Talk:Orban

Orban was Hungarian guild master

• 1. IMPORTANT! : Contemporary sources mention only that he was Orban of/from Hungary
• 2. Orban is a very frequent family name in Hungary.
• 3. Vallachia and Moldavia were mostly a late nomadic shepherd society
• 4. Metallurgy didn't exist in medieval Wallachia or Moldova, therefore they had to import all metal tools equipments from other countries.
• 5. He lived in city of Brasso, Romanians weren't allowed to enter royal cities of medieval Hungarian Kingdom.--Bornder (talk) 10:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

• 1. Yes, he was a Walllachian from Brasov, Hungary
• 2. Yes. So what?
• 3. No comment
• 4. Even if it is true, it is irrelevant in this context
• 5. Guess in what city the Romanian printer Coresi was living. Not to say that the Rrgent of Hungary himself, John Hunyadi was a Romanian.

79.117.217.39 (talk) 10:24, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Wrong, Crosei wasn't medieval printer, therefore he couldn't live in medieval Brasso. Romanians printed books only in the second half of 16th century. (In vallachia and Moldavia the book printing was estabilished much later.) John Hunyadi was semi romanian (from his paternal side) but he was not commoner but a nobleman. (Hunyadi's father was court knight of king/emperor Sigismund.) Romanian commoners were not allowed to go to medieval cities in Kingdom of Hungary

The simple conclusion is that Orban was not a commoner either 79.117.217.39 (talk) 12:18, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Noblemen weren't guild masters / industrialist, because it downgraded their status in the society. The simple conclusion that juor 3 books are not enough to prove his romanian origin (with a typical Hungarian surname).--Bornder (talk) 12:30, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

First you say that Romanians were not allowed, afterwards you say Romanian commoners were not allowed, what will be next? decide yourself already! Between your original research and those sources, I prefer them 79.117.217.39 (talk) 12:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

There are around 1000 books that call Orbán Hungarian [1] versus the 3 that call him Wallachian [2], hence it is out of question that his Hungarian origin should be mentioned. Koertefa (talk) 10:48, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I have updated the text today. Proper information (author, title, publisher, year, etc.) for the references about his possible Dacian ancestry are still needed, otherwise, these claims will be deleted. See WP:CITE about citation styles. Google search results are clearly not good enough references and even just using google snippets as sources is not satisfactory as they could be out of context. Koertefa (talk) 07:00, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

There are much more books that call Orban German [3] than Wallachian, so it should be mentioned as the second possibility. Moreover, the sources that talk about his potential German ancestry also claim his Hungarian one [4][5], which justifies mentioning these two in one sentence. There is also no reason to put the claim about Laonikos Chalkokondyles in a separate paragraph. Koertefa (talk) 23:59, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Dacian means toponym instead of ethnicity in medieval chronicles

Dacians didn't exist in medieval time, but the medieval territories were often called by their ancient roman names, like "pannonians" (for medieval Hungarians) and Dacia from the eastern part Tisza river + Transilvania. In this term Dacian refer to the ancient territory of the dacia province.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.101.235.109 (talk) 13:38, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Urbanus

in Latin. Böri (talk) 13:29, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Urban word wasn't used by vlachs (ancestors of modern romanians)

URban or Orban familyname was delivered from the latin word for city, it means citizen of a city. "Urban" word was used by medieval Hungarians like the "város" word for great cities and citisens (Urbanus). However, Vlachs (romanians) use the "oraş" word for city, which was copied from the Hungarian "Város" word (means fortfied settlement)

Term of medieval "Dacia"

The medieval Dacian term doesn't refer to Orbán's vallachian (Romanian)origin. BEcause the Dacian origin theory of Vlachs (Romanians) was not developed yet. "Dacian" was a simple ancient roman toponym of the territory, which included Transylvania too. Like Hungarian kings often used "King of Pannonia" title, which is an ancient Roman toponym-based title. Forexample, some Prince of Transylvania (prince Báthory, and prince George Rákóczi) held the title "Prince of Dacia"). According to this medieval term all people until the line of Tisza river of present-day Hungary were called as "Dacian" too.

But remember the ancient latin "Bohemia" toponym of Czech territory, it is based ony the ancient celtic territory in roman times, which is created long before the slavic migration. It doesn't men that czechs are celtic, doe to the celtic migration to westwards.

"Modern Romanian theories ..." - Samuel Sullivan Cox is not Romanian

By the way, Michael the Brave was also called Dacus by Habsburgs: [6].Can you point to a clear ethnic Hungarian called Dacus in medieval documents? 79.117.185.122 (talk) 08:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, everybody was "dacian" (because it didn't mean not more than a simple toponym) until the Tisza river, regardless their ethnicity. All Czechs were called as "Bohemian" which was the ancient Roman name for local Celtic people, regardless that the population identity language changed to Slavic and German in medieval Kingdom of Bohemia. And Hungarian kings were often referred as kings of Pannonia, which was an ancient roman province. An other good example is the latin name of Switzerland Helvetia, whic referred to some gaul tribes (Helvetii) before the germanic conquest. It was used in medieval texts, german Switzerlander were called as Helvets. Some older English books also depicted Dracula as Hungarian, instead of his real Vlach origin, due to the fact that the dracula stories talked about Transylvania which was Kingdom of Hungary until 1918.

The confusion of toponyms from ancient roman age - which were also used unaltered until the modern age, (especially in latin and greek medieval texts) - and the real ethnicity is a seriuos semantical error.

Hungarians are not Pannons and Czechs are not Celts. Nobody had any knowledge that Vlachs romanians were descendant of dacians, because the daco-romanian origin theory was not invented yet. Thus the Hungarians often became automatically pannons, the czechs became automatically celtic, the German Swish population automatically became Helvetii (Helvetia), and Vlachs became automatically dachus in medieval texts...

Dracula was depicted in Bram Stoker's book as a Szekely, not as a Hungarian (they are presented as distinct nations). In the population of Transylvania there are four distinct nationalities: Saxons in the South, and mixed with them the Wallachs, who are the descendants of the Dacians; Magyars in the West, and Szekelys in the East and North. 79.117.167.247 (talk) 09:26, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Székelys are Hungarians. All romanian censuses confirmet that in the region. They always spoke Hungrian lnguage, and originally only a part of them lived in transylvania (eastern székelys) however medieval Székelys from 10-11th century lived in Pozsony county (Bratislava) Szombathely (close to Austrian borders) Zala county (close to austrian border), And Fehér county. Therefore it is an other error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.46.188.254 (talk) 09:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Székelys are different people who were Magyarized during centuries. In Unio Trium Nationum Szekelys were a distinct nation 79.117.167.247 (talk) 09:36, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Magyarized? Romnized? Germanized? Russificized Polonized? etc... There were no such an efforts and ideology in Europe before the era of natonalism and national awakening. For nationalization of other ethnic groups needed state organized compulsory school systems, newspapers theatres etc..... There weren't infrastructure to do that. It is an other anachronism from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.46.188.254 (talk) 09:45, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

A people can adopt a culture and a language spontaneously. See Romanization (cultural) 79.117.167.247 (talk) 09:49, 30 June 2012 (UTC) Don't confuse natural assimilation with forced/planned/state-organized assimilation attempts of modern era societies.

And again: Székely lived in Western Hungary and present-day Western Slovakia in the 10-11th century, and around Esztergom and Székesfehérvár. Szekelys weren't only Transylvanians. The Eastern (or transylvanian) Székelys moved to their present-day territory from Bihar county in the end of 11th century.

Distinct nation? You confused the term of "political nation" with "ethnic nation". Medieval Hungarian parliaments also contained three estates which were also known as "nations" 1. Church, 2. the Magnates (barons and above) the third was the lower nobility(gentry) with the emissary of the royal cities.

Photo caption

How could a gun used in 1453 have been cast in 1464? 49.230.48.136 (talk) 04:56, 19 January 2023 (UTC)