumans (if their troops are well reconstructed in the mod) against a variety of armies. Considering the Cumans' role in the establishment of the second Bulgarian Empire, it would be nice if they are given missions and objectives south of the Danube.

  5. #35

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Unfortunately, in the mod there will be no Bulgaria and Latin Empire,
    Taking into account the timeframe of the mod 1071-1492, what significant faction might emerge within the balkans? Think as if there was not a faction limit or perhaps several open slots.
    Medieval 2: Total Realism Development Team
    Coding & Scripting Lead

  6. #36
    Experimental Archaeologist Member Russ Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Texas and Budapest
    Posts
    212

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Hi, Abe. Let's put it this way. Kaloyan single-handedly destroys the 4th Crusade.

    Kavhan: the element that I believe to be crucial is the initial engagement the day before. The Latins learn not to chase the Cumans, publicly commit themselves not to do so, and then do anyway. You can't posit that they were total idiots, since they'd just taken Constantinople. That means the Cumans are bringing something to the table that the Crusaders can't handle...

    but I withdraw my headbanging, b/c you clearly know your stuff.
    Ngata tsukelan mokwisipiak!

  7. #37

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Well I get that. I am just trying to figure where to focus our efforts. We may have a chance to modify and potentialy add to the faction list. So I am trying to get a feel for where would be the first places we look to. Not much of a student of balkan history myself. I am much more comfortable with scandanavia and the Iberian peninsula.
    Medieval 2: Total Realism Development Team
    Coding & Scripting Lead

  8. #38
    Experimental Archaeologist Member Russ Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Texas and Budapest
    Posts
    212

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Well, the real issue is that everybody's important to the history of their region. Are the Asenids important to the Balkans? Yes, critically so, just as are the Serbs and the Istrian/Dalmatian city-states... similarly, the Albanians are a pain in the Ottomans' side for years until they're gradually converted...

    To answer your previous questions, though, no, Romania as such is inappropriate as an emerging faction. Though the Vlachs and Moldavians are around, the conception of government is different, and neither becomes anything we'd recognize as "Romania" within the medieval timeframe. (Sorry, but this is established. Even most of the Romanian scholars I know are quick to state this when the state isn't looking over their shoulders.) When it comes to "state formation," the medieval Vlachs are a lot closer to the Welsh or the Appalachian Scots-Irish in mentality than they are to your classic feudal ideal. It's a fascinating region that the TW series unfortunately is ill-equipped to represent.

    So.... The Latin Empire *could* emerge, the Bulgarians and Serbs should DEFINITELY do so, and the Moldavians could pop up as a minor (unplayable) faction very late in the game, as could the Albanians, and rebellions in Wallachia should be common coin as the locals play off all the outside powers against each other. As you can guess from my conversation with Kavhan, the Vlachs, Cumans, and Bulgarians are all VERY cozy with each other (Kavhan, I agree with Vasary on this one), so you've at least got some potential for interesting unit rosters.
    Last edited by Russ Mitchell; 04-04-2007 at 15:45.
    Ngata tsukelan mokwisipiak!

  9. #39
    Kavhan Member Kavhan Isbul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pliska
    Posts
    453

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    It is undeniable that Bulgarians, Vlachs and Cumans were in extremely close relations during that period. As for Vlachs, I belive they were not that different from the Bulgarians (after all, Vallachia was part of Bulgaria for centuries before the Byzantine conquest, and the population there spoke the same language as in Moesia), and the main reason why so many Greek chroniclers refer to the armies of Kaloyan consisting of Vlachs might be as a synonim to Bulgarians with a slightly negative connotation - Greek chroniclers tend to describe their enemies as Barbarians, and often use use any word that may have offensive meaning to their foes. The Cumans are a little more complicated, and there have been speculations (or we should say a hypothesis) that ethnically, they (The Western Cumans at least) were somewhat similar to the Bulgarians, before the latter mixed with the Slavs. Whatever the truth, the quick inclusion of the Cumans into the Bulgarian society and politics suggests some ties. Anyway, this is really diverging from the topic and might cause a riot among our Romanian friends, which is really not my intention.
    It will be interesting to see how the mod handles faction emergencies and the establishment of Crusader states, such as the Latin Empire. I understand this would be tough to do, but I trust in the creativity and ingenuity of the modders.

  10. #40

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Of course, this is all assuming that MTR manage to increase the faction limit, otherwise they seem definite about their choice. It would be a shame if Bulgaria never gets properly represented, but if the faction limit doesnt increase it looks like they will remain in the dark.
    For his betrayal, his eyes were gouged out and molten lead poured in his ears...

  11. #41

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    ...otherwise they seem definite about their choice.
    I think its pretty safe to say that faction choices will not be definite until we move into beta testing. We are taking a fresh look at who should be playable and who should be either emerging or represented as a minor faction.
    Medieval 2: Total Realism Development Team
    Coding & Scripting Lead

  12. #42
    Member Member Boyar Karhunkynsi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    A metal gig near you!
    Posts
    31

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    I think people are missing the point of rebel factions.

    A rebel faction is there to indicate a people that played an important part in history, but did not expand its influence over the surrounding area. It denotes a nation that was about looking after themselves rather than forming an Empire.

    So, by this we can see that every nation that significantly invaded another people or place for a economic, social, religious or political reason(s) should be a playable faction (For a a unified group of states/regions that did not expand their influence but aided one and other should be a non-playable faction.)

    Which is why Scotland is oft mentioned in games and movies. It did attack and raid England on more than one occasion.

    I like to contribute my two or three or fifty cents.
    "Our ancestors took this land. They took it and made it and held it. We do not give up what out ancestors gave us. They came across the sea and they fought here and they built here and they're buried here. This is our land mixed with our blood, strengthened with our bone. Ours."


    M2TW is too easy; even on VH/VH.
    New Zealand Heathen Pride!
    Blacklodge Brutal

  13. #43
    Experimental Archaeologist Member Russ Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Texas and Budapest
    Posts
    212

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Boyar: problem is, some of these minor factions were a royal pain in the butt to their neighbors. It *hurts* when the Welsh or whoever comes in and kicks the snot out of some market town while carting off anything and anyone who isn't nailed down. The Cumans definitely fit in that category, just like the Scots you describe, and the Vlachs don't own any states outright, but can still be a serious problem if they don't like you.

    Rebels, otoh, don't really do much in the way of expanding, and you can simply waltz around them to your heart's content on the strategic map. In the game, you can wander through Cuman territory to your heart's content. IRL you took your life in your hands any time you crossed their part of the map without local friendship.

    Now, how that circle gets squared? Beyond me: at this point, unless I have a couple projects fall through, I'm strictly an end user.
    Last edited by Russ Mitchell; 04-09-2007 at 23:16.
    Ngata tsukelan mokwisipiak!

  14. #44

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    I agree that Eastern-Eu is not properly represented in most games, as there regions are not historically accurate, presented poorly, and whiteout there natural recourses, but perhaps before you request a romanian faction you should read a bit of history, as romanian was not used in the medieval period, there were wlachs, and later (much later) moldavians - by the way they loved each other like cat and mouse, but one could newer tell witch is the mouse-.
    I can understand that eweryone would like there nation to be included, but hey just because today the map of europe looks the way it looks, it does not mean it always looked the same. See history of europe before WW1 and WW2.
    Just a pointer here: the wictors always writhe there history to there liking, not the other way around. My history theacher thought me to be realistic, as it is easy to write history from a perspective - an extreme example: the Third Reich can be presented as a good, self defending state -.
    Even the term nation did not unite the people, as you can see the history of France, Germany, etc. By the way Germany was not a single sate until the XVIII-XIX - i have no problem whit Germany i`m referring here only because today Germany is a major member of the EU, yet they dont change there history to fit there goals -.
    Sorry to say bet king Stephan the 1 - who was proclaimed a saint - did proclaim, an ruled ower an european roman-christian Hungary that was even recognized by the pope in 1001.
    And it seems you are forgetting the point of this game is ... go back in time, take control of an army and change history ... not replay history.
    "One who knows the enemy and knows himself will not be in danger in a hundred battles.
    One who does not know the enemy but knows himself will sometimes win, sometimes lose.
    One who does not know the enemy and does not know himself will be in danger in every battle."

  15. #45
    Member Member Speiz_Bankurt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    48

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    It would be a mistake to include Transilvania as an independent or a Romanian facton. The province of Transilvania has been ethnically and culturally Hungarian (or Magyar if you will) throughout the entire medieval period. When it was independant for a while, it was only because the rest of Hungary was lost to the Turks and the Habsburgs.

    Otherwise, including Wallachia as a faction may not be a bad idea, I mean they were there and they did fight off the advancing Turks on many occasions.... but of course this is up to the developers of the mod who have to look at game balancing issues etc.

    Also another note; Romanian historians like to hijack Hungarian historical personalities by changing their names and pretending they were Romaninans. Especially if they accomplished something noteworthy. If this mod is intended to be a total realism mod, it would be a good idea to ignore the Romanian version of history of that region as a reference.

    Cheers

  16. #46
    Gentis Daciae Member Cronos Impera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Bucharest, Romania
    Posts
    1,661

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Iancu de Hunedoara was a Catholic Romanian for Zeus's sake.
    His father was Voicu Corbu, the descendant of Ion Corbu, a pretender to Litovoi's Kingdom. He was a Romanian baptised in the Roman-Catholic religion. Why must any Catholic in Medieval Erdely be a Hungarian beats me. Religion is different from ethnicity and Romanian historians knew that.
    " If you don't want me, I want you! Alexandru Lapusneanul"
    "They are a stupid mob, but neverless they are a mob! Alexandru Lapusneanul"


  17. #47
    Kavhan Member Kavhan Isbul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pliska
    Posts
    453

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Quote Originally Posted by Speiz_Bankurt
    If this mod is intended to be a total realism mod, it would be a good idea to ignore the Romanian version of history of that region as a reference.

    Cheers
    Second that!

  18. #48
    Ja mata, TosaInu Forum Administrator edyzmedieval's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Fortress of the Mountains
    Posts
    11,389

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Quote Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul
    Second that!
    Maybe perhaps the Romanian kings should have allied with the Ottomans and leave the Turks to concentrate on Western Europe.

    Remember Nikopole? Remember the thrashing the Crusaders got?
    Maybe perhaps you don't know the history. Mircea the Old said: "Let's wait and see what they will do."

    But nooo, we are Crusaders! Men of God, we'll never get defeated!!!
    You won't, because they were in Heaven from the first moment they engaged the Janissaries.
    Ja mata, TosaInu. You will forever be remembered.

    Proud

    Been to:

    Swords Made of Letters - 1938. The war is looming in France - and Alexandre Reythier does not have much time left to protect his country. A novel set before the war.

    A Painted Shield of Honour - 1313. Templar Knights in France are in grave danger. Can they be saved?

  19. #49
    Kavhan Member Kavhan Isbul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pliska
    Posts
    453

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Quote Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
    Maybe perhaps the Romanian kings should have allied with the Ottomans and leave the Turks to concentrate on Western Europe.

    Remember Nikopole? Remember the thrashing the Crusaders got?
    Maybe perhaps you don't know the history. Mircea the Old said: "Let's wait and see what they will do."

    But nooo, we are Crusaders! Men of God, we'll never get defeated!!!
    You won't, because they were in Heaven from the first moment they engaged the Janissaries.
    Romanian kings, you mean from Alexandru to Mihai?

    And trust me, I know my history, just disagree with mainstream Romanian historiographers, especially when it comes to their attempts to steal and misrepresent the medieval history of their nowadays neighbors.

    Therefore, as far as this mod is concerned, I second Speiz_Bankurt's advice - Romanian interpretations of history are to be taken with a grain of salt, at best, especially when they come from angered teenagers, who start sentences with "maybe perhaps".

  20. #50
    Ja mata, TosaInu Forum Administrator edyzmedieval's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Fortress of the Mountains
    Posts
    11,389

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    What's wrong with the fact that some dukes, like Janos Hunyadi (Iancu de Hunedoara) was born in Alba Iulia?

    Romanian kings, from Basarab I to Mihai the Brave.

    Angered, no. Annoyed, yes.
    We couldn't make our imprint on history because we were always in the middle. We were forced to defend, and we rarely attacked. How could you possibly attack when you got Hungarians, Poles, Mongols, Byzantines, Ottomans and Kievans at your gates?

    Ok, if we take it like this. Why should Bulgaria and Serbia be included? Hungary, ok, because they were important. But why Bulgaria and Serbia should?
    Ja mata, TosaInu. You will forever be remembered.

    Proud

    Been to:

    Swords Made of Letters - 1938. The war is looming in France - and Alexandre Reythier does not have much time left to protect his country. A novel set before the war.

    A Painted Shield of Honour - 1313. Templar Knights in France are in grave danger. Can they be saved?

  21. #51
    Kavhan Member Kavhan Isbul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pliska
    Posts
    453

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Well, Serbia and Bulgaria not only existed for most of the Middle Ages, but both of them suceeded in establishing Empires in the Balkans. Bulgaria actually controlled Vallachia for a large period of time.
    The "Romanian kings" you have listed, first of all, were not kings, and second, not Romanian, for such a notion did not exist before the 19th century.
    You should go and check the Pike and Musket mod, which as far as I know will include Vallachia and Moldova, and starts at a time when these principalties did play a significant role.

  22. #52
    Ja mata, TosaInu Forum Administrator edyzmedieval's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Fortress of the Mountains
    Posts
    11,389

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Since when was Bulgaria controller of Wallachia? Bulgaria had it's expansionist rule when the Asan brothers (ironically, they were Vlachs, and don't negate it...) started thumping the Byzantines. They grew, but they were finally defeated by the Ottomans.

    And while the Bulgars and Serbs were absorbed in the Empire, at least we maintained a small independency.
    Ja mata, TosaInu. You will forever be remembered.

    Proud

    Been to:

    Swords Made of Letters - 1938. The war is looming in France - and Alexandre Reythier does not have much time left to protect his country. A novel set before the war.

    A Painted Shield of Honour - 1313. Templar Knights in France are in grave danger. Can they be saved?

  23. #53
    Kavhan Member Kavhan Isbul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pliska
    Posts
    453

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    The origins of the Assen dynasty are somewhat unclear, most likely were of Cuman origin, and most certainly not Vlachs. One thing is certain - they considered themselves rulers of Bulgaria and tried to prove a lineage to the ruling dunasties of the First Bulgarian Tzardom. There is strong evidence that Bulgaria maintained control of Vallachia at least until the end of Ivan Assen II's reign, and after that the region passed to the Golden Horde, but Bulgarian rulers maintained possession of cities north of the Danube right until the Ottoman conquest. Ivan Shishman, the last Bulgarian tzar, was able to defeat (and kill) Dan I and retake cities on the northern shore of the Danube even though Bulgaria was collapsing under Ottoman pressure. This shows that it was not until the 15th century that Vallachia and Moldova started to play any significant role in the region. I am not disputing the significance of Stefan the Great, but this is in the Pike and Musket scope and time frame, not Medieval Total Realism.

  24. #54

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Quote Originally Posted by Triglav
    I'd say it's mainly because of general ignorance for "lesser known parts of history in nowadays-popular-culture-determined perception".

    For instance...Since the movie Braveheart came out, Scotland was featured in numerous computer games (MTW2 included) though it was really quite an insignificant kingdom. Yet people nowadas have a much better awareness of what may have gone on in Scotland, which didn't really change the course of European history that much, than they do of what went on in the Balkans or the Iberian penninsula, where eventually the spread of Islam was halted, thus resulting in a Christian Europe...

    Kingdoms that may have been players back then, but are less significant today tend to be overlooked in favour of those that may have or may not have been important then, but are ore influential now. Thus a "Germany" or a "France" are featured in most medieval games, though they were as much a collection of warring little states as the Balkans were...

    Good answer.

  25. #55
    Bopa Member Incongruous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    H.M.S Default
    Posts
    2,647

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Quote Originally Posted by Kavhan Isbul
    Second that!
    Third it!

    At the start of this period the Vlach were, in all respects a minor semi-nomadic people. Whereas by the the end of the 11th century the Serbians had proved themselves to be the major Slavoc power. Not only that, but gameplay wise, the Serbian millirtary has some really interesting options. What with thier adoption and adaptation of Magyar, Latin and late Ottoman arms and armour.

    Sig by Durango

    Now that the House of Commons is trying to become useful, it does a great deal of harm.
    -Oscar Wilde

  26. #56

    Smile Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Also another note; Romanian historians like to hijack Hungarian historical personalities by changing their names and pretending they were Romaninans. Especially if they accomplished something noteworthy. If this mod is intended to be a total realism mod, it would be a good idea to ignore the Romanian version of history of that region as a reference.
    Good joke!!! Every nation likes to hijack the history of their country and their region (Hungarians included, Romanians too).

    The province of Transilvania has been ethnically and culturally Hungarian (or Magyar if you will) throughout the entire medieval period.


    Another good joke!!! Culturally yes (the social elite of Transilvanya was hungarian or more exactly catholic, because they were orthodox, the romanian nobles were excluded), but ethnically, NO, the bulk of Transylvania's population was and still is of romanian entichity. Because of their religion, romanian were excluded from nobility, and they were peasants. For more about this you should read the book Ardeal, a romainan land by the american writer Milton Lehrer and especially Gesta Hungarorum by Annonymus (a medieval hungarian official), chronicle of Simon of Keza, Descriptio Europæ Orientalis, Chronicon Pictum of Vienna, about monk Ricardus.

    About a romanian faction in XI century: the first true romanian state, Wallachia gained the independence in 1330 (battle of Posada), the second, Moldavia, in 1359. Before those dates, the romanians north of Danube and Charpatians were organized in little duchies called cnezate or voievodate which payed tribute to the nomadic tribes(cumans, pechenegs, mongols) E.g. Gelu , Glad and Menumorut in Transylvania and Salunus in Pannonia (IX century), Litovoi, Ioan, Farcas, Seneslau in Wallachia (XIII century).
    The area of today Romania should be populated by romanian rebels with armies made of archers and peasants. The largest town in romania should be Campulung, town founded by romanians and germans from Transylvania led by the semi legendary voievod Radu Negru or Negru Voda (XIII century)
    A bulgarian doomination, north of the Danube was a formal one and not a real one. The romanians north of the Danube helped bulgarains led by Asan brothers (they were at least partialy of aromanian origin).

  27. #57
    Experimental Archaeologist Member Russ Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Texas and Budapest
    Posts
    212

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Sorry, Mircea, but you're presenting a serious geographic distortion. Seneslau was a voivode in *Oltenia,* which, just like *Muntenia,* was trans-Carpathian... and had fark-all to do with Hungarian transylvania except in the middle of the 14th century, when certain Hungarian kings decided they wanted to extend their power to exercise more than nominal rulership over the region (and then got his butt kicked in a running mountain ambush).

    Having gotten your history from the unfortunately not-dead-yet Ceaucescu-era "support-this-historiography-or-lose-your-job" narrative is one thing -- I can understand that, having had to engage in some serious de-programming regarding how I teach several episodes in U.S. History that are not at all what students have been taught to believe previously. But presenting minor Oltenian lords as if they somehow have *anything* to do with medieval Transylvania, on the other side of the Carpathians (let alone suggesting that the Vlachs were any sort of serious presence in 9th-century Pannonia), is simply dishonest.
    Ngata tsukelan mokwisipiak!

  28. #58
    Ja mata, TosaInu Forum Administrator edyzmedieval's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Fortress of the Mountains
    Posts
    11,389

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Russ, you cannot deny the fact that more than 70% of Transylvania's population was made of Romanians. The nobility was fully Magyar, but the rest, you have to be kidding.
    Ja mata, TosaInu. You will forever be remembered.

    Proud

    Been to:

    Swords Made of Letters - 1938. The war is looming in France - and Alexandre Reythier does not have much time left to protect his country. A novel set before the war.

    A Painted Shield of Honour - 1313. Templar Knights in France are in grave danger. Can they be saved?

  29. #59
    Experimental Archaeologist Member Russ Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Texas and Budapest
    Posts
    212

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    We can't have this conversation until we all agree to use medieval terms. Romania is founded, and "Romanian" delineated, as a 19th-century concept, and present-day history is simply not relevant.

    To then answer the "I can't deny"... no, I can't, because you're asking me for the square root of negative one. It is, however, *not true* that 70% of Transylvania was ever Vlach in the middle ages... and I don't know the figures after that, because I don't do the early-modern period in any scholarly way.

    I am *not* a Hungarian or Hungarian-sympathizing irredentist. I am a complete stranger who thinks the actual history of your region is fascinating, and who wants to spit after having to listen to Romanian scholars sadly wishing that they could practice their craft without constantly having to toe a 20th-century ideological line.

    But when you say "Romanians," you are using a modern concept (describing people on the basis of a nation-state), rather than a tribal one. Even the folks still defending the Daco-Roman continuity theory (which does have some good points) describe Dacians and then Vlachs. This is not how medieval people thought: you could be a Jasz Hungarian, a Pecheneg Hungarian, a Saxon Hungarian, a Magyar Hungarian, or a Vlach Hungarian. The modern tribalism is a mindset that is just that.. modern. In the middle ages, nobody cared. What they cared about was, to whom did you owe your fealty?
    Ngata tsukelan mokwisipiak!

  30. #60

    Default Re: Romanian Factions Requierd

    Gesta Hungarorum by Annonymus, chronicle of Simon of Keza, Descriptio Europæ Orientalis, Chronicon Pictum of Vienna, monk Ricardus, Decree of Turda of king Louis I of Hungary are historical sources of european or even hungarain origin (Annonymus), not of romanian origin, so your statemant about Ceaucescu-era historiography falls. Or, mayby, those writers forged the history because they knew that they would support the claims of romanians over Transylavania. L-)

    Every nation likes to hijack the history of their country and their region (Hungarians included, Romanians too). Do you agree this statemant, or mayby, hungarians are saints and they do not forge parts of their history???

    But presenting minor Oltenian lords as if they somehow have *anything* to do with medieval Transylvania, on the other side of the Carpathians (let alone suggesting that the Vlachs were any sort of serious presence in 9th-century Pannonia), is simply dishonest.
    About a roamanian(vlach) and slavic presence in Pannonia talks Gesta Hungarorum. But I didn't said that Seneslau had any conection with Transylvania, but Gelu, Glad and Menumortu had (about them talks Annonymus).

    The only serious geographic distortion is yours, Senslau is in Muntenia, Litovoi is in Oltenia

    and had fark-all to do with Hungarian transylvania except in the middle of the 14th century
    Litovoi fouhgt with Hungary in 13 century.

    So, long live Trianon and cheers

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO