Talk:Early Modern Romania

message: My first note in this discussion is that this article starts with a nonsensical statement:
:: the early modern period, roughly from the end of the 15th century to the end of the 18th century (or from the union of Mihai Viteazul of 1600-1601, to the revolution of Tudor Vladimirescu in 1821.)
The end of the 15th century is 1500, and the end of the 18th is 1800, which does not match with Mihai and Tudor Vladimirescu. 
The choice of the dates is essential is deciding whether the merger is OK.Dpotop 13:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger with [[Byzantium after Byzantium]]

message: Someone asked me today just what transpired in the area that is now Romania during the Napoleonic Wars. I had to admit I had no clear idea, so I figured I'd look it up here. Neither this article nor the chronologically next one (National awakening of Romania) gives me any clue, beyond the Russian occupation of Bessarabia at the tail end of it all, which I already knew about. Someone with a clue want to add something? - Jmabel | Talk 04:18, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, this article could use serious revamping and cleaning up, and it should eventually include detail on all such relevant issues. In the meantime, to tentatively answer your question: the impact was marginal, but not uninteresting. If we're talking about Transylvania, it furnished the Austrian Army with a fairly known Hungarian general, and a Romanian border regiment saw action. Wallachia and Moldavia lived in a parallel world. According to Neagu Djuvara's Între Orient şi Occident, they were mainly a bargaining chip for Napoleon. Interestingly, Napoleon was an idol for those boyars who saw themselves as a patriotic party (as opposed to the "Greeks", though the line is seriously blurred). Their representative Constantin Dudescu visited Paris and did his best to meet Napoleon, but had to return when he ran out of money. Initially, the principalities interested France as providers of wood, but the deal went bust when NB decided to attack Egypt (which, as you know, was an Ottoman possession). But then the Russo-Turkish War affected the area in more than one way, and the Russian presence in the area had immediate consequences for Napoleonic policies in the Orient and the Dardanelles Operation (see here and here, for instance). During the time when the Ottomans were at peace with France, the principalities were main providers of cattle for the regiments stationed in "Illyria". Apparently, France also acquiesced the occupation of Bessarabia, and insisted for the Russians not to take hold of more - NB effectively but discreetly mediated. After 1815, the two countries were a place of refuge for Bonapartists, who helped organize the education system. (I'm basing this largely on Djuvara's account.) Just the other day, I found an interesting tidbit: apparently, NB had a sizable impact on popular culture - there was a hype surrounding his rapid and seemingly unstoppable ascent, and for some reason various memoirists and political writers of the period were convinced that he was of Balkan origin, related to Byzantine emperors. (It's discussed in Răzvan Theodorescu's Civilizaţia românilor între medieval şi modern, which, incidentally, is a hugely important contribution to this field, and could and should serve as a source of information for articles such as this one). Dahn (talk) 07:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Napoleonic Wars 

message: Do anybody know what work of Giurescu is cited in the article? Thank you for the answer in advance. Borsoka (talk) 16:16, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Giurescu