Are South Slavs more Balkan Native than Slavic?

[Wonomyro]

That's it I am done with this thread I won't comment further ok

That's your best post ever!

 

[Lenab]

Well I havent noticed that. I see Albanians as a pretty much compact population.



Well, it cannot be that wikipedia lies in every article that was linked. Some errors can always be found but IMO not that much as you said. You should present your links to articles that support your claims.



Yes, but Croats are not autosomally close to all Serbs but only to those who live in the proximity of Croatia. So in no way Croats are "former Serbs" because in that case they would be autosomally similar to all Serbs.

However, Croats are autosomally close to their western and northern neighbours, so it seems that they are, what they claim to be. since 9th century.



I've already explained to you why that is not possible. Will you now stop posting nonsense?

They aren't one plots close to Tuscany ( thank you for that sample ) one plots on to Serbia on FB I can get his result I saw another one on TA plotted in Macedonia Greece one guy from Southern Italy Caudium from a anthropology website Anthroscape ( he doesn't blog there anymore but did in 2010 ) told me his Albanian ancestors came from the Caucasus and there are other samples. Albanians are scattered all over the place, actually

 

[Lenab]

That's your best post ever!

I am done, just research it. Bye.

 

[Lenab]

https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.ne...=f22f6127ce176662d9fd7249371823e3&oe=5C6F854B

Serbian Turkish wars

 

[Crya]

I am afraid that you made a mistake. Take a look again into my post:

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...ve-than-Slavic?p=559883&viewfull=1#post559883

The text you are pointing to was not quoted. That means that the sentences were mine, not from the source. If you wanted to know where I get information about the "first Serbian dictionary", here it is:

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



First known dictionary of the vernacular Serbian language in 1818. OMG!

Practically, the same language had been already used by Croats 400-500 years back, and it was called anyhow (Croatian, Dalmatian, Illyrian, Slovinski...) but NEVER Serbian. Even the term used in the title - Rječnik (=Dictionary) - was a borrowing from Croatian Kajkavian dialect which was NEVER used by Serbs.

Yes, that is why I asked you where did you get it from. Obviously this is your personal interpretation of something which you think have happened. Did you asked your self why Croatian language was called Illyrian but not Croatian? It is because there was dispute between Serbs and Croats about the name of the language which was used among Croats in that time. There are a lot of linguists talking about this subject but i would prefer if you leave this subject for some other discussion since it doesn't belong here. Let's not open Pandora's box.

 

[markod]

The Slavic tribe would have spoken the same language as all Slavs at that time. Some isoglosses somewhere survived, some not. Church influence, different substrate, geography... IMO all that helped the separation of the languages. In short, because Hapsburgs wanted that to happen. They had enough money and power to force Serbian Church elite in Vojvodina to break up with its centuries long tradition and accept a new language. However, it is not quite correct that Serbs did not have vernacular before 1818. They did, but it was a different language – however, based on Church Slavonic. If Hapsburgs hadn't done anything about it, we would need Croatian-Serbian translator today. (We need it today also, in some matters).

Are you making fun of me now? We have attested Serbo-Croatian vernacular already in the 14th century. It has nothing to do with the Habsburgs lol. 150 years ago a Bavarian and a Frisian would have had trouble understanding each other as well, yet they still spoke the same language and always did.

 

[don_joe]

And why was that, just because they were ethnic Croatian Partisans? Look what the Croats and Bosnians did during the Ottoman rule look at the peace we all had together before the breakup of Yugoslavia if all of us hated we would not get involved with one another which I attempted to do. I tell my Serbian friends that Croats are related to us also. I don't see how it's complicated if you skip the 400 years of the Ottoman rule and the fact that that's when Croats and Bosnian converted and broke apart

What did we all have together in Yugoslavia if you are allegedly only 1/8 Serbian? You are hard to follow, you give no facts, just assertions. But keep on provoking, I think that the answers to you containing facts and arguments are educational. Not necessary for you, since you're a full cup, but for others.

 

[don_joe]

This again? There are no Croatian and Serbian languages, only dialects of Serbo-Croatian as we have definitively established earlier in the thread. Štokavian comprises the majority of Serbo-Croatian speakers, and it is the most conservative of all extant Slavic tongues if Matasovic is to be believed.

What needs to be explained then is how Serbians came to speak Štokavian. Note in this context also the ethnonym 'Serb', which probably quite simply means 'kinsmen, one of us', derived from the Proto-Slavic word for 'suckle' - a very common naming convention among primitive tribes called 'kinship by milk'. In contrast to the very conservative nature of this ethnonym, the Croats adopted a name that in all likelihood is not even linguistically Slavic.

The picture that emerges is that the ancestors of the Serbs were probably an extremely conservative group who never changed their language or traditions much.

We didn't establish that Serbo-Croatian was ever one language, not in linguistic sense, only politically. The fact is that it's a political effort in the 2nd half of the 20th century with a relatively short duration. It was a Frankenstein made up to give the citizens a new Yugoslavian identity.

 

[don_joe]

Evliya Çelebi quotes Serbian words and they are similar with Croatian words but he says that Serbians do not speak as Croats and Bosniaks, today we all talk similar. It is obvious that in the 17th century there was a difference in the pronunciation of these words.



Yes, for now I see that this branch has couple of Albanians but the same is 3,000 years old so you need to see what subbranch you have, there is also possibility of Illyrian assimilation in the time of Croat arrival to Roman Dalmatia.

Oh, sorry, I missed your point. Thanks, there were no many subbranches at the time. I'm waiting for an updated panel.

 

[don_joe]

Cyrillic script was created by St. Cyril and St.Methodius' disciples at the end of IX or the very beginning of Xth century. It's named so in honor of the two "Apostles to the Slavs".
What the two brothers devised was the Glagolitic script and this was what they used to translate the Holy Scriptures in the language of the Slavs .

Thanks for correcting me. Anyhow, I think it wouldn't be incorrect to say that the both scripts had the same purpose.

 

[gidai]

We are here in huge proportion Balkan people!
Serbia 95.9%
Croaţia 89.4%
Slovenia 87.1%
România 86.1%
Bulgaria 81.3%
... and so on

But I want to be viking. :grin:

 

[Wonomyro]

Yes, that is why I asked you where did you get it from. Obviously this is your personal interpretation of something which you think have happened.

No, it isn't. Karadžić called his dictionary "Serbian" not "Srbo-Croatian" even though he knew whose older dictionaries and grammars he was using to compile his own. That was my point.

Did you asked your self why Croatian language was called Illyrian but not Croatian? It is because there was dispute between Serbs and Croats about the name of the language which was used among Croats in that time.

That is not true! Illyrian name for Croatian language arose in Venice Dalmatia hundreds of years before the Croatian-Srbian language issues started.

 

[Crya]

Most of the time these countries were occupied and passive.

You are talking about Serbs like in that time Croats were rulers of Hungarian empire and not vassals.

Ottomans were stopped mostly thanks to Croats and Hungarians. Credits go to Venice and Hapsburgs too. Also to Poles who saved Vienna.

I can understand that people here are irritated by certain members of this forum but even then you should stay calm with a dignity.

It is easy to show off with the mighty Hungarian army at your back. Show a little respect for your neighbors and their struggle against mighty empire without any help from a single European nation instead of trying to diminish their courage and effort for liberation. Battle of Kosovo was very important for whole Europe. Serbs were standing alone between whole Christian world and the mighty Muslim enemy from the other side. Battle of Kosovo gave time to the rest of Europe to prepare for the upcoming. The bells of Notre Dam in Paris rang to honor Serbs after the battle. Almost all of the Serbian nobles died out in that battle. You wont find many such of examples in the history. Turks suffered heavy losses and were stopped from advancing for the next few decades.

 

[Wonomyro]

Are you making fun of me now? We have attested Serbo-Croatian vernacular already in the 14th century. It has nothing to do with the Habsburgs lol. 150 years ago a Bavarian and a Frisian would have had trouble understanding each other as well, yet they still spoke the same language and always did.

Sorry, my mistake, it should have been written "vernacular dictionary" instead of just "vernacular". However, there is no Serbo-Croatian language in the 14th century.

Slavs of Dubrovnik were not Serbs:

The Vatican Croatian Prayer Book (Croatian: Vatikanski hrvatski molitvenik) is the oldest Croatian vernacular prayer book and the finest example of early Shtokavian vernacular literary idiom.

Written between 1380 and 1400 in Dubrovnik as a transcript and transliteration from older texts composed in a mixture of Church Slavonic and Chakavian dialect idioms and written down in Glagolitic with some Bosnian Cyrillic script, it retained a few phonological and morphological features found in the original manuscripts. (...)

The book's central importance lies in the fact that it is the first major Shtokavian dialect vernacular text.

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

 

[Crya]

No, it isn't. Karadžić called his dictionary "Serbian" not "Srbo-Croatian" even though he knew what older dictionaries and grammars he was using to compile his own.

This have nothing to do with your original statement that i have commented. If you are talking about certain subject try to focus and stay on the subject. Don't spread into 10 different directions with the new assumptions.

That is not true! Illyrian name for Croatian language arose in Venice Dalmatia hundreds of years before the Croatian-Srbian language issues started.

Are you claiming now Illyrian origin and language? You are getting involved in something you cannot bring to a daylight.

 

[Wonomyro]

This have nothing to do with your original statement that i have commented. If you are talking about certain subject try to focus and stay on the subject. Don't spread into 10 different directions with the new assumptions.

Please, be civil. You jumped into the conversation that I had with @marko. I tried to answer your question the best I could. I still don't understand what you want.

Are you claiming now Illyrian origin and language? You are getting involved in something you cannot bring to a daylight.

Also, I kindly ask you not to ridicule the conversation unless you want to stop getting answers from me. We both know very well what was meant by "Illyrian language".

Here is the first Croatian grammar: "Institutionum linguae Illyricae libri duo. Authore Bartholomaeo Cassio"

http://www.theeuropeanlibrary.org/exhibition-reading-europe/detail.html?id=96737

Bartul Kašić's (1575–1650) work marks the beginning of the Croation grammarian tradition. A Jesuit, he recorded his Croatian grammar as a young teacher at a Jesuit College in Rome. He was encouraged to educate people in the "Illyrian" language by none other than Pope Clement VIII himself. Kašić started his grammatical endeavour as a means of aiding missionary work, by helping fellow monks to learn the Croatian language. As he copied the Latin model of grammar, the influence of Alvarez, Manuci and Donato grammars is evident in his work. Instead of the term grammar, Kašić modestly uses the term rule (institutio) in the title of his work, which went on to become a source of great academic pride.

The dialects described in the book are Štokavian-ikavian and Chakavian (actually a mixed variant of two). None of the mentioned dialects has been used by Serbs.

 

[Wonomyro]

You are talking about Serbs like in that time Croats were rulers of Hungarian empire and not vassals.

You should know at least basics. There was no “Hungarian Empire”. Croatian noblemen were vassals to Hungarian king as well as Hungarian noblemen were vassals to the same king. Hapsburgs were elected by Croatian Parlament in 16^th century:

The election in Cetin (Croatian: Cetinski sabor, meaning Parliament on Cetin or Parliament of Cetin) was an assembly of the Croatian Parliament in the Cetin Castle in 1527. It followed a succession crisis in the Kingdom of Hungary caused by the death of Louis II, and which resulted in the Kingdom of Croatia joining the Habsburg Monarchy. The charter electing the Habsburg Archduke of Austria Ferdinand I as King of Croatia was confirmed with the seals of six Croatian nobles and four representatives of the Archduke.

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

Serbia was a non-existing entity during the Ottoman occupation. During that period the “Serb” ethnonym was hardly mentioned. All Orthodox people in the Empire were called Rum, which means (Byzantine).

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

It is easy to show off with the mighty Hungarian army at your back.

There was no “Hungarian army at our back”. Hungarians were hardly managing their own kingdom. Ottomans managed to take Buda (Hungarian capital), almost Vienna, but never Zagreb.

Show a little respect for your neighbors and their struggle against mighty empire without any help from a single European nation instead of trying to diminish their courage and effort for liberation. Battle of Kosovo was very important for whole Europe. Serbs were standing alone between whole Christian world and the mighty Muslim enemy from the other side. Battle of Kosovo gave time to the rest of Europe to prepare for the upcoming. The bells of Notre Dam in Paris rang to honor Serbs after the battle. Almost all of the Serbian nobles died out in that battle. You wont find many such of examples in the history. Turks suffered heavy losses and were stopped from advancing for the next few decades.

I am talking about facts. Glorious Serbian fightings against Turks were more a myth then a reality. On Kosovo Battle there were also Croatian and other foreign units fighting on the Serbian side. One of them was John of Palisna with his Knights of Saint John:

John of Palisna (Croatian: Ivan od Paližne, Latin: Joannes de Palisna) (? – 23 March 1391) was a Croatian knight and warrior, prior of Vrana, and Ban of Croatia

Would it be disrespectful to mention that some Serb nobility refused to fight because they were vassals to Ottomans. Some Serbs also escaped (Branković) during the battle and left Bosnians to continue the fight.

 

[gidai]

I had totally forgotten this.

The Byzantine Empire was known to its inhabitants as the "Roman Empire", the "Empire of the Romans" (Latin: Imperium Romanum, Imperium Romanorum; Greek: Βασιλεία τῶν Ῥωμαίων Basileia tōn Rhōmaiōn, Ἀρχὴ τῶν Ῥωμαίων Archē tōn Rhōmaiōn), "Romania" (Latin: Romania; Greek: Ῥωμανία Rhōmania)

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

It seems that we all knew we were living in Romania here in Balkans and we were Romani-Rumâni-romaioi, for almost a thousand years!

 

[hrvat22]

No, we're talking about the ancestors of the Serbs in late antiquity. What language would the Slavic tribe who called themselves 'Serbs' have spoken, and why do they speak the same language as the Croats today?

Because they all come from White Croatia! At least originally, later the Serbs are mixed with Albanians.

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31539-Genetics-confirm-migration-of-White-Croats-to-Croatia

 

[hrvat22]

No it's not they presented data they are mixed in with whatever country their ancestors came from.

Serbians don't as much. Links and references to Serbs aiding Turks in attacking nonsense is utter bull and it didn't happen in the same way Bosnians and Croats didn't aid Turks to attack Serbia during the uprising they used them because they did not aid them if any of you said something like that in front of an actual Serbian nationalist....

Also Croats are automatically close to Serbs not vice versa. Because such a thing cannot and does not exist. It's Croats with Serb ancestors not Serbs with Croat ancestors same as Bosnians and which ever else.

Second Serbian Uprising

The national council proclaimed open revolt against the Ottoman Empire in Takovoon 23 April 1815. Miloš Obrenović was chosen as the leader and famously spoke, "here I am, here war to Turks!"

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

A quote from Serbian historian on Serbian national television

Many rebels in the second Serbian uprising do not know what is the term "Serbia"

That's year 1815.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zOIjZLKiwE