Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 168

Thread: Knez Dervan's Serbia and the Ethnogenisis of Balkan Serbs

  1. #76
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    621
    Points
    6,422
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,422, Level: 23
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 128
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Crya View Post
    Please provide the link.
    http://homepage.univie.ac.at/ilja.steffelbauer/DAI.pdf

  2. #77
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-11-17
    Posts
    273
    Points
    2,039
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,039, Level: 12
    Level completed: 63%, Points required for next Level: 111
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22 View Post
    Today's Serbs are genetic mixture of Croats, Albanians and Vlachs.
    Samo u tvojim mitomanskim snovima.

    Only in your dreams.

  3. #78
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    621
    Points
    6,422
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,422, Level: 23
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 128
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    Samo u tvojim mitomanskim snovima.
    You have genetics, historical records and refute my statement.

    That's why Eupedia is genetic forum to prove something while we are here. If I'm wrong and you prove that I will respect it.

  4. #79
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-11-17
    Posts
    273
    Points
    2,039
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,039, Level: 12
    Level completed: 63%, Points required for next Level: 111
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22 View Post
    You have genetics, historical records and refute my statement.

    That's why Eupedia is genetic forum to prove something while we are here. If I'm wrong and you prove that I will respect it.
    There is no genetic evidence that Serbs are conected with Croats, Albanians and Vlachs, but there is a genetic evidence that large part of Croats are Serbian origin, deal with it.

  5. #80
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    621
    Points
    6,422
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,422, Level: 23
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 128
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    There is no genetic evidence that Serbs are conected with Croats, Albanians and Vlachs, but there is a genetic evidence that large part of Croats are Serbian origin, deal with it.
    You are the joker hahahaa.. how is it possible that there is no genetic evidence that Serbs are conected with Croats when you clame that Croats are genetic Serbs.

    Joke to the side, please show genetic evidence and historical records that support you clame, till then you talk fairy tales.

  6. #81
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-11-17
    Posts
    273
    Points
    2,039
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,039, Level: 12
    Level completed: 63%, Points required for next Level: 111
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22 View Post
    You are the joker hahahaa.. how is it possible that there is no genetic evidence that Serbs are conected with Croats when you clame that Croats are genetic Serbs.

    Joke to the side, please show genetic evidence and historical records that support you clame, till then you talk fairy tales.
    Proto-Croats were Turkic tribe possible Avars or Ogurs as Turkish historian Osman Karatay claims.

    Haplogroup I2-PH908 came to the Balkans with Serbs in VII century. Serbs came to Balkans from modern western Czechia and eastern Bavaria, haplogroup I2-CTS10228 exist in western Czechia and eastern Bavaria today.
    Real name of Sorbs were Wends they were in the alliance with Serbs which lived south from them, because of that Wends adopted Serbian name.
    Sorbs don't call themselves Sorbs, they call themselves Serby https://dsb.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serby

    Croats came to the Balkans as Turkic tribe probably as remains of Avars, few Turkic Croats it imposed as elite to Slavs and local Slavs in part of western Balkans adpted Croatian name, similar as Turkic Bulgars and Slavs in eastern Balkans.
    In VII and VIII century Croats were mentioned as non-Slavic people with weird non-Slavic names of their rulers such as Kluk, Muhol, Lovel, Kosen, Tuga, Vuga...
    Proto-Croats were Turkic without any doubt, deal with it.

  7. #82
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    621
    Points
    6,422
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,422, Level: 23
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 128
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    Proto-Croats were Turkic tribe possible Avars or Ogurs as Turkish historian Osman Karatay claims.

    Serbs came to Balkans from modern western Czechia and eastern Bavaria, haplogroup I2-CTS10228 exist in western Czechia and eastern Bavaria today.
    Real name of Sorbs were Wends they were in the alliance with Serbs which lived south from them, because of that Wends adopted Serbian name.
    Sorbs don't call themselves Sorbs, they call themselves Serby https://dsb.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serby

    Croats came to the Balkans as Turkic tribe probably as remains of Avars, few Turkic Croats it imposed as elite to Slavs and local Slavs in part of western Balkans adpted Croatian name, similar as Turkic Bulgars and Slavs in eastern Balkans.
    In VII and VIII century Croats were mentioned as non-Slavic people with weird non-Slavic names of their rulers such as Kluk, Muhol, Lovel, Kosen, Tuga, Vuga...
    Proto-Croats were Turkic without any doubt, deal with it.


    Haplogroup I2-PH908 came to the Balkans with Serbs in VII century.
    No one with I2-PH908 came to Balkans with Serbs.

    Do you know the history of Serbs?

    Give me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman Dalmatia


    Translation into English you have no proof for your theory, which means I'm right.

    Kluk, Muhol, Lovel, Kosen, Tuga, Vuga...
    Proto-Croats were Turkic
    Names, surnames, language, letter, hair color, etc. have nothing to do with origin of man, group or tribe.

    Serbs came to Balkans from modern western Czechia and eastern Bavaria, haplogroup I2-CTS10228 exist in western Czechia and eastern Bavaria today.
    Quote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia.

  8. #83
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-11-17
    Posts
    273
    Points
    2,039
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,039, Level: 12
    Level completed: 63%, Points required for next Level: 111
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22 View Post
    No one with I2-PH908 came to Balkans with Serbs.

    Do you know the history of Serbs?

    Give me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman Dalmatia


    Translation into English you have no proof for your theory, which means I'm right.



    Names, surnames, language, letter, hair color, etc. have nothing to do with origin of man, group or tribe.



    Quote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia.
    The earliest found mention of Serbs is from Einhard's Royal Frankish Anals, writen in 822, when Ljudevit went from his seat at Sisakto the Serbs (believed to have been somewhere in western Bosnia), with Einhard mentioning the Srbs, who control the great part of Dalmatia (ad Sorabos, quae nation magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...bs#Middle_Ages

    Deal with it.

  9. #84
    Enfant Terrible Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience Points
    Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    462
    Points
    890
    Level
    7
    Points: 890, Level: 7
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 60
    Overall activity: 35.0%


    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    The earliest found mention of Serbs is from Einhard's Royal Frankish Anals, writen in 822, when Ljudevit went from his seat at Sisakto the Serbs (believed to have been somewhere in western Bosnia), with Einhard mentioning the Srbs, who control the great part of Dalmatia (ad Sorabos, quae nation magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...bs#Middle_Ages

    Deal with it.
    "quae natio magnam Dalmatiae partem optinere dicitur"

    He mention them but with reserve. He is not sure whether the information he got correct.

    My take is that that "Sorabos" were Gheg Albanians. Otherwise Franks would know more about them. I think he might heard the name from Croats or Byzantins.

  10. #85
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-11-17
    Posts
    53
    Points
    1,200
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,200, Level: 9
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 150
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Wonomyro View Post
    The root is indeed old.

    The root “srb” existed in archaic Croatian in the meaning “to slurp” or “to suck”. A place where shepherds bring their flocks to drink water was called “srbišće”. The high occurrence of the word in some areas may indicate such places. It is possible that Serbia got its name after the high number of montain rivers where sheperds could find lot of water for their flocks. Then the Balkan Serbs probably got their name from the the region they lived in/occupied, not vice versa. Also we can imagine that the word itself was brought to the region by Croats.
    The two of you should agree (Wonomyro and hrvat22) about the root SRB. One is saying this is Greek name the other saying it is Croatian. Interesting

  11. #86
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-11-17
    Posts
    53
    Points
    1,200
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,200, Level: 9
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 150
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Miroslav View Post
    In DAI is literally said: "...entered Serbia and took away with them the entire folk, both old and young, and carried them into Bulgaria, though a few escaped away and entered Croatia; and the country was left deserted. Now, at that time these same Bulgarians under Alogobotour entered Croatia to make war, and there they were all slain by the Croats. Seven years afterwards Tzeeslav escaped from the Bulgarians with four others, and entered Serbia from Preslav, and found in the country no more than fifty men only, without wives or children, who supported themselves by hunting... Serbs living in Croatia and Bulgaria and the rest of the countries... Moreover, many had escaped from Bulgaria and entered Constantinople... And from the rich gifts of the emperor of the Romans he organized and populated the country..." If the Serbs, like Croats, came as elite warrior caste i.e. minority elite who imposed their political rule, and these accounts represent their history, then it is clear these same Serbs almost vanished, and only a few managed to return and reimpose their rule with Byzantine Empire support in a depopulated territory. Basically speaking:
    • There's a doubtful continuity between R1a dominant Sorbs from Lusatia (White Serbia), which tribes were located in the West and not like White Croatian tribes all along the Carpathian mountains from the Czech Republic to Ukraine, and I2a-Dinaric dominant Serbs from Balkan.
    • There's a doubtful continuity between Serbs from Balkan who arrived since the 7th century and contemporary Serbs.
    You are again dealing with counterfeits and delusion. You have extracted only the part which supports your falls theory intentionally skipping the part where is written: And thenceforward the emperor of the Romans continually benefited him, so that the Serbs living in Croatia and Bulgaria and the rest of the countries, whom Symeon had scattered, rallied to him when they heard of it. Moreover, many had escaped from Bulgaria and entered Constantinople, and these the emperor of the Romans clad and comforted and send to Tzeeslav. Simply saying they came back, since never is written that he killed peaople it was written they What is also written in Constantin testimony is: Now, after some time these same Serbs decided to depart to their own homes, and the emperor sent them off. But when they crossed river Danube, they changed their minds and sent a request to the emperor Heraclius, through the military governor then holding Belgrade, that he would grant them other land to settled in. And since what is now Serbia and Pagania and the so-called Zachumli and Terbounia and the country of the Kanalites were under the dominion under the emperor of the Romans, and since these countries had been made desolated by the Avars (for they had expelled from those parts the Romani who now live in Dalmatia and Dyrrachium), therefore the emperor settled these same Serbs in these countries... Now attaching the map of these territory This is to support my theory of Serbs living in today Croatia which is highest concentration of I2a. And the other one showing demography of the 19 century

  12. #87
    Enfant Terrible Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience Points
    Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    462
    Points
    890
    Level
    7
    Points: 890, Level: 7
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 60
    Overall activity: 35.0%


    Country: Croatia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    Proto-Croats were Turkic tribe possible Avars or Ogurs as Turkish historian Osman Karatay claims.

    Haplogroup I2-PH908 came to the Balkans with Serbs in VII century. Serbs came to Balkans from modern western Czechia and eastern Bavaria, haplogroup I2-CTS10228 exist in western Czechia and eastern Bavaria today.
    Real name of Sorbs were Wends they were in the alliance with Serbs which lived south from them, because of that Wends adopted Serbian name.
    Sorbs don't call themselves Sorbs, they call themselves Serby https://dsb.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serby

    Croats came to the Balkans as Turkic tribe probably as remains of Avars, few Turkic Croats it imposed as elite to Slavs and local Slavs in part of western Balkans adpted Croatian name, similar as Turkic Bulgars and Slavs in eastern Balkans.
    In VII and VIII century Croats were mentioned as non-Slavic people with weird non-Slavic names of their rulers such as Kluk, Muhol, Lovel, Kosen, Tuga, Vuga...
    Proto-Croats were Turkic without any doubt, deal with it.
    The real name of Sorbs was maybe different.Take a look:

    The boundary between Thuringia and the Sorbs was defined as the Saale river by Einhard, writing in the 830s: Salam fluvium, qui Thuringos et Sorabos dividit ("the river Saale, which divides the Thuringii and the Sorbs").
    There is the list of cities and villages along the Saale river:

    Originating in Zell, the Saale flows through – Sparneck – Weißdorf – Seulbitz – Förbau – Schwarzenbach an der Saale – Fattigau – Oberkotzau – Hof – Brunnenthal – Saalenstein – Joditz – Landesgrenze Bayern/Thüringen – Hirschberg – Sparnberg – Rudolphstein – Blankenberg – Blankenstein – Harra – Saaldorf – Saalburg – Poeritzsch – Gräfenwarth – Burgk – Walsburg – Ziegenrück – Neidenberga – Hohenwarte – Eichicht – Kaulsdorf – Fischersdorf – Weischwitz – Reschwitz – Breternitz – Saalfeld – Schwarza – Volkstedt – Rudolstadt – Catharinau – Kolkwitz – Weißen – Uhlstädt – Rückersdorf – Zeutsch – Niederkrossen – Orlamünde – Freienorla – Großeutersdorf – Kleineutersdorf – Kahla – Großpürschütz – Jägersdorf – Rothenstein – Maua – Lobeda – Jena – Zwätzen – Porstendorf – Dornburg – Dorndorf-Steudnitz – Wichmar – Camburg – Tümpling – Großheringen – Kleinheringen – Landesgrenze Thüringen/Sachsen-Anhalt – Stendorf – Saaleck – Bad Kösen – Naumburg – Schellsitz - Schönburg – Eulau – Goseck – Leißling – Lobitzsch – Uichteritz – Markweben – Weißenfels – Dehlitz – Schkortleben – KleinkorbethaGroßkorbetha – Oebles-Schlechtewitz – Wengelsdorf – Bad Dürrenberg – Kröllwitz – Leuna – Trebnitz – Merseburg – Meuschau – Freiimfelde – Schkopau – Korbetha – Hohenweiden – Rockendorf – Holleben – Halle – Kröllwitz – Lettin – Brachwitz – Schiepzig – Salzmünde – Pfützthal – Döblitz – Zaschwitz – Wettin – Kloschwitz – Rumpin – Dobis – Friedeburg – Zickeritz – Rothenburg – Nelben – Gnölbzig – Trebnitz – Alsleben – Poplitz – Großwirschleben – Plötzkau – Gröna – Neuborna – Bernburg – Dröbel – Nienburg – Wedlitz – Damaschkeplan – Wispitz – Calbe (Saale) – Trabitz – Groß Rosenburg – Werkleitz
    The place names Kleinkorbetha, Großkorbetha and Korbetha are of Slavic origin but germanized. In the times of Limes Sorabicus their names were slightly different:

    (..) in Germany along Saale river there were Chruuati near Halle) in 901 AD, Chruuati in 981 AD,[24] Chruazis in 1012 AD,[24] Churbate in 1055 AD,[24] Grawat in 1086 AD,[24] Curewate (now Korbetha), Großkorbetha (Curuvadi and Curuuuati 881-899 AD) and Kleinkorbetha,[24] and Korbetha west of Leipzig
    Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Croatia

    So the place names were as follows:
    - Chruuati (Chruwati)
    - Curuuuati 881-899 (Curuwati)
    - Curuvadi
    - Curewate
    ...

    Obviously it comes from the plural form of "Hrvat" - "Hrvati".

    We can't fully trust Einhard and other Frankish sources when it comes to ethnonyms.

  13. #88
    Enfant Terrible Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience Points
    Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    462
    Points
    890
    Level
    7
    Points: 890, Level: 7
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 60
    Overall activity: 35.0%


    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Crya View Post
    The two of you should agree (Wonomyro and hrvat22) about the root SRB. One is saying this is Greek name the other saying it is Croatian. Interesting
    Which theory do you like more?

  14. #89
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-11-17
    Posts
    53
    Points
    1,200
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,200, Level: 9
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 150
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Miroslav View Post
    In DAI is literally said:

    "...entered Serbia and took away with them the entire folk, both old and young, and carried them into Bulgaria, though a few escaped away and entered Croatia; and the country was left deserted. Now, at that time these same Bulgarians under Alogobotour entered Croatia to make war, and there they were all slain by the Croats. Seven years afterwards Tzeeslav escaped from the Bulgarians with four others, and entered Serbia from Preslav, and found in the country no more than fifty men only, without wives or children, who supported themselves by hunting... Serbs living in Croatia and Bulgaria and the rest of the countries... Moreover, many had escaped from Bulgaria and entered Constantinople... And from the rich gifts of the emperor of the Romans he organized and populated the country..."

    If the Serbs, like Croats, came as elite warrior caste i.e. minority elite who imposed their political rule, and these accounts represent their history, then it is clear these same Serbs almost vanished, and only a few managed to return and reimpose their rule with Byzantine Empire support in a depopulated territory.

    Basically speaking:

    • There's a doubtful continuity between R1a dominant Sorbs from Lusatia (White Serbia), which tribes were located in the West and not like White Croatian tribes all along the Carpathian mountains from the Czech Republic to Ukraine, and I2a-Dinaric dominant Serbs from Balkan.
    • There's a doubtful continuity between Serbs from Balkan who arrived since the 7th century and contemporary Serbs.
    Again misleadings and delusions. You cited only part that supports your fake theory intentionally missing the part mentioning the folk coming back and resettling, since they were not killed. Also you forgot to mention part referring to initial settling of Roman areas by Serbs which, in that time includes Serbia, Travunia, Zahumlje, Pagania, Konavle. Map provided here https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...atian_view.png This map, together with attached Austro-Hungerian demography map from 19th century https://srbski.weebly.com/uploads/4/...75472_orig.jpg completely supports my theory of Serbs with dominant I2a haplogroup, and putting a big question mark on Croatian origin, and your so-called "theory".

  15. #90
    Enfant Terrible Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience Points
    Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    462
    Points
    890
    Level
    7
    Points: 890, Level: 7
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 60
    Overall activity: 35.0%


    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Crya View Post
    Again misleadings and delusions. You cited only part that supports your fake theory intentionally missing the part mentioning the folk coming back and resettling, since they were not killed. Also you forgot to mention part referring to initial settling of Roman areas by Serbs which, in that time includes Serbia, Travunia, Zahumlje, Pagania, Konavle. Map provided here https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...atian_view.png This map, together with attached Austro-Hungerian demography map from 19th century https://srbski.weebly.com/uploads/4/...75472_orig.jpg completely supports my theory of Serbs with dominant I2a haplogroup, and putting a big question mark on Croatian origin, and your so-called "theory".
    Mind that Constantine places that migration (and Christianization) into 7th century, which is impossible because Serbia got Christianized in the middle of 9th century. Moreover, at the end of the chapter 32. he precisely locates “Baptized Serbia” behind the mountains. In “Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea”, that area is named Red (South) Croatia.

    Austrian maps are extremely biased when it comes to ethnic naming.

  16. #91
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-11-17
    Posts
    53
    Points
    1,200
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,200, Level: 9
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 150
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Wonomyro View Post
    Mind that Constantine places that migration (and Christianization) into 7th century, which is impossible because Serbia got Christianized in the middle of 9th century. Moreover, at the end of the chapter 32. he precisely locates “Baptized Serbia” behind the mountains. In “Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea”, that area is named Red (South) Croatia.
    There are too many inconsistencies about Constantine which you agree to swallow it for Croats benefits only. Now swallow it all. “Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea” is completely disputed book, you better don't mention it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonomyro View Post
    Austrian maps are extremely biased when it comes to ethnic naming.
    Austrian maps are neutral they didn't have any benefits to undermine Croats in favor to Serbs. Not only this, have you seen the numbers? Numbers do not go into your favor... at all. So if i were Croat, i would take a friendly request as i offered in beginning and i would stop denying other peoples origin and history, since something bad might come out if we uncover the truth. At the end we are condemned to live together on Balkan... better to leave in peace and respect...

  17. #92
    Enfant Terrible Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience Points
    Wonomyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-17
    Posts
    462
    Points
    890
    Level
    7
    Points: 890, Level: 7
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 60
    Overall activity: 35.0%


    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Crya View Post
    There are too many inconsistencies about Constantine which you agree to swallow it for Croats benefits only. Now swallow it all. “Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea” is completely disputed book, you better don't mention it.
    Cronicle is a primary source and no one has right to "completely dispute" it. One should try to decode it, not simply reject it. "Priest" was local bishop. He based his story on a local oral tradition. The inconstencies in his stories are due to the nature of oral tradition. He was bishop of the area that he called Red Croatia, so we can't say that he didn't know how the area was called. Using the colours (red, white) to name two parts of Croatia is another proof that the names are authentic. Just compare it to very well known Slavic system of naming of the cardinal direction e. g. White Rus' and Red Rus' (Ruthenia).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardin...ral_variations

    Quote Originally Posted by Crya View Post
    Austrian maps are neutral they didn't have any benefits to undermine Croats in favor to Serbs. Not only this, have you seen the numbers? Numbers do not go into your favor... at all. So if i were Croat, i would take a friendly request as i offered in beginning and i would stop denying other peoples origin and history, since something bad might come out if we uncover the truth. At the end we are condemned to live together on Balkan... better to leave in peace and respect...
    Contrary, Austria, as a imperial, power was very often playing "divide et impera" game with its nations. In the beginning of the 19th century their state administration had plans to split Croats into "Serbs" and "Slovenians". For that reason they initiated and financed Serbian language reform.

  18. #93
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    02-03-17
    Posts
    92
    Points
    1,546
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,546, Level: 10
    Level completed: 98%, Points required for next Level: 4
    Overall activity: 14.0%


    Country: Slovenia



    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    Haplogroup I2-PH908 came to the Balkans with Serbs in VII century. Serbs came to Balkans from modern western Czechia and eastern Bavaria, haplogroup I2-CTS10228 exist in western Czechia and eastern Bavaria today.
    It is incredible that you, Serbs, are constantly making such a fraudulent argumentation with which you intentionally ignore the fact the I-PH908 could not come to the Balkans with the Serbs since the 7th century because the territory from which consider the migration took place is populated by ancestral population of the Sorbs who are dominant, around 65%, R1a, without almost any trace of I-CTS10228. Also, the small peak of I-CTS10228 in the Czech Republic is due to one surname family multiple test samples, practically one SNP sub-branch of I-PH908 which is absent in the Balkan. So much about the Serbian ethnogenetic "continuity". One of the simplest and typical examples of historiographical debunks in history.

  19. #94
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    02-03-17
    Posts
    92
    Points
    1,546
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,546, Level: 10
    Level completed: 98%, Points required for next Level: 4
    Overall activity: 14.0%


    Country: Slovenia



    Quote Originally Posted by Crya View Post
    Again misleadings and delusions. You cited only part that supports your fake theory intentionally missing the part mentioning the folk coming back and resettling since they were not killed. Also, you forgot to mention part referring to initial settling of Roman areas by Serbs which, in that time includes Serbia, Travunia, Zahumlje, Pagania, Konavle.
    You are saying that citing a historical source is misleading and delusional, while never bothered to read even Tibor Živković work about DAI. The few remaining "folk" are the elite caste, and from which areas the other part of the lower caste i.e. people of the land migrated i.e. is highly doubtful they were the same Serbs or mostly Serbs. Also, you forgot to understand that the settling of the Roman areas actually meant tribal political control over these provinces and not the actual ethnogenetic reality of the people in these provinces. DAI is not an ethnographic work, if anything, it is very bad being and understanding it like that. One of the best examples is Greek etymologies of Serbian and Croatian ethnonyms.

  20. #95
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    621
    Points
    6,422
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,422, Level: 23
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 128
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    The earliest found mention of Serbs is from Einhard's Royal Frankish Anals, writen in 822, when Ljudevit went from his seat at Sisakto the Serbs (believed to have been somewhere in western Bosnia), with Einhard mentioning the Srbs, who control the great part of Dalmatia (ad Sorabos, quae nation magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...bs#Middle_Ages

    Deal with it.
    I askeed, quote

    Give me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman Dalmatia
    Quote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia.
    Please answer otherwise my claim is true.

    Regarding
    Serbs who control the great part of Dalmatia
    In the same record write that
    Ljudevit left Serbs and went to Dalmatia
    , if Serbs control great part of Dalmatia how is possible that Ljudevit left Serbians and go to Dalmatia.?

    Furthermore today Dalmatia in Croatia is small part of Roman Dalmatia that covered Bosnia, western parts of Serbia, part of Croatia all way to Albania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalmat...a_(125_AD).svg so we do not know which part of Roman Dalmatia is spoken here.

    Stated
    the Srbs, who control the great part of Dalmatia
    is disputed by Priest of Dioclea 12th century
    And from the field of Dalmae (Duvno)(Bosnia) to the city of Dyrrachium (Durrës) (Albania) is Red Croatia"
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Croatia

    De administrando imperio, 10th century
    From the Croats who came to Dalmatia, one part separated and occupied Illyricum (Illurikon) and Panonian (Pannonian)
    Territory Ilirikuma stretches from the Drim River in today's Albania to Istria in Croatia and from the Adriatic coast to the Pannonian Basin. Salona near today's Split in Croatia was the center of the Roman province Ilirikum.

    John Skylitzes, Latinized as Ioannes Scylitzes (1040-1101)...The Bulgarians asked Mihajla,who then rule of those who were called Croats, who sat in Kotor and Prapratnica(Montenegro), and who had no small country under them, to help them and work with them, and to give them their son whom they would proclaim as emperor of Bulgaria "
    Mihailo, in Cyrillic Mihailo, the first king in Duklja and Montenegrin history, the head of the Duklja state from Vojislavljević dynasty from 1046 to 1081.
    1154 g. - The Arabic geographer, cartographer and travel writer Muhammad Al-Idrisi (1099-1164), describing Croatia (Bilad Garwasija), writes in his work "Kitab al Rudjar" the following:
    "Ragusa, Ragusah is away from Ston 30 miles. (Residents) are Dalmatians who have many boats for long sailing. This is the last town in Croatia (Garwasijah)".

  21. #96
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    04-11-17
    Posts
    53
    Points
    1,200
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,200, Level: 9
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 150
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Miroslav View Post
    You are saying that citing a historical source is misleading and delusional, while never bothered to read even Tibor Živković work about DAI. The few remaining "folk" are the elite caste, and from which areas the other part of the lower caste i.e. people of the land migrated i.e. is highly doubtful they were the same Serbs or mostly Serbs. Also, you forgot to understand that the settling of the Roman areas actually meant tribal political control over these provinces and not the actual ethnogenetic reality of the people in these provinces. DAI is not an ethnographic work, if anything, it is very bad being and understanding it like that. One of the best examples is Greek etymologies of Serbian and Croatian ethnonyms.
    I said that citing some historical sources partially with intentionally missing the part that disproves you is misleading and delusional.

    I've seen Tibor few times on TV and some of his old interviews on youtube. Yeah, you gave me a homework. Yesterday and today I have read some of his work but I couldn't find what you are talking about. Could you provide a link please?
    Anyway Tibor said for Serbians and Croats that have come to Balkan in 7th century could have been only 1-3% of total Balkan population, nobles, that ruled the natives. If this is truth how can we call our self Serbs and Croats today?
    One more thing, what is the difference in R1a and I2a between so-called Serbs and so-called Croats? Is there any difference, I am just asking since I haven't gone deep into the genetics yet?

  22. #97
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,307
    Points
    279,511
    Level
    100
    Points: 279,511, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crya View Post
    I said that citing some historical sources partially with intentionally missing the part that disproves you is misleading and delusional.

    I've seen Tibor few times on TV and some of his old interviews on youtube. Yeah, you gave me a homework. Yesterday and today I have read some of his work but I couldn't find what you are talking about. Could you provide a link please?
    Anyway Tibor said for Serbians and Croats that have come to Balkan in 7th century could have been only 1-3% of total Balkan population, nobles, that ruled the natives. If this is truth how can we call our self Serbs and Croats today?
    One more thing, what is the difference in R1a and I2a between so-called Serbs and so-called Croats? Is there any difference, I am just asking since I haven't gone deep into the genetics yet?
    Stop posting this nonsense. We now have dna from the Balkans, both ancient and modern. People from the Balkans are no longer like the people who lived there before the Slavic invasions.

    Please read all three of the following papers carefully:

    Iain Mathiesen et al 2015:https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/30/135616

    Balkan Genetics:
    http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology...l.pbio.1001555

    It was discussed here:
    https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...eway-to-Europe

    The Geography of Recent Ancestry across Europe: Ralph and Coop et al-based on IBD analysis
    http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology...l.pbio.1001555

    From the last paper based on IBD or actual inherited links:


    That didn't come from 2-3% of the population.

    It's beyond time to enter the modern era.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  23. #98
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    621
    Points
    6,422
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,422, Level: 23
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 128
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Crya View Post
    I said that citing some historical sources partially with intentionally missing the part that disproves you is misleading and delusional.

    I've seen Tibor few times on TV and some of his old interviews on youtube. Yeah, you gave me a homework. Yesterday and today I have read some of his work but I couldn't find what you are talking about. Could you provide a link please?
    Anyway Tibor said for Serbians and Croats that have come to Balkan in 7th century could have been only 1-3% of total Balkan population, nobles, that ruled the natives. If this is truth how can we call our self Serbs and Croats today?
    One more thing, what is the difference in R1a and I2a between so-called Serbs and so-called Croats? Is there any difference, I am just asking since I haven't gone deep into the genetics yet?
    So-called Croats they have R1a types that exist in southern Poland, whether there originate remains to be seen.

    https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...ufrQJyWb4fD9zg

    So-called Serbs have different main type of R1a, which is located in northeastern Bosnia and northwest Serbia,
    Z280>CTS1211>Y35>CTS3402>Y33>CTS8816>Y3301>L1280>Y 5647>YP611>YP3987>YP3992
    where is his source I do not know.

    https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1a?iframe=ymap

    So-called Croats have I2a types that coming from southern Poland and southwestern Ukraine (White Croatia).


    So-called Serbs have I2a types that coming from southern Poland and southwestern Ukraine (White Croatia) and I2a (dinaric-N types) that coming from southeastern Europe with Vlachs, together with other haplogroups (E1b, J2b, R1b types etc.)

  24. #99
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-11-17
    Posts
    273
    Points
    2,039
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,039, Level: 12
    Level completed: 63%, Points required for next Level: 111
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22 View Post
    So-called Croats they have R1a types that exist in southern Poland, whether there originate remains to be seen.

    https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...ufrQJyWb4fD9zg

    So-called Serbs have different main type of R1a, which is located in northeastern Bosnia and northwest Serbia, where is his source I do not know.

    https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1a?iframe=ymap

    So-called Croats have I2a types that coming from southern Poland and southwestern Ukraine (White Croatia).


    So-called Serbs have I2a types that coming from southern Poland and southwestern Ukraine (White Croatia) and I2a (dinaric-N types) that coming from southeastern Europe with Vlachs, together with other haplogroups (E1b, J2b, R1b types etc.)
    I did not know that I2-CTS10228 (north) is Vlachs origin, then Vlachs came from Belarus, because I2-CTS10228 originated in modern Belarus.

    Belarusians and Ukrainians have more I2-CTS10228 than any nation in the Balkans.

    I2-CTS10228 is 17,5% in Belarus and 20,5% in Ukraine, I2-PH908 does not exist in Ukraine and Belarus.

    I2-CTS10228 is pan-Slavic haplogroup and I2-PH908 is present only among Yugoslavs (except Slovenes), I2-PH908 it coincides with Vlach migrations.

    So there is much much much more chance that Dinaric-south is related with Vlachs than Dinaric-north.

  25. #100
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    621
    Points
    6,422
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,422, Level: 23
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 128
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    I did not know that I2-CTS10228 (north) is Vlachs origin, then Vlachs came from Belarus, because I2-CTS10228 originated in modern Belarus.

    Belarusians and Ukrainians have more I2-CTS10228 than any nation in the Balkans.

    I2-CTS10228 is 17,5% in Belarus and 20,5% in Ukraine, I2-PH908 does not exist in Ukraine and Belarus.

    I2-CTS10228 is pan-Slavic haplogroup and I2-PH908 is present only among Yugoslavs (except Slovenes), I2-PH908 it coincides with Vlach migrations.

    So there is much much much more chance that Dinaric-south is related with Vlachs than Dinaric-north.
    I askeed, quote


    Give me historical record from where Serbs coming to Roman Dalmatia



    Quote me genetic evidence for this and historical record since the first time I hear that I2a comes from western Czechia.


    Please answer otherwise my claim is true.

    Regarding
    I2-CTS10228 (north) is Vlachs origin
    types that coming from Greece, Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia in period of 500 years to Croatia¸are Vlachs origin (I2-CTS10228)


    Originally I2-CTS10228 with mutation

    https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/

    is White Croatian origin.


    Wich types of I2-CTS10228 coming to Croatia with Vlach we'll see in the future.


    Belarusians and Ukrainians have more I2-CTS10228

    There are branches of I2-CTS10228 in Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Romania etc..we follow specific branches and not all I2-CTS10228.


    https://yfull.com/tree/I-CTS10228/


    Do you see how many branches there are behind I-CTS10228, not all are from Belarus.

    I2-CTS10228 is pan-Slavic haplogroup and I2-PH908 is present only among Yugoslavs
    What does this have to do with source of same in southern Poland.


    So there is much much much more chance that Dinaric-south is related with Vlachs than Dinaric-north.

    All types I2a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types E1b in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types J2a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, all types R1a in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs and all types R1b in the Balkans are associated with Vlachs, but each haplotype and types has its origin and path of migration.


    History of most Vlachs in Croatia is around 500 years,


    When in a couple of years are establish which haplotipes and which branches of same coming to Croatia at that time then we will know exactly which mutation is Vlach origin. Which is source and original origin of that haplotype is another matter.


    You have to know that Vlach have mixed genetics, they have aboriginal Balkans genetic and genetic of newly arrived Croats and Slavs.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •