Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 151 to 168 of 168

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

  1. #151
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    625
    Points
    6,446
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,446, Level: 23
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 104
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    There is no evidence that I2a Din-south came from "White Croatia."

    "White Croatia" probably did not exist, deal with it.
    If White Croatia does not exist, there existed White Croats.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Croats

    In 2010 has Ken Nordtvedt argued that I-L69.2 is too young not to have been a result of a sudden expansion. According to him I2a1b1 arose not earlier than 2500 years ago in Eastern Europe. He has presumed this to be a consequence from the Slavic invasion of the Balkans, from the area north-east of the Carpathians since 500 CE. In 2011 Nordtvedt has confirmed I-L69.2 is not older than 2,800 years. In his last comments about Haplogroup I tree and the conjectured spread map, he locates the start of the I-L69.2 lineage around the middle course of the Vistula.

    http://www.waughfamily.ca/Ancient/Tr...r%20Hg%20I.pdf


    So far, most or all of those who are negative for S17250 have patrilineage
    originating near the Carpathians, particularly southeastern Poland and
    extreme western Ukraine. That pattern may change with more sampling, of
    course Date: 20 May 2014.
    http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.co...-05/1400615460


    May 4, 2017..In fact there is still only one known man who is CTS10228+ S17250- Y4460- Z17855- A2512-, he has paternal ancestry from southeastern Poland.
    http://i2aproject.blogspot.hr/2017/0...621-and-i.html


    R1a Z280 CTS3402 also has a high frequency in southern Poland, but for now it does not know the source of the same ... probably in southern Poland but it needs to be determined.
    https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...ufrQJyWb4fD9zg

  2. #152
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    22,749
    Level
    46
    Points: 22,749, Level: 46
    Level completed: 20%, Points required for next Level: 801
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: Serbia



    No historical sources, no scientific sources in this list.

    But there are historical sources.

    One of them is Latin medieval text by Bavarian Geographer containing a list of tribes in Central-Eastern Europe, it is emerged in 9th century.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bavarian_Geographer

    There is no Croats or White Croats.

    Latin text:

    Descriptio civitatum et regionum ad septentrionalem plagam Danubii.

    (1) Isti sunt qui propinquiores resident finibus Danaorum, quos vocant Nortabtrezi, ubi regio, in qua sunt civitates LIII per duces suos partite.
    (2) Uulici, in qua civitates XCV et regiones IIII.
    (3) Linaa est populus, qui habet civitates VII.
    (4-6) Prope illis resident, quos vocant Bethenici et Smeldingon et Morizani, qui habent civitates XI.
    (7) Iuxta illos sunt, qui vocantur Hehfeldi, qui habent civitates VIII.
    (8) Iuxta illos est regio, que vocatur Surbi, in qua regione plures sunt, que habent civitates L.
    (9) Iuxta illos sunt quos vocant Talaminzi, qui habent civitates XIII.
    (10) Beheimare, in qua sunt civitates XV.
    (11) Marharii habent civitates XL.
    (12) Uulgarii regio est inmensa et populus multus habens civitates V, eo quod mutitudo magna ex eis sit et non sit eis opus civitates habere.
    (13) Est populus quem vocant Merehanos, ipsi habent civitates XXX.
    Iste sunt regiones, que terminant in finibus nostris.

    Isti sunt, qui iuxta istorum fines resident.
    (14) Osterabtrezi, in qua civitates plus quam C sunt.
    (15) Miloxi, in qua civitates LXVII.
    (16) Phesnuzi habent civitates LXX.
    (17) Thadesi plus quam CC urbes habent.
    (18) Glopeani, in qua civitates CCCC aut eo amplius.
    (19) Zuireani habent civitates CCCXXV.
    (20) Busani habent civitates CCXXXI.
    (21) Sittici regio inmensa populis et urbibus munitissimis.
    (22) Stadici, in qua civitates DXVI populousque infinitus.
    (23) Sebbirozi habent civitates XC.
    (24) Unlizi populus multus civitates CCCCXVIII.
    (25)Neriuani habent civitates LXXVIII.
    (26) Attorozi habent civitates CXLVIII, populus ferocissimus.
    (27) Eptaradici habent civitates CCLXIII.
    (28) Uuilerozi habent civitates CLXXX.
    (29) Zabrozi habent civitates CCXII.
    (30) Znetalici habent civitates LXXIIII.
    (31) Aturezani habent civitates CIIII.
    (32) Chozirozi habent civitates CCL.
    (33) Lendizi habent civitates XCVIII.
    (34) Thafnezi habent civitates CCLVII.
    (35) Zeriuani, quod tantum est regnum, ut ex eo cuncte genetes Sclauorum exorte sint et originem, sicut affirmant, ducant.
    (36) Prissani civitates LXX.
    (37) Uelunzani civitates LXX.
    (38) Bruzi plus est undique quam de Enisa ad Rhenum
    (39) Uuizunbeire
    (40) Caziri civitates C.
    (41) Ruzzi.
    (42) Forsderen.
    (43) Liudi.
    (44) Fresiti.
    (45) Serauici.
    (46) Lucolane.
    (47) Ungare.
    (48) Uuisane.
    (49) Sleenzane civitates XV.
    (50) Lunsizi civitates XXX.
    (51) Dadosesani civitates XX.
    (52) Milzane civitates XXX.
    (53) Besunzane civitates II.
    (54) Uerizane civitates X.
    (55) Fraganeo civitates XL.
    (56) Lupiglaa civitates XXX.
    (57) Opolini civitates XX.
    (58) Golensizi civitates V.

    Picture of the tribes:


  3. #153
    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



    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    There is no Croats or White Croats.
    Could be a use of a different ethnonym/exonym (for e.g. Chozirozi mentioned alongside Lendizi), toponym, political situation, in the fact they did not live alongside a river or trade routes, among others. The list is incomplete, has many errors, while the map is even less complete and has a hypothetical consideration by an author of dubious reliability. One historical source does not over-weight other even more reliable sources. Actually, you are intentionally making low provocation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    There is no evidence that I2a Din-south came from "White Croatia."

    There is no evidence for many things, but considering all the evidence we have, in a such an ideological and two-sided discussion, there is much less probability Dinaric-South came from "White Serbia" which probably even less existed and Serbs than "White Croatia" and White Croats. By historiographical, archeological, ethnogenetic and genetic evidence and viewpoint, that's a fact.

  4. #154
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    625
    Points
    6,446
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,446, Level: 23
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 104
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    No historical sources, no scientific sources in this list.
    It does not have to be scientific sources when we have ancestors of Croatian I2a types in southeastern Poland, include brain. Father of mutation https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250/ is in southestern Poland, from where mutation I-S17250 comes to Roman Dalmatia, Spain?



    How do you think that there are no historical sources?

    Nestor the Chronicler in his Primary Chronicle (12th century)From among these Slavs, parties scattered throughout the country and were known by appropriate names, according to the places where they settled. Thus some came and settled by the river Morava, and were named Moravians, while others were called Czechs. Among these same Slavs are included the White Croats,
    Alfred the Great in his Geography of Europe (888–893) relaying on Orosius, recorded that "To the north-east of the Moravians are the Dalamensae; east of the Dalamensians are the Horithi (Choroti, Choriti; Croats),

    Nestor described how many East Slavic tribes of "...the Polyanians, the Derevlians, the Severians, the Radimichians, and the Croats lived at peace" In 904-907, "Leaving Igor (914–945) in Kiev, Oleg (879–912) attacked the Greeks. He took with him a multitude of Varangians, Slavs, Chuds, Krivichians, Merians, Polyanians, Severians, Derevlians, Radimichians, Croats, Dulebians, and Tivercians, who are pagans.
    Many Croats also lived in the territory of Bohemia. The Prague Charter from 1086 AD (actually with data from 973) mentions on the Northeastern frontier of the Prague diocese "Psouane, Chrouati et altera Chrowati, Zlasane...". They were probably located around Elbe river in Czech Republic, while others on upper Vistula in Poland.
    In the 10th century, Arab historian Al-Masudi in his work The Meadows of Gold mentioned Harwātin or Khurwātīn, between Moravians, Chezchs and Saxons.[
    In the Hebrew book Josippon are listed four Slavic ethnic names from Venice to Saxony; Mwr.wh (Moravians), Krw.tj (Croats), Swrbjn (Sorbs), Lwcnj. Those Croats are probably those who were located in Bohemia.

    Historia Salonitana 13th centuryFrom the Polish territories called Lingonia seven or eight tribal clans arrived under Totilo. When they saw that the Croatian land would be suitable for habitation because in it there were few Roman colonies, they sought and obtained for their duke...The people called Croats...Many call them Goths, and likewise Slavs, according to the particular name of those who arrived from Poland and Bohemia.
    De Administrando Imperio 10th centuryThe Croats at that time ( 610—641)were dwelling beyond Bagibareia (usually considered Bavaria), where the Belocroats(White Croats) are now.(10th century)
    The toponyms that Croats brought from the Carpathians to Croatia http://www.kapitaltrade.hr/wp-conten...-s-Karpata.jpg

    Czech Tribes and Prince's Territorieshttp

    http://labphys.tf.czu.cz/czechtribes.htm


    In this article author describes archaeological excavations in the town of Stiljsko in Ukraine, which enabled researchers to reconstruct some aspects of historical and cultural development in this region during the early middle ages. On the basis of these revelations author points up that in the ninth century there existed one of the greatest fortifi ed settlements of Croats in the eastern-Karpatian region
    https://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show...ak_jezik=17599

  5. #155
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    625
    Points
    6,446
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,446, Level: 23
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 104
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Miroslav View Post
    There is much less probability Dinaric-South came from "White Serbia" which probably even less existed and Serbs than "White Croatia" and White Croats. By historiographical, archeological, ethnogenetic and genetic evidence and viewpoint, that's a fact.
    White Serbia does not exist, there is no historical record that mentions White Serbia.

  6. #156
    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
    White Serbia does not exist, there is no historical record that mentions White Serbia.
    Wrong.



    Deal with it.

  7. #157
    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 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    No historical sources, no scientific sources in this list. But there are historical sources. One of them is Latin medieval text by Bavarian Geographer containing a list of tribes in Central-Eastern Europe, it is emerged in 9th century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bavarian_Geographer There is no Croats or White Croats. Latin text: Descriptio civitatum et regionum ad septentrionalem plagam Danubii. (1) Isti sunt qui propinquiores resident finibus Danaorum, quos vocant Nortabtrezi, ubi regio, in qua sunt civitates LIII per duces suos partite. (2) Uulici, in qua civitates XCV et regiones IIII. (3) Linaa est populus, qui habet civitates VII. (4-6) Prope illis resident, quos vocant Bethenici et Smeldingon et Morizani, qui habent civitates XI. (7) Iuxta illos sunt, qui vocantur Hehfeldi, qui habent civitates VIII. (8) Iuxta illos est regio, que vocatur Surbi, in qua regione plures sunt, que habent civitates L. (9) Iuxta illos sunt quos vocant Talaminzi, qui habent civitates XIII. (10) Beheimare, in qua sunt civitates XV. (11) Marharii habent civitates XL. (12) Uulgarii regio est inmensa et populus multus habens civitates V, eo quod mutitudo magna ex eis sit et non sit eis opus civitates habere. (13) Est populus quem vocant Merehanos, ipsi habent civitates XXX. Iste sunt regiones, que terminant in finibus nostris. Isti sunt, qui iuxta istorum fines resident. (14) Osterabtrezi, in qua civitates plus quam C sunt. (15) Miloxi, in qua civitates LXVII. (16) Phesnuzi habent civitates LXX. (17) Thadesi plus quam CC urbes habent. (18) Glopeani, in qua civitates CCCC aut eo amplius. (19) Zuireani habent civitates CCCXXV. (20) Busani habent civitates CCXXXI. (21) Sittici regio inmensa populis et urbibus munitissimis. (22) Stadici, in qua civitates DXVI populousque infinitus. (23) Sebbirozi habent civitates XC. (24) Unlizi populus multus civitates CCCCXVIII. (25)Neriuani habent civitates LXXVIII. (26) Attorozi habent civitates CXLVIII, populus ferocissimus. (27) Eptaradici habent civitates CCLXIII. (28) Uuilerozi habent civitates CLXXX. (29) Zabrozi habent civitates CCXII. (30) Znetalici habent civitates LXXIIII. (31) Aturezani habent civitates CIIII. (32) Chozirozi habent civitates CCL. (33) Lendizi habent civitates XCVIII. (34) Thafnezi habent civitates CCLVII. (35) Zeriuani, quod tantum est regnum, ut ex eo cuncte genetes Sclauorum exorte sint et originem, sicut affirmant, ducant. (36) Prissani civitates LXX. (37) Uelunzani civitates LXX. (38) Bruzi plus est undique quam de Enisa ad Rhenum (39) Uuizunbeire (40) Caziri civitates C. (41) Ruzzi. (42) Forsderen. (43) Liudi. (44) Fresiti. (45) Serauici. (46) Lucolane. (47) Ungare. (48) Uuisane. (49) Sleenzane civitates XV. (50) Lunsizi civitates XXX. (51) Dadosesani civitates XX. (52) Milzane civitates XXX. (53) Besunzane civitates II. (54) Uerizane civitates X. (55) Fraganeo civitates XL. (56) Lupiglaa civitates XXX. (57) Opolini civitates XX. (58) Golensizi civitates V. Picture of the tribes:
    These are the names of tribes, not nations. Do you believe that there were as much as 58 Slavic nations, only in that area?

    "(35) Zeriuani, quod tantum est regnum, ut ex eo cuncte genetes Sclauorum exorte sint et originem, sicut affirmant, ducant."

    Croats were "hidden" under the "Sclauorum" ethnonyme.

  8. #158
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    625
    Points
    6,446
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,446, Level: 23
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 104
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Bachus View Post
    Wrong.Deal with it.
    Dervan or Derwan (Latin: Dervanus) was an early King of the Sorbs (fl. 615–636)
    Sorbs (Upper Sorbian: Serbja, Lower Sorbian: Serby, German: Sorben), known also by their former autonyms Lusatians and Wends, are a West Slavic ethnic group predominantly inhabiting their homeland in Lusatia
    Sorbs and Balkan Serbs they have nothing to do among themselves historically and genetically. Where in historical records is mentioned White Serbia in the area of Lusatia, or elsewhere?

  9. #159
    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
    Wrong.



    Deal with it.
    The territory of "Dervan's Serbia" was full of Croatian ethnotoponyms durring the early medieval period:

    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
    Some of these are still there. They indicate early Croat presence in the area even though the sources do not mention them. What does it tell us? We shuld allow a possibility that they were mentioned under a different name(s). There are no toponymes to indicate "Slavic" presence so it is natural to suppose that the Croats were "hiddden" under a Slavic ethnonym.

  10. #160
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    625
    Points
    6,446
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,446, Level: 23
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 104
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Wonomyro
    The territory of "Dervan's Serbia"
    Sorbs and Balkans Serbs are not same people,
    He is mentioned by Fredegar in his Latin chronicle as dux gente Surbiorum que ex genere Sclavinorum:
    The earliest surviving mention of the tribe was in 631 A.D
    Chronicle described them as Surbi

  11. #161
    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



    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by hrvat22 View Post
    Sorbs and Balkans Serbs are not same people,
    Sorbs were not part of Serbian tribe from eastern Germany they lived north of Serbs. Sorbs adopted Serbian name because they were in state federation with Serbs, name of Sorbs before they adopted Serbian name were ​Wends.

    Serbs came from eastern Germany in VII century, of course that modern Serbs are not 100% same people as Sebs from VII century because of mixing with native Balkanites.

    Same is with Croats, modern Croats are not same people as Croats which lived in White Croatia.
    Western Ukrainians, Rusyns and southern Poles are closer to White Croats than modern Croats from Croatia.

    Modern Magyars are not same people as proto-Magyars.
    Modern Tukish people are not same people as Oghuz Turks.
    Modern French are not same people as Franks.
    Modern Germans are not same people as ancient Germanics.
    Modern Italians are not same people as Romans.
    Modern Greeks are not same people as ancient Greeks.
    Modern Spaniards are not same people as ancient Iberians.
    Modern northern Indians and Pakistanis are not same people as ancient Indo-Aryans.
    Modern Iranians are not same people as ancient Persians.
    Modern Egyptians are not same people as ancient Egyptians.
    Modern Mexicans are not same people as Maya and Aztec people.
    Modern Finns are not same people as ancient Finno-Ugric people.
    Modern English people are not same people as Angle and Saxon tribe from Middle Age.

  12. #162
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    01-09-14
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    625
    Points
    6,446
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,446, Level: 23
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 104
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Sorbs were not part of Serbian tribe from eastern Germany they lived north of Serbs. Sorbs adopted Serbian name because they were in state federation with Serbs,
    Give me historical information about Serbs in that area.

    Balkan Serbs are named in the Balkans in Greece, therefore no Serbs exist around Sorbs.

    Before that they come from a place called
    in a
    region called by them Boïki,
    Last edited by hrvat22; 15-11-17 at 09:46.

  13. #163
    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
    Sorbs were not part of Serbian tribe from eastern Germany they lived north of Serbs. Sorbs adopted Serbian name because they were in state federation with Serbs, name of Sorbs before they adopted Serbian name were Wends.

    Serbs came from eastern Germany in VII century, of course that modern Serbs are not 100% same people as Serbs from VII century because of mixing with native Balkanites.
    Your list is another typical denial of historical and genetic evidence which oppose the generally promoted theory by Serbian DNA Project. The generalizations are not definitive in the same amount for each of these listed groups. Sorbs were not part of the Serbian tribe because they were the same people with same ethnonym (Sorbs=Serbs). At the time there were no two separate populations with different but similar ethnonyms (Sorbs, Serbs). You are factually wrong, and the assertion that Sorbs adopted the Serbian name is a lie, while the name Wends was actually an exonym by the Germans used for Slavic people in general, including for the So(e)rb tribe. Basically with your saying that the modern Serbs are not the same as Serbs from VII century Eastern Germany because of mixing with native Balkanites you admit that dominance of I2-Dinaric in modern Serbs is of foreign origin because Sorbs have over 60% R1a and absence of any significant percentage of haplogroup I2 in general.

  14. #164
    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



    It is interesting that Balkan Serbs, unlike Sorbs in Lusatia, actually do not use a root form "Srb", as it is usually translated to English (Serb) and other foreign languages. They use the from "Srbin" which should be properly translated to English as “Serbian”. Srbian means “one from Serbia”. I’ve never heard them to say “Srb” for themselves. It is always “Srbin”.

    It seems that "Srbin" became a "real" ethnonym over time. Croatian sources until middle 19. century regularly call their country Servija (Servia) and its population Servijani (Servians).
    Last edited by Wonomyro; 15-11-17 at 17:43.

  15. #165
    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



    We are going off topic with linguistics, but just to add. Servia and Servians is the same as Serbia and Serbians (v=b), while in medieval Serbian documents like Dušan's Code (14th century) are used terms such as "Sebri", "Srbljin", "Srbljem" etc. -in is a suffix, as well as -at in "Hrvat" (and some supposed same or similar Iranian origin of hrv=srb), it is also recorded "Surbia", "Serbulia", "Sorbulia", in Lusatia due to influence by Germans changed Serb to Sorb. Heinz Schuster-Šewc considered origin from Indo-European *serbh- / *sirbh- / *surbh- (meaning "sip", "breast-feed", "flow").

  16. #166
    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 Miroslav View Post
    We are going off topic with linguistics, but just to add. Servia and Servians is the same as Serbia and Serbians (v=b), while in medieval Serbian documents like Dušan's Code (14th century) are used terms such as "Sebri", "Srbljin", "Srbljem" etc. -in is a suffix, as well as -at in "Hrvat" (and some supposed same or similar Iranian origin of hrv=srb), it is also recorded "Surbia", "Serbulia", "Sorbulia", in Lusatia due to influence by Germans changed Serb to Sorb. Heinz Schuster-Šewc considered origin from Indo-European *serbh- / *sirbh- / *surbh- (meaning "sip", "breast-feed", "flow").
    Don't worry, @Miroslav, we are still on topic. I am just using linguistics to support what you already concluded from genetics. I agree with all what you said above except that there is no analogy between Hrv-at and Srb-in. Here is why:

    1. "Croat" was never "Hrv", always "Hrvat". There is no "Cro" except as an abbreviation...

    2. Lusatian "Serb" is just "Srb" not "Srbin".

    e.g.

    Lower Sorbian: Serb
    Czech: Srb
    Ukrainian: серб
    ...
    Serbian: Srbin (exception!)

    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Serb#Translations

    3. Srbin is analogue to Hrvatin (plural: Hrvatini).

    e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hrvatini (Hrvatini = people from Croatia)

    That means that "Srbin" is "Serbian" the same way as "Hrvatin" is "Croatian". Original ethnonyms are therefore "Srb" and "Hrvat", not "Srbin" and "Hrvat".

    This tells us that Balkan Serb(ian)s got their name after the region (Serbia), not vice versa.

  17. #167
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    22,749
    Level
    46
    Points: 22,749, Level: 46
    Level completed: 20%, Points required for next Level: 801
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Wonomyro View Post
    These are the names of tribes, not nations. Do you believe that there were as much as 58 Slavic nations, only in that area?

    "(35) Zeriuani, quod tantum est regnum, ut ex eo cuncte genetes Sclauorum exorte sint et originem, sicut affirmant, ducant."

    Croats were "hidden" under the "Sclauorum" ethnonyme.
    No.

    Bavarian Geographer doesn't mention Croats.
    ...

    Historians are scientists, as all scientists they base their scientific papers on the facts, not speculations.

    We already discussed the Croatian name in Dalmatia, it is mentioned first time in 9th century, not before.

    No one Frankish chronicle, or Eastern Roman chronicle, or any other source mention Croats before 852.

    For example Duke Borna was named as "Duke of Dalmatia and Liburnia".

    About Croatian name, what is right question, I will continue in another thread.

  18. #168
    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 Garrick View Post
    No.
    Bavarian Geographer doesn't mention Croats.
    So what? Other sources do. Toponyms do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    Historians are scientists, as all scientists they base their scientific papers on the facts, not speculations.
    There are many historians and many theories.

    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    We already discussed the Croatian name in Dalmatia, it is mentioned first time in 9th century, not before.
    They were mentioned as Slavs. Hopefully there are two inscriptions of duke Branimir from 9th century: "dux Sclavorum" and "dux Chroatorum". The two were obviously synonyms. The Branimir’s predecessors had Slavic names too. We have no reason not to believe that they also called themselves Croats.

    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    No one Frankish chronicle, or Eastern Roman chronicle, or any other source mention Croats before 852.
    They mention Slavs. These were the same guys as I showed you above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    For example Duke Borna was named as "Duke of Dalmatia and Liburnia".
    So what?
    Last edited by Wonomyro; 16-11-17 at 01:46.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567

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
  •