[coolasfcuk]

Thanks spy for the info
Well, I never paid too much attention at school, only after graduation i became more interested in the subject - funny ah.

Originally Posted by freddie

I think the point with Romanians (or the tribes from which they descended from), was that they were in the region LONG before anyone else, even Slavs.

But of course, I understand that. WHO is 'anyone else' though? Im not sure if I made it clear, but in Bulgaria's case there was a trible living in 'our' region looooooooooooooong before the Slavs came - the Thracians, who were not part of the Byzantine empire. My point was... if there was the Thracians in Bulgarian region way before the Slavs came ... and who existed next to the Byzantines, why didnt the Slavs settle in the Romanian land just like they did in the Bulgarian and Serbian and so on .... because sooooooooooo many Slavs migrated from the east, they way outnumbered the local tribes (as i said in the Bulgarian example - persentage wise something like 70% Slavs, 10-15%Thracians, 10-15% protoBulgarians - the last tribe to migrate into the region from Asia). I guess there was some Slav influence on the Romanian region, but why NOT in such numbers as the rest of the region??? what stopped the Slavs from setteleing in those lands? because it is clearly NOT simply the fact that there was a tribe living there already, because as said above, there was a tribe living in the Bulgarian region as well ... how about the other regions?
I dont remember how it went with the Roman Empire influence in the region - will look into that, but it is obvious there is something 'fishy' going on with that isolated 'Roman' island in the middle of all the rest of us...

. So god knows where they came from as well.

are you kidding? we are all coming from ASIA! go explain that!