NationMaster - Discussion - Romania Profile

How can you explain the 89% of Romanian ethnics if Transylvania was a "new" territory? Transylvania was independent till 1711 and always had been populated by a great Romanian majority. Transylvania united itself with Romania due to the will of the Transylvania people which were Romanians happy to get rid of the Austro-Hungarian occupation and extreme exploitation. The austrians were so afraid that they banned the romanians to own even horses (under the death penalty - if they bought a horse they were decapitated)!!! May I mention here other barbaric penalties against the Romanians??? Or the orthodoxs churches demolished with the cannons???
When you're talking about Transylvania as "new territory" it is exactly like praising the slavery.
Also "nice" to talk about "centuries" of ottoman “suzerainty” (which didn't exist) but frankly extremely annoying not to talk about centuries of resistance and fight for independence.
Do I smell some anti Romania bias here or what?

Yolanda (Bucharest)
17th November 2006

Romania was never under Turkish Empire suzeranity. And Transylvania wasnt a new teritory that was acquired after WarI. TRANSYLVANIA WAS ALWAYS A ROMANIAN LAND. It was taken by Austrian Empire in 1711 and taken back after War I in 1918! It wasn't a NEW teritory ! After I read it here your brief history of Romania I wonder what's your target?! To inform or misinform the people ?!

Share your thoughts, questions and commentary here

Want to know more?
Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:

Discussion - Romania Profile > Background

One quick question before you continue, thanks!

Which of the following things do you do?