Are South Slavs more Balkan Native than Slavic?

Aspurg


Defter of Isa-beg Krajiste from 1455 (Krajiste Isa bega Isakovica, zbirni katastarski popis iz 1455.), Sabanovic

pg127
GULAM (ar.Gulam) boy, servant, slave, vassal


Therefore the evidence does not exist. I asked for a proof and link where it is claimed that word Gulam means servant or anything else. Only Sabanovic claims that and it is his personal opinion without any verifiable evidence especially from Turkish sources. In register of the Bosnian army from year 1526. Sabanovic proves its claims with words I quote
probably and seems like


therefore there is no proof whatexactly term Gulam means.

I saw that Ahmed Aličić use "encyclopedia of Islam" as evidence for word Gulam and it should be respected.
However and for term Merd he says that that can be lexical synonym with word Gulam, but the word Merd has an older meaning whose "servant" origin is forgotten. If is true that term Merd in fact means Servant then and soliders with ethnonym Bosnia has the same source because they are mentioned as Merdovi.

Since most of Croats are marked as Gulam it does not mean that they are brought from another place as slaves, same goes and for Bosnians. They are autochthonous Croats under Turkish rule which also exist in Bosnia and wider Sandžak area ( that proves and other historical sources). This is just one of the evidence who speaks about presence of Croats in the area of eastern Herzegovina, Montenegro, Bosnia etc.

This register from year 1526. does not say about capture or taking Croats from one place to another, it's just talking about Croats in this area. "According to reports of the provinces Carinthia, Kranjska and Styria (Slovenia), Turks were by year 1508. take to slavery or killed allegedly 200,000 Slovenians."
If these slaves are brought to Bosnia where is this visible? Very likely Croatian and Slovenian slaves going to Turkey, that would be logic.

Borders of Sanjak of Herzegovina in that time does not enter much to Croatia state from that time(it should be then under Bosnian rule), for Sanjak of Bosnia I do not have maps from that time. I know that Klis fell under Turks year 1537. Knin year 1522. Benkovac year 1538.

Most of Dalmatia fall under Turks at the time occurrence of Bosnian army register or later, so it is a question exactly from which concrete areas are Croats in the Bosnian army register with consideration that there are a lot of them, who are their descendants today since they all have Muslim names?

It is interesting that Ahmed Aličić considers that these Croats from that register are from Knin, Drniš area? He states that it is not a large geographical area but number of Muslims from that area is very large? Croatian wikipedia states that Nahia(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nahiyah) in Drniš was already established in year 1528. this would mean that Croats were Islamized in a couple of years which is unlikely because the Turkish administration comes there in year 1528. I do not think that these Croats are just from that small area, they must also be from Bosnia.
 
Last edited:
We are speaking about Bosnian Croats, Serbs and Bosniaks. If you really don't believe in what i am saying, then just search for Carleton Coon's work about Balkan anthropology.

That literally doesn't have anything with autosomal PCA's.
 
Their father was called Nemanja. Nemanjić means son of Nemanja".

Do we know the Nemanjic Y-Dna lineage? Considering he was baptized as a Catholic in Montenegro, its possible he has Albanian or even Croatian origins. There seems to be hints at this from unconnected authors. Would be quite interesting if the Nemanjic dynasty was non-serbian in origin. He gave his daughter Komnena to the Albanian Prince of Arbanon, Dhimitër Progoni


D3z63aZX4AEnX7o.jpg
D3z65RKXsAEW-uM.jpg

D3z66e-W0AA4Mx8.jpg
 
Interesting account from Edith Durham. In 1909, visiting the Devic Monastery in Drenica, she meets the head priest, who admits quite casually to being Albanian, although assimilating into the Serbian ethnos because of Orthodoxy.

D3zpUgqWkAEDqh5.jpg
 
During the time of Dushan, he cracked down on Catholics in Kosovo, and those that didn't convert were punished with death. Islam wasn't yet in the balkans, for Albanians, converting also entailed taking serbian name, attending religion in serbian language, i.e. assimilation. If serbs are getting high balkan, this period definitely could contribute to it, where bigger waves of assimilation happened.

D3uX8wfW0AALLuB.jpg
 
hm

something is strange here,

Around 1 century Simon Simeonsis writes that Albanians were the 3rd speaking group
But he does not Say about Slavic, But to Latin Speakers,

So if the Above is truth,
How come 1 century After Simeonsis Finds

primary Speaking the Latin
Second the Greek
and 3rd Albanian,

So if the Serbs, Slavicised the Albanians, as it is said above.
Then why 1 Century after we find major speaking the Latin, the Greek, the Albanian, and not Slavic
and not the Slavic !!!!!!

Also strange is the thing that Nemanjik Stefan was entitled by the papal authorities, not orthodox ones,
and was not affected by Latinocracy of 4rth Crusade which destroyed East Roman empire.
And Radoslav Stefan was almost to enter the Roman Catholic Church the era of Pope Inokentios 3rd,


indeed the above seems to be strange comparing on what I read above.
 
1322
Simon Fitzsimons:
Itinerary from Ireland
to the Holy Land

Narratives of pilgrims on their way to the Holy Land provide a primary source of information for much of the eastern Mediterranean in the first half of the second millennium, and in one such narrative (1) dating from the year 1322, we find a passage about Albania. Although many pilgrims showed no more than a passing interest in the lands they visited en route to their goal, two Anglo-Irish pilgrims of the Franciscan Order, Symon Semeonis and Hugo Illuminator, whom we may refer to in English as Simon Fitzsimons and Hugh the Illuminator, were impressed by their short stopover in Albania, and the former vividly recorded what he saw, a rare glimpse of the Albanian coast in the first half of the fourteenth century. The 'Itinerarium Symonis Semeonis ab Hybernia ad Terram Sanctam' (The Itinerary of Simon Fitzsimons from Ireland to the Holy Land) contains a wealth of information on matters as varied as customs inspections and procedures, costumes, coinage, raw materials and products of the countries he visited and of course on churches and holy sites. It is apparent from the narrative that in 1322 the port of Durrës had not recovered entirely from the disastrous earthquake which had struck it half a century earlier. The original population of the city was replaced to a certain extent by an influx of Albanian nomads from the countryside. That Albanian must now have been widely spoken on the coastal plain and in the mountain regions at the time can be inferred from Simon's initial observation that the province had a language of its own, i.e. Albanian. Within the city of Durrës, however, the 'barbaric Albanians' are referred to only fourth, after the urban Latins, Greeks and Jews, an indication that they had not yet formed the majority group. Interestingly enough, Simon refers to the Albanian 'barbarians' in Dubrovnik, too, noting: "In eadem dominantur Veneti, et ad eam confluunt Sclavi, Barbari, Paterini et alii scismatici negotiatores qui sunt in gestu, habitu et lingua Latinis in omnibus difformes" (The Venetians dominate in it (Dubrovnik) and Slavs, Barbarians, Paterines and other schismatic merchants frequent it, who are entirely different from the Latins in their customs, dress and language).

And then after spending a few days, we passed through the city of Ulcinj, which belongs to the king of Rascia (2), and sailed to Durrës, a city once famous and mighty by land and sea, subject to the emperor of the Greeks but now belonging to the prince of Romania (3), the brother of the aforementioned king of Jerusalem (4), (this city) being in the province of Albania. It should be noted that Albania is a province between Slavonia (5) and Romania, having a language of its own and which the aforementioned schismatic King of Rascia has subjected to his rule. For the Albanians themselves are schismatics, using the rites of the Greeks and are entirely like them in their dress and manner. For like the Greeks, they rarely if ever wear the cowl, but rather a white hat lowered almost flat to the front and raised at the back so that their hair, the length and beauty of which they are extremely proud, may appear more attractive to the eyes of the beholder. The Slavs on the other hand, of whom mention was made above, wear a white hat, oblong and round, on the top of which their nobles stick a long feather in order to be distinguished and recognized more easily by the peasants and common people. The city itself is very extensive in the circuit of its walls, but small and unpretentious in its buildings because it was once razed to the ground in an earthquake (6), and in the destruction, its wealthiest citizens and inhabitants were buried beneath their own palaces and indeed a good 24,000 are reported to have died. It is now sparsely populated and divided in religion, customs and language. For it is inhabited by Latins, Greeks, perfidious Jews and barbaric Albanians. In use among them are small tournois coins of which eleven are worth one Venetian grosso. They are in use at this rate in all of Romania. This city is two hundred miles from Dubrovnik. And then, taking advantage of favourable winds, we continued on to Vlora, a fortress of the Emperor of the Greeks, and to the island of Corfu on which there is a city called Corfu belonging to the aforementioned King of Jerusalem, this place being two hundred miles from Durrës.



(1)cf. R. Elsie: Two Irish travellers in Albania, in: Albanien in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart. Internationales Symposium der Südosteuropa-Gesellschaft..., Munich 1991, p. 24-27.
(2)Stephan Urosh III (r. 1322-1333).
(3)Romania refers here to territories in the possession of the Byzantine Empire, in particular the Morea, and has nothing to do with modern Romania. The Prince of the Morea at the time was John, Count of Gravina (r. 1316-1335).
(4)Robert the Good (r. 1309-1343).
(5)The term Slavonia refers here to the Slavic territories of Dalmatia and Croatia.
(6)The earthquake referred to Byzantine historian George Pachymeres probably occurred in July 1267.
[Extract from: Mario Esposito (ed.): Itinerarium Symonis Semeonis ab Hybernia ad Terram Sanctam, Dublin 1960, p. 36 40. Translated from the Latin by Robert Elsie. First published in R. Elsie: Early Albania, a Reader of Historical Texts, 11th - 17th Centuries, Wiesbaden 2003, p. 26-27.]

Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
hm

something is strange here,

Around 1 century Simon Simeonsis writes that Albanians were the 3rd speaking group
But he does not Say about Slavic, But to Latin Speakers,

So if the Above is truth,
How come 1 century After Simeonsis Finds

primary Speaking the Latin
Second the Greek
and 3rd Albanian,

So if the Serbs, Slavicised the Albanians, as it is said above.
Then why 1 Century after we find major speaking the Latin, the Greek, the Albanian, and not Slavic
and not the Slavic !!!!!!

Also strange is the thing that Nemanjik Stefan was entitled by the papal authorities, not orthodox ones,
and was not affected by Latinocracy of 4rth Crusade which destroyed East Roman empire.
And Radoslav Stefan was almost to enter the Roman Catholic Church the era of Pope Inokentios 3rd,


indeed the above seems to be strange comparing on what I read above.

Wrong, Albanians are the forth speaking community after Jews in Durres....what Durres has to do with Slavs at that time?????. It is as it should be....I do not see any contradiction with Durres population at that time.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
Im reading this discussion and is very good , i recognize few people all the time trying to provocate but we are all different personalities someone are more with complex's some are not , anyways i watched newest Lecture about 'The World of Early Macedon' from Prof.Kenneth W.Harl in few times he highlights that "Macedonians were not Greeks at all" , this Professor is very close collegue to Eugene Borza , historian known like "Macedonian Specialist".You can watch it Lecture here ;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsqyzECK7xs&t=4s
 
I'm genuinely curious if this has been "decided" anywhere by credible researchers.

South Slavs have a different stock of haplogroups than Northern Slavs, and cluster together rather than with other European groups. Clearly we're our own family-branch.

Coincidentally the people with the highest portion of M423 also dwell in what the Romans and Greeks labelled Illyria. Although most people think the Illyrians simply vanished after their Latinization, some kept their ethnic identity for a long time (such as the Barracks Emperors, Belisarius, etc.). I know the Balkans were generally a war-zone for the late Roman Empire and barbarian tribes, but did the Illyrians really just vanish (again)? I mean, Albanians claim to be of that stock but have more in common with Greeks genetically than South Slavs, and Albania was generally a kind of borderline between Illyria proper and Greece (Epirus).

Historically it was said that many Roman cities on the Croatian coast remained free and independent of the "migrant Slavs" and Latin Dalmatian was spoken well into the 1800's (from what I recall). Haplogroup I2 spikes in Dalmatia and Bosnia, one packed with seemingly peaceful Illyrian towns, the other a mountainous escape for natives from invading foreigners.

I mean, from the mosaics of Roman-Illyrian Emperors and Generals in Byzantium, I can definitely see more of a resemblance to many Southern Slavs than I can when comparing typical Bosnians to typical Russians. At the same time there is definitely a Slavic (or whatever northern European tribe) mix in Balkanians for sure, but mainly were we simply Slavicized after the collapse of the Western and Eastern Roman Empires?

Croatians were historically referred to as Illyrians, Serbs were synonymous with Tribalians (Thracian tribe), and Bosnia is named after the Bosona river (an Illyrian word if I recall correctly). I mean people of haplogroup I are noted for being particularly tall, the Greeks and Romans both described Illyrians as particularly tall people.

Can they ever dig up Illyrian bones and sequence their haplogroups?
This is a very difficult question! The problem with the ancient illyrians and the thracians is multifold. They were nomadic, had no written script and definetly did not refer to themselves as illyrians or thracians which was given to them by historians. There are however hard facts that cannot be ignored! One are groups like the vlachs which were the last of the romantic local speakers but then were assimilated into Slavic language. We know that Slavs are not a tribe or an ethnic group that is a hard fact! It’s more like the USA how many tribes of Europe do you have there? Cellts, anglos…. Same with the Slavs its seems they all started speaking a similar language. We know that trachian and Baltic are related. So Thracians and illyrians were closely related. So it’s not impossible that all those groups started speaking similar language which is related to Baltic, Thracian and Alan. This occurred around the same time the Roman Empire fell apart! I disagree that all Thracian and Illyrians were romanticized! Groups like the vlachs yes. Also along the Dalmatian coast but that was part of the venecian empire and the Italian language was reintroduced into the region and maintained by them. A such powerful tribe like the Thracians did not disappear or the illyrians they formed the back bone of the Slavic expansion. I highly question the finder hypothesis some are trying to state about the I2 clad in Croatia and Bosnia! There is also very little to no evidence of the Slavic migration! I don’t even know what that is or means! A Slavic migration from where to where? They are portraying Slavs as a tribe when it definitely was not, nor is there any evidence to that. I would go with the expansion theory from the Balkans rather than the reverse! Yes they just concentrated in Croatia and Bosnia and could not spread any further! Makes no sense! Other hard fact is the lack of evidence of Albanian having any relation to Illyrian or Thracian language. Albanian is strongly related to Greek. There are a lot of similar words with a mixture of Slavic. So no Albanian is not Illyrian at all nor do I think is it related. The R clad is no part of the Illyrian or Thracian genetic composition why because it would be at much higher concentration in the western Balkan region but is simply not! Another hard fact is that there is no relation between Greek and Illyrian languages. Greek historians were very clear that they did not understand them at all same with the Thracians. Albanian being so close to Greek does not make sense to be an Illyrian language. Another hard fact we know that Greeks were short same with Albanians and Macedonians. The tallest people in the world are in Bosnia and Montenegro where again I2 is in very high concentration not R group! There is absolutely no way to tell with genetics that the illyrians and Thracians were not the proto slavic cultures! The Slavic culture sprung out of nothing it’s a unification of similarities rather than an ethnic or tribal group like the Anglos for instance. The most intriguing part is that the illyrians and Thracians just vanished after the Roman’s made them into part of Roman Empire rather than purely beating them. So than this magical Slavic tribe just came and made both groups disappear! I strongly believe that Thracians/illyrians and several other groups are the forming core components of the Slavic culture and East western expansion of the Slavic culture. They had many things in common including crimation which the Thracians also practiced. For instance Spartacus was a very prominent figure. For the Roman’s most of their slaves came from that region and right after the collapse of the Roman Empire you have suddenly the Slavic group.
 

This thread has been viewed 245969 times.

Back
Top