Serbian Medieval History
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: Medieval Europe
Forum Discription: The Middle Ages: AD 500-1500
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=7325
Printed Date: 09-Jun-2024 at 20:40
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Serbian Medieval History
Posted By: Jay.
Subject: Serbian Medieval History
Date Posted: 01-Dec-2005 at 16:01
|
having trouble with this.. Lazar, Prince
------------- Samo Sloga Srbina Spasava Only Unity Can Save the Serb |
Replies:
Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 01-Dec-2005 at 16:41
Check Wikipedia:
 ------------- 
NO GOD, NO MASTER! |
Posted By: Jay.
Date Posted: 01-Dec-2005 at 21:57
 Thanks. ------------- Samo Sloga Srbina Spasava Only Unity Can Save the Serb |
Posted By: Sarmata
Date Posted: 02-Dec-2005 at 03:36
STEFAN DUSAN how can u miss STEFAN DUSAN?! 
|
Posted By: Jay.
Date Posted: 02-Dec-2005 at 09:31
 I knew it!! ------------- Samo Sloga Srbina Spasava Only Unity Can Save the Serb |
Posted By: Sarmata
Date Posted: 03-Dec-2005 at 16:23
| hahaha |
Posted By: cg rommel
Date Posted: 17-Dec-2005 at 17:40
CAR DUSAN, it was STEFAN nemanja, who originated from doclea(the frist name of montenegro), whse descendants were the rulers of serbia.... |
Posted By: HistoryGuy
Date Posted: 23-Dec-2005 at 18:49
|
I find that Serbs are very close to Poles.... Is this true? Did Serbs migrate from Poland northern Eastern Europe area? ------------- هیچ مردی تا به حال به شما درباره خدا گفته. |
Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 24-Dec-2005 at 07:09
All Slavs come from Poland/Belarus but they have mixed heavily with natives of the regions they settled in the Middle Ages. -------------
NO GOD, NO MASTER! |
Posted By: HistoryGuy
Date Posted: 24-Dec-2005 at 15:14
|
i seriously thought they came from an area in turkey... ------------- هیچ مردی تا به حال به شما درباره خدا گفته. |
Posted By: Jay.
Date Posted: 24-Dec-2005 at 21:19
| No, Serbs didn't come from Turkey... But, many Serbs have Turkish blood in them now-a-days, because some Serbs married Turks. |
Posted By: Jay.
Date Posted: 24-Dec-2005 at 21:20
Serbs are a very old people, and interesting 
|
Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 24-Dec-2005 at 21:40
No. That makes no sense. Slavic migrations, starting c. 700 CE, took out from Poland and nearby regions, their native homeland since about the Bronze Age. But they obviously didn't migrate to virgin lands nor displaced the natives significatively: they mixed heavily with them. In this sense Southern Slavs are probably closer to their non-Slavic neighbours (Rumanians, Hungarians) than to Poles. In any case they never came from Turkey. Another very diferent thing is that Serbia, Bosnia, Macedonia and Bulgaria were for many centuries under Ottoman rule. -------------
NO GOD, NO MASTER! |
Posted By: Jay.
Date Posted: 25-Dec-2005 at 00:08
| Serbia had been independent at various points in time, the Ottoman conquest in 1389 kept Serbia submissive until 1878, when it reestablished its independence. |
Posted By: Sarmata
Date Posted: 25-Dec-2005 at 05:32
| I wouldnt say that Serbs are closer to their non slav nieghbors then to Poles. Serbian and Polish have a similar language, and they both looks slavic, there traditions are similar, and the serbs od indeed come form western polend when they settled there before coming form the Caucasus probabaly. The croats settled eastern-southern poland and established a kingdom called Chrobatia centered in Krakow. |
Posted By: Scytho-Sarmatian
Date Posted: 25-Dec-2005 at 06:46
| Chrobatia was also known as "White Croatia." Do people from eastern-southern Poland retain any identification with "White Croats"? |
Posted By: ill_teknique
Date Posted: 25-Dec-2005 at 11:37
language yes look probably no bosnians and serbs and croats look similar but they also look more similar to albanians than poles migratory tribes never numbered in millions of member maybe in hundreds of thousands if ever so high - i.e. the barbaric german kingdoms of the west had perhaps fifty thousands franks, a hundred or so thousand goths, that is why they retained the romance languages and the latin roman culture for so long, which eventually was molded locally into unique cultures that had a common ancestry. same with the balkans the only difference the slavs "slavicized" the inhabitants of the region, as the bulgars were slavicized even though the ruling class was of non slavic deascant, but most bulgars today would because the real bulgar tribe did not number in ten million people. migrations do not happen is such high numbers at least not two thousand years ago it was logistically impossible to travel in such high numbers. ------------- |
Posted By: Jay.
Date Posted: 25-Dec-2005 at 12:01
| Yeah, I would agree with Teknique.. |
Posted By: Sarmata
Date Posted: 27-Dec-2005 at 16:00
I haven't met anyone who called themselves White Croatian, I have read that some immigrants from that region when coming to America identified themselves as White Croatian. |
Posted By: Sarmata
Date Posted: 27-Dec-2005 at 16:03
I would say you are right, majority of Serbs and Bosnians do look more similra to Alabaniana, but I have seena share of sebs and croats with the typical dark blond blue eyed look thta most Poles have. Also there are Poles aorund, I know of one who looks more Turkish with dark skin and dark eyes. I might have misunderstood but just to clear up, are you saying that Serbs and Croats are just a Slavicized people and not really slavic at all? |
Posted By: Jay.
Date Posted: 27-Dec-2005 at 17:53
| Wtf? Dark blonde and blue eyes? What the hell? |
Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 27-Dec-2005 at 18:09
They are Slavic in the sense that they speak Slavic languages and feel Slavic. But their genome shows that they are diferent from Poles, sharing a big deal of their genetic pool rather with other non-Slavic Balcanic peoples. That's normal: even if the Slavic infiltration of the 7th century was massive (something that we just don't know) the previous inhabitants of the region (Romanized or Hellenized Dalmatians, Thracians, Illyrians, etc.) would have mostly remained in their villages and towns, adapting to the new new situation. It's a wrong idea to think that language and culture is the same as genetic background: peoples adapt and adopt (even via such violent means as slavery), while mass genocides or "ethnic cleansings" are rather the exception (very concentrated in modern times) than the rule. -------------
NO GOD, NO MASTER! |
Posted By: Scytho-Sarmatian
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2005 at 04:58
That's actually a pretty good description of me. BTW, Sarmata, thanks for your response. I'm one of those with roots in White Croatia. It's funny that nobody has mentioned the connection between the Serbs and the modern Sorbs of eastern Germany. They're obviously two branches of the same people. |
Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2005 at 09:51
That's curious. What's the connection apart of the name? -------------
NO GOD, NO MASTER! |
Posted By: Sarmata
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2005 at 15:42
They are the same people ethnically. Serbs and Croats migrated somewhere form the east, maybe the caucasus as some people believe they were a branch of the Sarmatian tribes (there is evidence of this as there are carvings of tribes names very similar to HRVAT which means Croat). The serbo-croats migrated eventually to southern Poland, Croats made a kingdom centered around Krakow, Serb settled between the areas of easter Gemany and western Poland. Then a Byzantine emperor called for their assistance against the Avars and in return would give them land, this was the same ting the western roman emperors did to Vandals and Goths; promised them land in return for servitude, we all know how that ended up. It's curious because later the Avars and Slavs would ally and sometimes the Avar empire is called a Avar Slav empire, as some slavs assimilated with Avars. Not all the Croats and Serbs form southenr Poland migrated south, we see Sorbs today still exist in eastern germany. During the reign of Boleslaw Chrobry, First King of Poland, he connected that lands of the western Slavs to the kingdom of Poland which included upper and lower Lusatia, where the Lusatian Serbs or Sorbs live. The Sorbs acctually consider Boleslaw a national hero. The Croats or Chrobatians(white croats) were still around during Boleslaws rule, which shows not all of them migrated south. All this shows that Slavs have relations between themselves which is greater then just linguistics. I also ask any of you, if your curious as I was, tolook at Boleslaw I Chrobry's name; Chrobry the nickname that Ive always been taught to mean, Valiant or brave, when I looked the word up, it was noe wher ein a dictionary. Maybe its just old Polishlanguage? maybe. OR it could mean Boleslaw of Chrobatia (Chrobacja)? Mieszko did give Boleslaw originally to be prince of the soouthern lands befor ehe ruled the entire kingdom. Not only that remember Tomislav? Croatian king, who made croatia into a very powerful nation, by the end of his reign, he just disappeared...maybe, to Chrobatia? Perhaps there is a closer relation to the Croats and Poles then we think. Just a thought. |
Posted By: Sarmata
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2005 at 15:45
If we'd be in the 9th century or so Id be calling myself a Chrobatian right now as well...perhaps there's little difference really, we jsut dont know as much as we'd like. |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 30-Dec-2005 at 04:32
|
Many Germans have slavic 'genes'-until the 12th century there was some slavic peoples in (modern) Germany-in the 12th century they were germanized-the todays Macklenburg-Pomeranie in germany is an example-POMERANI-slavic-by the sea(more=sea)-first duke of Macklenburg was a ruler of Obodrite tribe(bodryci=the brave ones). Now Maju,there's not too many nations calling or being refered to as Serbs-it's a self-given name,not a latin term(your example of Albanians). |
Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 30-Dec-2005 at 11:16
You're surely right in the sense that the colonzation of the east by
Germans obviously assimilated many Slavs alreadyl living there,
specially in the formerly Polish regions of Pomerania and Silesia. On the other hand, it's vane to speak of Slavic or Germani genese,
specially when Germans had also inhabited those regions centuries
before, in the Ancient Age, and therefore, Slavic migrations also
surely assimilated Germans in places such as Bohemia or Eastern
Germany, which surely weren't total deserts when the Slavic tribes
arrived. If we want to go further back, most of Germany (and Bohemia
and other Central European regions) had been earlier inhabited by
Celts, who again were largely assimilated by Germans. Even earlier,
some of those regions were inhabited by other less known peoples (maybe
Illyrians, Italics or who knows?) and Celts assimilated them, etc. So
talking about ethnic genes in most cases is a dangerous excersise.
I don't think I mentioned Albanians in this threat. It was someone else. -------------
NO GOD, NO MASTER! |
Posted By: Scytho-Sarmatian
Date Posted: 31-Dec-2005 at 03:20
|
A "dangerous exercise," eh? Be afraid, be very afraid! |
Posted By: Jay.
Date Posted: 31-Dec-2005 at 13:01
|
|
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 06-Jan-2006 at 05:25
|
I wasn't refering to actual genes-simply stated that a significant number of Germans have got distant(or not that distant) slavic ancestry-which is ironic considering views of the nazi's-that slavs r inferior to germanics... About the Sorbs-u went around my question-Albanians were just an example(latin alba appearing at different locations-don't try to represent me as one of those nationalists that propagate the Caucasus theory) |
Posted By: Sarmata
Date Posted: 06-Jan-2006 at 18:20
| Ther Germanic and Slavic tribes have a long history of bad blood, and I doubt they have ancestry between one another, unless ou mean for example eastern germans might because of Slavic settlements long ago, and the present Sorbian population. Slavs caleld germans "Niemcy" which means mute or dumb, meaning its a safe assumption to say they didnt understand one another. |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 14:51
|
I didn,t say it happened through "mutual love and understanding"...however it is a fact that many of baltic slavs were germanized-and it wasn't in ancient times-more like in the medieval ones.Obodrites(or bodrichy in slavic-the brave ones) r a perfect example: The Obodrites' independent principality, which was developed by the early 9th century, was conquered in the middle of 12th century by Henry the Lion, duke of Saxony, after a long resistance lead by its last pagan prince, Niklot (d. 1160). Niklot's son Przybyslaw (Pribislav; d. 1178) accepted Christianity, acknowledged German suzerainty, and he was recognized in 1170 as a prince of the Holy Roman Empire. Both his descendants became the dukes of Mecklenburg and the Obodrite people eventually became Germanized... |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 14:56
| Btw, the term Nemecy could be also rooted from germanic tribe Nemety in eastern Germania. |
Posted By: HistoryGuy
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2006 at 16:43
|
Hej Sarmata, where do you think the people you know with dark skin and dark eyes in Poland originally come from (I mean in terms of their ancestors)? Like Roma or something? ------------- هیچ مردی تا به حال به شما درباره خدا گفته. |
Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 10-Jan-2006 at 17:28
And not just in the Middle Ages. In Ancient times, several German tribes (Goths are the more famous) settled in Slavic territory. I'm sure they intermixed then too. -------------
NO GOD, NO MASTER! |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2006 at 08:44
So those Nazis had some slavic ancestry... This guy must be out of his mind: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3608& ;KW=inferior+slavs - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3608& ; ;KW=inferior+slavs Or this Aryan(he actually calls himself Aryan): http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=603&KW=ossetian&TPN=1 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=603& KW=ossetian&TPN=1 I don't understand how they can write such things...and nobody seems to mind... |
Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2006 at 09:55
Austria itself is built up on Slovenian lands for the most part. I'm
sure that the Slavs there weren't exterminated nor expelled for the
most part: just assimilated. Yes the Nazis and their poor blood theories are way pathetic. Not
just there's no pureblood race at all (even the purest groups are mixed
in one or another way) but also Europeans aren't "Aryans" (i.e.
Indo-Europeans) by blood for the most part - and if any group would be
closer to that these would be Eastern Europeans and specially some
Slavic groups. -------------
NO GOD, NO MASTER! |
Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 11-Jan-2006 at 10:11
Iranians and some Indians have always called themselves Aryans. Iran (Aryanam) actually means the land of the Aryans. It doesn't have a racial sense but an ethnic sense. Let's not mix things, what is absurd is the Nazis imported the term from people they would surely consider "inferior" but in Asia is a common term. Is the same about the svastika: in Europe and America it's become a dreadful symbol of greed and destruction but in Asia is common among many cultures (not just Indo-Europeans, also is frequent among Buddhist East Asians) and it's basically a symbol of good fortune. But ulike the svastika, which was also relatively common in Europe and even America before Hitler's megalomaniatic crimes, the term Aryan is totally alien to Europe. -------------
NO GOD, NO MASTER! |
Posted By: violentjack
Date Posted: 11-May-2006 at 13:54
Uros is Dragutin Uros 1243-1271 famous traveler and writer Milutin took southern Macedonia mostly and Skoplje in 1299,was longest ruler of Serbia,so he is almost most famous 1281-1321 Dusan was skilled ruler he used Kantakuzemos-Paleogolous Byzantine civil war to increase Serbia all the way to Sallonica.Fuj kakve ste vi Srbende,kada vam Bosnjo zna bolje vasu historiju od mene  ------------- Bosnjaci,probudite se ili nestanite |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 12-May-2006 at 07:27
|
------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: Bosniakum
Date Posted: 12-May-2006 at 22:33
|
Well of course Bosnians , Serbians and Croatians have ilyrian, greek etc... blood, but we still are dominantley slavic, one proof for that is that when looking at Albanians is that they are on average a head shorter then Bosnians, Serbians and Croatians. ------------- "I krv svoju za Bosnu moju" |
Posted By: violentjack
Date Posted: 13-May-2006 at 00:25
 Wtf BosniakumHow old are you I knew many Albanians and most werent short,and i had many Albanian friends I dont get this so called Slavic theory which was proven wrong by not only me,also many historian disputed that Im more of Illyrian ancestry ------------- Bosnjaci,probudite se ili nestanite |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 17-May-2006 at 08:00
|
We're all slavs only about 10 - 20 % - if we presume that slavic marker is HG3...Most of our genes are native to balcan-illyrian,thracian and pre indo-european... As for the stature of albanians - they're not all uniformely tall or short... ------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: Theodore Felix
Date Posted: 17-May-2006 at 14:10
|
Most tall Albanians actually come from the north. The tallest are in Montenegro and a territory called malcia e madh(greater highlands). Average of 6 feet. Im 6'5 and from the south with partly greek admixture. We are a mixed people. ------------- |
Posted By: polak966
Date Posted: 30-May-2006 at 23:35
you have no idea how right you might actually be in the 16th c. our king zygmunt stary took for a wife an italian woman, she brought many italians with her to poland, and it is a common theory that alot of the darkness in Polish hair etc. is linked to some of the small italian blood that is in Poland right now. then again, im pretty sure every person in poland has germanic, hungarian, baltic, and other slavic blood in their genes. also id say that looking at a nations hair coliur and skin tone isnt the best way to tell how related they are to other supposedly related grups. alot of that has to do with the location of where that people is settled. i have a friend from montenegro and he is very dark skinned and has black hair (obviously due to the mediterranean region he comes from). but he says that if you move a bit inland to belgrade the people there gain lighter hair and skin colour. and i doubt anyone would argue that serbians and montenegrans have completely different genetic background. also the white croats never held krakow, that area was controlled by the Wiślanie, a lechitic (polish) tribe. the croats have been marked down on most maps between the czechs and silesians. there was also another croat popultion eastwards centered near and around galich. unless im mistaken i think they may have been called black croats. |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 31-May-2006 at 05:59
Your friends dark skin is certainly of mediteranian source-however, u'll find a significant no. of montenegrins with blonde\red hair and pinkish white skin...Most of montenegrins are dinarics...And their height is certainly the evidence that mediteranian influence is strong-according to Coon(1939) they are the tallest nation in europe...And since i'm serbian-i can confirm that... ------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: polak966
Date Posted: 01-Jun-2006 at 00:27
|
thats funny, cuz hes almost a head taller than me
|
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 01-Jun-2006 at 10:27
|
Just to correct myself: i said ''a significant no. of them are blonde/red haired..."-what i meant is more like a ''noticeble minority''...
------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: Monte
Date Posted: 04-Jun-2006 at 09:22
|
Hello everyone, Ive only done a little research on Serbian ethnicity, but I did tour through the Serm and Backa districts for about three months. I found a very wide mix of people. The impression I left with was that Serbia was a cross roads for many nationalities and had a very diversified mix of people they could call their ancestors. I met a few people who appeared to be of Mongol decent near Budisava. Yet in other areas I meet people who where about a foot or two taller than me. Which on average I think most Serbian people were taller and more athletic than in many other countries I visited. As an example I was shopping in Novi Sad and had a very difficult time finding pants that fit both my waste and leg length. Im 58 (173cm) about 3 or 4 inches shorter than the average male. Yet anything I tried on was at least a foot longer in the legs. The women also where very tall. I felt like a midget the entire time I was there. But anyways, has anyone read Evlija Celebi, book of travels through Serbia in the 16th century? He was a Turkish traveler who documented the history of many of the cities he came across . I was hoping to discuss it with someone. |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 05-Jun-2006 at 12:05
Mongol decent???there's about 2 % of central asian genes (y chromosome) on serbia's genetic map, but that's even less then sweden or czech republic etc...They could be of some other ancestry then serbian alone...or it could be somesort of recombination...Anyway-you should visit Belgrade and central serbia to give you a clearer picture of our appearnce...
And ''mongol look'' is present in almost all european countries-i've seen a few brits that correspond to that appearance-as well as a few swedes - not to mention some other countries... ------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: NikeBG
Date Posted: 05-Jun-2006 at 12:13
|
Or it could be normal migrants. F.e. we have a whole neighbourhood of Asians (mainly Vietnamese and Chinese) and Arabs around the open market in Sofia.
------------- |
Posted By: Monte
Date Posted: 06-Jun-2006 at 06:14
|
From what the locals told me, apparently the mongols invaded the Backa region in the 1200's. They established a few strong holds but wheren't able to completely subdue the area.
A young man at the local coffee shop in Budsava told me that Kovilj had a lot of Mongols who lived there. I didn't really investigate it or look into the mongol invasion story. I just assumed they where given me the local history.
But the idividuals I seen looked nothing like the normal Serbian population and being mainly a farming area I didn't think they were immigrants. Unfortunately, my Serbian is very limited and I wasn't able to talk to them.
But they did seem to keep to themselves. similar to the gypsie population I've seen
|
Posted By: Monte
Date Posted: 06-Jun-2006 at 06:30
|
I'm sorry, I just realized. Things are different here.
If a person is born in Serbia, is he or she considered Serbian?
Or is it strickly a blood and ancester thing? And how far back does it have to go?
See, I'm from America and it is really different here. We all come from somewhere else but if you are born here you are considered American.
like most americans my ancesters came from many different european countries. So it is hard for us to idenetify with one blood ancestry.
Our Medeival history is your medeival history.
|
Posted By: violentjack
Date Posted: 06-Jun-2006 at 17:11
|
I have book Seyathana or Traveling, or just Putopis with me Which town are you interested in? ------------- Bosnjaci,probudite se ili nestanite |
Posted By: violentjack
Date Posted: 06-Jun-2006 at 17:14
|
Thats from Celebi book! He does desribe lot of towns, and ones who were populated by Bosniaks then like Kanjiza or Kanigsza,and some in Serbia Nis is described as Bulgarian town by the way, most of population speaks Bulgaria There is lot of Vlachs in his book Bosnian language he finds most admirable, even has praises about it Evlija Celebi Seyathana-Traveling travels from 1660-1665 period ------------- Bosnjaci,probudite se ili nestanite |
Posted By: Thracian
Date Posted: 07-Jun-2006 at 01:53
|
Interesting, well I highly doubt the whole mixing thing in (Bulgaria, Serbia, ....) considering our languages are 99% slavic. (Plus culture in general)
If I might ask, when is the state of Serbia officially considered to start its existance. I know that it started as a group of kingdoms in....
around 850?
|
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 07-Jun-2006 at 07:10
Well, i know a greek guy living in serbia-his serbian is much better then his greek, because he was born here-yet he considers himself greek-although he's got serbian citizenship...There's also hungarians in serbia-yet they've got a strong hungarian identity...
Or is it strickly a blood and ancester thing? And how far back does it have to go? well-it's not like we want to see the girls family tree when we want to marry her...
Thracian:
The first serbian medieval state was Rashka (Rascia) in the 9th century...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C5%A1ka_%28state%29 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C5%A1ka_%28state%29
One correction is necessary: porphyrogenit says serbs live in bosnia - he doesn't mean the lands of modern bosnia-he means the teritorry around Bosna river... ------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: Decebal
Date Posted: 07-Jun-2006 at 09:29
|
I have recently read in "A history of the Early Medieval Balkans" by Fine, that both the Croats and the Serbs were initially Scythian (Iranian) tribes who were acting as a military aristocracy for the Slav population which later on became the modern Serbs and the Croats. Apparently they migrated together to the Balkans, in the early 7th century, and that the process of Slavicization of the Iranian Serbs and Croats had probably started out even before the migration started. Thus, the genetic imprint of the Iranian Croats and Serbs was minimal, but the name of the ruling aristocracy was preserved and extended to the ruled Slavs. As proof of this, he presented linguistic evidence, as well as the mention in Roman chronicles of the 2nd century AD, of Scythian or Sarmatian tribes called the Serboi and the Croatans. In some ways, this is similar to the process that occured in Bulgaria, where the minority Turkic Bulgars were assimilated by the Slav majority, but where the old name of the aristocracy was extended to the ruled people. The major difference is that the assimilation process probably started much earlier for the Serbs and Croats, than it did for the Bulgars. ------------- What is history but a fable agreed upon? Napoleon Bonaparte Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi 
|
Posted By: Theodore Felix
Date Posted: 07-Jun-2006 at 13:21
|
I'd be careful with that book Decebal. great study indeed but one made over 15 years ago. it doesnt include all of the most recent available studies. ------------- |
Posted By: Decebal
Date Posted: 07-Jun-2006 at 14:15
|
And what do those studies say in this case? ------------- What is history but a fable agreed upon? Napoleon Bonaparte Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi
|
Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 07-Jun-2006 at 17:58
|
The hypotheses suggested by Decebal are strenghtened by the fact it is assumed that Slavic groups north of Danube (like Antes) were in fact a mixture of Slavic, Gothic, Iranic, Uralo-Altaic elements.
However, Walter Pohl (1985) observed that the ethnonym of the Croatians appeared after the fall of the Avar khaganate and suggested that the elite group giving this name to Croatians were in fact a tribe from Avar confederation. Therefore, he suggested a Turkic origin char-vata (free warriors) -> chrovatoi.
|
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 05:16
Fine is right-in general-both names Serbs and Croats cannot be explained through slavic languages...they don't mean anything...Pliny and Ptolemy (1st and 2nd century AD) mention serbs and croats on theritories where there wasn't any slavs... ------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 05:23
The hypotheses suggested by Decebal are strenghtened by the fact it is assumed that Slavic groups north of Danube (like Antes) were in fact a mixture of Slavic, Gothic, Iranic, Uralo-Altaic elements.
weren't the antes in eastern europe? Altaic element? I don't think there was any altaics around when antes started existing as a confederation...
However, Walter Pohl (1985) observed that the ethnonym of the Croatians appeared after the fall of the Avar khaganate and suggested that the elite group giving this name to Croatians were in fact a tribe from Avar confederation. Therefore, he suggested a Turkic origin char-vata (free warriors) -> chrovatoi.
I never thought i'd be defending the croats... Ok-both serbian and croatian names are mentioned centuries before avars as sarmatian tribes...And that ethimology is rubbish-both serbs and croats called the avars OBRI.Turkic origin....pffft.... ------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 10:33
"Obri" is a late mention and possibly taken from Byzantine accounts ("Abaroi").
|
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 12:30
No-i understood your point quite well...''Obri'' is what the south slavs called the avars...not our historians but common people- do u think they picked it up from byzantine historians
 ?...There's a proverb in croatia-''to shout like Obri''- it means to shout like a savage...Not their names but some names bearing some similarity.
I don't know about croats-but Plinii Cecilii Secundi in Historia Naturalis says: "A Cimmerio accolunt Maeotici, Vali, Serbi, Zingi, Psesii".It's dated 1st century AD.SERBI-hmmm...sounds similar to....oh, i don't know-Serbs, perhaps...
 Once again:what altaics were part of the Antes? ------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 12:58
I haven't said "historians" but "accounts". Many early Slavic states from southern and eastern Europe were under certain degree of Byzantine cultural influences. There's (was?) a saying also in Russia - "to perish like the Obri" (invoking Avar khagante definitive demise). Did the Russians take it from Croatians?
And amazingly, popular traditions do inherit some rather scholarly traditions. For instance, in the Medieval Slavic culture we find a copy of a Byzantine account of Alexandria (the story of Alexander the Great). Elements from this story eventually reached the folklore, and even today, in rural areas, you may encounter the legend of "blajeni"/"rocmans"/"nago-mudri" derived from the gymnosophistai, the brahmans Alexander the Great allegedly met.
Antes, like most nomadic entities were probably an impure mixture of tribes of various origins. I just enumerated the possible elements that could form them because of their neighbourhood.
|
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 13:14
Yes-but how many people calling themselves Serbs are there?You've got us serbs, Sorbs (lusatian serbs) in germany and Sarban tribe in afghanistan.It's a well-known fact that sarmatian imposed their rule to slavs.I'm aware that we're slavs culturally and mostly balcan natives genetically, and that our original serb genes are like 0.03 %-but how can u explain the name Serb?
Btw - why would the croats call themselves by avars after the avars were crushed-i mean-they hated the avars... and it's not the same as with Bulgars-turkic bulgarians allied with slavs to defend themselves from avars and byzantines-in the first 200 years there was almost no mixing between them-not until they were christianized... ------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 13:27
|
A third objection (though rather question) would be, if Serbs are so well identified where are the others?
assimilated by others probably-where are the huns, avars, sumerians,hurians,cimmerians, scythians...
But from that I draw a fourth objection, how do you know Pliny's account to be accurate? Confirmed by whom/what?
Ptolemy mentions Serboi dwelling in Sarmatia in the 2nd century AD.
Similarity between Serb/serboi/serbi/sorbs/srbi is quite obvious (the root srb)...but if say it's just a coincidence-then so be it-since u must have more competence then John Fine-you must be some world-authority on history...
------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: Chilbudios
Date Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 19:10
|
Even a reputable historian can be wrong, yet I'm not saying that, merely I'm asking for some substantial evidences. Reputation does not replace evidences or arguments. |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 09-Jun-2006 at 05:30
|
You're hopeless......i'll let the croats fight their own battles...Btw Avar and Hrvat don't sound that similar...they don't even have the same root... ------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: NikeBG
Date Posted: 13-Jun-2006 at 10:26
|
Hah, funny! You mentioned a saying about the Avars I just read in a book. There it says that as early as 11th century there's a saying in Russia: "Izumrli kao Avari!", which is the Serbian translation, I guess. And http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b4/NikeBG/Savic.jpg - the book is "History of the Bulgarian people" ("Историjа Бугарскога народа") of the Serbian Dr. Milan Savic, originally published in 1878. Quite an interesting read! And it's on Serbian too, so I'm practicing kin languages... Btw, he also mentions Nish among the Bulgarian cities there (with population of 16 000). ------------- |
Posted By: slavis-aleximus
Date Posted: 12-Sep-2006 at 21:08
i am verry sorry to say this but u probably have never seen bosnian serb or croat or slovenian or macedonian in youre life. because if u have ever seen more than two yugolsavs, as we call oureselves u could clearly see that we look nothing like albanians. |
Posted By: slavis-aleximus
Date Posted: 12-Sep-2006 at 21:23
earliest neighbours of slavic people were what we today call german tribes. slavs called them nemci. even today in serbian and croatian language germany is called namachka. in slavic languages nem means mute or unable to speak. most likly unable to speak with other slavic people and that makes a lot of sence especialy if u take in mind that even toaday some 14 ceturies from slavic expanzion thru soutern and eastern europe almost evry slav can understand almost any slavic language. |
Posted By: slavis-aleximus
Date Posted: 12-Sep-2006 at 22:02
actualy it is not diferent at all. once upon a time when all southern slavs livet in one big happy country we all had a red passport wich was most persious of all of the passports of the world on the black markrets around the globe. and if u open the front page of that passport u could see that in it were writen youre name last name citizenship and youre nationality. so it was up to u what u will write as youre nationality. serb croat macedonian albanian eskimo or even a penguin or jedi knight. as long u pay youre taxes and make no trouble to the police nobody cared. but every body wrote something as theirs nationality. they wrote as theirs nationality what they feel theay are, serb croat macedonian turk albanian exatcly what theay are. not because where they were born but what they are. |
Posted By: Maljkovic
Date Posted: 13-Sep-2006 at 04:57
| I have to make my point here. Many history records say that the area setlled by Croats and Serbs was laied to waste by the Avars, so there wouldn't be that many natives around. Also, there are numerous archeological evidence linking Croats to south Ukraine, especially the give-away red and white squares. Now south Ukraine is way too far south to be speaking of a slavic nation! Also, all archeologic evidence from the 7. century sugests Croats were horsemen. This is very unusual for Slavs, who were mainly footsoldiers. Therefore I'm inclined to believe that asimilation into slavic ethnicity happened after Croats settled in the Balkans. |
Posted By: tsar
Date Posted: 13-Sep-2006 at 08:13
| I dont get it why u people always change the subject and never stay on the right topic, is this a topic about serbian medieval history or a topic on genetics? |
Posted By: Socrates
Date Posted: 18-Sep-2006 at 16:53
|
Many history records say that the area setlled by Croats and Serbs was laied to waste by the Avars, so there wouldn't be that many natives around.
lol Can you imagine an Avar on a horseback climbing on the mountains of Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia(where many people took refuge)? Why would they do such a thing, when all the good stuff were in the valleys? Besides, all you need is little anthropology to notice that we're different from other Slavs.Just look at these Montenegrins-phenotypes of Montenegro haven't changed much in the last 2000 years:
http://www.sergejcetkovic.com/Sergej%20prva%204.jpg - http://www.sergejcetkovic.com/Sergej%20prva%204.jpg http://www.balkanmedia.com/m2/sl/1958-1-4.jpg - http://www.balkanmedia.com/m2/sl/1958-1-4.jpg http://www.newizv.ru/images/photos/big/20050725212141_1-marovic.jpg - http://www.newizv.ru/images/photos/big/20050725212141_1-marovic.jpg ------------- "It's better to be a billionair for a lifetime then to live in poverty for a week" Bob Rock |
Posted By: SOKON MEJIA
Date Posted: 31-Dec-2006 at 20:54
| I got question about Stefan Dusan did he ever overtaken Odrin ? |
Posted By: The Chargemaster
Date Posted: 01-Jan-2007 at 03:31
Odrin=Adrianopolis=Edirne No. Never. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 11-Jun-2007 at 06:19
|
I cant believe that someone say that Serbs and Croats look like Albanians. Serbs and Croats came long before any albanian was mantioned in history. How can you search for similarity between them? Just look at some pictures of @normal@ Serb or Croat and then look at the albanian people. Youll see the diference. |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 11-Jun-2007 at 14:49
There is numerous genetic evidence that many inhabitants of Hercegovina have majority illyrian blood. Alongisde cultural traits. Fact is that Slavs were few in number, the ruling families for most part were slavs, the rest an amagalm of peoples, mostly illyrian.
------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 17:56
| I agree with you on that Jay. I 'm Montenegrin and, boy do you see a lot of dark , Middle Eastern- looking people around here! Just by looking at them it 's clear to you that they have Turkish blood. My elder brother is one of them , so I 'm aware that unfortunately I have some Turkish blood too. However , there is indeed a significant minority of people in Montenegro and an even greater number of people in Serbia and Bosnia who are really blond , blue eyed and light or pinkish skinned. I think that probably all Serbs would be mostly looking like this if the Turks never onquered us. After all Serb lands in the Balkans were settled by two Slavic waves : one in the 5th and 6th and the other when in the 7 th century, when the slavicized Serbs (linguistically and through intermarriage) came to the Balkan Penninsula and inhabited the regions oh Serbia , Montenegro and Bosnia and Hercegovina. Therefore the Serbs of the Middle Ages had a lot of Slavic blood, more than their neighbours, the Croats and the Bulgarians. |