Should Italians and Romanians be considered as Latinos?

Status
Archived
Joined Mar 2016
353 Posts | 0+
In Orbit
Otherwise spare us about dictum "they are revisionists/they are racists/they falsify/they want to show...", and Vaya con Dios! mind your own kindergarden history for Trianon revisionists

But it is true none the less, isn't it? I'm just stating facts. My last post is practically well-known information by many, I was just answering your wacky claims because I noticed that they seemed loaded.

Word of advice, Vaya con Dios! is a gypsy-rock band, by the way.
 
Joined Dec 2009
10,107 Posts | 48+
Romania
Word of advice, Vaya con Dios! is a gypsy-rock band, by the way.

you mean Gypsy Kings? Your knowledge's are impressive in every domain!


anyway, better than that:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQUgtEBbPi4"]www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQUgtEBbPi4[/ame]
 
Joined Dec 2014
8,941 Posts | 991+
Spain
Wrong. It's Belgian !

And everybody knows that Belgian were the bravest amongst Gauls.

So watch it! :D


Funny, you think the same than me.. For you it is not possible to be gypsy and belgian.. for me it is not possible to be Spanish if you are not Celtic or Iberian... there are your words..

Wrong (not gipsies). It´s Belgian !...:) Gypsies arrived to Belgium few centuries ago...but for you, they aren´t belgian (ok, I think as you)...
Gypsies arrived to Belgium sooner than Spain... in Spain, first time they arrived it was June 11, 1447 by the Barcelona Harbour... so.. are they latin...?:) Oh not.. they arrived before to Germany-Prussia-Denmark.. they arrived to Rostock-Lübeck-Hamburg in 1417 and to Kobenhavn in 1433.. so they are Germans!.. but they arrived to England in 1430, Seventeen years before to Spain.. so.. Gypsies are anglosaxons...
If Spaniards and Romanians are Latins... Gypsies are Anglosaxons...:zany:
Regards.
 
Joined Oct 2013
24,148 Posts | 6,119+
Europix
Funny, you think the same than me.. For you it is not possible to be gypsy and belgian.. for me it is not possible to be Spanish if you are not Celtic or Iberian... there are your words..

Wrong (not gipsies). It´s Belgian !...:) Gypsies arrived to Belgium few centuries ago...but for you, they aren´t belgian (ok, I think as you)...
Gypsies arrived to Belgium sooner than Spain... in Spain, first time they arrived it was June 11, 1447 by the Barcelona Harbour... so.. are they latin...?:) Oh not.. they arrived before to Germany-Prussia-Denmark.. they arrived to Rostock-Lübeck-Hamburg in 1417 and to Kobenhavn in 1433.. so they are Germans!.. but they arrived to England in 1430, Seventeen years before to Spain.. so.. Gypsies are anglosaxons...
If Spaniards and Romanians are Latins... Gypsies are Anglosaxons...:zany:
Regards.

You should relax and try to understand a joke now and then.

I'll come back maybe later, as today it's a bit difficult for me to keep calm.
 
Joined Sep 2015
1,711 Posts | 1+
Romania
Last edited:
Funny, you think the same than me.. For you it is not possible to be gypsy and belgian.. for me it is not possible to be Spanish if you are not Celtic or Iberian... there are your words..


If Spaniards and Romanians are Latins... Gypsies are Anglosaxons...:zany:
Regards.

And what if we're looking at a mixed person (like literally 98% of human beings and all of spanish and romanians are) let's say 15% anglo-saxon, 25% celtic, 10% scandinavian and 40% gypsy, 10% middle eastener, who was born in England, spoke english all life and has an anglo-saxon culture and identity?

What's that person? Will you take your pen and notebook out and make the math to see if he ''passes the finish line'' for being anglo-saxon lol?

If you do that with every person in England you will end up telling millions of people (who have no recent ancestor from outside of England) that they're not anglo-saxon and they can bugger off (because they're 60% celtic, 15% anglo-saxon and 25% south-european, for example).

... I'm trying to point out how ridiculous it is to judge what group someone belongs to based on blood percentage, when the concept of ''people'' comes down to language, culture, identity, etc.


Look at modern Spanish and Romanians who are, obviously, a very mixed bunch. They speak the language of the original latins, they have a latin culture, religion, mentality, etc and they have a considerable amount of ''original latin'' ancestors. What are they? Now look at a modern native of Lazio, who has slightly more ''original latin'' DNA than the first two groups. What are you going to do, take your note-book out and start deciding who goes where based on blood % ? lol you're likely to send the Romanian to Greece and the Italian to the Middle East. This would be a funny event to witness.
 
Joined Apr 2012
13,180 Posts | 885+
Romania
Last edited:
But it is true none the less, isn't it? I'm just stating facts.

From where did you get those supposed "facts"? Your way of talking shows that you don't have something of "substance" behind, to say at least.
 
Joined Dec 2014
8,941 Posts | 991+
Spain
Look at modern Spanish and Romanians who are, obviously, a very mixed bunch. They speak the language of the original latins, they have a latin culture, religion, mentality, etc and they have a considerable amount of ''original latin'' ancestors. What are they? Now look at a modern native of Lazio, who has slightly more ''original latin'' DNA than the first two groups. What are you going to do, take your note-book out and start deciding who goes where based on blood % ? lol you're likely to send the Romanian to Greece and the Italian to the Middle East. This would be a funny event to witness.

History craft,

I understand to you but I disagree. Well, no matter we have different point of views. For you, Spain and Romanian are latins because in both countries you can hear languages came from Latin (and Latin came from Indo-European)... and for you it is important.. I understand.. but for me It is more important the biological elements.. I hope you understand... for me a Jamaican can´t be Latin because he was under Spanish Control.. and German because he was under British Control...
For me... Niger is as Latin as Romania (in both countries you can listen "latin" languages).
By the way... Spain is not very much "mixed".. We are not Germans (very much mixed)...that´s the reason because Spain-Finland are the place with much genetical rarities..I think.
If you can see...our arguments are based on different parameters.. for you the language and for me the blood. Languages change very much (and very soon).. today we are talking in Celtic languages, tomorrow in Latin and next tomorrow in Spanish/Romanian/English/Japanese etc etc etc Biological elements are more abiding... I think. Maybe I am wrong but It is what I think...
For me Latin People were the Latin Tribes (Historical concept). In Spain, we have also a non-Latin language, very very old:

Jzioqui Dugu
Guec Ajutu Ez Dugu.
(The Spanish language is based also in this language, in fact, born in the same place).

And yes, you are right... concepts as race, country, nation, people etc are no-scientific and vague, I think,

As conclusion:

For many people, Latin countries are the countries speak in "latin" as Senegal, Madagascar, Angola, Mozambique, Ecuatorial Guinea, Romania, Yugoslavia? etc etc etc
Gemanic countries are Jamaica, Nigeria, Gambia, Ghana, Malawi, also Sweden, UK etc etc etc

For me, there aren´t latin (or Germanic) countries... there were Latins tribes.. 3.000 years ago but not today (as not celts or iberian today).. to use the name Latin is manipulative in 2016 as to use the concept "Magyar", "Bulgar", "Keltoi", etc etc etc The old tribes continue living in our blood but it is not important and we are not that tribes... You are romanian (Not latin) as I am not latin..because Latin tribes dissapeared 25 centuries ago!
The word "Latin" uses today is manipulative and false.. it was invented by Napoleon III.. the French are the only latins in the world today..They invented the concept.. ok.. they must eat it.. not me.. I am not latin and I will never be.
 
Joined Jan 2013
13 Posts | 0+
Last edited:
The word "Latino" means different things for different people.

It's basic meaning is quite straightforward: Latinos are people who speak romance languages that evolved from Latin. From that point of view, yes, Spaniards, Italians, French, Romanians, Walloons...etc., are Latinos.

However, if you try to use the word "Latino" as a racial term, things get messy...

XIX-XX European scholars tended to identify contemporary nations with ancient cultures, (which is dumb, every nation in Europe is the product of a mix of many people and cultural influences): The English, Germans and Scandinavians would be Germanic, the Irish and French would be Celt, the Italians and Spaniards would be Latins, the Greeks would be Greek...etc.

Of course, that is problematic, because the Iberians and Celts (among others) lived in the Iberian Peninsule before the Romans arrived, and the Vandals, Goths, Arabs, Berbers...etc., arrived later... so, are the Spaniards and Portuguese Latinos, or not?

Now with North Americans, it becomes way more complicated. Historically speaking North Americans loved to put people into neat racial boxes: White, Black, Asian, Native American, Arab...etc., and they really, really, really had a lot of trouble accepting that something could be outside their tidy mental boxes. Just look at how people still keep arguing if ancient Egyptians were Black or White, as if everybody had to fit in one of those categories.

People in Spanish-speaking and Portuguese-speaking American countries challenge that worldview. Anglo-saxons and Germans weren't really sure that South Europeans were really White in first place, but, in addition to that, there are mixes of every race in Latin America, and there are a lot of different combinations. That made the brains of the people who were trying to sort everybody in US into neat racial boxes bleed...so they just chose to dump every Spanish and Portuguese people (White, Black, Native American and all the mixes between them) into a common box, the Latino race, which is largely a bureocratic construct, so they didn't have to acknowledge that the world wasn't divided in neat racial categories.

Oh, but there are Spanish and Portuguese-speaking people who are of almost exclusively of European ascentry... No problem, they created the White Hispanic box for those.

So, are Italians and Romanians and French and even Walloons Latinos? The answer is: Your choice. It all depends on what you mean when you say "Latino".
 
Joined Sep 2012
10,340 Posts | 4,400+
Bulgaria
Yes. It's up to every individuals. In our last census we had several martians living among us in my dear motherland. By the way Latino sounds close to Ladino, the Sephardic language.
 
Joined Apr 2015
439 Posts | 5+
Italy
Last edited:
What's up with all these sock puppet accounts with less than 10 posts popping out just to troll people?
 
Joined Jan 2013
13 Posts | 0+
Yes. It's up to every individuals. In our last census we had several martians living among us in my dear motherland. By the way Latino sounds close to Ladino, the Sephardic language.

Ladino is XV century's Spanish/Castillian with the addition of some Hebraic words. Jews were expelled from Spain around then, so Sephardim have kept a purer form of Spanish than Spaniards themselves.
 
Joined Dec 2014
8,941 Posts | 991+
Spain
Last edited:
The word "Latino" means different things for different people.

It's basic meaning is quite straightforward: Latinos are people who speak romance languages that evolved from Latin. From that point of view, yes, Spaniards, Italians, French, Romanians, Walloons...etc., are Latinos.

However, if you try to use the word "Latino" as a racial term, things get messy...

XIX-XX European scholars tended to identify contemporary nations with ancient cultures, (which is dumb, every nation in Europe is the product of a mix of many people and cultural influences): The English, Germans and Scandinavians would be Germanic, the Irish and French would be Celt, the Italians and Spaniards would be Latinos, the Greek would be Greek...etc.

Of course, that is problematic, because the Iberians and Celts (among others) lived in the Iberian Peninsule before the Romans arrived, and the Vandals, Goths, Arabs, Bersbers...etc., arrived later... so, are the Spaniards and Portuguese Latinos, or not?

Now with North Americans, it becomes way more complicated. Historically speaking North Americans loved to put people into neat racial boxes: White, Black, Asian, Native American, Arab...etc., and they really, really, really had a lot of trouble accepting that something could be outside their tidy mental boxes. Just look at how people still keep arguing if ancient Egyptians were Black or White, as if everybody had to fit in one of those categories.

People in Spanish-speaking and Portuguese-speaking American countries challenge that worldview. Anglo-saxons and Germans weren't really sure that South Europeans were really White in first place, but, in addition to that, there are mixes of every race in Latin America, and there are a lot of different combinations. That made the brains of the people who were trying to sort everybody in US into neat racial boxes bleed...so they just chose to dump every Spanish and Portuguese people (White, Black, Native American and all the mixes between them) into a common box, the Latino race, which is largely a bureocratic construct, so they didn't have to acknowledge that the world wasn't divided in neat racial categories.

Oh, but there are Spanish and Portuguese-speaking people who are of almost exclusively of European ascentry... No problem, they created the White Hispanic box for those.

So, are Italians and Romanians and French and even Walloons Latinos? The answer is: Your choice. It all depends on what you mean when you say "Latino".

+1 Very interesting your post and yes, Celts weren´t only in France...but in Spain for 2000 years... and it is the most important fact, from a biological point of view for the Spanish pool (more r1b in Spain than in France, for example). and lot of Celtic culture ruins in Peninsula.

Problem begins when somebody want to classificate...Latins were in the Past.. not today.. so Spain is not Latin as Romanian is not Latin.. as USA is not Lakota! Spain had latin elements in the culture (as England or Italy or Hungary) and in the language..
Celts and iberians are the base of the modern spanish and portuguese people. But, of course, Rome had a great influence in culture and language.
 
Joined Dec 2014
8,941 Posts | 991+
Spain
Last edited:
Ladino is XV century's Spanish/Castillian with the addition of some Hebraic words. Jews were expelled from Spain around then, so Sephardim have kept a purer form of Spanish than Spaniards themselves.

Right again.

Esther Leví (Jerusalem 1920) speaking in Ladino.. the Old Spanish (Castillian) language.. It was the language spoken by the Catholic Monachs and by Cortes and Pizarro.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q323m0RRPU

Ladino (Spanish) also it was spoken in Morocco, Algeria, Tunis, Greece, Bulgaria, Turkey, Albania etc
In Israel, Ladino was spoken by the Israeli Radio.

Israeli TV in Ladino.. Sixties?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1pQ3b5GK3Q
 
Joined Mar 2016
353 Posts | 0+
In Orbit
What's up with all these sock puppet accounts with less than 10 posts popping out just to troll people?

What? A big fat sack of truth text is trolling? Come on. If it seems like i'm denying you or your friends, the right to discuss theories, by shutting it down with truth, i'm sorry.

If you included me in your 'sock puppet accounts', (one can only guess who you mean to be the puppet master), you are incorrect, never had an account here ever, although I did visit this site for research years ago, when it was less Stormfronty.
 
Joined Sep 2015
1,711 Posts | 1+
Romania
I hope you understand... for me a Jamaican can´t be Latin because he was under Spanish Control.. and German because he was under British Control...

Just answer me this. Is an mixed african-american who has 25% germanic dna and 75% african dna, who speaks a germanic language, follows a germanic culture and has a germanic identity, germanic for you?

History craft,

I understand to you but I disagree. Well, no matter we have different point of views. For you, Spain and Romanian are latins because in both countries you can hear languages came from Latin (and Latin came from Indo-European)... and for you it is important.. I understand.. but for me It is more important the biological elements..

You're missing a point I made where our views meet; I was saying romanians and spaniards are biologically descendants of the original latins, even if it's just 15-25%, besides the fact they actually continue the language, culture and identity.
That's the case with the people in Lazio too, so what if one is 25% ''original latin'' and one is 40% ? Is there a finish line? Do you need to score over 30 to get admitted to this club ?

By the way... Spain is not very much "mixed".. We are not Germans (very much mixed)...that´s the reason because Spain-Finland are the place with much genetical rarities..I think.

It depends on what you understand by ''very'' I guess, so I won't go into that.
 
Status
Archived

Trending History Discussions

Top