Who are closer to the ancient Romans?

Question

I really wanted to know by someone that is knowledgable about history, are the Romanians of Romania closer to the blood of ancient Romans or are the Italians of Italy their present blood?

Answer 1

My degree is in Ancient History and Classical Civilization, so I lived and breathed Romans and Greek for several years. Also, I worked on an archaeology project in Italy for one summer.

Based on what I know, I think it's a close race, but the Italians win by a nose. They are most likely close to equal in their genetic relationship to the ancient Romans, but the Italians have a few more points of connection.

Here are the important points to consider:

-- The ethnic term "Roman" is a complicated one. The early Republican Romans considered their "race" to be Latin -- meaning an inhabitant of Latium, which was the region of central Italy around Rome.

-- Italy was always inhabited by a handful of very different ethnic groups, and these ethnic divisions persisted long into the period of Roman dominance over Italy: There were the various Celtic tribes, Etruscans, Oscans, Latins, and Greeks.

-- South of Rome, the modern day "Italians" are genetically heavily influenced by the Greek colonists who founded cities like Taranto, Brindisi, Naples and Messina. These Greeks became Roman citizens after the Social War and their "Greekness" faded only somewhat and only after a great deal of time.

-- North of Rome, Italians are genetically heavily influenced by intermarriage with the Germans who settled in Italy and ruled starting in the 5th century CE and continuing through to the end of the Holy Roman Empire.

-- Romania was heavily colonized by Romans, especially veterans of the legion. However, it appears that after Roman imperial power faded, Romania became more and more settled and influenced by Slavic people from far Eastern Europe and Central Asia.

-- I had a roommate whose girlfriend was Romanian, and she helped me learn some basic Romanian grammar and vocabulary. I was shocked at how close the language was to Latin. Yes, in some ways it is closer than Italian.

-- However, bear in mind that Slavic languages like Russian have a similiar grammar with Latin: Russian, for example, has no article and is heavily inflected using case forms like Latin. Russian also has masculine, feminine, and neuter genders (unlike modern Italian). So, some of the linguistic similarities could point to Slavic influences.

-- Italian is essentially simplified "Vulgar Latin", the language spoken by the non-noble classes -- or, at least the elites never wrote anything down in Vulgar Latin. So, the differences between Italian and the Latin of Cicero, for example, do not necessarily point to a distance from Roman culture.

-- Also, bear in mind that colonial societies often retain cultural elements of their homeland long after their homeland has abandoned them -- often through artificial means. For example, simply look at how the 19th-century American South retained English idioms that were abandoned in Britain in the 17th century. Note how Israel has resurrected Hebrew as a national language, although most of its founders spoke Yiddish, Polish, or other languages.

-- What I am saying is that the Dacian Romans were extremely conscious of their Roman identity and their proximity to dangerous barbarians just across the frontier. They may have artificially retained elements of Roman culture that exaggerrate their actual Roman ethnic identity.

-- Veterans often married women who were natives of the land in which the veterans were settled. In other words, I would suspect many of these veterans' sons spoke perfect Latin, but their mothers were full-blooded Dacian.

Answer 2

Hi-- I actually know the real answer to this. Here it is:

First, YES, the Romanians are decedents of the Romans (since you already know that's how the country got it's name). It used to be called Dacia until Trajan conquered the people there and created a Roman colony. However, the Romanians are also mixed with Magyar and other ethicities as well.

Second, the Sicilians are decedents of the old Romans, too. The people who make up most of Italy's population are descended from the Etruscans (I used to have a professor who was Sicilian by blood, and he had a running (friendly) insult campaign with another professor who was Italian. This one difference was the crux of their very lively back-and-forth insults).

Answer 3

Romanians are not italians they are gypys ok
Rome is full of culture , Just look ar michelagelo, Da Viinci,
Ancient Rome was not all lust and perscution. For that matter
look at what they did to the slaves in the south all those centuries later I am proud to be from Roman Descent

Answer 4

Technically almost every European country has Roman bloodline in it but the true Romans are considered the Italians.

Answer 5

I dont know of anyone that are like the Romans of old myself.I believe that they persecuted Christians
and that they crusified Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ rose on the third day and this Is our victory In Jesus Christ the risen savior

Answer 6

homosexuals. homosexuality was rampant in those days. and they persecuted the christians who said it was immoral.