Are South Slavs more Balkan Native than Slavic?

Serbians are close to Bulgarians. However, both Bulgarians and Serbians are shifted north from Albaninas mostly due to a Slavic part of their ancestry. Our Bronze Age sample is shifted north due to Bronze Age Steppe newcomers, most probably J2b2/R1b people:



https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_J2_Y-DNA.shtml#J2b1


North Serbs are related to Croatians nothing to do with Bulgarians Bulgarians are between Greek and Romanians, actually.
 
North Serbs are related to Croatians nothing to do with Bulgarians Bulgarians are between Greek and Romanians, actually.

The Serbs who "are related to Croatians" are mostly members of a Serb minority in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. That's understandable. In forums they are usualy referred to as "Western Serbs", so I use the same term too. I've never heard that anyone use a term "North Serbs". These should be the Serbs who live in Vojvodina I suppose. So far I haven't seen data that proves that the Serbs from Vojvodina are autosomally related to Croatians.
 
The Serbs who "are related to Croatians" are mostly members of a Serb minority in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. That's understandable. In forums they are usualy referred to as "Western Serbs", so I use the same term too. I've never heard that anyone use a term "North Serbs". These should be the Serbs who live in Vojvodina I suppose. So far I haven't seen data that proves that the Serbs from Vojvodina are autosomally related to Croatians.
Then take their word for it and the fact that they live in Vojvodina not West Serbia because technically it's North that includes their genetics.
 
IMO, that is correct. First Nemanjic (his brother actually - Sava) was a founder of Serbian (Orthodox) Church.

Sava nor his brother was not the first Nemanjic but their father Stefan.

What was called "Serb", in the century to follow, was more or less a believer of the Serbian Church.

That's not true. Serbs are mentioned few centuries before in DIA.

The Serbian medieval culture was strongly associated with the Church.

Like any other empire in Europe in that time.

However, a Serb ethnonym appears earlier then that, but it is not clear what exactly it represented, was it a tribal, ethnic or a regional name.

True, same is applicable for Croats.

It is not even clear whether these early Serbs were Slavs or locals.

I am not sure to whom this is not clear?
 
The Serbs who "are related to Croatians" are mostly members of a Serb minority in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. That's understandable. In forums they are usualy referred to as "Western Serbs", so I use the same term too. I've never heard that anyone use a term "North Serbs". These should be the Serbs who live in Vojvodina I suppose. So far I haven't seen data that proves that the Serbs from Vojvodina are autosomally related to Croatians.
What is it exactly that you would deny the connection to Serbs what have Serbs done to hurt Croats do you not understand the Ustasha was influenced by outside influences do you know everyone in that region is very close racially. You'd have more in common with a Serb than say a French most likely.
 
When Serbs finally accepted the language "that was used in Croatian schools" the latter was no longer called "Illyrian" but got a new politically correct, but equally ridiculous name "Serbo-Croatian". However, Serbs didn't care about the political corretness and started to call their "new" language (only slightly localized) - Serbian, strightaway.

Where have you taken this from since it is not provided in the link you attached?
 
Then take their word for it and the fact that they live in Vojvodina not West Serbia because technically it's North that includes their genetics.

I don't take word for anything. I take data. No cherrypicking. From papers if possible.
 

Give time to a since don't be inpatient.

Then clearly say that you do not have genetic confirmation of historical record which mentione Serbian arrival to Roman Dalmatia.

Who are you to decide what it has or has not to do with the origin of anyone? In order to determine origin of people scientists are using multidisciplinary approach, among the all others linguistics as well.

It may have to do with modern people but I know a lot of Croats and Serbs in Slovenia who neither speak Serbian or Croatian(they speak Slovenian) and they are there only one generation.

The changes that have occurred in the Indo-European language family, for example, demonstrate that languages follow a ‘downhill’ simplification in inflections, etc. by natural processes. The huge ‘uphill’ growth of languages in their vocabulary and expressiveness only comes about through human intelligent input. Thus, the changes observed in language development are quite different to the processes proposed for biological evolution, so any analogy is completely unfounded.

https://creation.com/the-development-of-languages-is-nothing-like-biological-evolution

Biology
a. Change in the genetic composition of a population duringsuccessive generations, often resulting in the development of newspecies. The mechanisms of evolution include natural selectionacting on the genetic variation among individuals, mutation,migration, and genetic drift.

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Biological+evolution

This is only in your imagination I don't buy that Croatian propaganda. Toponym with the root Serb is presented in all the Slavic countries. Go google it.

According to the historical document Serbs got their name in Greece. "De Administrando Imperio ("On the Governance of the Empire") is the Latin title of a Greek work written by the 10th-century Eastern Roman Emperor Constantine VII"
 
I don't take word for anything. I take data. No cherrypicking. From papers if possible.
How is it cherrypicking if a Croat says my ancestors came from Vojvodina? Shall we be like Hitler/Stalin and just make everyone do dna tests to prove their ethnicity? There isn't such a thing as indigenous apart from in a few very select people, who are mostly so isolated they couldn't possibly mix.

You can put your money where your mouth is and show me a few Croatian samples though, if you so wish.
 
Mark Serbian speak with Cyrillic alphabets and Slavic languages Croats and Bosnians do also but their suffix on words are different.

Croats speak in Latin Slavic languages
No one speaks with an alphabet, it's only a script, not a language. Cyrillic has some short history in Croatia too as well as Glagolitic which is even older. I asked you already, what do you exactly mean with this suffix? Suffix on verbs in infinitive or what?
 
What is it exactly that you would deny the connection to Serbs what have Serbs done to hurt Croats do you not understand the Ustasha was influenced by outside influences do you know everyone in that region is very close racially. You'd have more in common with a Serb than say a French most likely.
Just shooting a few Croatian politicians in the middle of a parlament session for example?
 
No one speaks with an alphabet, it's only a script, not a language. Cyrillic has some short history in Croatia too as well as Glagolitic which is even older. I asked you already, what do you exactly mean with this suffix? Suffix on verbs in infinitive or what?
You are smart, when someone reads the alphabet they then read out load aka speak what they read. How people fixated on languages is by reading something that would give you a language an alphabet.

Suffix Google what it means, meaning they will have the same words but say an ending would be different and a slight variation like they might put a I instead of a J on something, for example
 
Sava nor his brother was not the first Nemanjic but their father Stefan.

Their father was called Nemanja. Nemanjić means son of Nemanja".

That's not true. Serbs are mentioned few centuries before in DIA.

As I said.

True, same is applicable for Croats.

No, it isn't. Croatian ethnonym appeared first time in 9th century in titles "DUX CHROATORUM" which means "Duke of Croats". The Croatian medieval culture appeared about the same time and has continuity during the rest of middle ages. Croatian ethnic identity has an interrupted continuity ever since. Croatian ethnonym also appeard in more then one medieval politiy (e.g. in Dioclea) which means that it was not regional, nor only political name, but rather ethnic too. Croatian vernacular appeared in middle ages too.
 
Cyrillic is a Slavic based language alphabet based on the fact that Croatia is Middle/South Eastern Europe they will speak the language and read from a Cyrillic alph/texts. However it's more Latin based than Serbs speak and read.

Google Latin based Alph/languages and Cyrillic based language texts then you will see the difference between Serbs and Croats and what they speak.
 
You are smart, when someone reads the alphabet they then read out load aka speak what they read. How people fixated on languages is by reading something that would give you a language an alphabet.

Suffix Google what it means, meaning they will have the same words but say an ending would be different and a slight variation like they might put a I instead of a J on something, for example
You see, that's the problem, you're mostly bluffing. You can't even give an example of what you are asserting. But you are persistent.
 
Where have you taken this from since it is not provided in the link you attached?

Of course it was. I left a link to an article with more detailed explanation. What exact detail have you not found?
 
What is it exactly that you would deny the connection to Serbs what have Serbs done to hurt Croats do you not understand the Ustasha was influenced by outside influences do you know everyone in that region is very close racially. You'd have more in common with a Serb than say a French most likely.

I haven't denied any "connection" that is visible from data. I only deny assumed connections that are not proved by data. That's what we all should stick to. Daily politics, "Ustashe" and discussions who we like or not, have nothing to do with the subject.
 
You see, that's the problem, you're mostly bluffing. You can't even give an example of what you are asserting. But you are persistent.
Alright I will give you literal examples of words from Google translate nonsense and try to elaborate
 
Cyrillic is a Slavic based language alphabet based on the fact that Croatia is Middle/South Eastern Europe they will speak the language and read from a Cyrillic alph/texts. However it's more Latin based than Serbs speak and read.

Google Latin based Alph/languages and Cyrillic based language texts then you will see the difference between Serbs and Croats and what they speak.
Cyrillic is an alphabet based on Greek alphabet. Brothers Cyrillus and Methodius developed it after Glagollitic, which they created first to help spread Christianity from the Byzantine. Latin letters are used in Croatia since the Middle Ages. The only contact with Cyrillic was before the '90. in 5. class in school.
 
How is it cherrypicking if a Croat says my ancestors came from Vojvodina? Shall we be like Hitler/Stalin and just make everyone do dna tests to prove their ethnicity? There isn't such a thing as indigenous apart from in a few very select people, who are mostly so isolated they couldn't possibly mix.

You can put your money where your mouth is and show me a few Croatian samples though, if you so wish.

I don't see how your comment relates to what I said. I said - no sample cherrypicking. That has nothing to do with Hitler/Stalin or any other nonsense.
 

This thread has been viewed 248309 times.

Back
Top