6 ms·

> Though I’m a little confused why there is both the Italian looking type of Romanian and the Dracula looking type. It's self explanatory. Romania was the name

by misinfo2024 2y ago

> Though I’m a little confused why there is both the Italian looking type of Romanian and the Dracula looking type. It's self explanatory. Romania was the name of the Roman Empire, in vulgar latin, starting around Diocletian, and Romanians are descendants of Romans (lierarily colonists from spain, italy, the balkans, and anatolia mixed with what was left from the dacians), as documented by literarily all classic and modern historians starting 80 AD after the Roman invasion of the former kingdon of Dacia by emperor Trajan. Not even Romania's arch enemies dispute that. Over thousands of years, the country was invaded by various peoples, including slavs, hungarians, and mongols - the latter bringing in Roma (Indians) as slaves. Thus the genetic mix and variation in apperance. It feels like this article is classic misinformation and classic british anti Romanian propaganda. Does not belong on HN. Edit: be great if whoever downvotes would actually disprove my comment with facts. I am happy to provide links ranging from Cassius Dio to modern historians to those interested in genuine facts.

pfannkuchen 2y ago
Thanks for the interesting details. I think I had assumed that modern Italians don’t necessarily look like OG Romans, what with all of the blending that AFAIK occurred as the empire progressed. So I wouldn’t personally assume that because someone looks Italian, this is because they originated from the area that is now Italy way back when. Are you saying that OG Romans and modern Italians do look roughly the same?
- misinfo2024 2y ago
  > I think I had assumed that modern Italians don’t necessarily look like OG Romans > Are you saying that OG Romans and modern Italians do look roughly the same? Let me rephrase - the reason you see italian looking romanians is because some romanians are descendants of italics and hispanics. Italians, better yet their ancestors, were brought in along with anatolian greeks, ilyrians, celts, syrians, thraco dacians, semites, north africans, etc as colonists during the first invasion of the province of dacia. The list of legions deployed into Dacia seem to indicate that they have also included some italics and hispanics. The second invasion, during Constantine the Great covered the south of Romania and likely led to another batch of colonists. The north west of Romania, around Maramures, had another batch of italian colonists, "the old romans" (christan romans) that fled persecution by langobards. The final somewhat relevant batch of italians moved to romania around the start of the great italian migration. Having said that, the south of Romania also has significant influence, and a different skin tone, due to the influence of the eastern roman empire, followed by the byzantine empire, and then the ottoman empire. The central european part, transylvania, is lighter in tone due to the presence of dacians, celts, gepids, ostrogoth, visigoths, west slavs, huns, and maghiars. The celtic presence was so intense that celtic villages are somewhat frequently discovered in the region. Fun fact is that a german ethnic was the first to mention the name of Romania, for the territory that modern Romanians inhabit - Martin Felmer, Prima Linae i believe, 1779. Moldavia, including the Republic of Moldavia which was part of the Dacian Province, and Scythia, had a stronger slavic influence and is reflected in people's looks. It also has a strong turkish influence due to the ottoman empire, slavic due to the russian empire, jewish due to a significant jewish presence until the second world war. Then of course, all regions have a Roma influence, as those people, as the article points out - albeit a bit off in regarding to whom enslaved them (Romania was not a country back then, the regions were either Austrian-Hungarian, Ottoman vassals, or in the Russian Empire) - were distributed as slaves throught. Bottom line is that it is difficult to pin point a specific romanian look. But those that look italian look so because of the above reasons. Those that are not "citizens of Rome" even if they arrived hundreds of years ago, look, speak, and think, according to their own culture.

pfannkuchen 2y ago

Thanks for the interesting details. I think I had assumed that modern Italians don’t necessarily look like OG Romans, what with all of the blending that AFAIK occurred as the empire progressed. So I wouldn’t personally assume that because someone looks Italian, this is because they originated from the area that is now Italy way back when. Are you saying that OG Romans and modern Italians do look roughly the same?

misinfo2024 2y ago
> I think I had assumed that modern Italians don’t necessarily look like OG Romans > Are you saying that OG Romans and modern Italians do look roughly the same? Let me rephrase - the reason you see italian looking romanians is because some romanians are descendants of italics and hispanics. Italians, better yet their ancestors, were brought in along with anatolian greeks, ilyrians, celts, syrians, thraco dacians, semites, north africans, etc as colonists during the first invasion of the province of dacia. The list of legions deployed into Dacia seem to indicate that they have also included some italics and hispanics. The second invasion, during Constantine the Great covered the south of Romania and likely led to another batch of colonists. The north west of Romania, around Maramures, had another batch of italian colonists, "the old romans" (christan romans) that fled persecution by langobards. The final somewhat relevant batch of italians moved to romania around the start of the great italian migration. Having said that, the south of Romania also has significant influence, and a different skin tone, due to the influence of the eastern roman empire, followed by the byzantine empire, and then the ottoman empire. The central european part, transylvania, is lighter in tone due to the presence of dacians, celts, gepids, ostrogoth, visigoths, west slavs, huns, and maghiars. The celtic presence was so intense that celtic villages are somewhat frequently discovered in the region. Fun fact is that a german ethnic was the first to mention the name of Romania, for the territory that modern Romanians inhabit - Martin Felmer, Prima Linae i believe, 1779. Moldavia, including the Republic of Moldavia which was part of the Dacian Province, and Scythia, had a stronger slavic influence and is reflected in people's looks. It also has a strong turkish influence due to the ottoman empire, slavic due to the russian empire, jewish due to a significant jewish presence until the second world war. Then of course, all regions have a Roma influence, as those people, as the article points out - albeit a bit off in regarding to whom enslaved them (Romania was not a country back then, the regions were either Austrian-Hungarian, Ottoman vassals, or in the Russian Empire) - were distributed as slaves throught. Bottom line is that it is difficult to pin point a specific romanian look. But those that look italian look so because of the above reasons. Those that are not "citizens of Rome" even if they arrived hundreds of years ago, look, speak, and think, according to their own culture.