Early South Slavic History
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- My second channel M. Laser Random- / @mlaserrandom
where I just upload random videos from game-plays to vlogs and more.
My Patreon- / mlaser
My Twitter- / mnlaser
Video scripts with sources are available for free on my Patreon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More Information
0:16 There where obviously more towns/cities then just shown on this map.
0:38 Even though the Greek culture and language spread, the Greeks mostly stayed below the line shown before.
1:09 Or any other farmers from the people groups mentioned before.
8:19 Along with some Germanic Farmers like Lombards, Ostrogoths and Franks.
8:47 Even though Carantania would later on become Germanic at this point it was mostly Slavic and there are even records of Slavic farmers staving off Germanic Settlers coming from the West.
10:05 This is not to say that the Huns where Indo-European, this was a pour choice of words on my part. However it is believed that the Huns did control Indo-European tribes whilst in Europe and some of these tribes got then assimilated in to the Bulgar tribes.
12:20 This is just a snapshot of the Bulgar Empire at it's largest expanse, however this doesn't reflect the borders of the Bulgar state throughout most of it's life which where much smaller.
13:56 Boris didn't die in 889, just abdicated, he died in 907.
14:37 The coastal city states shown here under Byzantine control had a very complex political structure and not all of them where under a complete control by the Byzantines but it was simpler to just show them this way on the map.
15:05 It is not completely known whether both where either vassals or part of the empire, but considering the events that followed, I went with the most plausible statement.
15:59 It is still debated if he killed Radoslav or his son Prosigoj.
16:36 With a brief disruption in the middle by the Domagojevic dynasty.
17:40 It is also debated that around the middle 9th century the Serbians may have been forced alias or even vassals of the Bulgars for a while.
Music comes from this video - • Medieval RPG Music & G...
#History #SouthSlavic #Balkans
Sheit history of Balkans is like 1000 seasons of game of thrones
bruh, you have no idea :D
Keep in mind that this is just early south Slav history, this doesn't mention anything about ancient Greece, the Ottoman empire and ofc the Balkan wars. Also the Byzantine empire is briefly mentioned ofc because the point of this video is the Slavs not the Greeks.
*of Europe
@@georgegkoumas5026 those could be spin-offs lol
You ain't seen nothing. Read up on the Nemanjić dynasty. There was no generation in which that family didn't fight each other for the throne.
I wonder if our ancestors also wore Adidas tracksuits?
Lol, ofcourse they did eating semechki and drink slivovitza
@@timax4114 the fuck are semechki, south slavs aren't russians you know?
Haha, I'm not a slav, but I'm living in Macedonia and wearing an Adidas tracksuit right now!
@@dacho707 semenke?
@@timax4114 semki
Correction about Boris 1 of Bulgaria - He didn't die in 889. He abdicated that year to his firstborn son - Vladimir Rasate, who, in turn, got taken down after trying to bring back paganism. In 893 Boris called a concil with which was decided that Boris's third son Simeon would take the throne.
Also the map of the ninth century is incorrect on the Serbo-Bulgarian border
I had to pause several times so that the narrator could catch breath.
Small corection - Boris the First died in 907 not in 887. I see why you may have been cnofused since he abdicated the throne to his firstborn and the thirdborn son (hella of a infighting)
Ah that lovely balkan.... The place full of peace and fights, what to say, arguing is in our blood.
well Balkan is cross road for North - South and West - East , we are not strong enough to be able to have our own interest so we follow interest of other Imperial countries that is why there were and still is a lot of wars in the Balkan.
We are never bored... :D
Najbolja stvar kod nas je to što uvjek znaš ko je pobijedio u argumentu, onaj koji nema sjekiru u lubanji:D
Less blood, more geography. Every single empire just has to expand into the Balkans.
🖤🇦🇱AUTOCHTONOUS SHQIPTARIA🇦🇱🖤
Wow, never heard that Bulgarian people lived originally in other side of the sea which is called "Great Bulgaria".
Really interesting video!
Those are the bulgarS, just 1 of the 3 main ethnic groups that form what are today the bulgarIANS. they were the political and military elite and were quickly assimilated in the local population, today we have even less than 1% of their dNA (however this is disputed because even the bulgar origin is uncertain, so no need to go deeper)
Yeah but it also causes confusion. One needs to distinguish the proto-Bulgars from the modern day Slavic Bulgarians. In short, the two nations mixed, and got on, and the Empire eventually adopted a Slavic personality due to the fact that the Turkic Bulgars assimilated. However, for one to be a Bulgarian in 2021 does not necessarily spell proto-Bulgar ancestry, while the Bulgars in turn settled across on the lands on both sides of the Adriatic (ex-Yugoslavia and Italy).
Get this, there was a time where 2 Bulgarias existed. This one and Voljka (Volga) Bulgaria. Voljka Bulgaria got destroyed and wiped out by the expanding Horde of Genghis Khan, later transforming into the Golden Horde that also almost wiped out the entirety of the Rus Principalities during the early 1200s.
Bulgars are NOT TURKISH!!! Bulgrs are from Alano-Persian group! And they are about 90% similar to today's Bulgarians!
Your maps are not exact
Your channel is simply amazing and very underrated
Serbian territory it's a OLD COUNTRY BULGARIA.
there is so many versions..
@@eltoro10-v5t Patria is a greek word
@kim a hellens was just a small tribe
@@nedimistanojen7070 hahahaa
Who no that ?
History change face
Day by Day
7:01 that moment when 2 crazy guys crash the party
true story. Every great europian empire got fucked when that happend.
We didn’t crash the party we started it
@@ivanpetkovic2130 preach brother
@@ivanpetkovic2130 everything was great until two brothers appeared
Eeeey there were just late a couple minutes!
Dude, I have studied Bulgarian history quite extensively and I still learned new things about our own history, really impressive! Great overview of the region's history, gives great perspective and I love the animations - thank you for the great work!
Good representation of Slovenia. Even Slovenes rarely know of the fact that we have common roots with Czechs and Slovaks. Even though we no longer share national or cultural border, we still have more in common that with our southern neighbours.
Anyway all slavs share a lot of common stuff
@Washing Machine Mine from Czechia.
I really like your videos, everything is presented very clearly and reasonably. I can see the huge ammount of work you put into this. Keep up the great work. Pozdrowienia z Polski! :)
Great Video...and really accurately presented the Bulgarian part
The truth about Macedonia...
There is tons of evidence that almost all the national heroes we have considered to be Macedonians in Republic of Northern Macedonia so far have considered themselves as Bulgarians in one way or another!
Even the father of the so called Macedonian nation, philosopher Krustyo Petkov Misirkov is a pure Bulgarian, born in 1926 in Sofia, Kingdom of Bulgaria!
He is also often regarded as "the founder of contemporary Macedonian literary language".
Gorche Petrov proudly states this in his book "Study Materials about Macedonia".
There he writes that the Macedonian population is made up of Bulgarians, Greeks, Turks, Arnauts, Roma and Vlachs, but the Serbs are not mentioned anywhere!
All this is described in detail in a literary Bulgarian language in a book with over 700 pages in 1896.
The motto of all Bulgarians from the Macedonian region has always been only one ...
🦁FREEDOM OR DEATH🦁
@@bobantheighty6141 Actually, in Bulgaria we even joke by calling it "Macedonia Bulgarian (Македония Българска)"
Some people that are more serious about history are kinda...pissed at you, but most of us just joke. No offense intended, of course.
@@leckyboy1475 македония е българска.
@@leckyboy1475 Maybe that's because my grand grandfather is from Stip, and my other grand grand father is from Drama region in Greece, which is also Macedonia. And that applies to at least 1/3 of Bulgarian people, because we had close to 1 million refugees after the Balkan Wars and First World War from Aegean and Vardar Macedonia. At that time Bulgaria was less than 4 million. And that is one thing that was hidden for you for many years. Among many other things.
Ah, Bulgarians, the people who assimilated their own conquerors, also took their Turkic name but didn't give a single fuck like a boss lol
A video about the avars would be great. Really liked this video
Check Bavaria the only name in Europe that has as a root the word Avar. I know the helens say that Albanians are of avarian origin ,and is true that in albania the last name avari exist but that should not confuse us, the name alba, or arvani or arber cannot arrive from the root avar.
for an english speaking guy, you are very good at saying Bulgarian names. Normally our languange is hard.
He is Slovakian
@@zvaramartin english speaking
The author, many errors in the English text.
The language called "Serbo-Croatian" didn't exist until the 19. century when Croats and Serbs under the banner of pan-slavism created a standard language based on the Eastern Herzegovian and Dubrovnik dialects for their future Yugoslav state. I would argue that modern standard versions of Serbian and Croatian are how each country now calls that language (also sometimes called Bosnian or Montenegrin in their respective countries).
First written documents of Croatian in the littoral part (Dalmatia) are based on what's today called The Chakavian Dialects which can be mostly unintelligible with normal Serbo-Croatian, same with it's cousin group Kajkavian in Pannonian Croatia which is the closest dialect group to Slovenian and even shares some underlying similarities with Slovak due to it's proximity and late magyarisation of West Pannonian Slavs which probably formed one of the last bridges between West and South Slavs. These two Croatian dialect groups covered a much wider area of early Croatia if not almost it's entirety.
Just like it was mentioned in the video, there was a Slavic dialect continuum from Carinthia to Thrace. In the later medieval period as Slavic languages (or dialects) solidified the further you went from one Slavic settlement to another the harder it was for the two to understand each other. Although after that the natural continuum was broken by the Ottoman expansions which forced a lot of southern groups northwards.
I know this is unrelated, but how did you make those maps? Also, I love all the detail you put into a subject people tend to generalize!!
Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro make me think a bit of the Catholic and Protestant Irish.
~Look, we're the same people, our ancestors decided that this tiny difference between us was a reason for us kill each other, so we kept on disliking each other because we've harmed each other in the past.
But the Troubles ended up working out brilliantly for Ireland, unlike our trashy system of banana-republics
Probably we are not the same people and we have never disliked each other through out the whole history just up until recently, Germanic people are much wilder and aggressive but they were on the right side of the history so because of their interest and interests of the other major powers it was convenient to stick that label of primitive tribes fighting each other to the Balkan people although that couldn't be far away from the truth
We have difrent r1a subclades of slavic haplogrups so no
Well before the ottomans fucked it all up for us
sadly the video didn't go far enough for us to learn how bosnia came to be but still a lovely video about my people and our history!! And ofc i hope you make a part 2 of some sort , i would love that , the slavic history is rarely covered here on youtube
Well judging by what Ive learned,what this video shows and Bosnia's area of birth witch is around the river of Bosna im guessing that other settled south slavic tribes(not serb or croat) and mixed remnants of germanic, avaric, latin, greek and lliryan population gave birth to this duchy.
I always thought Bosnia is a meme country declared through some American grapevine for some strategic reason after they broke up the old country. Can easily see it as basis for further conflict.
@@Kafchuga That's very unlikely. Before the Ottoman invasion and forced Islamization, Bosnians were always considered as Serbs. The best example would be that the first king of Bosnia, King Tvrtko I Kotromanić had a title "King of Serbs" although his territorial rule was over entire Bosnia, Hum and parts of Dalmatia. If there were other people under his rule, he would have included them in his title without a doubt.
Today's Bosnia consists of Croats, Boshniaks and Serbs, but Boshniaks are just Islamized Serbs, there are numerous historical references to confirm this fact.
Also, this video makes a lot of modern false assumptions. For example, "Serbo-Croatian" language is a very modern and very absurd idea. Croatian language, dialect of the South Slavic, is Čajkavica, while Serbian is Štokavica. Serbo-Croatian is only Štokavica, meaning only Serbian, which is a digraphic language, and this was used to create a false separation to Serbian and Croatian as part of the nationalistic and political struggles. However, Croatian language is still used in parts of Croatia, although their official language is Serbian, they just call it Croatian, same as in N. Macedonia, Montenegro and Bosnia, although after the wars of the 1990 they had all renamed the language by the names of these new-founded countries.
With these modern assumptions, many errors arise. The first well recorded history of the Serbs is that of the Nemanjić dynasty (they are the center of modern Serbian national identity). Yet they originate from Zeta region/tribe and only after they had united multiple regions and tribes, combined they call themselves Serbs. Also, there is no separate historical record of a single Serbian tribe, this name us always used for larger groups of South Slavic tribes, unlike ex. Croats or Moravians, implying that Serbs are not a single tribe but a group of South Slavic tribes. This further is supported by historians like Mavro Orbini, who for example puts Croatian insignia grouped as part of insignias under the Nemanjić Serbian insignia.
@@storymatters7309 I have noticed that way too many people now days miss the difference between region and ethnicity. In middle ages (and before) there was no concept of national state, and people of the same ethnicity were separated in multiple countries/regions that were even often in war with one another. Bosnia was not named by Bosnian people, but by river Bona. Not even today there is a specific Bosnian nation/ethnicity, but Bosnia is a country of three constitutional people: Serbs, Croats and Bošnjaks (named themselves like that in 1993, before just called Muslims). So it is very difficult to say someone was Bosnian. Of course he was Bosnian, but then the founder of Serbian Nemanjić dynasty (from which was that Serbian prices you mentioned) was Zettan (or whatever the English term for people from Zeta is), and later Serbian rulers from the same dynasty were Rasians (people from Raška) and later Macedonians, since these were the lands where they were born and lived. On this same way you could argue that Normans are not French or Bavarians are not German, or that Alexander of Macedonia was not Greek (Helen), or that I am not Serb because I would always proudly call myself Dalmatian.
But there was no mention of Tvrtko being the King of Bosnians. His title was "King of Serbs, Bosnia, Costal lands and Hum". If he had ruled over some Bosnian group of people he would make sure to include it in his title. Further more, it is not true that there was a missing hair, Mrnjavčević dynasty was set to replace Nemanjić dynasty and last Serbian tzar Uroš had named Marko Mrnjavčević a young king and gave him a right of succession. Also, there was prince Lazar, who was actually crowned tzar by the patriarch, but was challenged by Tvrtko. Also, Tvrtko did not assert himself as king because "his grandparents from his mother side were Serbs", but because they were from the Nemanjić royal dynasty, which gave him a right of succession. Bosnian bans were very powerful since Kulin Ban, which gave them a lot of de facto independence and sovereignty but they were sill bans, and that's one of the lowest titles that is a title of local lords that are under the rule of some other prince/king/tzar.
@@storymatters7309 yes, Bosnian LAND. Just as I had said, as his title says. King of Serbs (people), Bosnia (land), etc.. You have confirmed exacly what I have said. You must take everything in the context, not cherry pick fragments to try to prove a point. Ex, "POVELJA DUBROVČANIMA 1378"
To be in Christ Jesus faithful and by God apointed Stephan (Serbian Nemanjić dynasty name), King of Serbs (people) and Bosnia and... (his lands). And then I had started my reighn with God and rebuild the trone of Serbia (here he directly puts Bosnia as a land in Serbia) with wish to erect what was fallen and streighten what was damaged.
The Balkans and around are like a family.
Serbia and Croatia are the parents, Slovenia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Macedonia are children, while Bulgaria is a cousin.
Serbia - A dad who was often drunk, and assaulted his kids and wife, while now he is normal, improves his wage and wants to improve relations with his family who hates him.
Croatia - Very hot, married to Serbia, but was seen hooking up with Germany and other EU members while Serbia was drinking. Now she stays with the family, and goes often to work in the city(EU).
Slovenia - The oldest child, he went young to the city (EU) and visits his family in the rural areas once in a week.
Bosnia (Bosniaks) - While Serbia was drinking, he also hooked up others without noticing. He hooked up with Ottomans and made Bosnia. Now Bosnia wants kinda to move to Turkeys house but can't.
Bosnia (Serbians and Croatians) - Serbia and Croatia adopted two more children - Republic of Srpska and Herzeg-Bosnia. Srpska wants to be like dad, and Herzeg-Bosnia like his mom.
Montenegro - The lazy elderly son/daughter.
Macedonia - Macedonia is the child who hated Bulgarians (its dad), so it went for adoption. It was adopted by the Yugoslavia family, but it kinda regrets it. Dome DNA tests show it is connected to Serbia and Albania too.
Bulgaria - The cousin of Serbia (from Russia's line). They argue about land, argue about the Macedonia thing, but now don't care about anything.
Kosovo - Serbia hooked up with Albania too. Both want it.
Vojvodina - A child of Serbia, who has more than 3/4 Serbian genes, a bit of Hungarian genes, and others are just random.
Albania - A stranger Serbia had sex with while drunk. Bad move.
Greece - Serbia saw a person in church, and they started talking really much. Now they are best friends. Serbia visits Greece every summer, and helps a bit with money.
Cyprus - Greece brother
Romania - Just like Greece, the only thing is that Romania wants to join the family for some reason.
Hungary - A stranger
Austria - Is where Slovenia and Croatia work. Kinda a distant cousin with Croatia.
Italy - They are related to Romania. They always wanted to steal Slovenia and possibly Croatia from the family.
Moldova - Romania's sister
Ukraine - Russia's little brother who hates his elder one so much.
Turkey - A stranger, who wanted to kidnap all of the Balkans, but ended up having sex with Serbia, and had sex with Albania for a short period, before they went on their ways.
@Epiri Cham You mean USA gave the D to Serbia because Albania was so good at giving BJs it wanted some for itself ;)
Epiri Cham How did it give the D, when Serbia is male? That means Albania is gay
I love how much controversy this message gives
Hahaha yes man that is true
lol :Dd
Actually this is a good video dude
What about the Second Bulgarian empire ? NIce video !
I'm guessing he omitted it because the video was more about early history of the Slavs, rather than the whole history of the region..
better no wars
8:17 my family comes from the Veneto region of Italy, so learning about the neighbouring Slovenia and its origins is awesome. This is a great video, it's so hard to understand the ethnic and linguistic history of the Balkans! this helps a lot, thanks
Wow, great video! Very detailed and informative, thanks for your work, you earned yourself a new sub :)
Love your channel. Greeings from Sirmium!
Good and accurate video! Keep up the good work and greetings from Bulgaria! :)
The big picture I gathered from this video is: The Byzantines clashed with the invading Avars and the main beneficiaries turned out to be the other invading group, the Slavs. It almost sounds like a leaderless mass was given a free pass into Byzantine territory without any battle.
Macedonians were of mixed serbian bulgarian heritage.While montenegrins were always regional Serbs.
People of Vardar and Aegean Macedonia were never serbian, lol. The majority of this region was populated by Bulgarians, followed by Greeks, Albanians, Aromanians even turks and jews but never Serbian.
Александър Георгиев history says otherwise bulgarian
@@quarksamurai6101 If you're talking about Serbian history, I agree.
Quark Samurai Macedonia is populated only by Bulgarians. There are no Serbs in Macedonia and had many uprisings against Yugoslavia between the two world wars.
Historically Serbia owned them for 30 years before the arrival of the Ottomans and that’s all.
Thank you for your effort to picture one of the most dynamic areas in the Medieval Europe. Still the origins of the bulgarian ethnic people was under a discussion in science, but there were two independent scientific researches that tried to test all the possible variations. They used bones and teeth for this task. Scientists were barely able to isolate the thracian genome back in 2012 and finally reached to the conclusions that the bulgarians/proto-bulgarians/ have nothing common with turkic / altay ethnic groups. /With all due respect to this culture/. The bulgarian genome is mostly closer to the people from Croatia and Slovakia today. Although I do not accept that we are slavic people, still it is very difficult to state how common we have with the slavs genetically, because slavs tribes used to burn the dead and left no remains and necropolises.
It is said that croatians are the most slavic people in the balkans, with 65% slavic lineage, the servs are only 50% , what about bulgarians or westbulgarians ?
Thank you. I enjoyed that. Being part Slovene is confusing.
Also you forgot to mention Croatian-Bulgarian Wars in which Croatia gained a lot and Raška(aka Serbia) became Byzantine vasal. Byzantine empire sent gifts and land consessions to Croatian Kingdom (Byzantines gave islands in Dalmatia, scepter and a crown to Croat king).
Ne moze da pomene nesto sto se nikada nije desilo .Posalji nam Romejski izvor tvoje tvrdnje ,posto su Romeji sve evidentirali .
ahahahhaha
@@NomenNescioRR
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Dr%C5%BEislav
"During Byzantine emperor Basil II's war against Tsar Samuil of Bulgaria who in his conquest became neighbor of Croatia, Stephen Držislav actively allied with the Byzantines.[1][4] After Basil managed to defend every single Adriatic coastal city during Samuil's rampage towards Zadar in 986, the cities were returned to Croatian control. In an effort to compensate and award Držislav for his alliance, the Eastern Roman Emperor between 986 and 990 named Stephen Držislav Patriarch and an Exarch of Dalmatia, which gave him formal authority over the Theme of Dalmatia (but some historians believe not over the Dalmatian city-states).[1][4] According to Thomas the Archdeacon, Stephen Držislav received royal insignia and the titles as an act of recognition from the Byzantine Emperor,[4][5] becoming reges Dalmatie et Chroatie and his descendants having the same titles."
😂😂😂
You did your homework bro, thats a hard history to follow good job.
Serbs first arrived in Bosnia and Montenegro and western Serbia, rather than Belgrade
Sure, Belgrade was actually founded by the Old Bulgarians, and nowadays Serbia was just a province of Bulgaria for centuries.
@@georgikolev6598 Correct, essentially
As a Croatian I strongly wish we still used the square glagolitic alphabet
Normalno naše pismo sa se poluduhovno ujedinimo na našim teritorijama i da ovima mamum ono
Laser, You are great! What detail! Fantastic story/history telling! вообще отлично! я поражён! великолепно!
the region of x-yugoslavia sounds like a wild west in the dark ages
always is, just check out the 90s.
we are the champions :) :(
Awesome video, though i'm of the Danau Swab decent i do carry one line of serbian lineage and my family prior to the US lived in the balkans for several hundred years. Great video thoroughly enjoyed this one!
Great video :) Thank you for mentioning the situation of us Slovenes and explaining it in a bigger detail.
Nice avetar. If I am not mistaken that was the Slovene flag while part of the SFRJ (looking at the tricolour formation).
@@99Boiko Thanks. You are correct, this is the flag of SR Slovenia.
@@warlord970 Good man! All Slavs be praised! :)
It wasn´t Samo´s kingdom/ empire but more like Samo´s tribal federation.
This is a common mistake and I really ejoy your content, continue with making more.
Slovene historiography's position is that Samo's kingdom was indeed a tribal federation of Slavic 'princedoms'. I suppose we'll never know the exact title he held among the Slavs and the nature of his position, but since Samo was a Frank himself, it's not wrong to assume he styled himself king in the Frankish way, but then again, was probably one only in name. Thanks for a great video, you have my sub!
Pretty good video! Must've taken an eternity to research. The Balkans is a rough historical vacuum to cover, well done! Way better than most other videos about the subject.
I just have one genuine question; I keep seeing this everywhere, but nobody seems to know what the actual evidence is apart from invoking a nationalist historian:
What is the evidence that there were any Serbs west of the Drina river and any Croats east of the Una river before 897 CE, or that either of the two countries had borders inside of Bosnia? (I mean archaeological or written evidence, or something concrete, or at least circumstantial, deductive and identifiable)
From what I know, there is archaeological evidence for an unknown culture with strange huts with an unidentified architecture in the vicinity of Sarajevo (found by Irma Cremosnik in the 1970's), dated back to around 551 CE, and is thought to be the wave of Slavs that Procopius wrote about arriving to Dalmatia in the spring of 551 CE. And during the synods of Salona in 530 & 535 CE, the region between today's Tomislavgrad up to the Sava river and east to the Drina river (judging by the borders of Dalmatia and the surrounding bishoprics' locations) was named "Bestoensis" which was under the supervision of Andreas the bishop, whose supervisor was the archbishop of Salona called Honorius. There's also mention of a small part of the Herules crossing the Danube and entering into Dalmatia before that, and an Illyrian governor from "Gratiana"(Gradiska on the Sava river) warning Amalasuntha about invading "his city" Gratiana. So there were non-Croat, non-Serb Slavs, Illyrians, some Herules and probably descendants of retired Roman soldiers there in 551 CE. Anonymus Ravennatis wrote around 700 CE that there are different countries in the middle of Dalmatia.
But between then and the mention of Pribina of Nitra fleeing from the Franks to Ratimir across the Sava river in 838 CE, there's no mention of any rivers, landmarks, cities or such inside of the whole of Bosnia. And then Anastasius Bibliothecarius designated Bosnia as an independent country in 876 CE (Tibor Zivkovic, De Conversione Croatorum Et Serborum, 2012). Then Steven Runciman found some evidence that Petar Gojnikovic invaded and conquered Bosnia around 900 CE but was unable to conquer Zachumlia, John V.A. Fine thinks it was in 897 CE (Magyars destroyed Slavonia in 895 CE), and in 950 CE the De Administrando Imperio is written, Porphyrogenitus copies the terms from Anastasius when he writes about Bosnia as a "country within a country" and doesn't list its two ecumenical centers Desnik and Katera as just another 2 centers belonging to the Serbian state, and then some time after Porphyrgenitus' death, around 960 CE Caslav is drowned in the Sava or Drina by the Magyars, and Bosnia is independent again up until 968 CE when they lose the Battle of Vrbas against the Croats and that's the first time I know of Croatia having Bosnia as part of its territory. (Osman Karatay, 2003, "In Search of the Lost Tribe: The Origins and Making of the Croatian Nation")
So between 551-897 CE, how do we know that Serbia and Croatia had any land at all inside of Bosnia, let alone reaching that far inside?
Judging by the circumstantial evidence, it seems like the Hungarian destruction of Lower Pannonia / Slavonia made it easy for Serbia to conquer Bosnia, which implies that Bosnia might have been part of Lower Pannonia up until 897 CE rather than Serbia and/or Croatia. Especially since Braslav was the last duke of Lower Pannonia, and he disappears in 896 CE. The Slavs of Lower Pannonia have craniometrically different skulls than contemporary Croat craniums (Hrvoje Gracanin, 2008), they also seem to have been pagan from what I could gather, which coincides with the story of Theophanes Continuatus that many Slavs in the region left Christianity in reaction to Frankish oppression, and there are inscriptions of Frankish missionaries from the 9th century in a church or monastery near the spring of the Bosna river.
Also, I don't know of any evidence that the Serbs and Croats were present in the Balkans before 750 CE when there is archaeological evidence near Zlatibor in Serbia and in Croatia there's the font of Viseslav and such from that time. But they're not mentioned anywhere as being in the Balkans until 822 CE (The Royal Frankish Annals / Annales Regni Francorum). There are some letters from the pope to an Aquilean or Istrian governor, worrying about the advances of Slavs into Aquilea and their possible entrance into Italy, but they're still not mentioned by name, and nothing really seems to imply that they're Serbs or Croats.
There should be turbofolk playing in the background
1st gen American.of CZ& Hungarian heritage ..love this stuff ..ever single one i see i pass on to kids n grands ..so much was lost from WW1&2 that without folks like you would never be able to sort thru all the B.S.
This is my summary of all of the slavic nations (please don't take offence)
West slavs- very peaceful, they all get along well and have little to no drama between them.
East slavs- theres some dysfunction between them, Ukraine and Russia is fighting over Crimea while belarus is Russia's sidekick however nothing too crazy
South slavs- absolute chaos, its really dysfunctional everyone hates eachother, Bosniaks serbs and croats are constantly screaming and beating the crap out of eachother. Montenegro just sleeps alot. Macedonia is arguing with Greece and Bulgaria while having an identity crisis, Bulgaria is trying to tell Macedonia that they're just confused Bulgarians and don't have hellenistic roots and Slovenia is the rich snobby arrogant one that sits in his mansion and likes to drink wine and looks down on the other south slavs
You forgot bulgaria screaming and trying to stretch from the 3 seas, and Macedonia being the laughing stock of the balkans
Well, there is one (unfortunate) major difference between the three groups, namely the faith: while West Slavs were all Catholics, and Eastern Slavs Orthodox, the Southern Slavs got the limes of the Great Schism right across their peoples, which was later followed by a crippling new faith limes - that of Islam and Christianity. The organized religion used a divide et impera policy which last even today.
Slovenia is also the youngest
@@pyroshrimp4073 No more stretching, we did that more than enough 10-12 centuries ago and we are wiser now. Now N. Macedonians make that mistake trying to scream and stretch but mostly for time and history, cause that's what they need badly... ;)
You buddy never saw reality! Don't be leaded by news and politics. Believe me in reality is much more different and positive.
Great video! Such detail. I really enjoyed this!
I will tell you an interesting fact:
I come from a small town in north-western Serbia called Osečina.
Interestingly, historical manuscripts tell that my region was settled by a noble "Slav" called Beloš and his deciples somewhere in the 8-th century.
After the reformation of our writing system in the 19-th century, many words have been modified to sound better. Thet's when Osečina got it's modern name, yet the locals have preserved vocally the real name of the place that is Oseč'na whitout the vocal "i" in the middle.
What buffers me is that there's another Oseč'na placed in the area around Plzen in Czech Rep. The region has once belonged to the Samo's Serb Kingdom.
There are many, many more toponyms that come across all of Bosnia and Serbia, that have identical twins in western Poland, Czech Rep. and eastern Germany.
It just too much stuff to be ignored, even though we're missing the evidence from that time... but that would be ludacriss to expect, cause our ppl have been illiterate back at the time...
Pa da, Srbi dolaze iz tog djela sjeverna Češka, zapadna Poljska i Istočna Njemačka. Dok Hrvati iz južne Poljske i sjeverne Slovačke, a tamo su Karpati. A brdo/planina na Slovačkom i Poljskom je hora, od tud Horvati/Hrvati....Iako još mi nije jasno od kud bi došlo ime Srbi/Srbija.
You have brought up something I suspect from a long time. The fact is that after ottoman conquest of the illyrian peninsula. The germans and the lithuanians pushed the border between them and the slavs towards east and south, so the serbs became neighbors with the Albanians and Romanians and the Bulgarians, and in the east the Germans absorbed Prussia and penetrated slav territorry in poland and Transilvania, bringing their allies the hungarians from Finland, meaning there has been for sure a eastward and southward German expansion. Lets remember that the name Germany is 2500 years old and does not have any connection with Deutschland. The Deutsche are a modern nation. By the way the name germany in albanian means broadland. Just like the name macedonia means the bigland.
Great video, the gradual transformation of the balkans culture and ethnics, mix with the political struggles of that age are visually brilliant.
The question that comes in my mind is : how the albanians survived this mess ?
I imagine something verry similar, were ilyrians, traces, Daces, and germans mix and migrated to the south, were they mix with local romanised illyrians, that prossus toke place between the 5th to 11th centery I imagine.
I would like your take on that.
Thanks for the great content ! ^^
It is impossible to say because the thracians, illyrians and other early balcanites had no writing so we can't compare anything. But giving that the albanian language is mostly compromised of latin and has a dacian substratum as well as dorian greek words compromising trading goods, and given the toponyms in balcans, it is theorised that the albanian language formed before or during the slavic migration in Moesia Superior.
@@edsm6851 It's unfortunate that these people didn't write much. I like taking an detective aproche, moesia is a good clue. The other clues that are suggested from the albanian language is that you have 2 types of Latin influences, one of the Republic era. Which indicates the west and then a later influence of the empire era. The dorian part of the language indicates the south. So my supposition is that the modern albanian language formed some were in south West moesia. That the other moesians in the north and the plains around the danub mixed and integrated themselves with the slaves. It explains also why albanians have such an unique mountainous vocabulary, slaves mostly took the plains. But I don't understand why you mention the dacians, they are situated in the north on the otherside of the Danube, Moesia is the place of the dardans in intersection between the illyrians and the tracians. Dacians were not touched by the influance of the Republic era but later. And then they were crushed and assimilated to the goths and the huns. It doesn't make much sense to me.
Albanians seems to be some kind of retrogenesis of an older tongue, less latinised, who manages to influence some kind of latinised sister language in the south and delatinses it in the middle ages. It explains the two different dialect and why their split is older than the slavic invasion. It all points out to the south west balkan alps. I'm just talking of language here of cours, these groupe of people certainly mixed with the different invaders. Nevertheless, the mountain top preserved the language long enough to not become entirely latinised so that they could, when the time was right, "re-semi-albanise" theire romanised sister language on the coasts and plains in the south.
It explains also why they spread so fast through the south in the middle ages.
With this in mind, it makes more sense that they were some kind of "post-dardanians" than dacians.
Thanks for your comment, you made me think of lots of things.
Good night.
@@santoud The dorian part of the language has vocabulary of trading items which probably came into proto albanian by an intermidiate. I dont think proto albanians had direct contact with greeks as the language would have been much more influenced by it if that be the case. They either sat at the Jireck line or farther north of it. There is shared Dacian substratum in albanian and romanian (I think 60-80 words in albanian and 120-150 in romanian approx) which indicates a form of contact. I've read that Moesians spoke an intermidiate language between Thracian and Dacian sometimes reffered to by linguists as "Daco-Mysian". The Thracians have been conquered by the Dacians in the past (see King Burebista) so that would also support Moesia as an origin. About the latin, I know that the albanian latin has very early Christian vocabulary, and is a mix of the latin spoken in dalmatia and eastern romance. Albanian has also some Germanic loanwords. To give some historical perspective, Moesia didn't have any large settlements. When romans came they found only big villages with some 100 people max. Moesia became part of the Limes during barbarian raids and was heavily struck by war. It is normal to think that a native population would flee because of its geostrategical positioning. There are toponyms in balcans which follow albanian phonetic shifts, like Nish (Naissus), Shkupi (Scupi; modern Skopje). I think this is enough indication to at least give the Moesian theory some credit. I maybe don't know much about Illyrian or am biased, but the Illyrian theory doesnt ring many bells for me.
I thank you sir, because this is a very interesting topic but sadly it is very difficult to discuss in an unbiased matter because of the modern political landscape.
@@edsm6851 There is no Dacian substratum, and the Albanian language doesn't consist of Latin either. Albanian is a fully independent language, most likely the result of a partially Romanized Illyrian dialect in Moesia superior, and a large number of Latin loans has little to do with the 'formation' of a language going back to Indo-European itself.
The Dacian theory is mostly rejected, since Albanian is grammatically distinct from Thracian, to which Dacian belongs. The idea that Albanian words in Romanian would make Albanians 'Dacians' originally doesn't work, as the Albanian-Romanian contact happened in Kosovo and South Serbia, not in former Dacian regions.
super cool video, may I ask where the backgound map is from? I would love to put it in gqis for maps of my project... thx
thanks for the great history video :)
Looks great!
Look forward to the last of the series. are you going to make them a play list?
Suggestion - why not do the origins of the norse-germanic, ie the Goths and Vandals and Gepids ending with the Lombards - an show how they moved in the migration period? You might even intertwine the Wends with them.
I'll throw a wrench in the works here. Genome studies of the Balkan peoples do not indicate sharp divisions between the ethnic groups some commenters are discussing here. Slavic-speaking Macedonians in North Macedonia, Western Bulgaria and Greece share the same genetic sequences with the Hellenic peoples of Greece -- and they look like them, too! Anthropological research shows that ethnic identity is not frozen in history -- it is an evolving cultural force. As this fine video shows, groups interact and mingle with one another. I liked and subscribed!
I don't believe that Slavs look like us. I mean yeah of course we are all Balkans and we indeed will have some genetic similarity but I don't think we are the same with North Macedonians. They are more Slavic Greeks are more native.
@@jeffkarin7894 Thank you for your response. In my case, my immediate family came from the area of Florina. Our 23andme genomes show genes identical to Hellenic. My father who passed away looked exactly like the Foreign Minister of Greece. Some North Macedonians I know do appear Greek. For the most part South Slavs in the Balkans do not look at all like those in Poland, Russia, Ukraine, Czech, or Slovak areas.
@@viewercjg Yeah I am aware but me myself don't look Greek at all XD. I have different origins backrounds. I am mainly Thraco-Macedonian from Serres and the outskirts of Constantinopole ( aka East Thracian ) with a small 1/4 of mine from Pontus. Tho my ancestors were from Serres ( these were the blonds and I look a lot like them.....) and Constantinopole I look like French. I am dark blond with medium skin colour and kinda tall. However some relatives of mine that had made DNA tests showed 81% Ancient Greek heritege and the rest was Italian and Balkan. They have brunette hair wavy. I am just trying to figure out how ancient Greeks and Balkaners were looking like in general but as it seems generally from different articrafts of ancient times they had Mediterranean looks. Does your people look like this also? Cause I had the impression they were more Slavic look due to higher frequences of Slavic DNA. But that's cool too. I wonder how my relatives from East Thrace had so much Ancient Greek DNA inside them. I though they would be more Italian, Balkan, some Slav and some Thracian ( Ancient Thracians were brunettes with wavy hair ) but I guess the fairytale of blondism of ancient Balkaners is just that: a fairytale. But I guess the reason that they had so much ancient Greek DNA concetrated must be because Constantinopole and East Thrace was the center of Greeks for atleast one thousand years. So I guess the ancient Balkans were the same? Atleast genetically? Do you have as a haplogroup EV-13? Because that was the ancient Balkan hoplogroup just asking.
@@jeffkarin7894 My gene sequence shows some Italian as well, and one of my great-grandfathers was Vlach (Romanian-speakers in area). Some close relatives look classic Mediterranean (slender, dark complexion & hair), others like me are stocky, lighter skin, dark brown hair with red-gold highlights. However, when among Greeks, such as in Greek Orthodox Church, I am always recognized as Greek and the people all look like relatives and friends from my home community. Even people from at least some parts of North Macedonia fit this profile. As one goes further north into Serbia and Bulgaria, looks change, although they still are dark and don't look like Russians or Poles, etc.
@@viewercjg South Italians are pretty much the same with Greeks. So it's logical. As for the brunette hair if you have golden or red highlights then you might not be dark brown only light brunette people cn have red and blond hightlightes. Me myself am a dark blond and I am usually passed as French especially durning summer when my hair become even lighter XD.However Mediterranean people are not dark in general just darker than Centeral or Northern Europeans. Were I live in North Greece most people are either dark blond or light brunettes. I would myself tho like to have wavy hair. Lol
You nee to say", poshol nahui" don't forget to add blyat in the end
Thanks for Nah, you made my day 😂
8:29 where did u get that image on the bottom left about the slovene language
Man great work!! Kudos!
Great vid. That was really complicated 😀
That is why it was called Yugoslavia
Bc jugo means south
Slavia slavs
South slavs
ps: the republic of north macedonia, may be north of macedonia but it's not macedonian at all.
Very good video
Thank you. No mention of Krum’s 811 annihilation of the Byzantine Army and slaying of Emperoe Nikhoros I.
Nice video, but just a quick note- bulgar language died out but due to the fact it was iranid many old bulgar words entered the old slavonic language and are preserved even to this day. And you forgot to mention the creator of the Cyrillic alphabet was bulgarian.
old bulaagar language died in the Balkans but is spoken today in Tatarstan and Chuvashia and is TURKIC language ! CREATOR OF Cyrillic alphabet was not a " bulgar " !
@@ohrid59mk76 Thats pure bullshit, Sashko. Bulgars being turkic is a soviet propaganda. Many linguistic evidences show a connection between the bulgar language and the indo-iranic ones. And Clement of Ohrid was def a bulgarian.
@@ohrid59mk76 не пишувај срање, а ти и јас имаме бугарски пасоши.
@@AKana-gh9tr NIKOJ NE ZNAE OD KADE TOCNO E SVETI KLIMENT ! fakt e deka e sloven , i fakt e deka ziveel i umrel vo MAKEDONIJA ! a za prabugarite , ne e toa sovetska propagnda , isto pisuva i vo Istorija na BG narod - BAN - Sofia 1938 !
@@stn2467 1) jas nemam BG pasosh ! 2) pa duri i da imam , toa ne me pravi bugarin po etnos , samo drzavjanin na drzava Bugarija ! 3) nemam BG pasosh , imam MK i NL pasoshi !
"The same reason that makes us wrangle with a neighbor creates a war betwixt princes." Montaigne must've visited the Balkans when he came up with this one.
Didn't the division between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy happen in the 11th century? If so, how can you speak of Serbs and Croats accepting one or the other before that time? Anyways great video, keep it up!
Even though before the Great Schism, it was important what priests were responsible for the conversion. If they were from Rome, it was a preset for Catholicism, if from Constantinople - Orthodox
Krivaja you are correct but the point is what Milush said - whichever side was sending the priests that were converting the pagan Slavs was the one that was asked by various cheifs/leaders (kneževi - literally dukes or princes) to be acknowledged and the usual requirement for those acknowledgments was subordination of the local church towards one side. This eventually was formalized after the Great Schism, where one of the first tasks of the church reform i.e. in Croatia was ensuring the local priesthood could not marry and should not wear beards (which they could until then, but was a sign of Orthodoxy later and thus forbidden).
To be frank, one "filioque..." added in Vth century making so many problems nowdays is purely absurd.
great video well presented thanks
The "latin remnants" are about 20 million today, in the form of Romanians. Christianized Thracians, like Albanians must have been also quite numerous. These groups were not really "that small", especially if you take into account that groups of Romanians migrated north of the Danube at some point around the year 1000 and converted slavs and other peoples living there. Very good video overall.
they did not migrate. they were always there. also "Romanian" is confusing.
Romanian as a broder term for "Eastern Romance language speaker" or used mostly for the Daco-Romans speaking their Daco-Romanian dialect.
i'm sick of hearing about "vlach migrations from Illyria to Dacia". it did not happen. are you a Hungarian/Russian troll or what?
@@duxromanorum9861 I am Romanian living abroad. It is easier to look at the issue having studied it from a neutral perspective. There is basically no archeological evidence for Roman continuity north of the Danube between the 4th and the 12th centuries. South of the Danube the evidence is continuous. The Romanian language is phonetically and in syntax very similar to Albanian and Bulgarian. The loaned Slavic vocabulary is almost completely Bulgarian and Serbian and only very little Ukrainian. "Roman" in its medieval and classical meaning didn't mean "Eastern Romance Speaking". Greeks called themselves "Romioi" till the 19th century. Romanian comes from "inhabitant of the Eastern Roman Empire".
A great video! 👍👍👍
Great video !
its very good obviously, but maybe you could try to talk less monotone
Honestly, that was the best video on this subject I have ever seen! Congratulations!
The Bulgars were most probably Sarmatians with a bit of hun, magyar and other Indo-european nomadic groups that came from northern Afghanistan. They came to the Balkans and brought even more slavs from modern Ukraine to the Danube, Moesia and Wallachia and Moldavia where they all mixed with the local Thracians and Slavs, forming Bulgaria and her vassals - Wallachia and Moldavia. And yes, our biggest brother is probably Romania(Wallachia and Moldavia were mostly inhabited by Thracians). Today Bulgarians and Romanians are mostly Slavs and Thracians with minor influence from the Greeks, Turks, Arabs, Germans & etc.
Do you have to speak sooooo fast?! God it takes away your presentation, even though it was interesting. Next time slow down please
Most sources show that there was no Slavic settlement of the Balkans (south of the Danube) up until the 580s, however it is held that the first organized and large-scale settlement of the Slavs onto the Balkans was with the Serbs and Croats during the reign of Heraclius. (630s).
E druze mozes li urditi klip o prvom svetskom ratu u srbiji
Pozdrav cenim tvoj rad
The worst thing in Greek history is the migration of nomadic people it never brings a good thing with it
Question, which original document you use regarding coming of the Serbs and Croats to so called Balkan?
porfirogenet i think..
@@eltoro10-v5t This is only thing...
@@omerta3206 Well one from the 16 century is for sure fake as it miss nouns the names and positions ...
@@eltoro10-v5t nope, cause Porfirogenet clearly states Heraclius calling the Croats to come over and the video doesn't mention it (which I incline to believe since the difference of 3 centuries between the happenings and the writing of it, also the politics of the time).
where is the video about eastern slavs? its been 3 months
Wow, I am simply amazed how little I know about my own Croatian and Slavic history in general.
One could argue that the native population was not as assimilated in the Dinarid region and was not as eager to mix with the slavic newcomers as there are significant phenotype characteristics shared by Dinarid population across the nowadays Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro and Serbia which are totally different than what typical Slavic phenotype looks like. Speaking as a Croatian, it takes a quick glance to discern who is from the continent and who from Dinarid/coastal region. Lately, the DNA haplo-groupes support what can be observed, but someone still needs to make a good scientific connection between those. Unfortunately, all the genetics research is heavily politicized and I do not hope for a good and objective work in this direction. If anyone has any good source on the topic: please share. Thanks. And thanks to the author for the great work!
well done
THANK YOU..and all who research all this n share
I am a Croat from Bosnia and I must give you great respect and admiration for this brilliant video on the history of the Balkans. Truly you have no bias and did a good job in going by best known evidence and not just nationalist views.
Croats and Serbs have a long history living side by side as nations. Respect to all people of good will and Slava rodu.
Sometimes I wonder if the balkans would have been more peaceful had Croats , Serbs and Slovenes just divided the territory between themselves, now we seemingly are dividing into 7-8 or more tiny countries. Perhaps the Bosna river as a line between Croatia and Serbia would have been the best solution.
@a bee Not Slovenes but Horutani..that's old name..."По мнозѣхъ же временѣхъ сѣлѣ суть словени по Дунаеви, кде есть нынѣ Угорьская земля и Болгарьская. От тѣхъ словенъ разидошася по земьли [...] А се ти же словѣне: хорвати бѣлии, серпь и хорутане."
Your comment proves why there won't be peace, you want to carve up Bosnia and deny our identity. "Croat from Bosnia" yeah sure man. Read history. In the 1400's all Bosnians called themselves Bosnian. Didn't matter if you were Catholic, Orthodox or Bogomil. The whole Catholic = Croat and Orthodox = Serb and Bosnians don't exist crap popped out during Ottoman rule when Bosnian Bogomils converted to Islam. Bosnians have been around for a long time so no, we won't let you divide up our land.
@@biggie_boss nobody is denying we are Bosnians. We are Bosnians but to us it’s like a Croat from Dalmatia being also a Croat or from Slavonia. Bosnian is a region name for us Croats.
You can also read a history book , the so called Bosnjaks mostly live in turkey not even Bosnia. Bosnia has in part been part of Croatia at the river bosna and Serbia the rest. But don’t confuse that as if we , Croats, want to divide Bosnia. We only want equal right and our own control of our presidency.
Look at the Bosnjaks only they don’t feel resentment to the ottoman occupation , as yourself why that is. Don’t they see the great evil that brought us all?
@@xMoac So much revisionist history in your comment. Nobody directly ruled Bosnia other than in name only between Byzantine and Hungarian eras. After the Slavic migrations, Bosnia was too remote for anybody to administer so it was mostly just a bunch of peasants living in villages with no direct oversight. Multiple people "claimed" the land but had no legitimacy. It wasn't until the Banate of Bosnia was established with de facto autonomous rule that Bosnia was under anybody's direct authority. So no, Croats don't get to have any of Bosnia nor do Serbs. Also, I'm a Bosnian and I despise Ottoman rule and think they ruined our economy and contributed little to nothing. Croat and Serb are originally just regional names it isn't until later in history that nationalist movements caused BOSNIAN Orthodox and Catholics to declare themselves as non-Bosnians. So not only are you denying me my identity but you're lying to yourself. If you and your parents, grandparents, great grandparents were all from Bosnia, you're Bosnian, not Croatian nor a "Croat.
@@biggie_boss nobody is denying you anything and you should understand that for most of history before nationalism took deep hold the average farmer was just living their life having to please local authority. Borders shifted and peasants got taxed. Sometimes they just sided with those who would tax them less. The notion of nation as we understand it didn’t even exist to the peasant.
Ofc I am a Bosnian but above that identity also a Croat. On both my parents sides their grandmothers had crosses tattooed on their chest, hands, arms as a way to deter ottomans and to mark themselves out as not sullied by those bastards.
I am not saying Croatia as what is today ruled Bosnia nor did what is today Serbia rule Bosnia but that both had influence and claim over parts of land at some time.
Ask yourself : what is identity? The differences between Bavarians and north Germans is bigger then those of Bosnians and Croatians , slavonians etc. it’s all just slavs having intermarried with the local illyrians , goths, some Germans , romans etc. The result of all that is us “South Slavs” , our genetics differ but not by much. Croats from Dalmatia and Hercegovina share more of the same genetics then do they with north Croatians.
So again , nobody is denying your identity but don’t deny others theirs. What about the Croats in Bosnia who spilled their blood defending both Bosnia and Croatia? From vukovar to Knin. Is a Croat from Bosnian less Croatian then the immigrant to Croatia? When can a Croat claim to be Croatian? How much time can pass? From sports to war to economy etc , Croats from Bosnia have played a part in Croatian history and continue to do so.
People who just want to be Bosnians can freely be so, if someone asks me if I am Bosnian I tell them yes . I am Bosnian , Croat from Bosnia to be more specific.
Let’s all just agree to reject those that would hail and uplift the crescent flags of the despicable ottomans.
Croats don’t want to destroy Bosnia nor to divide it but rather for us to also have a voice in politics and to be fairly treated as equals.
Look at Bosnian politics and how the ‘Bosnjaks’ try to subvert power and undermine Croat rights and status in the federation. That’s a travesty and that is a threat to Bosnian unity.
what about the dacians/vlahs north of danube around the carphatians and also lots of setlements in greece, fyrom with romanian speaking groups (aromanians)? pls make a video about.
Heavy on the information, light on the propaganda - thank you for the great video!
thank you ,you give light and nowledge... darknes and confusion fom balkany history
You have to get to 5,000 subs before becoming eligible for monetization under the new youtube rules made a few months ago. It sucks, but keep with it you will get there your content is good.
Then was Bohemia and Moravia
Awesome video bro !
Very nice video,Ty!
@Nemanja ĆIrić zas nebi imo hr zastavu?
@Nemanja ĆIrić To je zastava propisana ustavom RH iz 1990,nema nikakve veze s ustaštvom.Prouči malo pa komentiraj.
@Nemanja ĆIrić Upisi na wikipediu grb rh 1990 godina.Nisam ustaša ne mrzim nikoga i boja prvog polja ne znači ništa jer je i grb hrvatskog kraljevstva u austro ugarskoj iz 15.st počinjao bjelim poljem.Također je bilo i ustaških grbova sa prvim crvenim poljem.Pozz sve najbolje
@Nemanja ĆIrić Gledaj,nemoj me učiti o simbolima moje zemlje,ja tebe neću učiti o simbolima tvoje zemlje.Znamo gdje nas je to dovelo prije 25 godina.I vjeruj mi da znam povijest jako dobro i da je ustaški grb iznad šahovnice imao slovo U u pleteru.Mir s tobom.
I love how 80% of the people are named MIR i.e. peace yet this is just the same as the 90s or GoT as westerners put it...
Pretty much accurate. I must admit . and in accord of latest historical researching of that. Only ....it will add more light on history of this region if you mentioned first Croatian King Tomislav who was very successful ruler and warrior and won several battles against Magjars and Bulgars,
Wait a minute, this is a bit diferent from what we learned about Serbian history. What we learned is that original Slavs settled around river Ras thus forming Raska and then later transformed into Serbia. Also, there is no mention of Bosnia and Bosnian Slavs.
@@7heplay961 I haven't claimed that they are. I specified "...original Slavs settled..." which implied that they have came from somewhere else.
Bosnian Slavs were Croats. You don't think the current Croatian borders are natural right, no one would settle like that and no one did in Europe
bosnian slavs diverged from the yugoslav continuum around the 14th century after the creation of the kingdom of bosnia. before that, its even unfair to claim that croatians and serbians were separate.
Glagolitic…. Glagol… does the old written text have anything to do with the word for “verb” in Serbo-Croatian today?
The name is derived from the Old Church Slavonic verb glagolati, which means to speak.
Bosniaks are Croats and serbs that chose islam as their religion bcs of smaller taxes and higher roles in ottoman empire...
How did the Romanians hold out until the present day being in the middle of all these population and cultural shifts? Were the Carpathian mountains their bastion?
Great video mate, greetings from Serbia.
considering how close the Serbian and Croatian languages are (i.e. they are basically identical, much closer than even Czech & Slovak), how strong is the evidence that they both moved into the Balkan area as separate tribes? Isnt is possible they were more like one tribe which diverged in the Balkan due opposite influences from Franks & Byzantium? Honestly, it sounds a bit political to say that Croats and Serbs were sepeare people even at that time. I don't mean you personally, but in general, the way the history is told on this point.
Well, you have to read history to find that out. The Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus in his book "De Administrando Imperio " written circa 948 AD said that in previous centuries the Croats had settled in "Pannonia" and "Roman Dalmatia" ( which then included Bosnia, see a map of the internal Roman Empire to see Roman Dalmatia). While the Serbs settled in "Roman Moesia" (see a map of the internal Roman Empire to see where Roman Moesia was).
Great video. Good of you to point out that fyrom is slavik and not descendants of Greek Alexander the Great.
You completely forgot Celts in the Balkans (Scordisci). There are so many toponyms in the Balkans which originate from Celts. Belgrade was founded by Celts, Cetinje, Negotin, Varazdin, Apatin, many other places were named by Celts. Also, Cyrillic alphabet is not based on Glagolitic. It is based on ancient Vinca proto-alphabet, like other European alphabets.
Funny how the slavs get offended whan they hear that they are not Authoctons in the Balcan. Albanians and Greeks are the real Authoctons of Balcan
Even the 5 year olds know we came from the North and didn't originate there. Care to explain how Albanians are aboriginals to the Balkans?
Туба с газ do your reserch. Albania and greece were always one. Until religion and politics came and divided them.
@@Тубасгаз Albanians are what is left of the Paleo-Balkanic population of the Balkans north of Greece. The Albanian ethnogenesis was in the Balkans, Albanians never migrated to the region after the Bronze Age - meaning Albanians are indigenous to the Balkans.
A good practical example is the presence of dozens of direct Doric Greek loanwords from 700BC onwards. What that proves is that Albanians came to contact with Northwest Greek dialects ever since the Doric colonization of the Adriatic coast began.
There are a ton more reasons, but just this much for now.
Nice video.Also there are records about Dervans Serbia in east germany
Nice video. It is clear, that FYROM ("Macedonians) are Bulgarians and they have nothing to do with Greeks. It is also clear the culture of this regions from Zagreb to Skopje, being so long under influence of Turks, and nothing to do with western culture (just take into account their music).
@@brucewillixaspirinix9652 The mentioned Zagreb did not mean that the Turks came to the exactly to the main square of Zagreb. It was mentioned as a capital of a nowadays country, that was predominantly occupied by Turks, which is today reflected in your culture and this region (from Zagreb (Croatia) to Skopje (FYROM)), such as your music ...
@Kristijan Car It was never fully occupied but mostly, which is also reflected in today's Croatian culture and other countries of the region (from Zagreb to Skopje), such as your music (not all) with Turkish melos. That is the fact.
@@brucewillixaspirinix9652 Well, I was in Croatia and I heard those Turkish melos and it was not Serbian music (Croats told me). Just a quick check on YT, let say Croatian Eurosong - Severina, moja stikla, etc...
@@brucewillixaspirinix9652 As I said, this is what the different Croats told me and that this ("non European music") is a very popular music in Croatia and you listen it a lot what I convinced myself in different places, bars, towns...
@Stallion Duck ?? I have nothing to do with Bulgaria or with any other Balkan country...
6:34 "So the Balkans were in this constant flux of uncertain political control by various groups."
Huh, and they say history doesn't repeat itself.
Said nobody ever
The actual saying is that history DOES repeat itself.
"History doesn't repeat itself, it rhymes."
Where did you find that information
The difference between today and then was the fluxing within ethnic tribes of Europeans.
Yep, especially when history is helped along the way by outside forces.
The main reason why Bulgaria was so successful is because Asparuh convinced local Slavs to join him in the battle against the Byzantines. When they won he founded Bulgaria as a country of both Bulgars and Slavs together. Bulgar nobility ruled exclusively for a few generations initially but regarded both peoples equally and they soon merged into one culture.
The early rulers practiced genuine nation building in a style reminiscent of Thracian nobility. Thracian scripts may have also been a basis for the Cyrillic script.
can you give me sources about the nation building in a style of thracian nobility?
cyrillic was based on glagolic and greek scripts and glagolic was based on the greek script.
What a great video!
Indoeuropean roots. Lot of words has same root, for example: Steel, Stahl, Stal / Iron, Icen, Acero, Acier / Sun, Sonne, Sol, Słońce
Actually no, indoeuropean words have a root in common and the use varies in diferent modern languages. An excellent example is the word "wòrd" wich means water, this word become unda in latin and is onda in spanish, onda means wave. You can see that words declinate from the common root
All this Slavs are one big nation,separate on tribes with diferent names from diferent regions but it was one big nation with same language and dna.There is no migration they just changing names of tribes tru history.
At 13:08 it's inaccurate though. There was no division between Rome and Constantinople in terms of the religious doctrine.
Your channel is one of the best on YT!