Sir, regarding your post I'm going to be brief:

You're full of shit!

Thank you

Wally Keeler ) wrote:
: If a Budapest Hungarian moved to Constanta, will his son be educated in
: Hungarian?

	Yes, Wally ? Now Constanta has a Hungarian majority ? Enough to 
justify the creation of a hungarian-language school in Constanta for one 
Budapest Hungarian ? Or is he free to chose between Cluj and Constanta ? 
And, by the way, aren't there any Hungarian-language schools in Cluj and in 
other towns and cities not only of Transilvania, but of the entire Romania ? 
And the same for German-language schools ?
-- 
--

Vlad Romascanu                                      
         '

 (ibokor) writes:
     
     >In my view, it is equally wrong to be proud of or to be ashamed of
     >being Hungarian or of Hungarian origin, for that is an accident of
     >birth. Once place of birth and heritage is not something one chooses,
     >just as one does not choose one's parents. These are facts into which
     >one is born.
     >
     >What one becomes, how one deals with one's heritage, how one treats
     >one's fellow human beings, these are matters where personal choice
     >and responsibility enter, albeit to different degrees under different
     >cirumstances. It is in these matters that one may have cause to be
     >proud or ashamed, or --- more usually --- both.
     >
     >d.A.
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
     
     so there is, after all, intelligent life here on scm.  
     
     especially following the regurgitative, verbal debris emanating from 
     troglodytes such as alex farcas, sorin tuluca, and that loser babbling 
     about the similarity between japanese and hungarians.
     
     how refreshing!
     
     -cristian

Liviu Iordache ) wrote:
>  (Cours 6412) wrote:


>>I don't understand why are you presenting an excerpt from a chronicle
>>as "genuine popular tradition". Is it only because you assume that 
>>Stoica Ludescu used such sources ?
>
>Exactly.

But in this case we are not dealing with "genuine popular tradition" but
rather with an alleged popular tradition filtered through the writings
of Stoica Ludescu.
I would like to insist a little more on this aspect because it looks
important to me. If an historical naration is stamped in some kind of
folklore item it would be very significant. But I think this is not the
case.
I find hard to believe that such a detailed report (using folklore
standards rather than historical standards) could be found in romanian
folklore. In general folklore doesn't record details as where the
residences were, where another branch of romanians has gone (the
reference to those who continued toward Maramuresh), what rivers
they crossed etc.
Second question is why this detailed report preserved for 7, 8, 9 (?)
century has dissapeared in the next 3 centuries.
It is possible that Stoica Ludescu used some kind of the boyar's oral
traditions. This oral narrations could be more likely to preserve the
memory of places they had the right to own.
But it is not possible to trace a line among this oral narrations and
other influences.


>A similar reasoning applies to Ureche's story about the
>founding of the Moldavian state by boyars from Maramures. Contrast
>these two cases with Miron Costin's mentioning of the Dacia Traiana.
>Romanian historians agree that Costin has not recorded a popular
>tradition, he was just strongly influenced by the works of
>Transylvanian German scholars.
>

This proves only that Miron Costin was influenced by the Transylvanian
German scholars. The rest are just suppositions.


>>: proof for the fact that, at least  before the 17th century,  among
>>: Romanians had existed a popular tradition preserving the memory of at
>>: least one migration wave coming  from south of the Danube. 
>
>>: >>>>But in the beginning it was inhabited by the Romanians who came
>northwards.
>>:      So crossing the Danube, they settled down at Turnul Severinului,
>>:      others in the Hungarian country on the Olt and on the Mures and on 
>>:      the Tisza, going as far as Maramuresh. And those who had settled 
>>:      down at Turnul Severinului went further to the foot of the mountains
>>:      as far as the Olt, others went down on the Danube and filling all 
>>:      places reached the outskirts of Nicopolis. Then, the high-born boyars 
>>:      were selected and of them they chose as their great ban, that is, 
>>:      their head, one of the Basarab family. And the first princely 
>>:      residence was at Turnul Severinului, the second was at Strehaia,
>>:      the third at Craiova. And they ruled over those places for a long 
>>:      time. And in year 6798 since Adam (1290) there was in the Hungarian 
>>:      country a voivode called Black Radu Prince, herzog of Almas and 
>>:      Fagaras, who rose with all his house and many peoples, Romanians, 
>>:      Catholics, Saxons, all kinds of men, going down the Dimbovita and 
>>:      founding a new country.<<<<
>
>>In my opinion this excerpt describes the conquest and colonization
>>of Dacia. 
>
>And your opinion is based on what?


Based on the fact that the "romanians" crossed the Danube in the same
place where romans crossed it and that they "settled" roughly the same
area as the romans did.
Now considering that Stoica Ludescu doesn't give any date between 6798
(1290) and the making of mankind what makes you situate this migration
in the VI/VII/VIII/IX/X/XI century ?


>There is no mention of Dacia,
> no mention of a "conquest" or a war, no mention of emperor Trajan leading
>his soldiers over the Danube, and no mention of the Dacian resistance.

I would try as an explanation the lack of details available to Stoica Ludescu
in describing those remote times. Actually it is quite the beginning
of his chronicle isn'it ?
As for the fact that he doesn't mention a "conquest" or a war is worthwhile
to point out that he also doesn't mention a war or a conquest when Black
Radu Prince has gone down on the Dimbovita and founded a "new country".
From his report it looks like the "wallachs" already had their leader,
the Ban. Did he simply accepted that someone from elsewhere found a new
country ? I can't believe that.

>
>
>>It is striking how the crossing of the Danube and the first
>>"settlement" at Turnu Severin is associated. Isn't at Turnu Severin where 
>>Appolodor of Damascus build for the romans the famous bridge ?
>
>The bridge of the Emperor Trajan is also mentioned by Constantine
>Prophyrogenitus. This is why nothing is striking about the fact that
>the people, who later elected a Basarab as their ruler, crossed the
>Danube at Turnul Severinului.  Hamza Pasa also crossed the Danube at
>Turnul Severin an he was not Emperor Trajan.
>
>>So yes, romanians ancestors crossed the Danube from south to north.
>>But those ancestors were the romans.
>
>Actually, they were already "Ruma~ni" when they crossed the Danube.


"Ruma~ni" looks pretty close to "Romani" (romans).

Another inconsitency that I think of when you are suggesting that we 
are dealing with migration of romanians instead of the roman
colonization of Dacia is the following.

S.L. mentions that after the crossing of the Danube and the settlement:
"Then, the high-born boyars were selected and of them they chose as
their great ban..."   
How come they had to select the high-born boyars ? Didn't they already
had an elite and a leader that directed the migration ?
How is it possible to organize such a massive migration without leaders ?

But if we consider that S.L is refering to the roman conquest it fits.
After the retreat of the Aurelian administration the local population
was orphaned of their leaders.


>
>>About the "naive" arguments, I don't see them as ridicule as you are
>>trying to make them to look like. The point wasn't only to say that
>romanians 
>>and dacians loved both the forrest. Suppose that a people lived for a long 
>>period of time hidding in forrest or mountains. Do you think that that
>people 
>>would develop a cult for forrests, mountains and nature in general ?
>>Where do you think you will be able to find traces of such cult ?
>>Wouldn't be in folklore ? I think that this traces are very apparent in
>romanian folklore.
>>Now I don't consider that a proof of continuity but just as another
>>finger that points in that direction.
>
>I can think of several hundred nations that love the forest,


Several hundreds ? Did you left anyone out ?
Of course, everybody loves forrest, mountains and the seaside.
But it wasn't this the point. It was about how nature is reflected
in folklore.
And in my opinion the way nature is reflected in romanian folklore
is very peculiar. Nature, mountains, animals, woods aren't saw as
dangerous or mysterious elements. They aren't seen as something
that must be controlled, dominated or exploited. The whole is saw
as a living thing that can communicate and share the feelings of
the people.
Romanian folklore abunds in "foaie verde...", "codru" ("green leaf",
"forrest"), in dialogs with woods, lambs, cuckoos, nightingales.


>  the
>mountain, and the nature, nations that at some point in their history
>sought shelter in remote areas. Despite all these things being
>recorded in their folklore I find extremely difficult to belive that
>all of them are of Dacian extract.


O.K may be I wasn't to clear. No, the fact that some people love nature
doesn't mean they are of Dacian extract. But the fact that a people feels
protected among nature could indicate that they used nature as a refuge
at some point in time.
The next question that arise is when and why ?
A natural answer could be sometime after the fall of the Roman Empire and the
formation of the romanian feudal states.
It is true that even after the formation of Wallachia and Moldova romanians
used forrests to their advantage. And I could think of Vlad Tepes campains
against the turks. But this happened rather occasionaly.



>
>Liviu Iordache
>
>

Cristian Alb

Please, send me all the informations I need, to can get connected.

Personaly, I am very interested on your offert, because I have an old 
mother in Bucharest ( Romania ), and I have to call her often, but I 
can't affoarde-it.

I arrived since two month in Canada, so please send me the conditions for 
enjoing you. I worked in BUDAPEST in GSM mobile communications ( I have a 
company over there ), and there is where I heard for the first time about 
 WESTEL (is the strongest hungarian GSM operator ).

Thank you in advance for your informations.

Sincerly your's, Karoly

WebWalker ) wrote:
: Den 7 Dec 1995 11:00:26 GMT skrev  (Jarmo Ryyti) :

: =>Lennart Regebro ) wrote:
: =>: In article >,  
: =>:says...
: =>(cut)
: =>: Around 0.5 percent then. We wouldn't want 10% finnish speaking schools 
: =>: then, right? :)
: =>: That would however mean that there are a couple of thousand kids going to
 
: =>: school, so unless they are spread out over a huge area (I don't think so)
 
: =>: they should be able to have finnish speaking schools.
: =>
: =>: Anybody knows if there are any Finnish speaking schools?
: =>
: =>There are ten (10) Finnish speaking schools in Sweden. So called
: =>free schools (friskolor) established *by the Finns of Sweden 
: =>themselves.* There are c. 700 pupils in those schools.
:                             ~~~~~~~~~~
: I don't believe that at all. 

My source is the Bulletin of Sweden's Finnish Centralorganization
called RSKL-Viesti.

:Skolverket (the State School Authority) official
: figures (Tabell 1.8C Elever med undervisning i hemsprĺk och svenska som
: andrasprĺk, available as a zipped Excel-file from
: http://www.skolverket.se/skolnet/skolverk/nus/sos951.html) for the number of
: pupils that attend schools where they are taught in their mother tongue, and
: where Swedish is the second (or "first foreign") language lists 9,954 pupils
: in foreign-language schools or classes (out of which about 300 didn't take
: Swedish at all). 

You source do not give any information about the schools where 
Finnish is teaching language. Please, give them in stead of opinions
or assumptions if you want to repeal the information of RSKL.

:The statistics don't list languages, but since Finnish is by
: far the biggest foreign language among immigrants in Sweden, it would be safe
: to assume that at least half of those students are being taught in
: Finnish.....

The Finns of Sweden do not consider their language being a foreign
language in Sweden but " a domestic minority language of Sweden".

Web Walker is talking about the Finnish minority the same way as
the Turks about Kurds. 

So you are referring to the sources which do not mention the vital
information about the schools where the teaching language is Finnish.

Why the official Swedish information is not able to produce such
information if you are referring to it.

A child has the right to study his/her "home-language" as it is
called in Sweden after the school day. There is no legislation
demanding the municipalities to establish Finnish speaking
schools for the Finnish speaking kids in Sweden.


--
# In 1958,The Swedish School Administration repealed directives banning #
# the speaking of Finnish language in Sweden's schools.    However,some #
# municipalities maintained restrictions on Finnish language until 1968 #
#.................aga parem hilja kui mitte kunagi..................... #
                        ---jami---

Hi all!

I read recently that a British charity is sending aid to a
Hungarian Orphanage.

Does anyone know of the conditions in the Hungarian orphanages.
Are things really that bad?

Thanks for any info.

A.M.

Obviously you have not studied Hungarian history.  We were one of the 
most powerful nations on the face of the earth.  Hungarians conquered 
most if not all of the empire.  The Auatrians were only invited into the 
union because their Hapsburg was elected as a King.  Read Hungarian 
History about Vlad the Impailer.  He was a Translyvanian (which means 
Woods Hungarian) that led three thousand Hussars against 66,000 Turks and 
wiped them out.  We are a proud people.  You must be a cross breed.

Laszlo Balogh ) wrote:
: Listen up Budweiser: Looks like you've got a lot of time on your hands.
: I know this shrink in Beverly Hills who may be able to help you!
: However, you've got to finish High School first, he'll only take educated 
: patients. Are you the only one, or does it run in the family... do let us 
: know!
: Dr. Laszlo

Oh lighten up.
It's obvious you're no FUNgarian.

You need a major upgrade to your sense of homour before it turns into a 
sense of tumour.

In article >,  says...
>
">
">And if you come to the Czech Republic, you will notice, that 8 of 10
">of them speaks Slovak...
">Peter
">

     is it because it is more acceptable than if they dared speak
     another language?

Den 9 Dec 1995 08:36:28 GMT skrev  (Jarmo Ryyti) :

=>WebWalker ) wrote:
=>: Den 7 Dec 1995 11:00:26 GMT skrev  (Jarmo Ryyti) :
=>
=>: =>Lennart Regebro ) wrote:
=>: =>: In article >,  
=>: =>:says...
=>: =>(cut)
=>: =>: Around 0.5 percent then. We wouldn't want 10% finnish speaking schools 
=>: =>: then, right? :)
=>: =>: That would however mean that there are a couple of thousand kids going 
to 
=>: =>: school, so unless they are spread out over a huge area (I don't think s
o) 
=>: =>: they should be able to have finnish speaking schools.
=>: =>
=>: =>: Anybody knows if there are any Finnish speaking schools?
=>: =>
=>: =>There are ten (10) Finnish speaking schools in Sweden. So called
=>: =>free schools (friskolor) established *by the Finns of Sweden 
=>: =>themselves.* There are c. 700 pupils in those schools.
=>:                             ~~~~~~~~~~
=>: I don't believe that at all. 
=>
=>My source is the Bulletin of Sweden's Finnish Centralorganization
=>called RSKL-Viesti.

And if the organization for Finnish immigrants say something then that must
automitically be the truth. Hallelujah, RSKL-Viesti has spoken the truth.....
=>
=>:Skolverket (the State School Authority) official
=>: figures (Tabell 1.8C Elever med undervisning i hemsprĺk och svenska som
=>: andrasprĺk, available as a zipped Excel-file from
=>: http://www.skolverket.se/skolnet/skolverk/nus/sos951.html) for the number o
f
=>: pupils that attend schools where they are taught in their mother tongue, an
d
=>: where Swedish is the second (or "first foreign") language lists 9,954 pupil
s
=>: in foreign-language schools or classes (out of which about 300 didn't take
=>: Swedish at all). 
=>
=>You source do not give any information about the schools where 
=>Finnish is teaching language. Please, give them in stead of opinions
=>or assumptions if you want to repeal the information of RSKL.

I would say that official government statistics are more reliable than the
figures given by an immigrant organization that is clearly acting in its own
interest..... Don't try to bullshit us again, Jarmo.....

=>:The statistics don't list languages, but since Finnish is by
=>: far the biggest foreign language among immigrants in Sweden, it would be sa
fe
=>: to assume that at least half of those students are being taught in
=>: Finnish.....
=>
=>The Finns of Sweden do not consider their language being a foreign
=>language in Sweden but " a domestic minority language of Sweden".

Frankly it isn't interesting what the organization for immigrant Finns think.
I bet that that a number of other immigrant organizations want their
languages to be regarded as minority languages too, such as the Turks,
Greeks, Italians, former Yugoslavs, Poles etc etc etc.....

=>Web Walker is talking about the Finnish minority the same way as
=>the Turks about Kurds. 

Please give some examples......

=>So you are referring to the sources which do not mention the vital
=>information about the schools where the teaching language is Finnish.

Do you want figures per school? The names of the schools and the numbers of
pupils? Why didn't you give that information to start with. You simply said
something like "10 schools and 700 pupils". Now you start by giving the names
of the schools, where they are located, and the exact numbers of students in
those schools.....

=>Why the official Swedish information is not able to produce such
=>information if you are referring to it.

=>A child has the right to study his/her "home-language" as it is
=>called in Sweden after the school day. There is no legislation
=>demanding the municipalities to establish Finnish speaking
=>schools for the Finnish speaking kids in Sweden.

You are a liar, Jarmo. The figures I gave you give the numbers of kids who
are being taught in their respective languages, with Swedish being the "first
foreign" language. And what is worse is that you know that it is so but
choose to ignore it....

-- 
  ___^. .^    S.O.Wendel -      ^. .^___
@/   (_@_)                                      (_@_)   \__
 \  _  /    printed on 100% recycled electrons    \  _  /=0=jarmoryyti
  || ||  practice safe government, use a kingdom   || ||

On 5 Dec 1995, eur.co wrote:

> Hello Csaba,
> 
> I couldn't agree with You more.I have been living in the US for 
> the past 18+ years,and  I have found nothing but 
> distortions,lies,lack of knowledge,or worse about Hungary.It's 
> almost as if someone or some certain people are doing this to 
> us.At any rate,it's strange You should bring up Japan as a 
> bloodrelative to us.I lived there for 10 months,and I felt a 
> bond which I never felt toward any other nation.It was many 
> times shocking to me,how a land so far could be as close in so 
> many things to us as the Japanese.As far as magyars and huns 
> go,don't listen to the romanians as how we really are,or where 
> we came from,etc.They are full of hate and lies toward us,since 
> they know they really have no culture or tradition to speak 
> of,and they have stolen Erdely by their being turncoats and 
> scheamers as they are,and they want to pretend now that it was 
> always Romania.It makes my stomach turn.
> Keep the faith.Hungary shall unite again,fate demands it!
> 
> Laci

	And here we are AGAIN. This time, a different type of extremist.

	This excellent sample, , is PERFECT for dissection !

	He is a genuine pre-sophist (pre-relativist) Athenian ethnocentrist. Of 
course, he cannot be proud of his Athenian descendance, since he most certainly
 
ISN'T of any direct Athenian descendance.
	Some may think that chauvinism is excusable. Here, we deal with 
pure violent ethnocentrism, which cannot and MUST NOT be excused; the 
same with the individual.

	Ethnocentrism was quite common in the days of colonisation of the New 
World, Asia, etc, and still is in other parts of the world. Ethnocentrism 
brought wars, and generally death. Ethnocentrism shouldn't be tolerated 
in a global-oriented world; the same with the ethnocentrics.

	This particularily dangerous human being is convinced that the 
country in which he (probably) was born is and was subject to, I quote: 
"distortions,lies,lack of knowledge,or worse", "hate and lies" from the 
Romanians, territorial theft ("and they have stolen Erdely"...), etc. His 
country is THE VICTIM.
	On the other hand, the AGGRESSORS: the Romanians. With, I quote,
"no culture or tradition to speak of", they (the Romanians), "turncoats
and scheamers as they are", dare to "want to pretend now that it was 
always Romania".

	Well, this ethnocentrist, like any typical extremist -- and 
sophist --, sincerely thinks that "might makes right", and he decided to 
prove it to everyone. For him, louder one speaks, righter he is.

	Of course, this person we are studying now (and who actually seems 
to have refused to reveal his real-life name) couldn't have possibly hear 
about the respect the sophists and their kind enjoyed from their 
contemporaries. If he did, he surely wouldn't have comitted the error to 
repeat THEIR errors -- which he actually did.

	Coming back to the ethnocentric rather than the sophist side of 
the subject, it is worth bringing in the spotlight europe77's affirmation:

"they [the Romanians] know they really have no culture or tradition to speak of
"

	Our subject's deliberate, or worse, natural lack of historical
(and other kinds of) knowledge is perfectly visible in the upper 
statement. Of course, he certainly ignores that the Romanian culture and 
tradition goes back at the Roman's conquering Dacia, and that the Dacian 
culture and tradition goes even farther in time. The Hungarian culture 
and tradition, however, as a sedentary nation, begins in the IXth 
century, if I remember well -- however you turn it, it comes centuries 
AFTER the formation of the Romanian nation, millenia after that of the 
early inhabitants of the region, ancestors of the Daces. Traditions going 
back millenia still exist in Romania, including Transilvania (in case you 
wondered...).

	Who can be more mentally, intelctually limited than someone who 
actually dares say that a nation DOESN'T HAVE ANY CULTURE AND 
TRADITION ? This is far worse than saying both that the Earth is flat and 
that the Sun is turning around it... There is not a single nation, or 
group of men, not having their CULTURE and especially TRADITIONS.

	In the case of Romanians, culture is far from being 
insignificant, both materially (sculptures, paintings, artifacts going 
centuries/thousands of years back in time, etc) and intelectually (writers, 
musicians, etc). It could have flourished tens/hundreds of times more 
than that if Romania was independent, like France, but -- unfortunately 
-- it didn't happen. Euro77's 'united Hungary' had its own role in 
the process of cultural brakeing, overall (I don't overlook Western 
influence in Transilvanian cities at all -- "Western" because they were not 
only Hungarians).

	But, again, the ethnocentrist sees matters in a dubiously polarized way.

	I just scrolled through the posting, and I'm sorry it is so long. 
In the ending I'd like to stop a moment on euro77's final statement:

	"Keep the faith.Hungary shall unite again,fate demands it!"

	Well, looks like euro has special access to fate's files and future 
projects... Or he probably is a prophet also, besides his being an
ethno-cultural-centrist sophist. Well, euro77, why don't you conquer the 
whole world. After all, who knows if the first human wasn't a Hungarian ?

	Ooops, but what if he was a Romanian ?

	Have a day, euro77. And practice Buddhism if you want to 
compensate for your own ethno-cultural-centrism. Ma foi, you don't 
deserve to live in this century.

--

Vlad Romascanu                                      
         '
_[E_O_Msg]_____________________________________________________________________

Hello,
 
If You're interested in the history of the biggest pre-war Hungarian
motorbike manufacturer, Meray (who also did some experiments with cars), 
please check out http://www.team.net/www/ktud/meray.html
 
It's the first part of a series, which will describe the history of the
Hungarian motorization.
 
Regards,
 
Paul


--
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Negyesi, H-1462 Budapest, P.O. Box 503, HUNGARY
KTUD Specialty car archive: 
ftp://ftp.team.net/ktud/ 	http://www.team.net/www/ktud/

Whaat? (Mihai Golescu) wrote:
>Sire, I have to admit that you have your mind stuck on the flag ban law in 
>Romania. Is there anything else your mind can think of? In your answer to my 
>posting, you gave the example of the traffic laws. Hei! Let's be realistic...

I must admit, Mihai, that I am rather stuck on this idiotic flag/anthem 
ban.  In this post-communist era, when Central Europe is trying hard to 
catch up with and re-join the rest of Europe, it is simply amazing to 
find a country so affraid of other cultures that it passes a criminal law 
to ban the display of foreign flags and anthems.

The law itself is just the tip of the iceberg, of course, and hints at 
the deeper problems.  While it's fairly easy for anyone to avoid 
displaying any flag or sing any anthem, but one must wonder just what 
on earth motivates a large number of elected parliamentary deputies to 
dream up such a law, debate it and pass it.  And what threats to 
Romania's very existence are conjured up in President Iliescu's mind when 
he sets his pen to it?  If Romania's leadership is so paranoidly affraid 
of foreign cultures that they feel they need a law like this to protect 
them, what hope is there for normal relations with her neighbors?

Anders Fransson ) wrote:
> (In swedish "Russian" becomes "Ryss").

In Finnish the "swetism" "ryssa" is today something like "nigger" in English.
The word "Ruotsi" = "Sweden" is probably same origin like "Russia" and "Ryss".

The Finnish name for Russia is "Venaja" (a with dots) and probably originates
to Vendis. Finns knew about Vendis when they went by ships in ancient times
to German and Polish coast. And when the first Slavs came to Novgorod level
they were speaking same kind of language.

The Estonian name for Russia is almost similar "Venemaa". If you make a straigh
t
translation in English, you get "Boatland". This is just a warning example
(when reading some wordexplanations in this thread) how easy it is to
make wrong conclusions about the origin of the name.

Jorma Kyppo
Laukaa
Finland