"Io Mihailŭ, Împĕratul Românilor" - A Michael the Brave Romania Wank

[Gian]

I have one question about the Hungarians though, would they have some status in Romania, or down the road Mihai's successors are going to forcibly Romanianize them?

And I'm not sure if there might be a Hungarian state in the future, maybe limited to the lands west of the Tisa?

 

[Avrorrange]

I have one question about the Hungarians though, would they have some status in Romania, or down the road Mihai's successors are going to forcibly Romanianize them?

And I'm not sure if there might be a Hungarian state in the future, maybe limited to the lands west of the Tisa?

I think the Hungarians would be protected citizens at most,and are assimilated over time.Mihai's plans seems to be to assimilate minorities at all cost,no compromises.

 

[Zagan]

1. Time to change the status of the country I reckon. It's a bit awkward for a great power to be a mere principality.
Given the Germans have taken the lead by declaring their leader emperor unilaterally, I don't think it matters anymore if another power called their leader an emperor.

2. Are Slovakia, Croatia and Greece supposed to be vassals / protectorates / tributaries of any great powers? Would think they would at least call themselves kingdoms, especially with Greece and Croatia given their history.

1. Yes!
On 12 August 1625, on the 24th aniversary of the Unification of Romania.
Not only Germany, Spain / Iberia was proclaimed an Empire as well.

2. They are supposed to be nominally independent countries. Certainly no tributaries, maybe protectorates. Everything will be sorted out at the looming Great Power Conference and by the permanent Great Power Council afterwards.
Yes. Some of the lesser countries will change to kingdoms in a few years.

 

[Zagan]

I have one question about the Hungarians though, would they have some status in Romania, or down the road Mihai's successors are going to forcibly Romanianize them?

And I'm not sure if there might be a Hungarian state in the future, maybe limited to the lands west of the Tisa?

I think the Hungarians would be protected citizens at most,and are assimilated over time.Mihai's plans seems to be to assimilate minorities at all cost,no compromises.

The Hungarians will be "Protected Citizens" and quite difficult to assimilate because they are Catholics. Some of them will be assimilated, but certainly not all.

The Orthodox minorities will be assimilated more thoroughly: the Bulgarians, the Serbs and the Albanians (those who did not convert to Islam)

Yes, there will be a Hungarian State in Transdanubia in 5 years. (I already anounced that in the list of countries at the end of the last chapter)

 

[Voyager75]

The Hungarians will be "Protected Citizens" and quite difficult to assimilate because they are Catholics. Some of them will be assimilated, but certainly not all.

The Orthodox minorities will be assimilated more thoroughly: the Bulgarians, the Serbs and the Albanians (those who did not convert to Islam)

Yes, there will be a Hungarian State in Transdanubia in 5 years. (I already anounced that in the list of countries at the end of the last chapter)

The situation in Hungary will probably resemble that of OTL Ireland. They will cause trouble for the next few centuries (Romania at least needs SOME challenges).

 

[Zagan]

The situation in Hungary will probably resemble that of OTL Ireland. They will cause trouble for the next few centuries (Romania at least needs SOME challenges).

That is very insightful. My plans are somehow similar.

 

[Zagan]

Brussels Peace Treaty Map​

Legend:

Dotted:
- Occupied by France during the First German War (Spanish Netherlands, Lorraine, Burgundy, Savoy, Geneva etc)
- Occupied by Germany during the First German War (parts of Austria, Switzerland, Netherlands etc)

Thick Diagonal Lines:
- Occupied by Germany during the Second German War (the rest of Austria, Switzerland, Netherlands, parts of the territories occupied by France during the First German War etc)
- Occupied by Germany during the Hungarian Crisis (parts of Ottoman Hungary)
- Ceded by Germany during the Second German War to:
--- The Italian Confederation (Ticino Canton & parts of Three Leagues Canton)
--- Venice (parts of Three Leagues Canton, parts of South Tyrol and parts of Carniola)
--- Croatia (Austrian Croatia)
--- Slovakia (parts of Austrian Hungary)
- Occupied by Croatia during the Anti-Ottoman War and during the Hungarian Crisis (parts of Ottoman Croatia)
- Occupied by Romania during the Hungarian Crisis (parts of Ottoman Hungary)

Thin Diagonal Lines:
- Occupied by France during the Second German War but not received de jure at the Brussels Peace Treaty (Piedmont)

 

[Zagan]

Germany after the Brussels Peace Treaty​

Notes:
1. Piedmont is under French occupation, but de jure is a semi-independent Italian State. The annexation of Piedmont by France was not recognized at the Brussels Peace Treaty.
2. The territory in which a Hungarian State ought to have been created (Transdanubia) has been partitioned between Germany and Romania during the Hungarian Crisis.
3. The border between Germany and Romania is a demarcation line and not an internationally recognized border.
4. The Dutch Colonies are in a state of limbo (more about their fate in the following chapters).

 

[Sian]

Question is if not the Danish/German border would be placed slightly further to the south, splitting Holstein in two ... The Southern half was ruled by the Danish king (who at this time was also count of Oldenburg, although that won't matter overly much in this case), while the northern half was ruled by Holstein-Gottorp. Might they not come to a relatively peacful argeement that Denmark get a slice of Holstein in return for accepting the de-facto loss of Holstein-Glückstadt?

Thinking something among the lines of a line roughly going from Fehmarn (or maybe even somewhere just north of Lübeck) to the mouth of Elbe

 

[Zagan]

Question is if not the Danish/German border would be placed slightly further to the south, splitting Holstein in two ... The Southern half was ruled by the Danish king (who at this time was also count of Oldenburg, although that won't matter overly much in this case), while the northern half was ruled by Holstein-Gottorp. Might they not come to a relatively peacful argeement that Denmark get a slice of Holstein in return for accepting the de-facto loss of Holstein-Glückstadt?

Thinking something among the lines of a line roughly going from Fehmarn (or maybe even somewhere just north of Lübeck) to the mouth of Elbe

Denmark was extremely lucky that Germany did not annex Schleswig as well, or even Jutland!
Holstein (or parts of it) was never under question. It has always been part of the Holy Roman Empire, was populated only by Germans and was Protestant. Under no circumstances could a victorious in battle, nationalistic, Protestant, strong German Empire have ceded it to small, defeated Denmark.

The fact that it was ruled by the Danish King meant absolutely nothing for the Germans. In fact, hundreds of German Princes and Bishops (mostly Catholics) lost their thrones during the First German War. King Christian lost the throne of Holstein as well. No big deal. He got over it. He thanked God that he did not lose his life or the Danish Throne as well.

EDIT:
Germany did cede some territories to France, Ticino, Milano, Venetia, Croatia and Slovakia, but these territories were either:
- Catholic and partly (~50%) French (and France was a Great Power and managed to fight Germany to a virtual stalemate)
- Catholic and majority (~80%) Italian
- Catholic and majority (~90%) Croatian
- Catholic and majority (~90%) Slovak

On the contrary, Holstein was:
- 100% German
- 100% Protestant

 

[Zagan]

Help needed!

Can anyone help me with ideas for the flags of the countries?
I am going to need them in the chapter with details about the countries.

1. Sarmatia (Poland-Lithuania): Should probably use the flag of Poland.

2. Germany (300+ German States): ??; Certainly not the black-white-red flag (no Prussia here); Maybe the current flag?

3. Iberia (Portugal-Castille-Aragon): ??; Not the Spanish flag! The King decided to do his utmost to include the Portuguese people de jure and de facto and make them rightfully feel the united country as equally theirs.

4. Britannia (England-Scotland-Ireland): The current flag may be ok.

5. Scandinavia (Denmark-Norway-eventually-Sweden-as-well): The Kalmar Union flag? Or was that a later invention?

6. Italy (Italian-Confederation-later-Venice-Rome-etc): ??; Certainly not the current flag.

7. Slovakia: ??; Is the current flag ok?

8. Egypt: ??; Will be (semi) independent soon.


Any ideas are welcome.
Descriptions should be enough. If you would like to post a picture as well, please make it small.

Thank you.

 

[Caranaar]

Sarmatia: http://www.deviantart.com/art/Flag-of-the-Republic-of-Three-Nations-313994898

Germany: Either this -

Or this -

Iberia: http://lyniv.deviantart.com/art/Flag-of-the-Union-of-Iberia-435007047
http://elmengu.deviantart.com/art/Iberia-Bandera-Nacional-423570967
http://hosmich.deviantart.com/art/Flag-of-Iberia-with-CoA-380098650

Scandinavia : http://www.deviantart.com/art/Scandinavian-Commonwealth-502194244

Italy: http://www.deviantart.com/art/Central-Italian-Union-291371339
http://kurarun.deviantart.com/art/TL-442-Flag-of-Italy-124442521
http://www.deviantart.com/art/Flag-of-Alpine-Confederation-194021313

Egypt:

The rest are fine. Btw if you want a bigger egypt or germany, just tell me .

 

[Zagan]

Snip.

The rest are fine. Btw if you want a bigger egypt or germany, just tell me .

Wow! Thank you very much!

No, thank you, I do not need bigger versions, I can draw them myself if needed. The problem was I did not know how the flags should look like, not the actual graphic editing process.

 

[Zagan]

Important question: What about copyright issues?

Sarmatia - Super! I would like to use it as is, without any changes.

Germany - First variant, definitely. I will use it. The second one has metals adjacent (white - silver and yellow - gold, which is forbidden / discouraged in heraldry)

Iberia - First variant is nice. The second one is hidden and I cannot see it. The third I do not like.

Scandinavia - Not usable, since no Finland, Estonia etc. I will use it as inspiration though.

Italy - Since Habsburg Monarchy (Austria) does not exist any more, variant 1 is not usable. Variants 2 and 3 are good for inspiration but they do not quite fit the bill. I will keep looking.

Egypt - Very nice. I will use it.

 

[Falkanner]

Another suggestion I could make for the flag of Iberia could be a quartered flag, with the Cross of Burgundy in two parts and Aragon's red and yellow stripes in the other two, with Portugal's coat of arms in the center.

Also, that Scandinavian flag has the flags of Finland and Estonia worked into it, so unless they are absorbed by Scandinavia at some point, you should take those parts out of it.

 

[Sian]

Denmark-Norway effectively used the Danish flag for all of their united time ... when Norway was (forcefully) released from Denmark (and subordinated Sweden) they first used the danish flag with the norwegian coat of arms (Golden rampant lion) in the canton and only a few years later the current flag was created (1821). So at least until Sweden gets folded into Scandinavia, at least on the question of flags, its business as usual.

Kalmar Union Flag (or Nordic Flag) was a airy thought of Eric of Pommerania (king in 1400s), and its actually somewhat uncertain if it was ever made, much less flown anywhere), so it'll probably won't be that.

When Sweden joins up, well ... at least to a certain extend I would guess it depends on how that happens. Maybe taking the cultural flag for Scania (Red with yellow nordic cross)


Not sure if Germany would borrow the Nordic Cross

 

[Zagan]

Another suggestion I could make for the flag of Iberia could be a quartered flag, with the Cross of Burgundy in two parts and Aragon's red and yellow stripes in the other two, with Portugal's coat of arms in the center.

Also, that Scandinavian flag has the flags of Finland and Estonia worked into it, so unless they are absorbed by Scandinavia at some point, you should take those parts out of it.

Denmark-Norway effectively used the Danish flag for all of their united time ... when Norway was (forcefully) released from Denmark (and subordinated Sweden) they first used the danish flag with the norwegian coat of arms (Golden rampant lion) in the canton and only a few years later the current flag was created (1821). So at least until Sweden gets folded into Scandinavia, at least on the question of flags, its business as usual.

Kalmar Union Flag (or Nordic Flag) was a airy thought of Eric of Pommerania (king in 1400s), and its actually somewhat uncertain if it was ever made, much less flown anywhere), so it'll probably won't be that.

When Sweden joins up, well ... at least to a certain extend I would guess it depends on how that happens. Maybe taking the cultural flag for Scania (Red with yellow nordic cross)

Not sure if Germany would borrow the Nordic Cross

Good suggestions. Thank you!

1. I will try that flag of Iberia as well to see which one looks better in the end.

2. Yes. The Kalmar Union Flag may be overrated. The Scania Flag might do it.

3. Sweden will join completely voluntarely, because of the Great Power status thing which will prove to be very important soon.

4. Germany actually had in OTL some flag proposals incorporating the nordic cross.

 

[Zagan]

In 1625, Romania was probably the biggest Principality to have ever existed.​

The Imperium​

After the victorious conclusion of the Romanian-Ottoman War, Romania had more than doubled its territory, from 362,000 km sq (140,000 sq mi) to 757,000 km sq (292,000 sq mi), had increased its population from about 3.5 million to more than 6.1 million and had begun to be rightfully considered a Great Power by the other European Great Powers.

Under these new circumstances, the designation of Romania as a mere Principality began to be seen as inappropriate and it was decided to elevate the status of the Country and that of its Ruler.
While a Kingdom (Regat) would have been considered the obvious choice by an Occidental Nation, in Romania the word King (Rege) was seen as foreign and, even worse, equivalent to the title Mihai already had, that of Lord (Domn / Domnitor).
In fact, only a single option remained, that of an Imperium (Imperiu), ruled by an Imperator (Împĕrat). Surely, the distinctions Imperium vs. Empire and Imperator vs. Emperor were at that time in the Occident at best blurry and the Romanians themselves simply did not care as the Romanian language lacked different words for those concepts anyway.


January 1625, Romania

While Mihai had returned to his Capital in yet another triumph and had once more passed through the Triumphal Arch, the Romanian Army had not, as his battle-hardened soldiers were still needed to guard and pacify the still restive New Provinces.


13 March 1625, Alba Iulia

The death of Lady Stanca and Mihai's grief led to the postponement of the Imperial Proclamation, which was rescheduled for 12 August in order to coincide with the 24th anniversary of Romanian Unity.


7 May 1625, The Second Land Reform

All the soldiers who fought in the Anti-Ottoman War as well as the families of those who fell on the battlefields received large plots of land in the New Provinces, setting in motion the greatest human migration witnessed by that part of Europe in centuries.
Almost a million women and children would move to the New Provinces during the following years, joining their husbands and fathers in their new and prosperous households.

This would, of course, fundamentally alter Romania's demographic balance, creating Romanian majorities or at least pluralities in most Provinces.
One can only wonder if this had been intentional or just a consequence of the much needed Land Reform.


17 May 1625, The Nation's Capital Law

The Romanian Senate proposed to move the Capital of Romania to a new location, preferably in the middle of the Country and with easy access to the Danube.
A multidisciplinary comission of geographers, historians, engineers, economists and military strategists was given the task to choose an appropriate location.

Several possibilities were taken into consideration:
1. Sirmium, one of the ancient Capitals of the Roman Empire, the only one on Romanian Soil, now in ruins;
2. Singidun (Belgrade), the Capital of Servia;
3. Panciova (Pančevo), in Temișana;
4. Semendria (Smederevo), in Moesia;
5. Cuvin (Kovin), in Temișana;
6. Columbacu (Golubac), in Moesia;
7. Orșova, in Oltenia;
8. Claudia (Kladovo), in Moesia, in a strategic location in a bend of the Danube near the Carpathians;
9. Turnu Severin, in Oltenia;
10. Dunonia (Vidin), in Moesia;
11. Calafat, in Oltenia;
12. Rahova (Oryahovo), in Bulgaria;
13. Bechet, in Oltenia;
14. Corabia, in Oltenia;
15. Nicopole (Nikopol), in Bulgaria;
16. Turnu Măgurele, in Muntenia (Greater Wallachia);
17. Pojarevacĭ (Požarevac), in Moesia;
18. Craiova, the Capital of Oltenia;
19. a New City, to be built on the banks of the Danube, or
20. leave the Capital at Alba Iulia.

The deliberation would take several years, but archeological work began at Sirmium without delay.

During that time, the multidisciplinary comission was given another task: to find suitable locations for military and commercial Ports on each of the four Romanian Littorals: Black, Aegean, Ionian and Adriatic.
The first to be inaugurated would be:
- Durațo (Durrës), in Albania, on the Adriatic Littoral;
- Preveza, in Epir, on the Ionian Littoral, near the border with Greece;
- Platamona, in Tessalia, on the Aegean Littoral, near the border with Greece;
- Constanța, in Dobrogea, on the Black Sea Littoral;
- Olbia (OTL Odessa), in Edisan, in a strategic location on the Black Sea Littoral.

The port of Portu, destroyed by the Ottomans in 1622, was almost completely abandoned in favour of the much easier to defend Olbia.


8-19 June 1625, The Greek Crisis

The relations between Romania and Greece had been quite frosty from the start for a variety of reasons:
1. Ecclesiastical. The Greek Patriarchy of Constantinople had rejected the Autocephaly of the Romanian Orthodox Church, had declared the Romanians heretics and had excommunicated them en masse.
2. Blood. There was already blood between the Romanian and Greek former subjects of the Ottoman Empire. Before the Romanian-Ottoman War, the Romanians and Greeks had frequently clashed in the Ottoman Empire, priests and teachers had been killed, churches and schools had been burned and members of the Romanian Church had been forced to convert to the Greek Church and vice versa.
There was a general feeling of hatred and mistrust between the two communities, with the Bulgarians, Serbs and Albanians caught in between.
3. Names. Romania had been appalled when the nascent Greek State took the name Basileia ton Rhomaion (Βασιλεία τῶν Ῥωμαίων), i.e. Roman Empire, because the Romanians considered themselves to be the descendants of the Romans with the Greeks being nothing but impostors.
4. Territory. Being unable to capture the Eagean Littoral of Thrace, Romania kept the Eastern parts of Macedonia and Thessaly in order to enjoy the benefits of at least a short Aegean Littoral. The problem was that the Littoral area was inhabited mainly by Greeks, had been promised to Greece and would have assured a future land connection with Salonica and the Chalcidic Peninsula, also tentatively assigned to Greece.
5. Personal. Mihai had an almost irrational dislike and fear of the Greeks. (Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes)

By late May, the situation became so tense that war seemed inevitable.
Romania and Greece began to mass troops at their common border, while negotiations to defuse the crisis were still taking place in Platamona.

The fact that Romania had almost 200,000 soldiers ready to invade while Greece had a total population of less than 500,000 people and only about 25,000 soldiers ready to defend their country forced the Greeks to finally acquiesce to the demands of the Romanians.


20 June 1625, Platamona, Romania

Treaty of Friendship and Good Neighbourhood

I. Romania and Greece vow to live in peace as friends and good neighbours, to refrain from any actions which could sour their relation in the future and to defer any possible issues that may appear between them to diplomacy rather than to the use of force.

II. Greece is a Principality called the Principality of the Hellenes (Πριγκιπάτο της Ελλαδας), or Hellas (Ελλαδα). The Greeks are called Hellens (Έλληνες). No names that could create an unwanted confusion between the Greeks and the Romanians or between their Countries are allowed.

III. The Romanians are the blood descendants of the Ancient Romans, while the Greeks are merely the descendants of the Ancient Greeks which were Roman Subjects and enjoyed Roman Citizenship.

IV. The Romanian Orthodox Church (with the Patriarchal Seat in Alba Iulia) and the Greek Orthodox Church (with the Patriarchal Seat in still Turkish occupied Constantinople) are equal, Autocephalous Orthodox Churches in full communion with each other.

V. The Greek Orthodox Church is the only legal Church in Greece.

VI. In Romania, all Christian Churches, including the Greek Orthodox Church, are free to function under the protection of the State.

VII. All Romanian subjects of Greek ethnicity should be members of the Greek Orthodox Church. An ethnic Greek is understood to be a man who usually speaks the Greek language at home with his wife and children.

VIII. All other Romanian subjects of Orthodox faith should be members of the Romanian Orthodox Church.

IX. Neither the Romanian Orthodox Church nor the Greek Orthodox Church is allowed to proselytize in the communities assigned to the other Church by this Treaty.

X. The Eastern part of the Romanian Province of Thessaly and the Eastern part of the Romanian Province of Lower Macedonia are Greek territories placed under the temporary administration of Romania. These Greek territories will be duly transferred to Greece after the expulsion of the Turks from Salonica, the Chalcidic Peninsula and Western Thrace.

XI. Salonica and the Chalcidic Peninsula are Greek territories under Ottoman occupation. Western Thrace and most of Eastern Thrace will be Romanian territories.

XII. In the event of the total collapse of the Ottoman State, Greece will receive ample territories in Asia Minor which are inhabited by Greeks.

XIII. Romania shall not annex Constantinople itself and the surrounding area. Greece is free to negotiate the future status of Constantinople with Sarmatia.

XIV. All Islands inhabited by Greeks should become Greek territory, including the ones under Venetian occupation, like Crete.

XV. In case of War against the Ottoman Empire, Romania and Greece will coordinate their war efforts under the leadership of Romania.

XVI. Romania is allowed to maintain a naval presence in selected Greek Islands. Romania shall pay to Greece a tax for the concession of the portuar installations.

XVII. No tariffs shall be paid for any goods imported and exported between Romania and Greece. Romanian and Greek merchants and traders shall not be hindered in any way while doing business in Greece and Romania, respectively.

XVIII. Romania and Greece are forever allied. Greece is under the benevolent protection of Romania.

Signed today, 20 June 1625 in Platamona by:
Romanian Plenipotentiary: ............
Greek Plenipotentiary: ............
Romanian Orthodox Church Plenipotentiary: ............
Greek Orthodox Church Plenipotentiary: ............

The Greek Crisis was thus defused.


February - July 1625, Romanian New Provinces

The Greeks, Albanians, Montenegrin Serbs, Croatians, Hungarians and Muslims were pacified.
The long process of integrating the New Provinces into Romania began.

The new borders with the Ottoman Empire, Greece, Venice, Croatia, Germany and Slovakia were marked and secured.
A few small slivers of land were ceded to Croatia since they were overwhelmingly populated with Catholic Croatians.

The Administrative Reform was finished. The newly acquired lands were divided into Județe, Provinces and informal Groups of Provinces. The minuscule Province of Eastern Thrace was probably established only in order to irritate the Ottomans.

A comprehensive population census was thoroughly conducted. While most probably biased, it was nonetheless the most accurate and comprehensive census ever completed in the whole World.
Census data were afterwards published and used for purposes of taxation, military conscription, building of schools and churches, economic development and statistics.

[Census data tables are already posted.]

According to the 1625 census:

- Romania had 6,125,000 inhabitants, of which 3,673,000 in the Old Provinces (60%) and 2,452,000 in the New Provinces (40%).

- By Ethnicity, there were:
--- 3,577,000 Romanians (58%), of which 2,746,000 in the Old Provinces (75%) and 831,000 in the New Provinces (34%).
--- 450,000 Hungarians (7%)
--- 372,000 Serbs (6%)
--- 339,000 Bulgarians (6%)
--- 307,000 Germans (5%)
--- 227,000 Szeklers (4%)
--- 223,000 Greeks (4%)
--- 199,000 Albanians (3%)
--- 143,000 Turks (2%)
--- 125,000 Croats (2%)
--- 63,000 Ruthenians (1%)
--- 16,000 Tatars
--- 10,000 Poles
--- 10,000 Jews
--- 6,000 Armenians
--- 5,000 Slovaks
--- 3,000 Italians
--- 1,000 Georgians
--- 39,000 Others / Unknown / Undefined

- By Religion, there were:
--- 3,972,000 Romanian Orthodoxes (65%)
--- 902,000 Roman Catholics (15%)
--- 718,000 Greek Orthodoxes (12%)
--- 282,000 Lutherans (5%)
--- 227,000 Muslims (4%)
--- 24,000 Others (Russian Orthodoxes, Armenian Orthodoxes, Georgian Orthodoxes, Calvinists, Jews, Others)

- By Status / Occupation, there were:
--- 123,000 Nobles and Clergy (2%)
--- 473,000 Crafters and Traders (8%)
--- 5,469,000 Peasants and Shepards (89%)
--- 60,000 Others (1%)

- By Citizenship, there were:
--- 783,000 Romanian Citizens (13%)
--- 604,000 Protected Citizens (10%), mainly Germans, Szeklers and Hungarians
--- 4,687,000 Non-Citizens (77%)
--- 51,000 Foreigners (1%)

The proportions of nobles, clergymen, crafters, traders, Romanian Citizens and Protected Citizens were much higher in the Old Provinces than in the New Provinces.

[For complete and detailed information by Province, see the Tables.]


August 1625, Alba Iulia

Tens of thousands of Romanians from all over the vast Romanian territories and hundreds of foreign guests continued to arrive in Alba Iulia, streching to the limit the city's capacity to absorb them.

Several Heads of State arrived in Alba Iulia as well, honouring Mihai and the Romanian Nation with their presence:
- Emperor Felipe of Iberia, Italia, Africa and the Americas;
- King Sigismund of Sarmatia with Queen Flora (Mihai's own daughter);
- The Princes of Slovakia, Croatia and Greece;
- The Doge of Venice;
- Several Italian Princes.


12 August 1625, Alba Iulia

The Proclamation of the Imperium (Proclamația Imperiului)

Article I. Romania is an Imperium of the Romanians. (România este un Imperiu al Românilor.)

Article II. Lord Mihailŭ is the Imperator of the Romanians. (Domnul Mihailŭ este Împĕratul Românilor.)

God save Romania and our Imperator! (Dumneḑeu să apere România și pe Împĕratul nostru!)

When the Speaker of the Senate appeared in the balcony of the Senate Palace overlooking the Union Square and read the Proclamation of the Imperium, the massive crowds erupted in cheers and applauses.
When Mihai himself appeared in the same balcony and waved, he was greeted enthusiastically by the masses: "Să trăiești, Măria Ta!" (Long live, Your Majesty!)

After more than half an hour of relentless cheering during which Mihai was silent, he left the balcony and went to the banquet in honour of his guests.
At the same time, the crowds were entertained with music, dances, games, food and drinks in the open air venues specially designed for the momentuos event.
The celebrations continues for several days.

Romania was gigantic, populous, rich, powerful and respected as a Great Power. It was truly an Imperium of the Romanians!

 

[Avrorrange]

Romanians are the blood descendants of the Romans while the Greeks are the descendants of only those who received Roman citizenship?The heck is with that logic?

So what does the Romanians think of the Italians,the Spanish and the French?

 

[Zagan]

Romanians are the blood descendants of the Romans while the Greeks are the descendants of only those who received Roman citizenship?The heck is with that logic?

So what does the Romanians think of the Italians,the Spanish and the French?

Roman = From Rome, Italy, the founders of the Roman Empire, those who were Roman Citizens before Caracalla's Edict.

Their blood descendents = Romanians, Italians, French, Iberians. (because of the Romanization process)

The Greeks = Descendents of Roman Citizens, not of Romans per se. (Greeks have never been Romanized)

The rest of the Europeans = Spiritual descendents of the Romans.


The idea in a nutshell is: Ethnicity is completely different from Citizenship (Subject of the State) and completely unrelated.

So: A Roman Citizen was NOT necessarily a Roman (ethnic Roman). It may have been a Roman, a Greek, a Briton, an Egyptian, a Dacian etc.
And: A subject of France (for example) may be French or may be some other ethnicity. And so on.

In fact, this is the way most Europeans see the things now in OTL.