**1. Introduction**

In recent decades, there have been various changes in the ethnic composition of countries. This development has aroused great interest among researchers who seek to discover and study the role of ethnic diversity in modern human society [1,2]. Ethnic diversity plays an important role in shaping socio-economic and political goals. Ethnic diversity is also relevant to various different public policies, including those relating to ethnic integration and migration.

Social scientists have measured ethnic diversity using various indices, but most of these indices treat ethnic fractionalisation and polarisation as time-invariant phenomena [3] (p. 1). Recent studies in ethnic fractionalisation have approached the time-variant issue of fractionalisation and polarisation based on immigration estimates [4] or different national units [5]. Alternatively, they considered only one country at a time [6]. In more recent times, some scholars have published articles that use time-varying measures of ethnic fractionalisation [7,8]; however, all of the indices used are very limited, either with regard

**Citation:** Rotaru, M.-A.; Cre¸tan, R.; Ian ˘a¸s, A.-N. Ethnicities in Post-Communist Romania: Spatial Dynamics, Fractionalisation, and Polarisation at the NUTS-3 Level. *Land* **2023**, *12*, 1133. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/land12061133

Academic Editors: Lucia Della Spina, Paola Pellegrini, Antonia Russo, Maria Rosa Valluzzi and Angela Viglianisi

Received: 14 March 2023 Revised: 17 May 2023 Accepted: 23 May 2023 Published: 26 May 2023

**Copyright:** © 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

to time-variation or the countries covered. The most relevant study for longer-term changes in ethnic fractionalisation studies is Lenka Drazanova's [3] Historical Index of Ethnic Fractionalisation (HIEF). The author introduced the HIEF dataset as a longer-term variant index for further ethnic fractionalisation studies. Additionally, the ethnic polarisation index has been studied more in relation to civil war and conflict issues. For instance, Schneider and Wiesehomeier [9] presented a correlation between *ethnic polarisation, potential conflict, and civil wars, while* Bhavnani and Modownik [10] examined how the relationship between ethnic polarisation and civil war could be moderated by different degrees of ethnic salience. However, we are not aware of any study on ethnicity that takes the shortterm and space as variants of both fractionalisation and polarisation at national and/or regional levels in East Central Europe. Moreover, previous studies on ethnic diversity in Romania [11–13] only referenced the 1992 fractionalisation index for Romania or examined ethnic spatial centrality/periphery at the county level [14]. These studies do not compare the fractionalisation and polarisation indices at different time scales at the post-communist Romania county level.

By contributing to the background of ethnic studies literature, this study aims to identify the ethnic spatialisation of Romania in the post-communist period and to determine the ethnic dynamics in post-communist Romania at the NUTS-3 (i.e., county) level based on the ethnic fractionalisation and polarisation indices. Therefore, the specific objectives of this study are (1) to determine the numerical evolution and ethnic spatial dynamics in post-communist Romania and (2) to apply the index of ethnic fractionalisation and ethnic polarisation.

The key questions of the paper are:


We conducted a literature review, followed by a brief historiography of the main ethnicities in Romania, the study area, and the presentation of the methods and data used in this study. Finally, we present the main results and discussions on the spatial evolution of ethnicity and the indices of ethnic polarisation and ethnic fractionalisation.

### *Literature Review: Ethnicities, Fractionalisation, and Polarisation*

Yang [2] considers that *ethnicity* is not a precise and clear concept but is subject to different interpretations. This is because some authors understand it as ancestry, and others perceive it as a physical attribute. The classic definition of 'ethnicity' is presented by Glazer and Moynihan [15]. They define it as the feature of belonging to a particular ethnic group. In contrast, Rogers Brubaker proposes an alternative approach, different from the classical anthropological approach, defining *ethnicity* as a way of seeing and perceiving the world around, as well as social self-identification (whereby individuals identify themselves with certain social groups) [1]. A study by Walker Connor shows that ethnicity and nationalism underlie the construction of the nation-state and are based both on elements of kinship due to common ancestry and psychological ties [16]. Furthermore, Wallerstein and Gordon [17] used this term to designate the sense of belonging to a particular people or community of subgroups in American society. According to Craig Calhoun [18], ethnicity is a concept used in relation to groups that share a combination of cultural, historical, racial, religious, or linguistic characteristics; often, ethnicity implies common ancestral origins and, as such, overlaps in meaning with the concept of people—which was used earlier—or certainly more modern conceptions of race. A prescriptive explanation of ethnicity is proposed by Cashmore [19], who defines it as an indispensable characteristic of a social group whose distinctive elements will be perpetuated and transmitted from one generation to another. However, in some cases, the term "ethnicity" is used in conjunction with "ethnic minority" or "ethnic group". According to Cret,an [13], *ethnicity* can be broadly defined as belonging

to or identifying with an ethnic group, the notion being synonymous with terms such as ethnic group members, ethnic identity, and ethnic affiliation.

*Ethnic groups* are defined as distinct population groups within a society whose culture is different from that of the majority population (from mainstream culture) [19]. Furthermore, an *ethnic minority* would represent a social entity that does not constitute a dominant group in the total population of a given society. This usually designates foreign, outsider people who are different from the native population [20]. The key concept in defining ethnic minorities is culture. The specific culture of an ethnic minority refers to the system of meanings shared and developed in an economic and social context against a specific historical and political background.

The basis of building a healthy multi-ethnic human society is the identification and maintenance of *ethnic identity*. Julia Chaitin et al. [21] (p. 7) argued that ethnic identity could be considered a fundamental and permanent aspect of human identity that claims the existence of a common origin. According to Descartes [22] (p. 57), ethnic identity represents a social construct, including culture, language, collective origin, and shared cultural traditions. The objective approach to the concept of ethnicity implies that belonging to a particular ethnic group requires the existence of criteria regarding homogeneous particularities, such as origin, language, culture, etc., or their combination. However, the subjective approach assumes that people are convinced that they are part of a particular community, with importance placed on individual self-inclusion. Although ethnicity can be subjectively identified as a product of human feelings, objectively, it is a construction of social relations [22].

Researchers have developed various theories of ethnicity in the existing literature, including primordialism, situationism, constructionism, and instrumentalism. From the perspective of *primordialist theory*, ethnicity will never disappear, rather experiencing a continuous development. Under this theory, ethnicity has a socio-biological perspective that represents the extension of kinship relations, the biological factor being very important in the development of ethnicity [23]. On the other hand, Gryosby [24] argues that ethnic groups and nationalities exist because there are traditions of belief and action towards primordial objects, such as biological factors and territorial location. This argument is based on a concept of kinship, where members of an ethnic group feel that they share characteristics, origins, or sometimes even a family relationship. Yang [2] also argues that ethnicity is based on kinship relations—it exists and is able to develop because of the existence of a common origin. According to primordialist theory, ethnicity is the deepest layer of a person's identity. In other words, in the primordialist conception, ethnicity is the essence of an individual's socio-cultural self, which determines the manifestation of other forms of belonging (e.g., gender, social category/class, political affiliation, etc.) [25].

The theory of *situationism* is in contrast to the primordialist view of ethnicity. According to this theory, changes in human behaviour are situational factors rather than traits that a person possesses [26]. The concept of 'ethnicity' would be the cultural repertoire of people that is contextually made available to individuals. Therefore, ethnicity marks the interaction between individuals based on their affections and strategic interests in various situations. According to situationism, the norms imposed by ethnicity may, in some situations, determine a certain type of behaviour.

The *constructivist theory* emerged as a new theory in 1970. According to Yang [2], this theory is based on two principles: (1) ethnicity is a created entity and social construction, and (2) ethnic boundaries are flexible and can be changed. Therefore, it can be stated that ethnicity is dynamic, representing the reaction to certain social circumstances. Basically, society determines or builds ethnic belonging or affiliation. Yancey et al. [27] believed that ethnicity would represent "a response to structural changes in society", speaking of the perspective of "emergent ethnicity" (p. 392). Moreover, Jonathan Sarna [28] initiated the two social features of the theory of ethnicity: attribution and adversity. "Attribution" means that the members of an ethnic group are part of a cohesive community within the school or church, and "adversity" implies prejudice, discrimination, and hostility in the

same ethnic group, which forces the members of the same group to unite, thus maintaining the group's identity and solidarity.

From the point of view of *instrumentalism*, ethnicity is a tool to obtain resources. It is considered that the basis of ethnicity is determined by the general and economic interests of the individual [29] and that ethnicity exists because it is useful [2]. Brubaker [30] considered that ethnicity could be identified with the concept of nationality, arguing that ethnic heterogeneity, which characterises most states, coincides with national heterogeneity. Cohen [31] also took an instrumentalist view of the concept of ethnicity, stating that economic and political reasons take precedence over psychological ones within ethnic groups in order for ethnic identity to be maintained. Taking up this idea, Banks [32] also considered 'ethnic identity' to be instrumental in nature. In addition, the cohesion of ethnicity can be ensured by certain complex behavioural patterns, such as the use of a certain language and participation in certain religious and public rituals [33]. According to Williams [34] and Banks [32], ethnicity equates to the country of origin and can only be understood in relation to the notions of state and nation. However, it is worth noting that, ethnically speaking, the vast majority of states around the world are characterised by heterogeneity [35]. However, it should also be pointed out that in some states, some ethnic groups consider themselves, or are considered by others, to belong to different nations, nationalities, or national groups [36].

In summary, there is no uniform criterion on how to define ethnicity. Group identities are complex and mostly socially constructed, depending on the school of ethnic theories to which the scholars adhere. Furthermore, ethnic fractionalisation and polarisation indices are among the most used indices in measuring ethnicities. In order to overcome the possible shortcomings in constructing ethnic classifications, Alesina et al. [37] proposed a classification that distinguishes between ethnic, linguistic, and religious diversity. They created separate indices for each factor because relying only on one factor, i.e., linguistic distinctions, could obscure other aspects of ethnicity (i.e., racial origin, skin colour). On the other hand, Campos and Kuzeyev [38] used data from post-communist countries to introduce time-sensitive fractionalisation indices to endogenise the relationship between ethnic heterogeneity and growth (see also [39]). Their findings show that while ethnic fractionalisation has little or no impact on economic growth when treated exogenously, it is negatively related to growth when analysed endogenously.

There have also been efforts to overcome simple fractionalisation measures by focusing on conjunctures with other heterogeneities, such as the index of ethnic inequality [40]. Moreover, sociologist Peter Blau [41] argued that heterogeneity—the distribution of a population into multiple categories of group membership—is positively associated with the likelihood of intergroup relations. The Historical Index of Ethnic Fractionalisation (HIEF) introduced by Drazanova [3] seems to be the best ethnic fractionalisation index for analysing long-term historical ethnic datasets. The author argued that time variance is crucial in ethnic fragmentation studies.

On the other hand, the ethnic polarisation index is more commonly used in conflict studies. Bhavnani and Modownik [10] examined how the relationship between ethnic polarisation and civil war could be moderated by different degrees of ethnic salience (i.e., fixed and variable). Holding ethnic salience fixed effectively amplifies the negative effect of polarisation on economic performance. Moreover, Schneider and Wiesehomeier [9] gave their insight into the ethnic polarisation-conflict link by coding and classifying conflict and highlighting the distinction between conflict incidence and conflict onset. They argued that highly polarised countries do not experience more civil war than countries characterised by lower levels of polarisation. They also suggested that fractionalisation, rather than polarisation, is negatively associated with economic growth.

Our paper contributes to the above-mentioned theoretical debates by arguing that ethnic fractionalisation and polarisation indices could be used as short-term and spatial variants because changes in the spatial and short-term ethnic diversity can help advance knowledge about co-existence in ethnically diverse societies.

#### **2. Methods and Data**

This paper uses a mixed methods approach. We use an archival methodology and descriptive statistics to present the spatial dynamics of ethnicities. Furthermore, two ethnic indices (fractionalisation and polarisation) were used to determine if there are specific tendencies at the county level in post-communist Romania.

We selected the historical literature of all major ethnic groups in Romania to contextualise their historical geographies and spatial position within Romania. The archival methodology is not only applied to past histories but also to analysing digital texts, including electronic databases, e-mails, and web pages [42]. The archival research method was used to obtain several sets of statistical data from INS Romania (i.e., the national statistical office of Romania). Furthermore, we plotted graphs based on these sets of statistical data using the descriptive statistical method. These graphs are used to present the ethnic structure of the Romanian population. We then made comparative sets of data on ethnic structure and interpreted the results obtained. Descriptive statistics, which deals exclusively with the properties of observed data, can be used to summarise population data in data analysis [43]. A descriptive statistic is a summary statistic that quantitatively describes or summarises the features of a collection of information [44]. Finally, we calculated the indices of ethnic fractionalisation and ethnic polarisation at the county level in Romania.

In investigating the ethnic structure of human society and being able to assess social diversity implicitly, the literature states that the weight of some ethnic groups in a total population is of limited use. Therefore, two fundamental indicators/indices are used in addition, namely the fragmentation index, also called the fractionalisation index (FRAC) and the polarisation index (Q) [45–49]. Both indices can be applied, irrespective of the intergroup demarcation criteria, whether ethnic, confessional, or linguistic.

According to Taylor and Hudson [48] (Equation (1)), the fragmentation or fractionalisation index (FRAC) is determined as follows:

$$FRAC = 1 - \sum\_{i=1}^{n} pi^2 \tag{1}$$

where

*n* = number of ethnic groups;

*pi* = the relative proportion/frequency/empirical ratio in the form of a coefficient of the ethnic group '*i*' in the total population, which is determined as the ratio/fraction between the number of inhabitants of the ethnic group '*i*' and the total number of inhabitants.

The ethnic fractionalisation index usually measures diversity as a steadily increasing function of the number of groups in a country. It is based on the probability that two individuals drawn randomly from a country belong to two different ethnic groups. The FRAC index takes values between 0 and 1, where 0 is a perfectly homogeneous population from an ethnic point of view (i.e., when all individuals are members of the same group). If the number of ethnic groups increases, the value of this index will also increase. However, it never reaches 1 since 1 means that each individual belongs to his/her own group, and all groups would have only one member [48]. The FRAC index is quite limited and even controversial, especially in terms of its use in ethnic studies. Most researchers in the field believe that inter-ethnic violence is lower in very homogeneous or very heterogeneous communities.

According to Esteban and Ray [45], the polarisation index (Q) measures the probability of a potential conflict that may occur between two equal groups. In this paper we use the Reynal-Querol polarisation index (Equation (2) [47]. This index is determined as follows:

$$Q = 1 - \sum\_{i=1}^{n} \left(\frac{0.5 - p\_i}{0.5}\right)^2 p\_i \tag{2}$$

where

*n* = number of ethnic groups;

*pi* = the relative proportion/frequency/empirical ratio in the form of a coefficient of ethnic group *'i'* in the total population, which is determined as the ratio/fraction between the number of inhabitants of ethnic group *'i'* and the total number of inhabitants.

The polarisation index Q measures the standardised distance of an ethnic distribution from a bimodal distribution (bimodal distribution occurs when there are two perfectly equal groups in a community, i.e., each group represents 50% of the community). As well as measuring a particular aspect of population structure, Q also indicates the extent to which one group may perceive another group as a threat to its interests, validating the hypothesis that the most conflict-prone ethnic configuration would be one in which a majority co-exists alongside a sizeable minority. In game theory, this situation may be the natural tendency of the two groups to represent their situation as a zero-sum game [45].

The statistical data were processed using GIS (Geographic Information Systems) in order to apply the fractionalisation and polarisation indices. GIS offers the possibility of an awareness of different situations in real time and space [50]. ArcMap 10.8.2 software (with license provided by Department of Geography, West University of Timi¸soara, Timi¸soara, Romania) was used to produce thematic maps, including ethnicity cartographic diagrams and diachronic maps, to determine differences in ethnic dynamics. In order to create the maps, we used digital data from Esri Romania, available in vector format and free of charge at www.geo-spatial.org (accessed on 15 January 2023) [51]. The fractionalisation and ethnic polarisation indices were calculated in the vector data-attribute table (polygons represent the boundaries of Romania's administrative/territorial units). The entire analysis is carried out at the administrative units (counties) level, equivalent to NUTS-3 at the European level. The analysis includes data from the 1992, 2002, and 2011 censuses [52].

One of the methodological limitations of this study is that it did not include the recent 2021 census in Romania because its data were only preliminary at the time of writing this paper (February 2023) and did not have a definitive form of data processing at the county level. Another limitation is that this study does not analyse the situation of ethnic groups at the urban and rural levels. This is an objective for future studies.

#### **3. Study Area and Short Historiography of Ethnicities in Romania**

#### *3.1. Study Area*

Romania is a country in East Central Europe, situated at the southeast and eastern border of the European Union. Its neighbouring countries are Hungary, Serbia, Bulgaria, Moldova, and Ukraine. Romania has an area of 238,397 sq km, with a population of under 19 million inhabitants (2022), making it the 12th largest European country and the sixth most populous state in the European Union.

Apart from Romanians, the most important ethnicities in Romania are Hungarians, Roma, Germans, Ukrainians, Russian-Lipovans, Jews, Turks, Tatars, Armenians, Bulgarians, Serbs, Croats, Czechs, Slovaks, Poles, and Greeks (Table 1). An analysis showed that the main ethnic group in Romania is Romanians, followed by Hungarians, and the Roma, whose share is increasing, reaching about 3% of the stable population in Romania. The other ethnicities in Romania each account for less than 1% of the total population.

An important point to note is that a high percentage (over 6%) of the population did not declare their ethnicity in the 2011 population census, compared to about 0.01% in the previous (2002) census. The ethnic structure of Romania's population in the postcommunist period has changed slightly from one census to another. However, there is a decrease in the population at a relatively slow pace, a trend that will probably continue in the coming years. Low birth rates and the immigration of younger people to Western European countries are among the major issues which have strongly impacted the decrease in ethnic groups in Romania in the three decades. For instance, Romania's crude birth rate decreased from 13.5 per 1000 total population in 1992 to around 10.0 per 1000 total population in 2021 [52]. Moreover, the natural increase in population reduced from positive (68,000 inhabitants in 1990) to negative values (−119,000 inhabitants in

2020) [52]. Poor living standards and the lack of a job/occupation have been among the main reasons for immigration. Germany, the UK, Italy, Austria, and Spain were the main destination countries for Romanian migrants in post-communist times. On the other hand, although immigrants/asylum seekers in Romania increased in the last decade to about 170,000 people [52], Romania is still not as much of an attractive country for immigrants from Asian and African countries when compared to most Western European countries.


**Table 1.** Dynamics of the ethnic structure of Romania's population in post-communist times.

(Source: [52], accessed on 1 December 2022).

#### *3.2. A Brief Historiography of Ethnicities in Romania*

In order to better understand the origin of ethnic groups in Romania, we briefly present a historiography of Romania's major ethnic groups below.

The *Romanians* are Daco-Roman descendants, a people that came to be through the cohabitation of the Dacians and the Roman colonists in the northern part of the river Danube. They are a Latin-speaking population surrounded by the Slavic populations and the Hungarians.

After the Romanian state was created in 1918 due to the unification of its historical regions, the Romanians increased in number in the interwar period but had a short decrease in population during World War II. In the more recent evolution of Romanian ethnicity, there were noticeable increases during mid-late communist times due to state policies on the interdiction of abortion and the sustenance of birth rates. Moreover, internal migration in communist times was specific; people migrated from the less developed regions to the more industrialised regions of Romania [53]. There has been a noticeable decrease in general Romanian numbers since 1990 because of the freedom to migrate abroad and lower birth rates [13].

The *Hungarians* entered the history of Europe as one of the ethnicities that the great migrations pushed from the Asian steppes to Western Europe. The organisation of the Hungarian kingdom and the territorial expansion towards the east put the Hungarians in direct contact with the Romanians who had lived in Romanian-Slavic voivodships in the area of Bihor or the Banat region [54]. The presence of Hungarians in Transylvania was recorded by numerous medieval Hungarian chronicles [55]. In the Middle Ages, the Hungarian kings settled other populations in Transylvania and Banat [56]. Therefore, as the situation in the first centuries of the Middle Ages evolved, Transylvania became the cradle of a specific kind of civilisation, in which various ethnic groups, including Romanians, Hungarians, Germans, and Roma, co-existed in a complex relationship [57]. The Trianon Treaty and the creation of the Romanian national state at the beginning of the 20th century meant a new economic, political, and legal framework for the development of the Hungarians [58]. The consolidation of the communist regime under Soviet pressure also had negative consequences for the Hungarian minority in Romania. Nicolae Ceausescu's regime sought to further restrict the possibility of preserving national identity for all Romanian ethnicities [58,59].

History shows the existence of local conflicts between Romanians and Hungarians in Transylvania and other western Romanian settlements. However, the major clash between Hungarians and Romanians in the post-communist period was in March 1990 in the Transylvanian city of T"argu Mures, . Five deaths and hundreds of injuries were recorded. Tom Gallagher's study [60] revealed that members of the Vatra Romanesca Union—a regional/Transylvanian Romanian nationalist party—were considered to have played an important role in the degeneracy of the events leading to the clash. The clash began after it was proposed that an important high school in T"argu Mures, should be divided into two based on ethnicity. The proposal called for separate Romanian and Hungarian schools. Those events remained known as the Black March (Martie Negru in Romanian or Fekete Március in Hungarian).

It is not known exactly when the first *Roma* arrived in Romania. However, they are now an ethnic group found in all the counties of the country. Their massive migration to Europe is thought to have started in the 14th century, with most scholars believing that there were several waves of migration from India to Europe [61]. In the Middle Ages, they were considered non-Romanians and non-Christians and suffered enslavement in southern and eastern Romanian Principalities [62]. After the Great Union in 1918 and the creation of Romania, the number of Roma in the country increased. In the interwar period, the Roma emancipation movement began, and a new elite emerged. However, the Roma remained on the periphery of Romanian society, discriminated against and marginalised. During the Second World War, they were deported to Transnistria in camps built by the order of Marshal Ion Antonescu. The Nazis considered the Roma a "second-class nation" [63].

Later, the communist ideology in Romania led to the fuelling of nationalism, which sometimes emerged with hostilities of the Romanian majority against all ethnic neighbours but especially against the Roma [13]. Thousands of Roma families were forced to move to the outskirts of towns in socialist Romania in the 1950s in order to "cleanse" the big cities of the Roma. During the communist regime, the Roma were forced to give up their old occupations to work in agriculture, industry, or sanitation [64]. The Romanian communist state tried to stop the Roma from appearing as a nationality in official documents. At the same time, the Romanian communist state confiscated assets held by the Roma. As such, many Roma fled communist Romania to democratic countries [65].

After 1990 and the political regime change, the Roma regained their status as an ethnic minority. However, many Roma communities still suffer from poverty and social marginalisation, and they are sometimes victims of discrimination [66–69], which often leads to their social and spatial ghettoisation [13]. The Roma are vulnerable and exposed to both social exclusion and spatial segregation [70,71].

The Germans are another important ethnic group in Romania. The German ethnic group is made up of Saxons, Swabians, and "Zipseri ( ¸Tipt,eri)". The settlement of the Saxons in Transylvania began in the 12th century and lasted until the beginning of the 14th century for economic and military reasons. The Saxons were settled by the Hungarian kings in Transylvania (around Sibiu, Bra¸sov, Sighisoara, and Năsăud) from Luxembourg, Saxony, Flanders, and the Moselle regions in order to defend the border of the Hungarian kingdom in southern Transylvania [72,73].

The second group of the German minority in Romania are the Swabians—the name given to the Germanic populations by their neighbours of other ethnic groups. Germanic populations were colonised in the 18th century by the emperors of the Habsburg Empire. The Danubian Swabians are made up of the Swabians of Banat and the Swabians of Satu Mare, as well as the Germans from Hungary and the former Yugoslav republics [74–77].

The third group of the German minority in Romania is made up of the "Zipseri ( ¸Tipt,eri)", found in Maramure¸s and Bucovina. The ' ¸Tip¸teri' can also be found in the Spiš region of Slovakia, which is where this ethnic group immigrated to Romania [78]. Unlike the Saxons, the ' ¸Tip¸teri' of Maramures, were mostly miners, while those of Bucovina (settled in the 17th and 19th centuries) were engaged in wood processing [79].

The ethnic group called the Turks is represented in the geographical region of Dobrogea, especially in the county of Constant,a. They arrived in Romania in the middle of the 13th century in Dobrogea with a mission to spread the Islamic religion. Dobrogea was almost unpopulated at that time, with the "Golden Horde" to the north and the Byzantine Empire to the south. This historical Romanian province was removed from Ottoman rule and came under Romanian administration after the War of Independence in 1877. Under these circumstances, some Turks preferred to leave for their Muslim homeland after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, while others remained in Romania, where their language, religion, and customs were respected [80].

Another small, Turkish-speaking ethnic group found in the Dobrogea region is the Tatars. They are of Mongolian-Turkish-Turanian origin. The first wave of Tatar migrants arrived in Dobrogea in the 13th century to spread the Islamic religion, followed by a second wave at the end of the 16th century. Towards the end of the 18th century, after the Tsarist Empire had increased its power and annexed Crimea, the Ottomans brought Crimean Tatars to Dobrogea, who, for the most part, had left Romania after the War of Independence in 1877. However, some preferred to stay on the Dobrogean lands, creating their own culture based on their history, religion, customs, and traditions [81].

The Lipovans/Russian-Lipovans are a small ethnic group of Slavic origin. They arrived in Romania in the 18th century as a result of Russian religious persecution. They came from the Don Valley areas in Russia and settled in the northern part of Dobrogea, especially in the Danube Delta, but also in Bucovina and Moldova, more precisely in the Constant,a, Tulcea, and Brăila counties. They separated from the Russian Orthodox Church, as they did not agree to renounce their faith. They were called "raskolnici" (in Russian meaning "schismatics") or "staroveri" (in Russian, meaning "old believers") since their religion was the Old Rite Christian Orthodox religion. In history, two large waves of their emigration are known: the first wave—during the reign of Tsar Peter the Great and the second—during the reign of Tsarina Catherine the Great. Fishing, gardening, and viticulture are the main occupations of this ethnic group [82].

Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes are small ethnic groups of Slavic origin, mostly found in the southwest of the country, in the counties of Timis, , Caras,-Severin, Arad, and Mehedint,i. Serbs emigrated from the Balkan Peninsula in successive waves. At the end of the 14th century, many Serbs—both commoners and nobles—emigrated across the entire territory of Romania, most of them to Banat, Cris, ana, and Transylvania. This was as a result of the strong Turkish penetration of the Balkans. Many Serbs had entered Banat even when it was under the Ottoman Empire. In the 17th–18th centuries, many Serbs settled in Banat on the Danube Gorges to defend the borders of the Empire, as Banat was under Habsburg rule at that time [83]. Most Serbs in Romania currently live in the southwest and west of the country. Serbs are Orthodox Christians, most of them are New Rite Orthodox Christians, but there are also some Old Rite Orthodox Christians [84].

Croats can be found in Romania in the counties of Cara¸s-Severin and Timis. Their colonisation also took place in successive waves in the 13th–14th centuries, and they were known as Caras, oveni [85]. The dialect spoken by the Caras, oveni was the Kosovo-Resava dialect [86]. Some of the Croats in Romania are descendants of the Slavicized Vlachs of Bosnia [87]. Today, most of the Cara¸soveni claim to be Croats [85]. They are of the Roman Catholic religion [88].

There are very few Slovenes in Romania. Additionally, since they are identified as Serbs and Croats in the population census, their exact number cannot be identified. They are descendants of the South Slavs, their religion is Roman Catholic, and the language they speak is Slovenian [86].

Slovaks can be found in the west of Romania, in the counties of Arad, Bihor, Timis, , Sălaj, and Caras,-Severin [89]. They were colonised in the 18th century, with their primary occupation being forestry, mostly in mountainous areas but also in lowland areas (which had been affected by the wars with the Ottomans) and in mining areas in Maramure¸s and Satu Mare [90]. Specific to the Slovaks settled in Arad County is the fact that they did not create new settlements but settled in already existing settlements, where populations of other ethnic groups lived, forming their own nuclei of habitation (e.g., alleys or neighbourhoods) [91,92].

According to information from the City Hall Archives of Brasov, the Bulgarians arrived in Romania at the end of the 14th century, when Bulgarian builders were brought in to build the city church (Black Church) [93]. The builders settled in the S, chei district. Later, at the beginning of the 18th century, by fleeing from Ottoman rule, the Bulgarians also arrived in Banat, seeking a decent living after obtaining economic privileges from Habsburg rule [93]. Bulgarian migratory waves had been particularly strong after the Austro-Turkish and Russo-Turkish wars during the 17th–19th centuries [94], with Roman Catholic Bulgarians emigrating primarily to Banat [95] and Transylvania and Orthodox Bulgarians settling in Wallachia [94].

Another ethnic group with a very small population share in Romania is the Jews. Like other ethnic groups that call Romania home today, the colonisation of the Jews took place in several waves. By the middle of the 16th century, a group of Jewish merchants was already living in Bucharest. Other waves followed, caused by the difficult life situation of Jews in Galicia, starting in the second half of the 18th century [96]. The Jews in Romania have become a significant ethnic community since the 19th century, not only in terms of numbers but also economically, culturally, and even politically [97]. According to the 1930 census, there were 756,930 registered Jews living in Romania [52]. However, the fascist and anti-Semitic ideology also reached Romania, with legionaries leading to the physical elimination of ethnic Jews [96]. The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 led to the emigration of Jews from Romania to their new homeland, resulting in a massive decline in their numbers [58]. Thus, only 24,667 people declared themselves to be of Jewish ethnicity in the 1977 census. By 1992, the number had dropped to 8955 [52].

The Czechs are a small ethnic group spread in the southeast of Banat, especially in the County of Cara¸s-Severin. Some of them also live in Mehedin¸ti, Timi¸s, and Arad. They were among the last colonised populations from around 1820 [98]. The Czechs first came to Romania to work in the forest as woodcutters but later became farmers, miners, or lime producers [99]. After the 1990s, many ethnic Czechs chose to leave the country because of diminishing economic opportunities and the desire to return to their country of origin [17].

The vast majority of Poles live in Suceava County, followed by Bucharest, Hunedoara, and Timis, . They were colonised at the end of the 18th century in Bucovina after this Romanian province became part of the Habsburg Empire. The Poles from Bochnia and Wieliczka were brought to work in the salt mines of Cacica. Some Poles preferred to settle in the Jiu Valley to work in the coal mines. However, some Poles emigrated to Bukovina for political reasons [100]. The occupation of Poland by Hitler in the Second World War led to the largest wave of Polish emigration to Romania [101].

Armenians are another ethnic group in Romania, with their presence in the country attested to for more than a thousand years. The historian Nicolae Iorga argued that the Armenians had arrived on the territory of Romania even before the formation of the Principality of Moldova, adding that it was not possible to trade without Armenians in Moldova ([102], see also [103]). Armenians are credited with building and developing Gherla as an important international trading centre [103]. Their presence in Wallachia has been mentioned since the 14th century [104].

The Greeks are an ethnic group whose presence in the current territory of Romania has been recorded since ancient times. Around 2700 years ago, ancient Greek communities colonised the Black Sea basin and built the first cities in Dobrogea, including Histria, Tomis, and Calatis. However, starting from the 17th century, Greeks in the Romanian Principalities began to hold important positions in the state, including the ruler of the country. During the reign of the Ottoman Porte, Greeks were appointed as Phanariots in Moldova and Wallachia [105]. At the beginning of the 19th century, the Greek aristocrats preferred to leave the Romanian Principalities after Greece gained independence. However, many Greeks from the lower social classes, such as merchants, sailors, etc., stayed back in Romania and continued to maintain their culture and traditions [106].

Romania is also home to ethnic groups, such as the Albanians, Italians (an ethnicity that migrated to Romania mainly after 1990), Chinese, and other ethnic minorities.

In summary, ethnic diversity has been present in Romanian territory for centuries due to complex historical factors. However, we do not find any important new ethnic groups settling in the country in the post-communist transition period. Romania is still not an attractive country for immigrants from Asia, Africa, and other continents.
