Attention! The music and the video contains Hungarian, Romanian and Saxon elements. So don't start comment wars, and stay away from vampires! Good luck Folks!
Medieval Transylvania, its noble people and its very spirit, they are here in this lovely song! As a mixed romanian-hungarian soul from a samely mixed family, and as a big fan of Arany Zoltán's music, I can strongly feel it! Greetings and love from Satu Mare, Szatmárnémeti, Zothmar, Northern Transylvania!
I see people are still debating on whether Hungarians or Romanians were first, does that really matter in the slightest? Transylvania has a wonderful culture which stands out for one particular reason, which i know some people won't agree with, but there's plenty of evidence of all kinds to back this claim up: it's its multiculturality and eclecticism, Transylvania wouldn't be Transylvania without any of the groups that inhabit it, be it the Romanians, Hungarians, Saxons, Romani, and even the smaller groups that bring a bit of their culture into the mix, making it what it is now and what it always was, a beautiful example of multicultural cohabitation, collaboration and exchange. If we want to preserve Transylvania's culture, we need to ditch all nationalistic derisive conceptions and respect each of its people as an intrinsic part of the land and the culture, without which it would be incomplete.
Hungarians were a minority there though. Together with the saxons. It was nice for the Hungarian nobility who resided in Transylvania but not so much for the Romanian peasants who despite being a majority didn’t have many rights. Lovely music though.
@@BlueSwampyCraft 1495 - hungarians and secklers 55%, saxons: 22%, romanians: 22% In the middle of the XVII. century (Vasile Lupu Moldavian prince data) 33% romanians, 40.45% hungarians, 18% saxons. The romanians became majority in the first half of the XVIII. century parttially due to the massive emigration of the hungarian peasents from Transylvania to the new liberated land from the ottoman rule in 1686, because the peasents taxes (úrbér) were less, than in Transylvania. Is a questionm, that the romanian peasents why did not move to that tarritories (today Hungary, Vojvodina and Banat), You can chek it: www.mtafki.hu/konyvtar/kiadv/etnika/ethnicMAP/001_session_e.html mek.oszk.hu/03400/03407/html/280.html
@Árpád the crown built stuff because they felt the need to legitimise their ownership. They conducted an intense magyarisagion and that is why the percentage of Hungarians were at one point higher that the others. In 1437 Unio Trium Nationum gave advantages to the Saxons, Hungarians and szekelys, the Romanians were always disadvantaged and were preoccupied with maintaining their identity. The Hungarian crown was very aggressive in its policies don’t forget that you came to Europe merely in the 9th century, which for Easter Europe is EXTREMELY late, it was later that the middle of the Middle Ages. You really believe NO ONE was there? Please. There are already several attests small principalities at that time in Transylvania, what Hungarians did is called a conquest. In 1600 Transylvania united with the other two principalities for the first time, without any previous preparation. There HAD to be a basis for this to happen. It’s a very complex matter and there is proof attested by western scholars, but you Hungarians are too biased to care and read only your propaganda. I think history class in your country is cancerous. P.S. when did Hungarians die for Transylvania, don’t make me laugh. Hungarians in Transylvania were mostly nobility or burgeoisie, the true canon meat were the Romanians which were mostly peasants and fought in the front line.
"Transylvania with its individual traditions and history, as well its own very special spirit, had become less and less recognized, by the central government in Budapest, who were all too apt to think of Transylvania as just one of a string of otherwise insignificant provinces. Nothing of its riches, either of historical achievement or individual culture, nor of its real problems, was accorded any real importance in the capital. The Transylvanian spirit was slowly being drained away in the maw of the Hungarian self-sufficiency and at best was ignored. So delicate, so subtle were Transylvania's real problems that it needed muck knowledge and experience to know how to handle them. When the central government did interfere it did so with brutal indifference, usually doing more harm than good." Count Miklos Banffy Thank you! Multumesc frumos! Koszonom zsepen!
@@Snruisy The gif is very accurate, and shows, how the Transylvanian cities were romanized in the last 100 years. It is romanian sourse, not hungarian: arnoldplaton.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/gif1.gif here you are the original article: arnoldplaton.wordpress.com/2015/01/04/romanizarea-oraselor-din-transilvania/
@@wanderlewis8552 It was not 200 years ago, Lewis, it was written only 100 years ago, and that's a lot of time in the history of Transylvania, if you know something about that. Please get your facts straight!
@Kristian Pepaj I think it has many meanings with possible same origin here in Istria west Croatia is in folk legends known as štrige štriguni google Jure Grande I think it comes from Romania some people from Istria have Vlachian origin and in Romania you have famous Drakula so probably in Albania have some influence of Roman heritage, what mean strigoi on albanian?
@@andrei010. but Romanians migrated or at least brought their language from the Roman empire, and only a part of Romania was in the Roman empire for a very short time. So the question remains who lived in Romania before the Romanians?
@@richardrobinson4869 romanians never migrated from the roman empire , the dacians intermixed with romans for a brief moment of time.. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dacia
I believe Gauls spoke celtic languages which are different to Latin. And i thought the Dacians were a minority in Romania, being a conquering aristocracy speaking an iranian language.
@@richardrobinson4869 First it was the pre-indo-european cultures After dacians and celts. While romans conquered part of Dacia many claim that is was only that "a part" some estimate that it was only 1/3 of dacian pccupiad land other more conspiracy priented dacopaths claim that it was only ~12 or 14%. Oh yes an the celts fought with Burebista and lost and they might have been expulsed,genocide or inter-married (more or less by force if needed). Later slavs and nomadic people came,most of them did last much here and disapeared,with the clearl exception of the maguar tribes that have given the szekely and ciangăi(hungarians in Moldova basically) communities to Romania.
